HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 08/17/1993City of Kent
City Council Meeting
Agenda
CITY OF I JIB4T
Mayor Dan Kelleher
Council Members
Judy Woods, President
Jim Bennett Paul Mann
Christi Houser Leona Orr
Jon Johnson Jim White
August 17, 1993
Office of the City Clerk
CITY OF
MAYOR: Dan Kelleher
Jim Bennett
Paul Mann
SUMMARY AGENDA
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
August 17, 1993
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
COUNCILMEMBERS: Judy Woods, President
Christi Houser Jon Johnson
Leona Orr Jim White
CALL TO ORDER
DROLL CALL
1. /PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
6-/A. Game of Life 193 Youth Wellness Conference Grants
6,t. DAWN Presentation
✓C. EMS Provider of the Year Award
✓`D. Proclamation - Sarcoidosis Awareness Day
2. 'PUBLIC HEARINGS
,,A. 1994 Budget
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
✓A. Approval of Minutes �Z
✓B. Approval of Bills 76
C. Auburn Thoroughbred Horse Racing Facility - Resolution
of Support
'D. Police Shooting Range Soundproofing - Authorization and
Budget
,/E. Planning Commission Appointment
✓F. Game of Life 193 Youth Wellness Conference - Acceptance
of Grants
G. Youth/Teen Center - Contract Authorization and Budget
4. `OTHER BUSINESS
r'A. 1994 Community Development Block Grant Program - set
hearing date
B. Indoor Paintball Arena - Zoning Code Amendment #ZCA-93-5
5. BIDS
None
6. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
7. ✓REPORTS
,%EXECUTIVE SESSION - Labor Negotiations, AFSCME
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) Game of Life 193 Youth Wellness Conference Grants
B) DAWN Presentation
C) EMS Provider of the Year Award
D) Proclamation - Sarcoidosis Awareness Day
YY�
1. SUBJECT:
-PROPOeEB- 1994 BUDGET
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 17, 1993
Category Public Hearings
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been established to
receive public input for the 1994 City of Kent budget.
Following receipt of public input, the Mayor will finalize the
preliminary budget for presentation to the Council on
October 19. The final budget is scheduled for adoption on
December 7 after another public hearing on November 2. --Ma�-
;- —
as- a1, eady bieen reviewed with -the
full n, it- at the�c ---R t t--Werrks
3. EXHIBITS: June Financial Report which includes a conservative
projection for the 1994 budget; the projection is based on the
193 budget as a baseline increased only by inflationary factors
and known contractual increases. Summary of additional possi-
ble uses and funding sources. 1994 budget calendar.
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Council
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NOX_ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT:
CLOSE HEARING:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:,
Councilmember ��'�lti` moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 2A
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
1994 BUDGET ANALYSIS
SOURCES USES
BASELINE FINANCIAL PROJECTION AS OF 6/30/93 FOR 1994 - APPROXIMATELY 675,000
POSSIBLE USE OPTIONS
PROJECT LIGHTHOUSE FULL YEAR OPERATING COSTS 80,000
DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP OPERATING FOR FULL YEAR 32,000
BEGIN FUNDING OF EQUIPMENT RESERVE FOR FIRE 300,000
BEGIN FUNDING OF AUTOMATION EQUIPMENT RESERVE 160,000
COLA FOR 1994, 1% = 250,000, 3% = 750,000
RESTORE TRAINING BUDGETS - REQUEST BY COUNCIL (1991 LEVEL + $100,000) 50,000
ESTABLISH A DIVERSITY TRAINING PROGRAM 50,000
REESTABLISH CAPITAL FOR REPLACEMENT OF OFFICE & MTC EQUIPMENT (1991 LEVEL $141,000) 50,000
SUBTOTAL 675,000 1,472,000
POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL SOURCES
ASSUME ANNEXATION OF LIBRARY DISTRICT (ONE TIME ONLY APPROX $311,153)
ASSUME ADDITIONAL 1993 ENDING FUND BALANCE (PAST EST OF 1.2%, $300,000)
PROJECT SOME GROWTH IN SALES TAX (STATE PROJECTS 3.2%, $290,000)
REDUCE ALLOCATION OF SALES TAX TO CIP (25% TO 20% = $600,000)
ELIMINATE SOME VACANT POSITIONS (EACH APPROX $50,000)
ASSUME CONTINUED HIRING SLOWDOWN (2 MO. X 15 POSITIONS = $133,000)
OTHER REQUESTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
CITY OF KENT
CURRENT BUDGET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
GENERAL FUND
1992
1993
------------------------------------------
Adjusted
Adjustments
Estimated
Actual
Budget
Fav (Unfav)
- Actual
--------------------- -------------------------'-------------------------------------
REVENUES
Taxes:
Property
9,365,147
10,124,967
10,124,967
Sales
8,446,846
8,280,139
809,599 *
9,089,738 1
Utility
3,601,274
3,772,201
215,886 *
3,988,087 2
Other
465,785
517,211
(1,873)*
515,333
Licenses and permits
580,047
650,679
(13,496)*
637,183
Intergovernmental revenue
4,654,991
4,934,298
(45,002)*
4,889,296 3
Charges for services
1,569,853
1,692,891
3,493 *
1,696,384
Fines and forfeitures
629,058
609,359
*
609,359
Interest income
889,702
760,500
760,500
Miscellaneous revenue
578,448
583,210
(16,199)*
---------
567,011
TOTAL REVENUES
----------
30,781,151
----------
31,925,455
952,408
32,877,863
EXPENDITURES
Salaries & Benefits
Supplies
Services & charges
Capital outlay
Cost allocation
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES
TRANSFERS IN FROM (OUT TO):
Capital Improvement Fund
Special Revenue
Capital Projects In
Capital Projects Out
Insurance Fund
One Time Only Transfers
TOTAL NET TRANSFERS IN AND (OUT)
23,739,097 24,391,996
1,177,931 1,318,224
9,896,756 10,926,964
33,980 3,241
(2,931,823) (2,841,223)
31,915,941 33,799,2C2
(1,134,790) (1,873,747)
806,851
(47,641) (48,558)
118,340 78,949
(43,019) (42,419)
150,000
326,335
---------- ----------
984,531 314,307
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (150,259) (1,559,440)
BEGINNING FUND BALANCE
ENDING FUND BALANCE
Reserved
Unreserved
Total
Reserved Balance vs. Expenditures
Total Balance vs. Expenditures
3,244,424 2,493,682
500,000 975,371
2,594,165 (41,129)
3,094,165 934,242
1.6% 2.9%
9.7% 2.8%
444,344 * 23,947,652 4
100,000 * 1,218,224
200,000 * 10,726,964
3,241
(2,841,223)
744,344 33,054,858 5
1,696,752 (176,995)
(48,558)
78,949
(42,419)
326,335
314,307
1,696,752 137,312
600,483 * 3,094,165
975,371
2,297,235 2,256,106
2,297,235 3,231,477
3.0%
9.8%
EXHIBIT F
June 30, 1993
i@iZ9
Preliminary
Forecast
------------
94 vs
93 EA
10,884,340 7.5%
8,595,488
4,302,578 7.9%
515,338
637,183
5,128,726 4.9%
1,696,384
609,359
760,500
566,761
33,696,657
94 vs
93 BUD
24,680,088 1.2%
1,362,850 3.4%
11,649,364 6.6%
(2,874,780) 1.2%
34,817,522
(1,120,865)
(38,558)
(44,000)
(82,558)
(1,203,423)
3,231,477
1,352,933
675,121
2,028,054
3.9%
5.8%
* Changes from last month
1) 7/12th of the variance projected by the graph, adjusted for the one time only settlements of
S150,000 received in May and $231,750 received in July. No increase in 94 over 93 estimated actuals.
2) Based on individual analysis of year to date utility tax collection, and audit results.
3) Reflects decreased per capita distributions estimate for 93, and increases per 6% lid for 94.
4) The preliminary forecast reflects the settlement of all contracts excpet Police. Police is
estimated at 3.0% COLA for 1993. The forecast includes adjustments for scheduled step increases and
Longevity eligibility. No additional COLA for 1994.
5) 6/12 of estimated savings per graph is reflected in expenditures, allocated by approximation.
Forecast projects inflation at 3.4% and reflects the impact of known and estimated contract increases.
CCC B89306D.40! 12-Aug-93
1994 BUDGET PROCESS/CALENDAR
COUNCIL RE EAT SESSION
2/26-2/27
COUNCIL WO SHOP
5/18
CIP Presen tion - Calendar
COUNCIL BUD ET COMMITTEE
5/24
Financial r port - April
Preliminary 1994 Forecast
COUNCIL BUD T COMMITTEE
6/28
May Financia Reports and Draft Capital Improvement Plan
DEPARTMENTS 4ORK WITH FINANCE
6/29-7/30
Review 1994 inance Forecast
COUNCIL REG LAR
Proposed Public Use Hearing on the Capital Improvement Plan
7/20
COUNCIL BUD T COMMITTEE
7/26
Balanced Capital Improvement Plan for final input and changes
Financial Re ort for June
COUNCIL WORKSHOP (6:00 P.M.)
8/03
Preliminary 1994 Budget Forecast
COUNCIL REG LAR
Proposed Pu lic Use Hearing for CIP
COUNCIL REG AR
8/17
Adopt Updat Capital Improvement Plan
Proposed Pu is Use Hearing on Budget
COUNCIL WOR SESSION (8:00 A.M. - 1:00 P.M.)
CANCELLED
Updated Fina cial Forecast, Dept Presentations of Issues
COUNCIL BUDGET COMMITTEE
8/23
Financial Report for July
COUNCIL BUDGET COMMITTEE
9/27
Financial Report for August
COUNCIL ORKSH
10/19,�
Overview o 994 Preliminary Budget
COUNCIL BUDGET COMMITTEE
10/25/93
Financial Report - 3rd Quarter
LOUNCIL-REGULAIR
Public Hearin on 1994 Budget—�
`7
12/�
COUNCIL REGULAR
�
�—
Adoption of Budget and Tax Levy Ordinance
i/
COUNCIL REGULAR
?/21
Adoption of the Final Adjustments for 1993
94budcal
3.
CONSENT CALENDAR
City Council Action /, ry
�'�
Councilmember i^ moves, Councilmember u'
seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through G be approved.
Discussi
Act
L1, 3A. �proval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
August 3, 1993.
3B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through August 16,
1993,after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting
on September 7, 1993.
\�4 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
August 3, 1993
Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at
7:00 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Woods. Present: Councilmembers
Bennett, Houser, Johnson, Mann, Orr and White, Chief Adminis-
trative Officer McCarthy, City Attorney Lubovich, Planning
Manager Satterstrom, Public Works Director Wickstrom, Police
Chief Crawford, Fire Chief Angelo, and Interim Parks Director
Thorell. Approximately 40 people were at the meeting.
PUBLIC Employee of the Month. Mayor Pro Tem Woods
COMMUNICATION announced that Melanie Manning, Customer Service
Assistant at Kent Commons, has been selected as
Employee of the Month for August. She noted
that Ms. Manning is highly motivated and is
praised by her supervisors and co-workers for
her courteous, helpful and cheerful personality.
Lori Hogan, Recreation Superintendent, added
that Ms. Manning works many extra hours and has
volunteered for numerous projects. She also
said that Manning opens the Commons building at
5:30 a.m. every day and greets the public with a
smile and a willingness; to help in any way she
can.
Regional Justice Center Update. Wendy Keller,
Project Director, announced that on September 7
she will present to the Council three alternate
layouts for the site and that on October 5 the
preferred alternative will be shown. She noted
that the group taking input from businesses
and the community will meet on August 10,
September 8 and September 22. She said that
these meetings are open to the public and that
notice has been posted, mailed to several
thousand people and sent to the newspapers.
Upon White's question, she indicated that they
had obtained a mailing list from the City, and
that notices were mailed to everyone who had
attended previous meetings.
Keller then introduced Leonard Garfield and
Consuelc Underwood of the 1% for Arts program,
Lead Architects Jerome Ernst and Charles Hartung
of TRA, William Valentine, Principal Design
Architect of HOK, and Charles Oraftik, Justice
Facility Planner of HOK. Garfield noted that
this project is the largest public art commis-
sion undertaken in King County, and said they
will make sure that the City of Kent, the Kent
Arts Commission and the community have direct
involvement in the art project. Ms. Underwood
explained that there will be portable pieces of
1
August 3, 1993
PUBLIC art, as well as artwork which will be integrated
COMMUNICATION into the facility. Mr. Ernst announced that
design work is now under way. He noted that TRA
designed the Convention Center over I-5, the
Metro Bus Tunnel Station, the ferry terminal
expansion and the original SeaTac Airport. He
noted that HOK will work with them, and that HOK
has done more jails than anyone else in the
country. He said that design should be complete
in time to begin construction in 1995.
Homestart Transitional Housing. Vern West of
Homestart noted that their first transitional
house was opened on April 1, 1993, with 11 men,
that they have since opened Share House with 6
men, and that they hope to open additional
houses in Federal Way, Des Moines, Kent, Renton
and Auburn. He explained that they work with
residents on behavior modification and self
management in a 3-month program. He noted that
it has cost them $60,000 to operate fully their
house for a year. He stated that they have
missed the deadline to apply for CDBG funding,
but would like to apply for any other special
funding for at least two more houses. He
invited the Ccuncilmembers to visit the Share
House at 23206 115th Avenue SE. Upon Woods'
suggestion, Orr agreed to discuss this item at a
future Planning Committee meeting.
CONSENT
WHITE MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A-M
CALENDAR
be approved. Orr seconded and the motion
carried.
MINUTES
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A)
of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of
_Approval
the regular Council meeting of July 20, 1993.
HEALTH &
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G)
SANITATION
Royal Woods Manor. ACCEPTANCE of the bill of
sale and warranty agreement submitted by Vortex,
Inc., for continuous operation and maintenance
of 267 feet of watermain extension, 253 feet of
sanitary sewer extension, 255 feet of street
improvements and 162 feet of storm sewers and
release of bonds after expiration of the mainte-
nance period, as recommended by the Public Works
Committee. The project is located in the vicin-
ity of 108th Ave. SE and SE 264th St.
2
August 3, 1993
STREETS (BIDS - ITEM 5A)
North 4th Avenue Street Rebuild.. This project
consists of furnishing and placing asphalt con-
crete pavement, roadway excavation, installation
of concrete driveways and other related work.
The bid opening was held on August 3rd.
The Public Works Committee has recommended that
the low bid be accepted for this contract,
provided that the low bid is within project
budget.
Public Works Director Wickstrom explained that
two bids were received, and that the low bid was
from M. A. Segale, Inc. for $243,274.00. He
recommended that the low bid be accepted. WHITE
MOVED that M. A. Segale, Inc. be awarded the
contract for the North 4th Avenue Street Rebuild
in the amount of $243,274.00. Bennett seconded
and the motion carried.
STREET VACATION (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
Mar Del Investment Street Vacation. ADOPTION
of Resolution No. 1368 setting September 7th as
the hearing date on the street vacation peti-
tion, for a portion of property on 45th Place
South, as recommended by the Public Works Com-
mittee.
TRAFFIC CONTROL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
Commute Trip Reduction Program for City
Employees. APPROVAL of the CTR program and
direction to all departments to initiate those
measures necessary in order to bring the City
into compliance with the Commute Trip Reduction
Act.
Recent Commute Trip Reduction legislation
requires the development of a CTR program. The
City has developed a program which identifies
those measures needed to attain the necessary
reduction in its single occupancy vehicle (SOV)
trips.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E)
High Capacity Transportation Grant AUTHORIZA-
TION for the Mayor to sign the interlocal
agreement for the High Capacity Transportation
Grant and to establish the budget for same,
3
August 3, 1993
TRAFFIC CONTROL should this funding become available from Metro.
The grant fund is in the amount of $37,000.
This has been recommended by the Public Works
Committee.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F)
Central Avenue & Pioneer Street Pedestrian
Signal. AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign
the City/County agreement for the pedestrian
actuated traffic signal at the intersection of
Central Ave. & Pioneer St. and to establish the
budget for same, as recommended by the Public
Works Committee. Grant funding is available in
the amount of $27,000.
TRANSPORTATION (PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 2A)
IMPROVEMENT six Year Transportation Improvement Program.
PLAN The Public Works Department has presented its
proposed annual Six Year Transportation Improve-
ment Program to the Public Works Committee.
This year's program is similar to last years in
that staff has prepared an interim project list-
ing for the purpose of securing ISTEA and TIB
funding.
Ed White, Transportation Engineer, noted that
this year's TIP includes approximately 24 proj-
ects in the Annual Element (1994), 9 projects in
the Second/Third Year Element (1995-1996), and
11 projects in the Fourth/Fifth/Sixth Year
Element (1997-1999). He noted that funding will
be approximately $139,300,000, which is an
increase over last year of about $20,000,000.
He added that the cost for the Annual Element is
approximately $28,000,000. He noted that TIB
funds, ISTEA funds and City matching funds are
to be used. He pointed out that this is an
interim TIP and that the City is currently
working on a Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Element which will be part of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Woods opened the public hearing. There were no
comments from the audience and WHITE MOVED to
close the public hearing. Orr seconded and
the motion carried. WHITE THEN MOVED that
Resolution No. 1367 be adopted authorizing the
Six Year Transportation Improvement Program.
Johnson seconded and the motion carried.
4
August 3, 1993
EQUIPMENT (BIDS - ITEM 5B)
RENTAL Truck Mounted Sewer & Catch 13asin Cleaner. Six
bids were received on this project. The two low
bidders, Sahlberg Equipment and Seattle Crane
did not meet the bid specification requirements.
It has been recommended by the Public Works
Committee that these two bids be rejected as
non -responsive and that the bid submitted by
Pacific Utilities in the amount of $129,000 plus
tax, for the 1993 Peabody Meyers Vactor, be
accepted. WHITE SO MOVED. Bennett seconded and
the motion carried.
POLICE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3J)
School Security Program/Officer - Budget Change.
APPROVAL of funding of an additional police
officer beyond the current allotment of 82.
This allows for an officer in the schools. The
cost to the City will be for equipment and the
use of a car. The School District will pay
basic wages and benefits.
PUBLIC SAFETY (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3K)
Police/Fire Surveillance Equipment Purchase.
APPROVAL of a joint proposal between Police and
Fire to upgrade the video surveillance equipment
used in the investigation of crimes.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4B)
196th Street Corridor Bridge Demolition. The
existing bridge over Mill Creek on 196th Street
has been determined to be hazardous by the
City's structural consultant -bridge inspector.
The bridge has deteriorated and holes have
developed over the bridge in the pavement
section. The Public Works Committee has
recommended that an emergency demolition be
commenced to remove the structure. The
principle responsible parties to the cleanup
effort have agreed to remove the contaminated
material along the bank:.
Assistant City Attorney Brubaker noted that this
is related to the Western Processing issue. He
explained that the proposed resolution elimi-
nates the requirements for a SEPA review and
for a public bid. WHITE MOVED that Resolution
No. 1369, finding and authorizing the removal of
the existing 196th Mill Creek Bridge on an
emergency basis, be adopted. Bennett seconded
and the motion carried.
5
August 3, 1993
PUBLIC SAFETY Panhandling Ordinance. Councilmember Bennett
distributed copies of a proposed ordinance
related to -panhandling and asked that it be
referred to the Public Safety Committee. Mann
agreed and it was so ordered.
DOWNTOWN (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3I)
PARTNERSHIP Downtown Partnership Funding 1993. AUTHORIZA-
TION to approve the 1993 budget change for
$7,000 to fund the balance of the 1993 Downtown
Partnership project. The Kent Downtown Part-
nership has met the matching fund goal of the
$25,000 from the community which funded the
organization through August 1993. The Budget
Committee recommended approval of this request
for continued financial support of their effort
to accomplish new programs for the business
community both for now and the future.
This budget is expected to promote and market
programs for Kent that would increase the abili-
ty to positively impact the local economy. The
request for $32,000 for matching funds for the
downtown partnership program in 1994 will be
considered as a portion of the 1994 budget pro-
cess. Over the last few years, this simple
program has resulted in over $200 million in
private and public funding commitments which are
now resulting in wholesale rebuilding of Kent's
downtown.
GOLF COMPLEX (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3L)
Capital and Maintenance Funding for Golf Com-
plex. APPROVAL of the expenditure of up to
$65,685 on the Golf Complex improvements in
1993, as recommended by the Budget Committee.
Funds from the SSMD Enterprises, Inc. contractor
buyout would be used to finance the request.
APPOINTMENTS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H)
Human Services Commission Appointments. CON-
FIRMATION of the Mayor's appointments of Janer
Wilford and Constance Stockton to serve as mem-
bers of the Kent Human Services Commission.
Ms. Wilford is in charge of arranging for
emergency services for Kent residents and the
homeless through St. James Episcopal Church and
works with the Kent Distribution Center for the
Salvation Army Emergency Funds. She has been an
I
APPOINTMENTS active member of St
more than 15 years
gious category. Ms
Duggan who resigned
tinue to 1/1/95.
August 3, 1993
. James Episcopal Church for
and will.represent the reli-
. Wilford will replace Peter
• Her appointment will con -
Ms. Stockton is employed at Kent Youth and
Family Services as Assistant Director and is a
member of Kent Soroptimists. She will represent
the service club category and will replace Dee
Moschel whose term expired. Her appointment
will continue to 1/1/96.
CAPITAL (PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 2B)
IMPROVEMENT 1994-1999 Capital Improvement Program.
PLAN This year's program focuses on the 1994 compo-
nent. Future years will be more clearly defined
following completion of the City's Capital
Facilities Plan as a required component of the
Growth Management Act. The 1994 requests have
been prioritized by City Council and reviewed by
the Council's Budget Committee. Memos from
various departments have been provided clarify-
ing or adjusting project requests.
Acting Finance Director Miller pointed out that
this plan includes a 1974 fire truck, a 1985
engine/aid car to be replaced in 1994, and
authorization to order an aerial fire truck in
1994 to be paid for in 1995. She added that a
complete fire equipment funding plan is part of
the Capital Facilities Plan.
Woods declared the public hearing open. Dee
Moschel, 425 Scenic Way, President of the Kent
Community Health Center, requested that the City
include $150,000 in the 1994 Capital Improvement
Program budget to acquire two lots adjacent to
the Health Center. She explained that Community
Health Centers of King County (CHCKC) will esta-
blish an agreement with the City for use of the
land to expand the Kent Community Health Center
(KCHC) and primary health care services. Jayne
Leet, Executive Director of KCHC, showed the
present location and the lots adjacent to it.
She noted that they are currently turning away
5-6 patients a day, that it is difficult to find
doctors because of the overcrowding, and that
there is no room to expand without acquiring
additional property because of codes. She noted
7
August 3, 1993
CAPITAL that with the additional property, they could
IMPROVEMENT double the number of exam rooms, add.two minor
PLAN operating rooms, lab space, office space and a
classroom. She said that after the land is
acquired, they would raise funds for a building
and would apply for grants. Upon Bennett's
question, McCarthy said that the City owns
houses but that none of them would be suitable
for their needs. Johnson suggested seeing
whether the City has any land that could be
used. Leet agreed to consider that, but said
they would like to use the existing facility,
which they own. McCarthy agreed to determine
what houses and land are available. Mann asked
that he also look into the possibility of sell-
ing property to afford the $150,000 requested.
Woods expressed support for this type of
service.
Bill Doolittle, 412 N. Washington, noted that
there is a budget request for $130,000 for tran-
sitional housing for single men. He noted that
the proposal is to acquire and remodel a house
for 11 homeless single men, and that the neigh-
bors are not aware of the proposal. He added
that there are at least 70 homeless single men
in Kent. He said the cost of buying and remod-
eling the house for eleven people is $490,186.
He noted that $360,000 of this amount has al-
ready been granted from State and County funds
and that Catholic Community Services has applied
for a HUD grant for $485,000, $130,000 of which
is for capital use, leaving $355,000 of the HUD
grant for the operating budget. He added that
the eleven residents must have jobs and must pay
30% of their salaries for rent, and that their
stay will average 6-8 months. He pointed out
that 16 single family permits were granted for
single family homes in June, and suggested buy-
ing houses. He noted that 30%-50% of homeless
men are veterans, and that there is no reference
to consulting with veterans group. He voiced
concern about the cost of acquiring and remodel-
ing the house, and the fact that neighbors are
not aware of it. He noted that San Francisco
spent $563,000 for two houses to home 16 people,
and said the cost of property in Kent is not
equal to the cost of property in San Francisco.
He requested that Council extend this item to
allow comments from the neighbors. He agreed
8
August 3, 1993
CAPITAL with Woods that some of the funding may not come
IMPROVEMENT through, and he suggested seeing whether the
PLAN transitional housing could be done less expen-
sively.
Mary Berkey, of King County Housing Development
Services, 4324 Phinney Avenue North, Seattle,
said that the total project would cost $490,000,
and that according to Kent's zoning codes, this
type of facility can't exist in a single family
zone; therefore property in a commercial or
multi -family zone must be purchased and the
price for that type of real estate must be paid.
She added that the house will be enlarged to
twelve bedrooms with room for a community space.
She said that it will cost $190,000 to add the
required square footage. She stated that they
have requested $130,OOJ from McKinney and that
although their application last year was denied,
the application for this year is improved. She
explained that the service portion ($385,000) is
for five years rather than one year and that it
covers the resident manager, a case manager, and
other operating costs such as utilities. She
said residents must seek employment and that
they coordinate employment services through the
veterans program.
Kathy Peters, Regional Director of Catholic
Community Services, 13012 SE 240th, Kent, ex-
plained that there are many single men in Kent
because Labor Ready is located in Kent. She
explained that although these men are working,
they cannot afford to pay first and last months
rent. She noted that transitional housing is
costly up front, but not over the long term.
She explained that in this instance neighbors
were not notified of the proposed use of the
house because they were unsure as to whether
they would receive funding. She noted that they
had previously chosen a site on Naden and that
when a public meeting ,,,as held, no one attended
it. She noted that the Employment Security
Department comes to their site to work with
veterans on job opportunities. White expressed
concern about the location near the Senior
Center and the Senior Housing project, and the
fact that there was no notice to the neighbors.
He pointed out that there is no point in ob-
taining public input after the property is
9
August 3, 1993
CAPITAL purchased. Peters stated that they will gather
IMPROVEMENT public input at this time, but that the location
PLAN is limited by zoning. Bennett concurred with
White's concern about notification, and ques-
tioned how long residents can stay at the house.
Peters explained that residents have to be
working within three months, and they will be
evicted if they are not employed by then.
Bennett agreed that money is a major issue and
commended the Way Back Inn's program. Peters
noted that it has become very costly to put
people up in the severe weather program, but
that more people keep coming. She noted that
shelters are less expensive than transitional
housing, but they do not help solve the problem.
She noted for White that other cities use motel/
hotel programs. She noted that because the
shelters in Seattle are considered dangerous and
are full, people leave Seattle and go to the
suburbs.
Orr pointed out that after the first eleven
residents are transitioned out, eleven more
people will be taken in, and that many people
could be helped. She shared the concern about
the neighborhood. Doolittle said that he was
not aware that the budget was for five years or
that veterans groups had been consulted, because
it was not contained in the printed material.
Lin Ball clarified that the operating and sup-
port services cost of $91,000 is for the first
year.
There were no further comments from the audience
and MANN MOVED to close the public hearing.
Houser seconded. Johnson said he would like to
have the hearing remain open and discuss this as
part of the budget process. HE MOVED that the
CIP be sent back to the Budget Committee for
further review. Mann and Houser both agreed.
White seconded Johnson's motion, which then
carried.
BUDGET (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3M)
(ADDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WOODS)
1994 Budget. AUTHORIZATION to set August 17,
1993, as the date for a public hearing to re-
ceive input on the 1994 Budget.
10
August 3, 1993
FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B)
Approval of Bills. APPROVAL of payment of the
bills received through July 30,. 1993 after
auditing by the Operations Committee at its
meeting on August 3, 1993.
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
7/16-7/30 132723-133179 $1,150,833.24
Approval of checks issued for payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
8/5/93 Checks: 185570-185966 $ 301,893.36
8/5/93 Advices: 8413-8734 $ 380,499.64
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
Sewerage Bonds. The Operations Committee has
recommended adoption of a bond ordinance and
authorization for the Mayor to sign a purchase
contract with Lehman Brothers for the Sewerage
Improvement and Refunding Bonds. The bond
issuance will be for approximately $8,635,000.
Approximately $3,511,000 will be used to refi-
nance the callable portion of the 1986 Drainage
Bonds. The issuance rate will be approximately
5.5 percent and will save the City approximately
$150,000 in net present value debt service. In
addition, $374,000 will refund the outstanding
principal on the City's portion of LID 330.
Approximately $4,750,000 of new revenue bonds
will be issued to finance drainage improvements
authorized and identified in the City's 6-year
Capital Improvement Plan for the drainage utili-
ty.
Acting Finance Director May Miller reported that
Standard & Poor's has confirmed the City's "A"
rating, and that Moody's has upgraded the rating
from "Baal" to "A". She introduced Dick King of
Lehman Brothers, who commended the City on the
upgrade. King noted that the final issue will
be for $8,690,000. He noted that LID 330 is
currently carrying assessment rates of approxi-
mately 7-3/4% and that the average interest rate
for the refinancing of the LID will be under 5%.
11
August 3, 1993
FINANCE He noted that the total cost of borrowing is
approximately 5.30%. .
HOUSER MOVED to adopt Bond Ordinance No. 3128
and to authorize the Mayor to sign a purchase
contract with Lehman Brothers. White seconded
and the motion carried.
REPORTS
Council President. Woods announced that the
King County Executive candidates will be at the
next Suburban Cities meeting to answer ques-
tions. She noted that the meeting will be held
at the usual time at the Bellevue Athletic Club.
EXECUTIVE
At 8:50 p.m. Woods announced an executive
SESSION
session of approximately 20 minutes to discuss
litigation and labor negotiations.
The regular meeting reconvened at 9:45 p.m.
LITIGATION
Canyon Drive. WHITE MOVED to accept the con-
struction contract for Canyon Drive Left Turn
Improvements as complete, to authorize release
of retainage after receipt of State releases, to
accept the settlement of $92,000 and to author-
ize the transfer of $100,000 from the East
Valley Highway Improvement Project Fund R68 to
the Canyon Drive Project Fund R28. Houser
seconded and the motion carried. Lubovich ex-
plained that Zuluaga Construction had filed suit
against the City on a claim and that this set-
tlement had been proposed.
LABOR
Non -Represented Employees. JOHNSON MOVED to
NEGOTIATIONS
approve a 3% COLA for non -represented employees
effective August 1, 1993, excluding department
heads, and that a longevity program establishing
1% at 5 years, 2% at 10 years, and 3% at 20
years be adopted. Houser seconded. Johnson
pointed out that the Teamsters, Firefighters,
and AFSCME unions were all settled at 3%. The
motion then carried.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Q�
Brenda Jacober, CMC
City Clerk
12
'v fie' Kent City Council Meeting
c ln'em Date August 17, 1993
cc n Category Consent Calendar
(�eVV1Wd A0f_ of 6i(I oodl'me)
1. SUBJECT: AUBURN THOROUGHBRED HORSE RACING FACILITY f
2. SUMMARY STATiM 4-ENT: Resolution No.sappeftjjCq��37� SifP°i
development of a thoroughbred horse racing facility
in the City of Auburn. The City of Kent believes that the
establishment of such a facility would economically benefit the
residents of Kent as well as residents of Auburn and other
adjoining local areas. This resolution endorses the establish-
ment and development of this facility subject to appropriate
mitigation of environmental and traffic impacts. LC) occ, S
dead Ives0 u 1c,(N 137C: 1r +c. r,e� CC-00rd ) as re� ue54 CJ
� k h' 1;^. JEb -� w�rove
oc�l,ttle ofion c�rr�ed
C' S D u i b rl 1 3 7C . LA)�%E .> e c. c ! :- eti� a� cL e Yvi
3. EXHIBITS: Resolution
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Operations 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: $ N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3C `�
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, supporting the
establishment and development of a
thoroughbred horseracing facility within the
City of Auburn.
WHEREAS, a thoroughbred horseracing facility has been
proposed for development in the City of Auburn for professional
horseracing; and
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn supports the development of
a thoroughbred horseracing facility; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kent believes
that the establishment of such a horseracing facility would
economically benefit the residents of the City of Kent as well as
the residents of the City of Auburn and other adjoining local
areas; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Kent
hereby endorses the establishment and development of a thoroughbred
horseracing facility in the City of Auburn as currently proposed
subject to appropriate mitigation of environmental and traffic
impacts.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this day of 1 1993.
day of
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this
1993.
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No. passed by the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, the day of 1993.
horsrace.res
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
2
(SEAL)
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 17, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: POLICE SHOOTING RANGE SOUNDPROOFING
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Safety
Committee, approval is requested to budget $20,000 from the
Public Safety Bond Issue for soundproofing the Police Shooting
Range.
No se lever abatement in the firing range needs to meet control
ley 1 standard of WAC 296.62..09019 through 27. See Exhibits
for nsu}tant's report by Towne, Richards and.Chaudiere and
architacts review and proposal by Edberg and Christiansen.
3. EXHIBITS: Cover memo of July 29, 1993 to Public Safety
Committee, April 2, 1993 Consultant proposal, June 30, 1993
Consultant Report Summary, June 1, 1993 Consultant Report,
July 26, 1993 Architect's Review and Construction Cost
Estimate, July 27, 1993 Architect's Fee Proposal and July 19,
1993 Review and Cost Estimate Billing
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Executive Committee and Public Safety
Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO __ YES_
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended"X A& Not Recommended
-Zr5:1
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $15 000 to 18,000 max
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Construction Bond Fund Current Balance of
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3D
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 29, 1993
TO: Kelli Rogers
FROM: Ken Chatwin, Risk/Safety Analyst
SUBJECT: Shooting Range Hearing Loss Fix/Public Safety Committee
Kelli: Please accept this as the cover letter for submission to
the Public Safety Committee. This has been a lengthy time frame of
documenting a problem, developing an acceptable, effective fix and
producing an architect's estimate.
The Executive Committee has reviewed and suggested that the
cost of the sound level abatement to comply with noise level
monitoring and control (WAC 296-62-09019 thru 27) can be funded out
of some $70,000 unspent bond funds for this project before the
balance is credit back to the bonded indebtedness.
Attached are memos of background summary dated April 2, 1993
and June 30, 1993 that led to the independent consultant's report.
Copy of the consultant's report from Towne, Richards and
Chaudiere, Inc. proposing the recommended fix and options. The
last page is a diagram summary and over view of areas to be sound
insulated.
Edberg and Christiansen have responded to the fix and
recommendations with cost estimates under date of July 26, 1993.
Bottom line is the fix is necessary, going to another architect
would be just as expensive, if not more so. In defense of their
position from a design standpoint, they were brought into the
original construction and design stage under a disadvantage picking
up and completing the original architect's project.
The last exhibit is a contract proposal from Edberg and
Christianson dated July 27, 1993, outlining scope of work and
compensation of $2,800.00 plus reimbursable expenses of $200.00 as
an estimate.
Total cost estimate is $13,177 at this point and I will not be
surprised if the cost of the doors and effective sound barrier seal
is low. I still recommend the over all cost be considered at this
point in the $15,000 to $20,000 range.
CC: Tony McCarthy, Chief Administrative Officer
Don Olson, Human Resources Directo�-
Ed Crawford, Police Chief
Charlie Lindsey, Customer Services Manager
CHIN,KEN-/_KENT70/PR___HPDesk print_
g
Messa e. Dated: 04/02/93 at 0956. �' ��� `��' i�''r•1
I
Subject: Shooting RangeProposal
Consultants
Sender: Ken CHATWIN / KENT70/PR Contents: 2.
Part 1.
FROM: Ken CHATWIN / KENT70/PR II Il
TO: Don OLSON / KENT70/PR
CC: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/AD f U
Part 2.
Don: You will recall that both myself and the Police Department have in
the past worked on what we both know is a noise level problem. What we
both thought would be a simple issue to establish concerns and solve with
a proposal did not work out because of concerns in our Code Enforcement
review and construction permit application approval.
Brief history, In the summer of 1991 I brought in the Scott Wetzel Safety
Engineer to take some noise level readings that confirmed a problem. I then
expanded for compliance of the law our annual hearing tests to include all
police officers exposed and active in the shooting range operations as
instructors and range officer personnel to extablish their hearing base
line. I can now document a very a significant loss of hearing in six (6)
officers per attached in one year! In November 1992 we have base line
tested three more officers involved in the shooting range and I can guarantee
you these three will show a hearing loss by November 1993.
47e have a problem, everyone of these are valid hearing loss Workers
Compensations claims already, just not filed SET! If the loss of hearing
is not stablized when Washington Audiology completes their testing in the
fall of 1993, we as the employer will have to formally open claim files on
these or Washington Audiology will have to do so for us.
r.e problem, in my opinionis the result of a shooting range design and
-onstruction problem, and the next step is to confirm with a consultants
study a course of recommendations for correction. I took the liberty to
contact the best of the recommended sound abatement consultants with specific
documented shooting range design and with a documented professional staff.
Towne, Richards and Chaudiere, Inc. is just completing a contract as the
consultant to the City of Anchorage's Police Shooting Range. The individual
I dealt with is Mr. Dan Bruck, who has a Ph.D. in Acoustics.
I recommend we execute this contract ASAP for the $2400 and charge it to
the Workers Compensation expense fund as a safety compliance expense. We
either deal with this cost and the cost to correct this problem or we will
very shortely be paying much more as partial permanent hearing loss claims
that could be of the type of permanent damage that could prohibit a police
officer from continuing in his profession, ie some dollar amount of
permanent disability.
C,iATWIN,KEN / KENT70/PR - HPDesk print.
---------------------------------------
Me age. Dated: 06/30/93 at 1131.
Su),ject: Shooting Range Consultany's Reportt
Sender: Ken CHATWIN / KENT70/PR Contents: 2.
Part 1
FROM: Ken CHATWIN / KENT70/PR
TO: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/AD
CC: Ed CRAWFORD / KENT70/PD
Roger LUBOVICH / KENT70/LW
Don OLSON / KENT70/PR
Part 2.
T`ony: In April 1993 I outlined an ongoing noise level problem and hearing
detoriation problem with our Police Shooting Range Officer personnel at the
',range.
That-correspondance is attached recommending that we contract with a
professional acoustics firm that had indoor shooting range expertise to
analyze and provide corrective recommendations and options.
That report from Mr. Dan Bruck, Ph.D of Towne, Richards and Chardiere, Inc.
is attached for your review. My verbal opinion that this range lacked
pr :r design was not very well accepted when I first arrived on
board for risk and safety duties. I can appreciate that reaction especially
since this was an architect design, But the facts, problems and consultant
report does support that opinion now.
I am not proposing we consider any action over the design and the fix, but
ve do have a problem. We have the acoustics consultant proposal with various
3ptions that entail "good, better and best" steps, we are looking at some
fairly extensive costs on a basics only approach that I estimate at $15,000
o $20,000. What we need and do not have is an architects estimate of the
carious progression options as to cost.. We need an architect to draw up
Did specifications and contract language before we go out to bid which in
-�y opinion is a cost we should not have to absorb nor should we be trying
�nalyz bids without some before hand fairly accurate cost estimates.
'he consultants contract was to conduct noise level studies and recommend
orrections for sound level reductions down to acceptable levels that with
-equired individaul hearing protection can then control to acceptable levels
,er WAC 296-62.09019 thru 26. -
'he consultant is a sound level reduction engineer that has recommend what
.eeds to be done with up to four products and the location source for that
roduct to accomplish each item of the objective, but they are not
onstructions cost estimate engineers nor contractors.
ft all this has been said and documented, we are still faced with the
ime and expense of putting together bid documents and contract language.
hat I am proposing is that we ask our original architect to review and
.ssist at their time and cost through to the final contract award. Taxpayers
eally should not have to fund this and the cost of construction, they
,ve already funded the $2400 cost of the consultant.
We do not want to forget we have revenue generating capabilities with this
facility from other law enforcement agencies, which we have not been able
to pursue, the need by these other agencies is real.
T®w+ne,R'schards & Chaudiere, hc,
Consultants in Sound and Vibration
June 1, 1993
Mr. Ken Chatwin
City of Kent
Human Resources Office
220 4th Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032
RegardinZD
g: Acoustical Recommendations
City of Kent Firing Range
Dear Mr. Chatwin:
JUN 2 1993
PERSONNEL DEP-
fob #93.034
This report presents an evaluation of the acoustical conditions at the subject project,
recommendations for reducing reverberant sound levels in the range, and improving sound
transmission loss between the range and adjacent occupied spaces. This report is based on
measurements and observations obtained during our visit to the project site on April 23,
1993.
EVALUATION
The current acoustical conditions in the range are due to the lack of sound absorbing
material on range interior surfaces, and inadequate sound isolation between the range and
adjacent occupied spaces.
The existing range interior finishes are steel and concrete, with an approximately 1/2"
thickness of mineral tile on the ceiling above the ready area. The mineral tile provides a
small degree of sound absorption, but the steel and concrete are highly reflective and are
the primary reason for the high reverberant sound levels and long reverberation time in the
range. The addition of an appropriate amount of sound absorptive material in the range
will significantly reduce reverberant sound levels.
The primary sound transmission paths between the range and adjacent spaces are through
the corridor and storage room doors, the conference room wall, and the control room
observation window.
The corridor and storage room doors have no seals and have an approximately 1/2"
undercut. This permits range noise to enter the corridor and consequently the control
room and conference room. Noise entering; the storage room is transmitted through the
iL�:; ��F �.,.,�.i•� ��n
Mr. Ken Chatwin
Kent Firing Range
June 1, 1993
Page 2
suspended ceiling and into the return air plenum, where it is distributed via return air
grilles to all the occupied spaces adjacent to the firing lanes.
The control room window, although apparently bullet proof, is a single pane of glass and is
inadequate for noise control. The preferred glazing configuration is a double -glazed
window with the maximum possible air space between the two panes of glass. There is also
an electrical outlet box below the control desk that is a probable sound leak for noise
generated in the range.
Firing range noise is transmitted to the conference room through the return air plenum,
door, and through the west wall. The west wall should be a separate framed partition,
structurally isolated from the CMU wall that encloses the firing range. Vibration observed
in the wall during testing indicates that there is rigid contact between the CMU and frame
partition which provides a structure -borne sound path to the conference room for noise
generated in the firing range.
We have reviewed the mechanical drawings and determined that there are no significant
acoustical problems with the mechanical system other than the return air sound
transmission path.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Firing Range Interior
We recommend the installation of acoustical wall panels on the side and rear walls of the
ready area, extending into the firing range 10 feet beyond the ceiling above the ready area.
Panels should also be installed on the side walls at the target end of the range, extending 20
feet from the rear target line toward the firing stalls (see enclosed drawings). The panels
should be 6 feet in height, and be installed so that the bottom edge is one foot above the
floor to minimize exposure to water during floor washing. The panels should be 2"-thick
and have a Noise Reduction Coefficient (NRC) of 0.95 or higher. Panel covering can be
perforated metal or perforated vinyl. Recommended panels are Wall Technology A200
WP Acoustical Panels with perforated vinyl finish, available locally from Schwarz &
Associates (206) 277-0631; or Respond ACT vinyl wrapped absorptive panels, 2"-thick ,
manufactured by Conwed and available locally from CISSI Inc., (206) 575-0607. It may be
desirable to install wall panels with perforated metal facing rather than vinyl for durability
and ease of cleaning. Recommended perforated metal panels are IAC Noise -Foil NR1-2N
panels, represented locally by Dave Kentala at Olympic Engineered Sales, Inc.
Towne, Richards & Chaudiere, Inc.
C_Lll 11" "I Sound ,t,0 Vfn1 II-0n
Mr. Ken Chatwin
Kent Firing Range
June 1, 1993
Page 3
(206) 454-0701; or Eckoustic Functional Panels (EFP) with fiberglass cloth wrapped
insulation, manufactured by Eckel Industries, Inc. and represented locally by McDougall
Control Company (206) 883-9000.
Deflectors & Ready Area Ceiling
The shot deflectors suspended from the ceiling and rnth of the
uning the lengrange should
be covered on front and back with a 2"-thick glass fiber panel as described in the wall panel
section above. It may be less expensive to cover at least the back of the deflectors with a
plain glass fiber board rather than a fabric covered panel.
The ceiling above the ready area currently has a 1/2"-thick mineral tile applied directly to
the suspended ceiling. The sound absorption of this ceiling area can be improved by
replacing or covering the mineral tile with a 1-1/2"-thick Glass fiber ceiling panel such as
Armstrong Painted Nubby or U.S. Gypsum Premier Nubby. Armstrong products are
available locally from Armstrong World Industries in Bellevue, Washington 1-800-448-
1405; U.S. Gypsum is represented by Chris Schmidt in Redmond, Washington (206) 868-
4838.
Doors
The most effective measure for reducing range noise in the control room and conference
room is to add a second door in the corridor, creating a vestibule between the range and
the other occupied spaces. A vestibule will not only reduce overall firing range noise, but
will allow passage through the range door during firing without direct sound transmission
into the corridor. The additional door should have a Sound Transmission Class (STC)
rating of 38 or higher. See enclosed Door Type 3 information for performance
specifications and recommended door manufacturers.
The vestibule should have one 4'x6' acoustical wall panel on each side wall to absorb noise
from the range.
The range/corridor and range storage doors should be fitted with automatic threshold
closures and adjustable doors stops. If a vestibule is not constructed as recommended
above, the control room and conference room doors should also be fitted with threshold
closures and stops. Recommended door hardware and factory representatives are listed in
the enclosed threshold closure and door stop infonnatioll.
Towne, Richards & Chaudiere, Inc.
ConiIIII.L"IS ui Sound r�nrl Vihri0i�n
Mr. Ken Chatwin
Kent Firing Range
June 1, 1993
Page 4
Control Room
The control room relight is a single pane of glass and should be fitted with a second pane of
laminated glass on the control room side of the window frame in all three sections of the
window. The additional glass should be a minimum 1/4"-thick, laminated, and be fitted
with resilient gaskets between the glass and frame around the entire perimeter. The new
glass should be located on the inner edge of the window frame, creating an approximately
2"-3" air space between the existing and new glass.
The electrical outlet box below the counter in the control room should be caulked around
the perimeter and covered with an appropriate plate. The box is currently completely open
and is a probable sound path from the range.
Return Air Grilles
The return air grilles in the conference and control rooms are approximately 2' square
openings to the plenum above the ceiling. These openings provide a direct path to the
control and conference rooms for noise in the plenum. If the addition of door seals does
not adequately eliminate noise entering the plenum, we recommend that lined elbows be
installed on the return air grilles. The elbows should be lined with 2"-thick duct liner board
such as Owens-Corning Fiberglass Duct Liner Board and fitted over the return air Grille in
the plenum above the ceiling. The elbows should have the same inside dimension as the
return air ceiling opening as a minimum. Owens-Corning products are available locally at
(206) 562-4700.�
Conference Room
The gypsum board conference room/firing range partition is apparently rigidly attached to
the CMU range partition and is contributing to noise levels in the conference room via this
structure -borne sound path. The sound transmission loss can be improved by constructing
a separate frame partition on the west wall inside the conference room, -with a Y gap
between the frame partition and existing gypsum board (see enclosed detail). A sawcut
should be made vertically in the existing gypsum board between the new and existing
construction, extending from floor to ceiling, to break the structural sound path along the
wall. The new partition should extend from the floor to the roof structure above the
suspended ceiling, which will be a difficult installation due to ductwork, electrical conduit,
etc. If it is not possible to extend to the roof structure, it wilt be acceptable (although not
as effective) if the partition extends 6" - S" above the suspended ceiling. AVe recommend
Towne, Richards & Chaudiere. Inc.
Lk, nsullnnl;: i11 COun'� and V9 'f I . "l
Mr. Ken Chatwin
Kent Firing Range
June 1, 1993
Page 5
that this construction take place only if noise levels in the conference room are
unacceptable after door and wall treatment in the range, and lined elbows installed on the
return air grille.
The prioritized list of recommendations is as follows:
1. Construction of a vestibule for the range entry and door seals, and threshold
closures on corridor and storage room doors. If a vestibule is not constructed,
threshold closures and seals should also be installed on the control room and
conference room doors.
2. Installation of acoustical panels on walls and deflectors in the firing range. If
additional reverberant noise reduction is required after installation of wall and
deflector panels, IT glass fiber panels should be added to the ceilinv above the
ready area.
3. Addition of a second pane of laminated glass for the control room relight. Caulk
and seal electrical outlet box below counter.
4. Installation of lined elbows on return air urilles.
5. Construction of a separate frame partition on the conference room west wall.
If you have any questions or require further information, please contact our office.
Sincerely yours,
TOWNE, RICHARDS & CHAUDIERE, INC.
Daniel C. Bruck, Ph.D.
Acoustical Consultant
DCB/mll
Enclosures
Towne. Richards & Chaudiere, Inc.
COI;adI:til!; in 5ountf w'!
E G
9
w
n
O to
zo-a
311191153A
$'.3rv.J ll]m l.:Ilin O:v w�IHI—.L
I \
fJ IFS
Sl3.V.J l'Y.x IY:II5n0]. N]IHl _.:
1
i'.dbCr�Y)
chrisn"1115Ci1
City of Kent
Human Resources Office
220 - 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Attention: Mr. Ken Chatwin
RE: City of Kent Firing Range
Analysis of Acoustical Recommendations
Dear Mr. Chatwin:
'; t�CF
jo 9
13y3
July 26, 1993
As you have requested, we have reviewed your memoranda dated 04/02/93 and
06/30/93 along with the Report and Acoustical Recommendations prepared by Mr.
Daniel Bruck, PhD., from the office of Towne, Richards & Chaudiere, Inc., dated June
1, 1993. Our first response is directed at your memoranda which imply that noise
levels reached in the range are a design and construction problem and that the
taxpayers should not have to fund the cost of the design and construction of any
proposed improvements. With this in mind, e offer the following information
concerning the history of the range building desi-,n process and our opinions of the
above referenced implications:
We assumed the design responsibility for this project following the release of the
original Architect. At this point, we were given the task to design the project
starting from scratch for the remaining fee left over after the original consultant
was paid for services to date, and complete it within the original schedule. We
responded to the very ambitious schedule and accepted the fact that there were
no available funds for any specialty consultants. If funds were available at the
time, the taxpayers would have faced additional design and construction costs
to incorporate the additional acoustical matt vials and the increased value of the
building.
2. During the design process, we were directed by our client to provide steel plate
containment lining completely around the interior walls. At this time we com-
mented and discussed with our client the intended use of the range and possible
locations of acoustical materials to lower the noise levels and reverberation.
Proposed areas of applied acoustical materials that were discussed were (a) the
ceiling in front and behind the firing line, (b) the face of the suspended bullet
deflectors, and (c) walls around and behind .he firing line. The result was that
we were directed to provide acoustical ceiling panels 12 feet in front of and
behind the firing range. There was to be n�) acoustical treatment on the walls
July 26, 1993
Page -2-
or deflectors because of the anticipated operational use of the range and the
continual maintenance and replacement cost of the bullet damaged materials.
It is our recollection that we also discussed the fact that we were not prohibiting
the installation of additional wall and ceiling panels in the future if it was
determined to be necessary. A "wait and see" approach was adopted.
3. The steel plate containment walls were installed ''out of square" as recommended
by the range equipment supplier to reduce reverberant noise. In addition, the
panels were installed with an overlap method and all screw heads were to be
ground smooth to prevent any blunt or protruding edges that could possibly
deflect stray bullets. It was also our understanding that different training
scenarios may be set up within the range that may allow for some shooting not
directly parallel to the containment walls.
ANALYSIS OF ACOUSTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
(Prioritized list from Page 5 of Report)
1. We agree that the creation of a vestibule at the entrance to the Range would
definitely be an asset in reducing the noisc level in the corridor and Prep Area
as well as reducing the noise entering through the Control Room and Conference
Room doors. When the Range door is open, the noise entering the plenum
space and ultimately other occupied spaces .would not be reduced unless
additional revisions are made above the ceiling at the vestibule to stop this
penetration into the plenum. Additionally, the HVAC diffuser must be relocated
outside of the vestibule which would also reduce noise passing through ductwork
and continue proper operation of the Hv.-a(-- system. All of this, however, is not
possible due to recent accessibility code requirements. The 1991 Uniform
Building Code has been revised to include accessibility requirements that will not
allow the creation of a vestibule at the proposed location due to inadequate un-
obstructed space clearances at the strike si:le of the door and distance between
doors. All new construction must be in accordance with the 1991 U.B.C.
adopted by the City of Kent.
RECOMMENDATION: Add door seals and threshold closures on Corridor
(Range) and Storage doors as well as on the Conference and Control Room
doors. Add acoustical wall panels in the cc,rriclor to absorb some sound entering
the Corridor when the door is open.
2. Because of previous design decisions described earlier in this report, we cannot
recommend any panel installation beyond the firing line that will add to
increased maintenance cost and the possibility of cleflecting stray bullets back
July 26, 1993
Page -3-
towards the firing line. We agree that the proposed recommendations are good
in attempting to reduce noise levels but the City of Kent must evaluate all
potential liabilities and initial and future costs prior to finalizing the direction
taken.
RECOMMENDATION: Add unlaced acoustical panels to the back side only of
the bullet deflectors. Add 4' x 6' acoustical panels on the three walls behind the
firing line. Add acoustical panels at the ceiling above the ready area. Additional
wall, deflector, and ceiling panels may be added as found to be appropriate by
the City of Kent.
3. We agree that an additional pane of glass and sealing any potential air leaks
would be beneficial.
RECOMMENDATION: Add a second pane of laminated glass for the Control
Room relite and caulk and seal electrical outlet box below counter.
4. We agree that lined elbows on the return air grilles would be beneficial in
reducing noise from the plenum space into occupied spaces.
RECOMMENDATION: Unless the noise penetrating the suspended acoustical
ceiling into the plenum is substantially reduced, the noise through the return air
grilles will continue. Without the addition of a vestibule and ceiling revisions,
there is nothing to stop the noise into the plenum when the corridor (Range)
door is open. Adding lined return air elbows in the Conference and Control
Rooms is recommended.
5. We are not certain as to the severity of the noise level passing through this wall
but we do agree that a separate wall will aid in lowering the transmission of
sound if built full height to the flat roof above the Range. Some suspended
ceiling revisions must also be done.
RECOMMENDATION: We agree with the Report to do all other recommended
additions first and then determine the necessity of this work.
ESTIMATED COSTS (Tax and Overhead/Profit not included)
RECOMMENDATION NO. ONE:
A. Door seals and threshold closures.
4 doors ct $1100.00 each = $1,600.00
July 26, 1993
Page -4-
B. Perforated vinyl wall panels (2")
96 SF @ $8.00/SF = $ 825.00
RECOMMENDATION NO. TWO:
A. Unfaced acoustical panels behind
deflectors (2")
280 SF @ $2.92/SF = $ 818.00
B. Perforated abuse resistant wall
panels (2")
336 SF @ $10.63/SF = S3,572.00
C. Nubby face ceiling panels (2")
384 SF @ $5.45iSF = $2,093.00
RECOMMENDATION NO. THREE:
A. Add second pane of glass and seal
at Control Room relites
Furnish and install = S 375.00
RECOMMENDATION NO. FOUR:
A. Add lined elbows at Control and
Conference Room grilles
2 @ $150.00 each $ 300.00
RECOMMENDATION NO. FIVE:
A. Add separate partition wall
132 SF @ $4.50/SF = $ 594.00
Should you have any questions regarding any of the above, or if we may be of further
assistance, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
Robert L. Christiansen, AIA
Partner
RLC:sv
CC: Charlie Lindsey, Director of Support Services
City of Kent
Support Services Office
220 - 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Attention: Mr. Charlie Lindsey
Director - Support Services
RE: Fee Proposal
City of Kent Firing Range
Acoustical Upgrades
Dear Charlie:
July 27, 1993
Edberg/Christiansen Architects is pleased to have the opportunity to present a fee
proposal for providing architectural design servic -s ror the City of Kent Firing Range
Acoustical Upgrades.
SCOPE OF WORK
1. Provide floor plan and building longitudinal section drawings illustrating the areas
of work, location, and extent of all improvements.
2. Provide material specifications of all nev., materials and equipment on the
drawings.
3. Provide design details and manufacturer's installation details for door seals,
threshold closures, wall panels, deflector panels, ceiling panels, and additional
relite glass. It is anticipated that the new wall in the Conference Room will not
be required and is not included in this proposal.
4. Conduct a pre -bid conference and assist Owner during the Bidding Phase.
5. Provide two (2) Construction Phase field investigation trips with reports of
findings and verification of Final Completion of the work.
COMPENSATION
Edberg/Christiansen Architects will provide the above outlined services for a lump sum
fee of $2,800.00 plus reimbursable expenses estimated not to exceed $200.00 for
reproduction, postage, paper handling and computer expenses involved in the project.
Anlr.l -;.:,. n ,,:
c
r;ot,C [ ..�
July 27, 1993
Page -2-
We are prepared to start work immediately upon your authorization. Should you have
any questions regarding the _foregoing, or if we may be of further assistance, please
contact our office.
Sincerely,
Robert L. Christiansen, AIA
Partner
RLC:sv
E(A Cl
ch nsti"1;TSCi ;
A I;` li:Cti:_`
CITY of KENT Jyly 29, 1993
220 - 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Attn: Mr, Charlie Lindsey
Director of Support Services
RE: City of Kent Firing Range
Job No. 30129
Professional Services through July 29, 1993:
8.25 Hours @ $86.00/hr. $709.50
1.0 Hours @ $35.47/hr. 35.47
Reimbursables
Postage 1,04
Total Professional Services S74CD. 00
Amount Due at This Time $746.00
AL 3 0 1993
,EHSUr4INEL DEP1
AI lIitCCCS
CITY of KENT July 29, 1993
220 - 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Attn: Mr. Charlie Lindsey
Director of Support Services
RE: City of Kent Firing Range
Dear Charlie:
Enclosed is Invoice #1 from Edberg/Christiansen Architects which reflects work com-
pleted on subject project thru July 29, 1993 and reimbursable expenses to date. This
invoice represents preliminary investigation and analysis of the Towne, Richards and
Chaudiere, Inc. - Report and Acoustical Recommendations, dated June 1, 1993.
Please call if you have any questions.
Respectfully,
Robert L. Christiansen, AIA
Partner
RLC:sv
Enclosure
N
1"
�V Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 17, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor's appointment
of Bob MacIsaac to serve as a member of the Kent Planning Com-
mission. Mr. MacIsaac owns and manages MacIsaac Construction
and was previously employed by General Construction for
15 years. He is a long-time Kent resident and is interested
in Kent's future. Mr. MacIsaac will replace Tracy Antley who
resigned. His appointment will continue to 12/31/93.
3
4.
5.
0
/A
EXHIBITS: Memo from Mayor Kelleher
RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Kelleher
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
M
s, Councilmember seconds
Council Agenda
Item No. 3E+'
MEMORANDUM
TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY UNCIL PRESIDENT
CITY COUNCIL MEMB S /
FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR \ c,v✓
DATE: AUGUST 4, 1993
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF ROBERT (BOB) MacISAAC TO KENT PLANNING COMMISSION
I have recently appointed Bob MacIsaac to serve as a member of the Kent Planning Commission.
Mr. MacIsaac currently owns and manages his own company, MacIsaac Construction in Kent, and
previously worked for General Construction for 15 years. Mr. MacIsaac has been a resident of Kent
since 1966 and has an ongoing interest is Kent s future. He will replace Tracy Antley, who
resigned, and his appointment will continue to 12/31/93.
I submit this for your confirmation.
DK:jb
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 17, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: GAME OF LIFE 193 YOUTH WELLNESS CONFERENCE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Safety
Committee on 7/19/93, acceptance of a $7,500 contribution from
the Beer Institute and a $1,000 contribution from the Kent
Chamber of Commerce Foundation to the Drinking Driver Task
Force for the 1993 "Game of Life" Youth Wellness Conference.
3. EXHIBITS: Letters from the contributors
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee 7/19/93 (2-0) and
Council President
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES /`
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Z it M Not Recommended
t��
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $8,500
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
seconds
Council Agenda
Item No. 3F i'
N
BEcR'INSTITUTE COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE FUND
---
Ms. Di --,= Lewis
Jcc= MS i.cw_S
_ �.0 _cBS-._ �-. _-_�__. _✓''�: �_.�._ VOL'- .._mac--="--" __`S
�„'_-- _�_�,=;,'v?C
1n Cne aoun-- _- - - _
-_ _
��'!''i. ._.. _v-,�'-LS_SL_.�_...._ _._.__ w a S .sec__
CS z c _ w- _ -_?-_ waS S C
7:�_�
ZZIIt-, n--- _------`Vc_vame_ 1C w---
_=s-='- _-
_
Nazi
_Y_'1ave e1C-C S?C
_ W_S VOL' SUCceSS in VCL'=
n = V c UT r-
_ 7
c _;
�.._.c .:.,cam
225 Eye Street. N.W. Wasnincron. G.0 20005 ;2C2; 737-2337
Y
July 15, 1993
Dianne Lewis
Drinking Driver Task Force
Kent, Washington
Dianne,
It is with great pleasure that I am able to inform you
that the Kent Chamber of Commerce Foundation has approved
your grant request in the amount of $1000. for "Game of
Life 193 Youth wellness Conference".
As we discussed, the grant will be formally presented at
the August 17t� meeting of the Kent City Council. At
present, Linda Cattey (Foundation President) and I plan
to attend.
We thank you for your contributions to solving the
Problems in raising the children in our community and
look forward to hearing about the success of your
program.
�Sincerely,
J.W. (Jim) McGinnis
Chairman, Education
Grants Committee
Kent Chamber of Commerce Foundation
cc: Linda Cattey
Becky Hanks
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 17, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: YOUTH/TEEN CENTER - CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION AND
BUDGET
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization for the Mayor to sign the
Youth/Teen Activity Center agreement between the City and
Miller/Hull Partnership Architects, after final approval by the
Law Department. The City of Kent's Youth/Teen Center Task
Force has requested approval be granted to complete a planning
and architectural design plan for a community youth/teen
center. The plan involves the siting development, facility
planning and estimated project cost. The Miller/Hull
Partnership Architecture and Planning firm was selected for
this project.
3. EXHIBITS: Request for Proposal, Youth/Teen Center workplan,
memo to Parks Committee, list of respondents to RFP
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Budget Committee 3-22-93 (3-0) and
Parks Committee 8-10-93 (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES_
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended7�v\ Not Recommended
��
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $30,000
SOURCE OF FUNDS: CIP _
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
VX46000 ill
Council Agenda
Item No. 3G �
FROM:
CITY OF KENT
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
AUGUST 31 1993
MEMO
Parks Committee: Jim Bennett, Chair
Jon Johnson
Christi Houser }
I �
Cheryl M. Fraser, Facility Manager
SUBJECT: Youth/Teen Center - Architect Selection
The City of Kent's Youth/Teen Center Task Force has requested
that approval be granted to complete a planning and architectural
design plan for a community Youth/Teen Center. The plan involves
the siting development, facility planning, and estimated project
cost. The Miller/Hall Partnership Architecture and Planning Firm
is the first choice of the committee. At the writing of this memo
the final dollar amount is not available but will be presented at
the August 10, 1993, Parks Committee meeting. The Budget Committee
has approved up to $30,00o for architectural fees.
Background Information Information - (Process of selection)
A Request for Proposal (RFP) seeking statement of
qualifications from architectural firms was published in the local
newspapers June 2-30, 1993. A total of 86 firms requested the RFP
packets and of those, twenty filed submittals. A sub -committee of
the Youth/Teen Center Task Force reviewed and selected the top five
firms. Each of the five firms were notified and asked to prepare
a 30 minute presentation for our full committee on Monday, August
2, 1993. The Task Force conducted interviews and selected
Miller/Hall Partnership as the first choice. At the writing of
this memo, the Legal Department staff is finalizing the fees and
contract. The dollar amount will be presented at the Augsut loth
Parks Committee meeting.
Miller/HallMiller/Hall partnership - Information
The Miller/Hall Partnership team has considerable experience
designing community center facilities and are familiar and
comfortable with the public interaction process in working with
citizen groups and city councils. One of their most recent and
relevant projects is the Port Townsend Community Center which
combines a youth center, senior center, and Head Start program in
a single complex. In addition, they are currently working on the
new Garfield Community Center scheduled to begin construction in
October 1993. The Youth/Teen Center members felt the Miller/Hall
group is familiar with issues that relate to youth/teen user
groups.
cc: Paul Mann, Chair, Task Force
Tony McCarthy, Chief Adminstrative Officer
Tom Brubaker, Assistant City Attorney
Patrice Thorell, Acting Parks Director
Attachments:
Youth/Teen Center Work Plan
Youth/Teen Center Architect Submittal LisRFP
Tentative Work Plan
Youth/Teen Facility Task Force
July 7, 1993
(for discussion only)
July 7-23 Establish Sub Committee. Select top four firms.
July 26-Aug 26 Interview all finalist (4) firms.
August 10 Report to Parks Committee with list - action item.
August 17 Council Meeting - approval.
Sept 1-Oct 15 Work with architectural firm.
October 15
October 30
November 10
November 16
December 1
December 1
First architectural draft due.
Final architectural draft due.
Report to Park Committee - seek approval.
Report to City Council Meeting - seek approval
for bond issue?
Submit to Election Board - general obligation
bond issue.
Formalization of campaign committee.
February Election on bond issue? YOU.PLN
Teen/Youth Center
1. Dale A. Klappenbach, AIA
Klappenbach Architects
Suite 620
1420 Third Ave
Seattle, WA 98101
2. Robert Wagner Architecture & Planning
1916 Pike Place
Seattle, WA 98101
3. Stewart Associates
1420 Pot Alley
Seattle, WA 98101
4. Chris Carson, AIA
Buffalo Design, Inc.
1501 Western, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98101
5. Coral P. DeWilliam, AIA, ASID
The ORB Organization, Inc.
607 SW Grady Way, Suite 210
Renton, WA 98055
6. David Rutherford
ARC Architects
1101 East Pike
Seattle, WA 98122
206-624-7515
206-448-2528
206-623-4300
206-467-6306
206-226-3522
206-322-3322
7. Henry Klein Partnership, Architects 206-336-2155
205 Matheson Building
Mount Vernon, WA 98273
8. Marlin J. Gabbert 206-774-4701
Gabbert, Bradweleit, Peterson Architects PS
6920 220 SW, Suite 200
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
9. William F. Rennie II, AAIA 206-471-0710
Rennie & Associates
Home Designers
3701 6th Ave. Suite 3
Tacoma, WA 98406
10. Audrey VanHorne 206-324-1980
VanHorne Architects
103 Bellevue Ave E
Seattle, WA 98102
11. Alan Sclater, AIA
Kober/Sclater Architects, PC
414 Stewart Street, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98101
12. Edward M. Burke, FAIA, AICP
Broderick/Burke
701 Dexter Ave N, Suite 215
Seattle, WA 98109
13. Michael Conatsey Assocates
1809 7th Ave, Suite 1603
Seattle, WA 98101
14. Gordon Edberg, AIA
Architecture/Planning/Interiors
616 First Ave, Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98104
15. Barry Anderson
AFJH & Associates
P. O. Box 37
Kent, WA 98031
16. Protect the Children
4540 8th Ave NE, Suite 306
Seattle, WA 98105
17. Lawrence M. Campbell, AIA
10024 SE 240 St, Suite 102
Kent, WA 98031-5124
18. Robert E. Hall, FAIA, Partner
Miller/Hall
Maritime Building
911 Western Ave, Room 220
Seattle, WA 98104-1032
19. Tom Beckwith, AICP
Beckwith Consulting Group
Urban Planning/Design/Development
P. O. Box 162
Medina, WA 98037
20. Robert Grossman, AIA
Northwest Architectural Co
303 Battery St
Seattle, WA 98121-1419
you.cen 7/5/93
206-624-8682
206-283-5209
206-624-2348
206-682-2857
206-831-6900
206-630-6717
206-854-2470
206-682-6837
206-453-6026
206-441-4522
THE CITY OF KENT
PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR A YOUTH/TEEN CENTER
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
The City of Kent is requesting letters of interest and
statements of qualification from architectural firms interested in
providing planning and architectural design development for a
community youth/teen center. The project will involve siting
development, facility planning, and estimating project costs.
The City intends that the selected consultant(s), in
association with the City, will develop and implement a public
process to determine the siting, scope, and program(s) of a youth/
teen center. To that end, the ccnsultant's anticipated services
will include (1) evaluation of existing and alternative sites; (2)
development of building programs (types, sizes, and relationships
of program spaces); (3) estimating construction, operating, and
maintenance costs; (4) environmental assessment; (5) permit
processing; (6) funding alternatives; and, (7) identify community
support of funding of a youth/teen center(s) through tax dollars;
and, (8) identify community support for a youth/teen center for
children 6 through 12 years and/or for youth 12 through 19 years of
age.
The first phase of this overall project involves selection of
a consultant(s) to address the feasibility of the overall project.
This feasibility study shall, at a minimum, include the following
elements:
1) center Options
a. Based on space needs, prepare a minimum of four
development options for an efficient and functional
center, to include but not limited to:
1) Remodel and add space to the existing facility.
2) Demolish the existing center and build a new one on
the same site in a phased approach.
3) Build a new center at a new location.
4) Build a new center at a new location using a phased
approach.
5) Remodel another building.
b. All options will include a coordinating element with the
Kent School District to identify joint program and
facility use opportunities.
C. All options will include a coordinating element with the
Kent Arts Commission and selected consultant(s) to
incorporate the City's.Art in Public Places program into
the planning and design phases.
2. Site Location options -- Based on the size of the center,
parking requirements and optional abutting recreation
space, the size of each center option will require a
minimum number of acres. Sites within Kent city limits
I
shall be identified that meet the acreage such as --
street access, central location, bus, bicycle, pedestrian
access, public visibility, environmental limitations,
compatibility with surrounding area, zoning, and
demographic consideration.
3. Funding Options -- working with the City Finance
Department, analyze funding options for cost estimates that
have been prepared for the various center options and land
purchases.
4. Recommendation -- The consultant shall prepare a
prioritized list of development options with support "pros"
and "cons" for existing site and other center option.
5. Study Format -- The study shall be presented in as
simplified form as possible. Separate support documents
shall be prepared that includes detailed information for
each option.
6. Design Diagrams -- Review design diagram options with
the City of Kent and appropriate groups. Potential space
may include a gymnasium, day care, music rooms,
game room (s) /multi -purpose room, computer rocm(s), offices,
meeting room(s), ticket office, kitchen, concessions,
seating, toilet facilities, arts & crafts rooms, display
areas, weight lifting room, shower and locker room
facilities, and cultural facilities. Review and select
preferred option.
3
7. Develop Pre -Schematic option, Artist Rendering, Site Model,
and Cost Estimate --Provide one reproducible and eight
copies of the schematic design, artist rendering, and site
model. (Performed fon select preferred option.)
A. Building (Cost estimate)
1) Public spaces
2) Mechanical/electric
3) Permit fees
B. Site Development (Cost estimate)
1) Parking
2) Landscaping
3) Sidewalks
4) Lighting
5) Signage
5) Storm water and drainage
C. Equipment (Cost estimate)
1) Furnishings/window coverings
2) Lighting control
3) Sound system/security system
4) Game room
5) Computer/recreational/classroom equipment
6) Office/kitchen equipment
D. Fees (Cost estimate)
1) Sales tax
2) Contingency
4
3) Escalation
4) Other study for
Any firm interested in developing
this feasibility
submit a statement of qualification indicating the
should s submitter
the City regarding the project. Any
expertise reg will work
firm's ability and of key personnel who
include resumes for
must, at a minimum, work, and references
on the project, examples of similar
of similar work.
projects cited by the consultant(s)
the firm as examples it deems the
The City of Kent will select
interviews based
on written submittals.
for final to
most qualified with the consultants)
the City will negotiate If.
Once selected, schedule for
this feasibility study•
s fee agree on a
set the consultant(s) ) cannot
the y and the selected censultant(s) its
city ,- the City will exercise
fee arrangement, the'`
satisfactory otiations and may
commence similar
option to terminate those neg a written
negotiations selected, your firm
who presented
to twith any other candidate will have
he City• Once finally 15 days to
submittal and an additional
45 days to present a full draft report
prepare the final report. to this request for
Further information pertaining Parks and R the Kent ecreation
qualification may be obtained from. at 8Manager.
Department 59-3599, Cheryl Fraser, statements
qualification ments of to
Interested firms should mail Attention:
the City of Kent, Parks and Recreation
Department,
Youth/Teen Center,
220 4th Avenue S., Kent, WA 98031. Information
must be delivered by 5 P m on June 30, 1993.
5
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RENT AND THE MILLER/HULL PARTNERSHIP
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Kent, a
Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter the "City"), and
The Miller/Hull Partnership, Architecture and Planning, organized
under the laws of the State of Washington, located and doing
business at The Maritime Building, 911 Western Avenue, Room 220,
Seattle, Washington, 98104 (hereinafter the "Consultant").
Recitals
1. The City is presently engaged in the feasibility study
phase of the development of the City of Kent Youth/Teen Center and
desires that the Consultant perform services necessary to provide
consultation and advice to the City on the preparation of plans,
specifications, cost estimates and other services for the City of
Kent Youth/Teen Center. The Consultant agrees to perform the
services more specifically described in the Scope of Work dated _
1993 including any addenda thereto, which is attached
hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference as if
fully set forth herein, as ofthe effective date of this agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth
herein, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
I. Description of Work
Consultant shall perform all work as described in Exhibit A.
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 1 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
II. Payment
A. The City shall pay the Consultant, based on time and
materials, an amount not to exceed Thirty Thousand
dollars ($30 000 00) including sales tax and all other
applicable federal state and local taxes for the
services described in Section I herein. This is the
maximum amount to be paid under this Agreement for the
work described in Exhibit A, and shall not be exceeded
without the prior written authorization of the City in
the form of a negotiated and executed supplemental
agreement. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, the. City reserves the
right to direct the Consultant's compensated services
under the time frame set forth in Section IV herein
before reaching the maximum amount.
B. The Consultant shall submit monthly payment invoices to
the City after such services have been performed, and a
final bill upon completion of all the services described
in this Agreement. The City shall pay the full amount of
an invoice within forty-five (45) days of receipt. If
the City objects to all or any portion of any invoice, it
shall so notify the Consultant of the same within fifteen
(15) days from the date of receipt and shall pay that
portion of the invoice not in dispute, and the parties
shall immediately make every effort to settle the
disputed portion.
C. In the event the Scope of Work is modified or changed so
that more or less work or time is required by the
Consultant, and such modification is reached by
mutual agreement of the parties to this contract,
the payment for services and maximum contract amount
shall be adjusted accordingly upon agreement of the
parties.
YOUTH/TEEM CRTR K--Page 2 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
III. Relationship of Parties
The parties intend that an independent contractor -employer
relationship will be created by this Agreement. As Consultant is
customarily engaged in an independently established trade which
encompasses the specific service provided to the City hereunder, no
agent, employee, representative or sub -contractor of Consultant
shall be or shall be deemed to be the employee, agent,
representative or sub -contractor of the City. In the performance
of the work, Consultant is an independent contractor with the
ability to control and direct the performance and details of the
work, the City being interested only in the results obtained under
this Agreement. None of the benefits provided by the City to its
employees, including, but not limited to, compensation, insurance,
and unemployment insurance are available from the City to the
employees, agents, representatives, or sub -contractor of the
Consultant. Consultant will be solely and entirely responsible for
its acts and for the acts of Consultant's agents, employees,
representatives and sub -contractors during the performance of this
Agreement. The City may, during the term of this Agreement, engage
other independent contractors to perform the same or similar work
that Consultant performs hereunder.
IV. Duration of Work
The City and Consultant agree that work will begin on the tasks
described in Exhibit A immediately upon execution of this
Agreement. The parties agree that the work described in Exhibit A
is to be completed within sixty (60) calendar days of the execution
of this Agreement, as outlined in Exhibit A; provided however, that
additional time shall be granted by the City for excusable delays
or extra work, as described in Section VI.(D) below.
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 3 of 14
Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
V. Place of Work
The Consultant shall perform the work authorized under this
Agreement at its offices in Seattle, Washington. Meetings with the
City staff as described in.Exhibit A, Scope of Work, shall take
place at the City's offices at 220 Fourth Avenue South, Kent,
Washington, or at locations mutually agreed upon by the parties.
VI. Termination
A. Termination of Agreement
If the City receives reimbursement by any federal, state,
or other source for work described in Section I herein,
and that funding is withdrawn, reduced or limited in any
way, or the project is cancelled or substantially reduced
after the execution date of this Agreement and prior to
the completion of the work hereunder, the City may
summarily terminate this Agreement. Termination shall be
effective ten calendar days after Consultant's receipt of
the written notice by certified mail.
B. Termination for Failure to Provide Services Bargained
For.
The consultant agrees that The Miller/Hull Partnership
was hired by the City based on the Consultant's
representation that employees identified in its Statement
of Qualifications, attached hereto as Exhibit B, will be
available to perform the services described in Section I
for the duration of this Agreement. If any of the
employees identified in the Statement of Qualifications
are unvailable to perform the services bargained for, for
any reason, the City of Kent reserves the right to
terminate this contract or renegotiate the amount of
consideration. The consultant must immediately notify
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 4 of 14
Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
the City, in writing, if any employee identified in the
Statement of Qualifications is unavailable to perform the
services described in Section I of this Agreement.
Nothing in the foregoing language will alter the
Consultant's independent contractor status.
C. Termination for Failure to Prosecute Work or to Complete
Work Satisfactorily
If the Consultant refuses or fails to prosecute the work
with such diligence as will ensure its completion within
the time frames specified herein, or as modified or
extended as provided in this Agreement, or to complete
such work in a manner satisfactory to the City, then the
City may, by written notice to the Consultant, give
notice of its intention to terminate the Consultant's
right to proceed with the work. On such notice, the
Consultant shall have ten (10) calendar days to cure, to
the satisfaction of the City or its representative, or
the City shall send the Consultant a written termination
letter which shall be effective upon the Consultant's
receipt of the written notice by certified mail. Upon
termination, the City may take over the work and
prosecute the same to completion, by contract or
otherwise, and Consultant shall be liable to the City for
any additional costs incurred by it in the completion of
the Scope of Work referenced as Exhibit A and as modified
or amended prior to termination. "Additional Costs"
shall mean all reasonable costs incurred by the City
beyond the maximum contract price specified in II(A),
above.
YOUTH/TEEN CMTR K--Page 5 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93_tcb
��
��j���
!'!
D. Excusable Delays
The right of Consultant to proceed shall not be
terminated nor shall Consultant. be charged with
liquidated damages for any delays in the completion of
the work due to: 1) any acts of the federal government
in controlling, restricting, or requisitioning materials,
equipment, tools, or labor by reason of war, national
defense, or other national emergency; 2) any acts of the
City, its consultants, or other public agencies causing
such delay; and 3) causes not reasonably foreseeable by
the parties at the time of the execution of the Agreement
that are beyond the control and without the fault or
negligence of the Consultant, including, but not
restricted to, acts of God, fires, floods, strikes, or
weather of unusual severity; and (4) negotiated and
executed supplemental agreements between the City and
Consultant for Consultant to perform extra work defined
as tasks not included in the Scope of Work referenced as
Exhibit A. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the Consultant must
promptly notify the City within ten (10) calendar days in
writing of the cause of the delay. If, on the basis of
the facts and the terms of this Agreement, the delay is
properly excusable, the City shall, in writing, extend
the time for completing the work for a period of time
commensurate with the period of excusable delay.
E. Rights Upon Termination
In the event of termination, the City shall pay for all
services performed by the Consultant to the effective
date of termination, as described on a final invoice
submitted to the City. After termination, the City may
take possession of all records and data within the
Consultant's possession pertaining to this project which
YOUTH/TEEN CHTR K--Page 6 of 14
Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
may be used by the City without restriction. Any such
use not related to the project which Consultant was
contracted to perform shall be without liability or legal
exposure to the Consultant.
VII. Discrimination
In the hiring of employees for the performance of work under this
Agreement or any sub -contract hereunder, the Consultant, its sub-
contractors, or any person acting on behalf of such Consultant or
sub -contractor shall not, by reason of race, religion, color, sex,
national origin, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or
physical disability, discriminate against any person who is
qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment
relates.
VIII. Indemnification
Consultant 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 Agreement, except for injuries and damages
caused by the sole negligence of the City.
The City's inspection or acceptance of any of Consultant's work
when completed shall not be grounds to avoid any of these covenants
of indemnification.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this
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 the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials,
employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's liability
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 7 of 14
Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
V I ! �i I i
���wI L
hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's
negligence.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or
termination of this Agreement.
IX. Insurance
The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the
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 the Consultant, its agents,
representatives, employees, sub -consultants or sub -contractors.
Before beginning work on the project described in this Agreement,
the Consultant shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing:
1. Automobile Liability insurance with limits no less than
$1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and
property damage; and
2. Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence
basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per
occurrence and $2,000,000 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; and
3. Professional Liability insurance with limits no less than
$500,000 limit per occurrence.
Any payment of deductible or self insured retention shall be the
sole responsibility of the Consultant.
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 8 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
The City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial
General Liability insurance policy, as respects work performed by
or on behalf of the Consultant and a copy of the endorsement naming
the City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate
of Insurance. The City reserves the right to receive a certified
copy of all the required insurance policies.
The Consultant's Commercial General Liability 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.
The Consultant's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects
the City and the City shall be given thirty (30) days prior written
notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, of any
cancellation, suspension or material change in coverage.
X. Exchange of Information
The City warrants the accuracy of any information supplied by it to
Consultant for the purpose of completion of the work under this
Agreement. The parties agree that the Consultant will notify the
City of any inaccuracies in the information provided by the City as
may be discovered in the process of performing the work, and that
the City is entitled to rely upon any information supplied by the
Consultant which results as a product of this Agreement.
XI. Ownership and Use of Records and Documents
Original documents, drawings, designs and reports developed under
this Agreement shall belong to and become the property of the City.
All written information submitted by the City to the Consultant in
connection with the services performed by the Consultant under this
Agreement will be safeguarded by the Consultant to at least the
same extent as the Consultant safeguards like information relating
YOUTH/TEEM CNTR K--Page 9 of 14
Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
r 1'
to its own business. If such information is publicly available or
is already in Consultant's possession or known to it, or is
rightfully obtained by the Consultant from third parties,
Consultant shall bear no responsibility for its disclosure,
inadvertent or otherwise.
All data, documents and files created by Consultant under this
Agreement may be stored at Consultant's office in Seattle,
Washington. Consultant shall make such date, documents, and files
available to the City upon its request at all reasonable times for
the purpose of editing, modifying and updating as necessary until
such time as the City is capable of storing such information in the
City's offices. Duplicate copies of this information shall be
provided to the City upon its request, and at reasonable cost.
Any use or reuse of the documents, data and files created by
Consultant for the City on this project by anyone other than
Consultant on any other project shall be without liability or legal
exposure to Consultant.
XII. Recyclable Materials
Pursuant to City of Kent Ordinance No. 3066, The City of Kent
requires its contractors and consultants to use recycled and
recyclable products whenever practicable. A price preference may
be available for any designated recycled product.
XIII. City's Right of Inspection
Even though Consultant is an independent contractor with the
authority to control and direct the performance and details of the
work authorized under this Agreement, the work must meet the
approval of the City and shall be subject to the City's general
right of inspection to secure the satisfactory completion thereof.
The Consultant agrees to comply with all federal, state, and
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 10 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
r-�
municipal laws, rules, and regulations that are now effective or in
the future become applicable to Consultant's business, equipment,
and personnel engaged in operations covered by this Agreement or
accruing out of the performance of such operations.
XIV. Consultant to Maintain Records to Support Independent
Contractor Status
On the effective date of this Agreement (or shortly thereafter),
Consultant shall:
A. File a schedule of expenses with the Internal Revenue
Service for the type of business Consultant conducts;
B. Establish an account with the Washington State Department
of Revenue and other necessary state agencies for the
payment of all state taxes normally paid by employers,
register to receive a unified business identifier number
from the State of Washington; and
C. Maintain a separate set of books and records that reflect
all items of income and expenses of Consultant's
business, all as described in the Revised Code of
Washington (RCW) Section 51.08.195, as required to show
that the services performed by Consultant under this
Agreement shall not give rise to an employer -employee
relationship between the parties which is subject to RCW
Title 51, Industrial Insurance.
XV. Work Performed at Consultant's Risk
Consultant shall take all precautions necessary and shall be
responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and
subcontractors in the performance of the work hereunder and shall
utilize all protection necessary for that purpose. All work shall
be done at Consultant's own risk, and Consultant shall be
responsible for any loss of or damage to materials, tools, or other
articles used or held for use in connection with the work.
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 11 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
U
XVI. Non -Waiver of Breach
The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of any of
the covenants and agreements contained herein, or to exercise any
option herein conferred in one or more instances shall not be
construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of said covenants,
agreements, or options, and the same shall be and remain in full
force and effect.
XVII. Resolution of Disputes and Governing Law
Should any dispute, misunderstanding, or conflict arise as to the
terms and conditions contained in this Agreement, the matter shall
first be referred to the City, and the City shall determine the
term or provision's true intent or meaning. The City shall also
decide all questions which may arise between the parties relative
to the actual services provided or to the sufficiency of the
performance hereunder.
If any dispute arises between the City and Consultant under any of
the provisions of this Agreement which cannot be resolved by the
City's determination in a reasonable time, or if Consultant does
not agree with the City's decision on the disputed matter,
jurisdiction of any resulting litigation shall be filed in King
County Superior Court, King County, Washington. This Agreement
shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of Washington. Each party shall be solely responsible
for its costs, expenses and reasonable attorney's fees incurred in
any litigation arising out of the enforcement of this Agreement.
XVIII. Written Notice
All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the
parties at the addresses listed on the signature page of the
agreement, unless notified to the contrary. Any written notice
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 12 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
hereunder shall become effective upon the date of mailing by
registered or certified mail, and shall be deemed sufficiently
given if sent to the addressee at the address stated in this
Agreement or such other address as may be hereafter specified in
writing.
XIX. Assignment
Any assignment of this Agreement by the Consultant without the
written consent of the City shall be void. If the City shall give
its consent to any assignment, this paragraph shall continue in
full force and effect and no further assignment shall be made
without the City's consent.
XX. Modification
No waiver, alteration, or modification of any of the provisions of
this Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and signed by a
duly authorized representative of the City and Consultant.
XXI. Entire Agreement
The written provisions and terms of this Agreement, together with
any Exhibits attached hereto, shall supersede all prior verbal
statements of any officer or other representative of the City,
and such statements shall not be effective or be construed as
entering into or forming a part of or altering in any manner
whatsoever, this Agreement or the Agreement documents. The entire
agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter
hereunder is contained in this Agreement and any Exhibits attached
hereto, which may or may not have been executed prior to the
execution of this Agreement. All of the above documents are hereby
made a part of this Agreement and form the Agreement document as
fully as if the same were set forth herein. Should any language in
YOUTH/TEEN CHTR K--Page 13 of 14
Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
any of the Exhibits to this Agreement conflict with any language
contained in this 14-page Agreement, this Agreement shall prevail.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on
this day of , 1993.
THE MILLER/HULL PARTNERSHIP
by:
Its Principal
Notices to be sent to:
CONSULTANT
TEENCNTR.prk
by:
THE CITY OF KENT
Mayor
Ms. Cheryl Fraser
Resource Center Facility Mgr.
The City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kent City Attorney
ATTEST:
Kent City Clerk
YOUTH/TEEN CNTR K--Page 14 of 14 Rev. 8/11/93:tcb
Exhibit A
THE CITY OF KENT
PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR A YOUTH/TEEN CENTER
Scope of Work - August 13, 1993
The Miller/Hull Partnership ("consultant") in association with
the City, will develop and implement a public process to determine
the siting, scope, and program(s) of a youth/teen center. To that
end, the Consultant's anticipated services will include (1)
evaluation of existing and alternative sites; (2) development of
building programs (types, sizes, and relationships of program
spaces); (3) estimating construction, operating, and maintenance
costs; (4) environmental assessment; (5) permit processing; (6)
funding alternatives; and, (7) identify community support of
funding 'of a youth/teen center(s) through tax dollars; and, (8)
identify community support for a youth/teen center for children
6 through 12 years and/or for youth 12 through 19 years of age.
This feasibility study shall, at a minimum, include the
following elements:
1) Site Selection
a. Based on space needs, prepare a minimum of four
development options (locations) for an efficient and
functional center, to include but not limited to:
1
1) Remodel and add space to the existing facility.
2) Demolish the existing center and build a new one on
the same site in a phased approach.
3) Build a new center`at a new location.
4) Build a new center at a new location using a phased
approach.
5) Remodel another building.
b. All options will include a coordinating element with the
Kent School District to identify joint program and
facility use opportunities.
C. All options will include a coordinating element with the
Kent Arts Commission and to incorporate the City's Art in
Public Places program into the planning and design phases.
2. Site Location options -- Based on the size of the center,
parking requirements and optional abutting recreation
space, the size of each center option will require a
minimum number of acres. Sites within Kent city limits
shall be identified that meet the acreage such as --
street access, central location., bus, bicycle, pedestrian
access, public visibility, envi.-onmental limitations,
compatibility with surrounding area, zoning, and
demographic consideration.
3. Recommendation -- The Consultant shall prepare a
prioritized list of development options with support
"pros" and "cons" for existing site and other center
option.
2
.4. Design Diagrams -- Review design diagram options with
the City"bf Kent and appropriate groups. Potential space
may include a gymnasium, day care, music rooms,
game room (s) /multi -purpose room, computer room(s), offices,
meeting room(s), ticket office, kitchen, concessions,
seating, toilet facilities, arts & crafts rooms, display
areas, weight lifting room, shower and locker room
facilities, and cultural facilities. Review and select
preferred option.
5. Community/Public Meetings -- Consultant shall attend,
upon the request of Resource Center Facility Manager Cheryl
Fraser, or her assigned designee, a total of six community
and/or public meetings for purposes of researching and/or
marketing this project.
6. Funding Options -- Working with the City Finance
Department, analyze funding options for cost estimates that
have been prepared for the various center options and land
purchases.
7. Study Format -- The study shall be presented in as
simplified form as possible. Separate support documents
shall be prepared that includes detailed information
for each option.
8. Develop Pre -Schematic Option, Artist Rendering, Site Model,
and Cost Estimate -- Once the preferred development option
has been selected, provide one reproducible and eight
copies of the schematic design, eight color artist-
3
you. rfp
renderings, and four site models.
A. Building (Cost estimate)
1) Public spaces
2) Mechanical/electric
3) Permit fees
B. Site Development (Cost estimate)
1) Parking
2) Landscaping
3) Sidewalks
4) Lighting
5) Signage
5) Storm water and drainage
C. Equipment (Cost estimate)
1) Furnishings/window coverings
2) Lighting control
3) Sound system/security system
4) Game room
5) Computer/recreational/classroom equipment
6) Office/kitchen equipment
D. Fees (Cost estimate)
1) Sales tax
2) Contingency
3) Escalation
4) Other
4
Miller lHull
June 30, 1993
City of Kent Parks & Recreation Department
220 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Attn: Ms. Cheryl Fraser, Facility Manager
Re: City of Kent Youth/Teen Center
Statement of Qualifications for Planning & Design
Dear Ms. Fraser,
The Miller/Hull Partnership and consultant team is pleased to submit
qualifications for your upcoming Youth/Teen Center for the City of
Kent. We have considerable experience designing community center
facilities and are familiar and comfortable with the public interaction
process and in working with citizen groups and City Councils. We have
assisted our clients in fund raising efforts by providing graphics and
models to aide in the process.
One of our most recent relevant projects is the Port Townsend
Community Center, which combines a youth center, senior center, and
Head Start program in a single complex. We are familiar with issues that
relate to youth/teen user groups. Miller/Hull has worked with many local
cities such as Seattle, Tukwila, Redmond, Issaquah, SeaTac, Auburn,
Kirkland and Bellevue on Community Center projects.
To provide the City of Kent with the best possible service, we have
included the firm of Langlow/Hall Associates - specialists in community
relations, facilitation, and consensus development. They have been
instrumental in the success of the Garfield Community Center (now in the
working drawing phase) and their guidance will be invaluable for the
public input, design and construction phases of this project.
We are proud of the work and service we have provided other community
center clients. Please feel free to call the references we have included with
each project sample.
Yours truly,
at
Robert E. Hull, FAIA, Partner
The Miller/Hull Partnership
NllllerlHull
Project Issues
Evaluation of Existing and Alternative Sites
We propose using a master planning approach, where key
advantages and disadvantages of potential sites would be
quantified and analyzed. Required areas of parking, landscaping,
access, and building footprint would be charted for each potential
site. Urban relationships and analysis would be re -studied in
diagram form. Expansion potential, sun, wind, noise, public
visibility, soils, and existing amenities and use patterns would all be
considered.
Develooment of Building Programs
Using input from community groups, advisory groups and City
personnel, the team will develop a building program with narrative
descriptions of space characteristics, adjacency requirements,
materials, light, and mechanical and electrical requirements,
operating hours, and net and gross square footage requirements.
Building code, fire code, mechanical code, and ADA requirements
would be included.
Estimating Construction&perating and Maintenance Costs
Cost modeling for options would be performed to help establish
budgets, and then would be analyzed in the options studies. First
cost, life cycle costs and such issues as local availability, ecological
soundness, durability and minimization of building complexity are
all carefully considered. Complete line items estimating will be
performed for the preferred design direction in uniformat or CSI
format, and summarized in a clear, concise executive summary for
public and agency use, in fundraising and outreach.
Environmental Analysis Er Permit Processing
The team would assist in obtaining all necessary permits, such as
Master Use Permits, EIS and SEPA Reviews as required, and
community review approval.
MillerlHull
Fundina Alternatives
The Design Team would support the City of Kent in its funding drive
through the production of simple, clear and concise graphic
documentation, costing information, and narrative descriptions.
Identify Community Support
Through the public workshop process, support for various programs
and amenities would be discussed, encouraged and consolidated
into a clear mission statement for the center. The project team
would solicit input and help the community to arrive at both
compromise and consensus for what the community needs and
wants. The community would become a part of setting priorities,
and working within budget limitations so that realistic goals are
understood by all, and reached with full participation.
This process is further outlined in the 1 1 x 17 diagram on the
following page:
mi'llerlHull
The Robinson Company
Cost Estimators
• Cost Modeling
• Cost Estimating
• Operations/Maintenance Cost
• Lifecycle Cost
• Options Evaluations
Team Organization
The Miller/Hull Partnership
Architects
• Overall team coordination
• Programminq
• Site Evaluations
• Development Options
• Pre - Schematics
• Drawings & Models
• Final Report Producticn &
Coordination
Murase Associates
Landscape Architects
• Site Programming
• Site Evaluations
• Site Development Options
• Pre -Schematics
• Drawings
Langlow/Hall
Community Relations
• Develop Community
Relations
• Manage Public Meetings
and Workshops
• Involve Affected Groups
In Planning Process
• Facilitate Compromise
and Consensus Building
�•
[ Z
Z
wO
❑ V
�/'� 7 Nqq
li v m W
n
y p a 9 C "/ !! \ l O
as e n ! O 0
z
°
a c
a Y
wC
a aY w W 0
a = i E r A LL a H
0: O O
oy -E a �----�
i V CiL W [,q Z
° u 'E O
E a _ $ oE �� =�
° E
] u c F-
L C Y q
E me av sm W
o c . cc EE]
S E o 2
$ 1Q,
Z W Z
Q>O
- ° w
W
v aS O
� N [
40
N Y v
N qE
a�
o A
a.
e o.
O
rt d Y
Y
N / N [ O
w [
M
u
q C
« q T O d O A
u a�
a E.2 4!L LMZ
[ CJ q 0 QF-
V
MillerlHull
The Robinson Company
Cost Estimators
• Cost Modeling
• Cost Estimating
• Operations/Maintenance Cost
• Lifecycle Cost
• Options Evaluations
Team Organization
The Miller/Hull Partnership
Architects
• Overall team coordination
• Programming
• Site Evaluations
• Development Options
• Pre - Schematics
• Drawings & Models
• Final Report Production &
Coordination
Murase Associates
Landscape Architects
• Site Programming
• Site Evaluations
• Site Development Options
• Pre - Schematics
• Drawings
Langiow/Hall
Community Relations
• Develop Community
Relations
• Manage Public Meetings
and Workshops
• Involve Affected Groups
In Planning Process
• Facilitate Compromise
and Consensus Building
Millerlftll
Project Team
The four team offices are described below, with fkey experience and
personnel listed. More in-depth project descriptions and resumes
follow in the "Relevant Experience and Past Performance" section.
The Miller/Hull Partnership, Architects
Miller/Hull has many years of experience designing community
centers in the Puget Sound Area. Projects have typically gone
through an involved and complex community input process, with a
large amount of compromise and consensus building required.
Some recent projects include:
• Garfield Community Center
Robert Hull, FAIA, Partner -In -Charge
Philip Christofides, AIA, Project Manager
A new 20,000 s.f. community center in Seattle's Central Area.
The project began with public and community group
meetings spanning over 9 months. Diverse community groups
were able to reach consensus and support the final design.
Currently in the Construction Documents Phase, the project
includes a gym, multi -purpose room, activity rooms such as
games and computer training, and short term childcare and
family out -reach.
• North SeaTac Community Center
Robert Hull, FAIA, Partner -In -Charge
Steve Totge, AIA, Project Manager
Typical of many community centers, this recently completed
22,000 s.f. facility responds to the public input needs of social
meeting space and recreation. In essence, two lobbies are
interconnected by a central reception counter. The social
lobby serves the youth center, dance, theater, arts and crafts,
daycare and meeting room functions of the center and is
designed to be quiet and comfortable with artwork and
overstaffed furniture. The recreation lobby serves the gym,
exercise, weight room, lockers and is designed as a cafe with
small tables and chairs and large view windows into the gym.
MillerlHull
• Port Townsend Community Center
Norm Strong, AIA, Partner -In -Charge
This 23,000 s.f. community center is a shared use facility for
Youth Center and Head Start programs located on the lower
level, and seniors who occupy the main floor. The Center
includes a full-size gymnasium, fitness and weight training
space, support locker rooms, public meeting rooms, multi-
purpose rooms, a dining hall to service 120 people, a child
care facility, as well as youth center and games area. In
addition to the feasibility study and programming efforts
Miller/Hull assisted the County in obtaining a funding grant
from the Washington State Department of Community
Development, along with alternative funding from FmHA.
• Highland Community Center
Robert Hull, FAIA, Partner -In -Charge
Three distinct user groups were vying for this community
center. The developmentally disabled, the seniors, and the
sports enthusiasts. Through workshop meetings and two open
forum community meetings a desired consensus was reached
and the building complex became the center for the disabled
program which was constantly being bumped from activities
at other centers. Scheduling for the gym, exercise and
kitchen is controlled by the disabled program with available
time slots offered to other users. A smaller space was
converted to a gym function capable of handling pickle ball,
dance and theater for the seniors.
• Issaquah Community Center
Robert Hull, FAIA, Partner -In -Charge
Miller/Hull originally designed this center as part of a
competition sponsored by the City of Issaquah. The Phase I
building, while appearing to be only one building, actually
contains two distinct parts; a recreation center wing, and a
youth center. The recreation center houses a 3 court
gymnasium, weight training room, exercise room, and offices
for the City Recreation Department. Phase II will contain the
senior center, a large dining room and kitchen,
offices/reception, pool room, arts & crafts, a clinic, and three
multi -purpose rooms. In keeping with Issaquah's historic
past, the building's scale and use of materials is suitable to its
surroundings.
Millerlftll
Langlow/Hall, Communitv Relations
Langlow Hall Associates, Inc. specializes in community relations
and facilitation for both public and private clients. A 100% woman
owned firm they have a 17 year track record of providing thoughtful,
effective and creative public involvement, strategic planning and
consensus -building services for clients in business and government.
Langlow/Hall Associates is a Washington corporation and a certified
WBE in the State of Washington.
The firm provides the expertise needed to establish informed
partnerships with agencies, citizens and community groups. To
accomplish this, Langlow/Hall Associates offers a full range of
community relations and communications services tailored to the
specific needs of each client and project. They have extensive
experience with a wide variety of projects in the areas of
transportation, facilities planning, land use, water resources,
energy, storm water drainage, solid waste, recycling, hazardous
waste cleanups. and the siting of controversial facilities.
Langlow/Hall Associates emphasizes identifying and assessing key
issues; developing community relations plans and policies;
explaining technical plans in non -technical language; managing
public and organization meetings and workshops; establishing and
staffing advisory committees; preparing targeted information
materials and presentations; and involving affected groups in
planning processes.
Relevant projects include facilitating and documenting workshops
for 3 community centers for the City of Seattle, and in particular, the
Garfield community center which is being designed by Miller/Hull.
Also of note is involvement in the Parks and Recreation COMPLAN
for the City of Seattle, and the Downtown Plan and Capital
Improvement Plan for the City of Redmond. All projects have
involved community workshops and focus groups.
Miller lHull
Murase Associates Landscape Architects
Murase Associates has a broad background in urban and park
design, recreation and campus planning, natural and cultural
resource inventory, and design work in other areas of landscape
architectural practice. The firm has been a consultant to the cities
of Seattle, Bellevue, Olympia, Everett, Portland, Eugene, and Grants
Pass, as well as for the University of Washington, Washington State
University and the University of Oregon.
The firm is a minority owned business established in 1982 to
provide a full range of services in landscape architecture. With 24
professional and technical support staff, Murase serves both public
and private clients from offices in Seattle and Portland. All of our
personnel have worked successfully in teams with public agencies,
facility planners, engineers, architects, and developers to create
projects which have been widely recognized.
Murase is currently working with Miller/Hull on the Garfield
Community Center, and on the Seattle Water Lab Master Plan.
The Robinson Company Cost Estimating
The Robinson Company has worked with Architects and Owners on
both private and public projects since 1985. Since that time they
have provided over 1200 cost estimates in either the CS] divisions or
Uniformat. Early cost estimates are developed to help either
establish or confirm the budget. These cost models can be
developed at the feasibility or programming stage, prior to any
drawings. The Robinson Company has worked on many municipal
buildings and community centers and are sensitive to the costs of
construction associated with these types of buildings. They are
familiar with the value engineering process. The Robinson
Company has lead the VE studies for all six of the Seattle's new
community centers, one of which is the Garfield Community
Center. The Robinson Company provided cost estimating services
to Miller/Hull on the Port Townsend Community Center for Jefferson
County, as well as numerous other public projects.
Miller] Hull
Garfield Community Center
Seattle, Washington
Currently in the design
development phase, this
new community center is
being planned for
construction at the
Garfield Playfield site in
Seattle's Central Area.
The neighborhood
community has been
heavily involved in the
decision making process
through meetings with
the architects, planners,
Seattle Parks Department
and the Arts Commission
Intended to provide a
focus for the community
as a neighborhood "City
Hall".
Existing Trees
l
10
The 20,500 s.f. center will
offer a gym, multi-
purpose rooms for
education, crafts, and
youth and children's
activities. A neighbor-
hood clinic will be an
integral part of the
center. The focus room of
the center will be a large
multi -purpose room with
kitchen that opens out
onto a tree lined green
with views across the park
to the playfield.
Weddings, parties and
other gatherings will use
the room and outdoor
green.
0
10
r
Design and the
community process will
continue throughout the
spring, with construction
planned for early 1994.
0
M
/ Sca on B
conaste - P sve n
Estimated Completion:
7994
Budget Estimate:
$2, 700, 000
Bid: n/a
Reference:
Mr. Michael Katagiri
Community Center Levy
Team Coordinator
206 684.4860
Parking
Benchu .
Shrubs Sand Play Area S
Ball Fields
r
MIIIerlHull
North SeaTac Community Center
SeoToc, WA
The combined agencies of
the new City of SeaTac,
King County and the Port
of Seattle commissioned
Miller/Hull to design a new
23,000 s.f. $2.7 million
community center north of
the SeaTac Airport runway.
Sensitive site planning and
building acoustical design
were requirements due to
severe jet noise impacts.
Major elements within the
facility include: a full size
gymnasium, a fitness/
weight training space,
performance/dance space,
support locker rooms,
public lobby/art display
area, public meeting rooms,
a youth center, multi-
purpose rooms, and a
drop -in child care facility.
Dual interconnected
lobbies are captured
between the gym.element
and a curved element that
contains the major multi-
purpose spaces and locker
rooms. One lobby is for
social events and the other
for sports events. The
building is designed to look
out onto a natural "hollow"
where passive park use is
planned.
This project is the first
new public building for
the newly established
City of SeaTac and will
be completed in March
of 1993.
Architect's Estimate:
$2.7 million
Bid:
12.65 million
Reference:
Mr. Bud Porker, P.M.
King Co. Parks 6r Rec.
206 296.4242
M ller-Hull
Dort Townsend Community Center
Jefferson County, Washington
The Port Townsend
Community Center
involved the renovation of
an existing two-story,
12,600 square foot
facility. The center houses
senior, youth and Head
Start programs. The
project includes complete
interior reconstruction to
suit each program's space
needs.
A new class and
craftroom addition with a
reconstructed 'link',
housing entries and
handicap accessible toilet
rooms to the existing
gymnasium is included in
the project. To blend with
the historic nature of the
community, the existing
masonry was covered
with wood siding
matching a nearby
gymanasium.
The project was designed
with a dining hall to
service 120 people.
Miller/Hull's initial
feasibility studies for this
project assisted the
County in obtaining a
grant from the
Washington State
Department of
Community
Development, along with
alternative funding from
FmHA.
Project Completion:
December, 7991
Architect's Estimate:
3682,000
Bid: $729,010
Reference:
Frank Gifford,
Jefferson County Dept. of
Public Works
206 385.9160
MillerlHull
Tukwila Community Center Study
Tukwila, Washington
The Miller/Hull Partnership,
in association with Robert
Wagner Architects and
Planners provided an in-
depth community center
feasibility study for the City
of Tukwila.
The project involved
evaluating two primary
options, either adapting
the existing facility for
continued use or building
an entry new community
center on an alternate site.
Both options required
programming and code
evaluations for energy,
barrier -free accessibility,
fire, life safety, zoning,
parking and traffic. Several
site development proposals
were presented for each
option. The study also
includes estimated costs for
each option.
The study is currently
being evaluated by Tukwila
city staff who will select a
preferred option for
continued development.
Study Completed:
1992
Reference:
Don Williams, Director
City of Tukwila Parks &
Recreation Department
206 433.1843
F`�flFC
�hurch
l
South_131st Street
to
13 I � 11L
an,.
� D�NGC
b FITNE Z'J
* L
..PF
7.'
\�//\\\\ ?lI•YLa JR
i
r7
O
N
r
�
73
c
r
wl/
�
Mi lerlHull
.edmond Community Center Study
Redmond, WA
The Miller/Hull Partnership
in a joint venture with
Robert Wagner Architects
developed a feasibility and
site study for a new 56,000
s.f. community center. The
center will include two
gyms, child care area, two
family oriented swimming
pools, fitness facilities,
multi -purpose rooms, a
teen center, andministrative
offices and support space.
V
z
u
Z
j.l TENNIS
COURT
The study addressed
questions of program,
cost, operations and site
location.
The City council will put a
37.9 million bond issue
before the voters for their
approval.
etHTIMe 6916DWA
Architect's Estimate:
J7.9 million
Reference:
John Couch, Parks Director
206 556.2310
Tom Trueblood
206 556-2115
----_L%1 •T IM1 �JILD INy
5 UILDIryO
I {I r�nflar
I
I
N. !. 8 0 T M 9 T PL Q C T
MillerlHull
Les Gave Park Community Center
Auburn, WA
The City of Auburn is in
the process of establish-
ing a major civic facility
that centralizes public
facilities in conjunction
with a central city park.
Major components of this
$7.5 million project
include renovations and
additions to the library
totalling 18,000 s.f., a
new 12,000 s.f. senior
center, a new 28,000
community center, a
museum, and increases to
the existing sports -
oriented eight -acre park,
including a 1 /2 mile
jogging trail with
exercise stations, tennis
courts, soccer and
baseball fields and an
outdoor pool.
The Miller/Hull Partner-
ship has worked closely
with the City of Auburn
Parks & Recreation
Department, Planning
Department and Public
Works Department. In
addition, eight public
meetings were held to
gather public input and
build a consensus on the
design direction of the
project. The project
awaits passage of a City-
wide recreational bond
issue.
Project Completion:
1993-94
Reference:
Len Chapman, Director
Auburn Parks and
Recreation Department
206.931.3043
SF1T1DffNTER
CE—T lTER
Mi11erlHu11
The Northwest Center for Art
Bellingham, Washington
The Northwest Center for
Art in Bellingham,
Washington will be
constructed within the four
story Levin's Warehouse in
the revitalized downtown
core.
The concrete frame, heavy
timber structure will be
completely renovated to
comply with current seismic
codes and includes new
mechanical and electrical
services, energy efficient
wood windows and a
central, open atrium.
The project, currently in
the schematic design
phase, is a 44,000 square
foot building devoted to
art manufactur-ing/studio
space and will include
community housing. The
studio complex will be
complemented by art
related retail such as
galleries and an art
supply/bookstore.
Assisted living housing
units will be located on
floors two and three, and
will also be added on to
the roof.
A cafe or restaurant open
to the public is also
envisioned as part of the
complex.
Building ccupancy is
planned for June of 1994
Estimated Completion:
Summer 1994
Architect's Estimate:
S 1.4 million
Reference:
Ms. Sheila Hardy, P.M.
Community Development
City of Bellingham
206 676.6880
mo lerlftll
Seattle Water Department Master Plan
Seattle, WA
The Seattle Water
Department
commissioned Miller/Hull
to evaluate the possiblity
of consolidating the
departments'
administrative offices,
water quality laboratory,
and operation divisions at
an existing S.W.D.
operations site in Seattle's
industrial area south of
the Kingdome and
adjacent to the 1-5
Freeway.
The study has led to two
distinct options for
consideration. One
would concentrate
development on property
currently held by S.W.D.,
but would require
crossing Airport Way, a
major arterial, with a
sky bridge.
The second option would
concentrate in one
contiguous campus, but
would require some
property aquisition.
Each option is organized
into two phases, with the
Water Quality Lab as the
cornerstone for first phase
development in either
option. Each option
encompasses 3 City
blocks and involves
improving adjacent
streets and right of ways.
A study examining the
feasibility of leasing
property under the
adjacent freeway for
parking and storage is a
component of the Master
Plan.
un ��
� I „�I� III I jil' IIIII,I �y
CW
� un R Inn r I I n♦'
WTORY
� WATER QDAL
QFACILITY �.�.
m I 1•!�'r.
' ovuw • Ny^ms.<a su. o...bp.«<a '.
ywy�
s <�Al.y ew
oibY 'p cm.r1
The existing operations
facility is expected to
increase from 115,000 to
132,000 s.f. while the
proposed administration
building will be
approximately 100,000
s.f. with staff moving in
from downtown.
The Water Quality Lab,
currently completing the
programming phase, will
comprise 38,000 s.f. of
lab and office space. The
lab portion of the master
plan, which grew out of
an earlier study of the
Department's existing lab
on Beacon Hill (by Miller,'
Hull), is scheduled to
begin design in the
Summer of 1993.
Estimated Completion:
Fall 1993
Estimated Constriction
Costs:
3 40 million
Reference:
Mr. Art Maronek
206 684.5995
1-5 FREEWAY —OI 5rrE ovnoN
B
"f �1
1Y1 '115I1 Exl s'TU clol`�w. �.e 9uILDING
—1 $ YIPS U CARPENTRY ITcucl u - •�'•E --` 5
SHOP
1 : J
vra{ PA0.%ING, SERVICE, - -�
STORAGE YARD
Ex15TINC
W.O.C. I STORAGE �vl
{ ` ��� �- OERCF BLDG. E%ISTING - BUILDING Z
WOC STOMGE
BUILOING
. , WAREHOUSE I W
'v I Wn •� J_ _ V1
Vi
i rluk� 1YIC swNAL AIRPORT WAY S.
III IiNA I 11111111i i1f. 'Sl.nhull ��l_:� �.
NAZ nOP �W?TEA .UVAATMOR^�^ > MASTER PLAN
r iT<MN•/N.R
('
tULL O V iW
MillerlHull
Firm Profile
David Miller and Robert Hull opened their office in 1977: Since that time they have gone on
to design a wide range of projects, from major institutional structures and office buildings to
passive solar residences. In 1985, Miller/Hull added a new partner, Norman Strong. The
firm has a staff of fourteen and is located in the Maritime Building in downtown Seattle.
The Miller/Hull Partnership is fundamentally design oriented, emphasizing a rational
approach to design solutions. The firm has received thirty design awards, including
several national awards. Miller/Hull is skilled at coordinating design teams based on their
belief in keeping communications open among all participants on a project. Miller/Hull
concentrates on meeting the real needs of both client and the ultimate user, controlling all
costs on the project and meeting the required schedule for occupancy.
The firm has designed numerous public facilities ranging from maintenance/warehouse
facilities to community centers, schools, and high tech laboratories.
Miller/Hull has worked with many advisory committees and citizens groups, and is familiar
and comfortable with interactive decision makirg.
Listed below are several of the public agencies Miller/Hull has worked with over the last
several years:
- Jefferson County Dept. of Public Works
- City of Seattle Dept. of Admin. Serv.
- Washington State University
- Bainbridge Island School District
- Federal Way School District
- North Kitsap School District
- Seattle Central Community College
Seattle School District
- University of Washington
- Washington State Dept. of Transportation
Marine Division
THE SOUTH CATS HOUSE
Pmpecvve Vis th Caux...ay
&edge aM app"wh W twd
City of Bellevue Parks dr Rec. Dept.
City of SeaTac
Metro Park District of Tacoma
City of Auburn Parks & Rec. Dept.
City of Bellingham
- King County Parks Department
- King County Facilities Management
Juanita Bay Wetlands
Gty of Kirkland/Parks Deportment
millerlNull
Robert E. Hull, FAIA
Born September 21, 1945
Registered Architect Washington State
Partner, The Miller/Hull Partnership
Fellow, American Institute of Architects
Education Washington State University
1968 Bachelor of Architecture,
Twice received Student Distinction Award, p
Washington State University
Member of Tau Beta Phi ix Sigma Tau Honorary Societies
The Lakeside School Art Building es/Ryc
Recent Professional Awards & Design, Noy
1992 AIA Citation, Future Category,
1991 Seattle Chapter, Jackson Cabin
Record Houses Award for Exellence in Planning
AIA Honor Award, Boeing CafeteriaCabin
n
AIA Merit Award, Seattle Chapter, g es/Ry
National Wood Council Design Award, Noy
Current Publications/Articles Cafeteria 9-12
1992 tO
ARCHITECTURE MAGAZINE Q�abber, Boeing
in
HAUSER March, Noyes/Ry
ME=pOLITA duly, Bolen Cabin
Professional Experience
968-72 He was also instrumental in setting UP
1 U.S. Peace Corps in Afghanistan where he was involved with sc o
and airline facility design
school at Kabul University.
2.75 Worked with Marcel Breuer in New York. Projects included Poe'
197 oined RIA Architects. prole,
Middle East and the Canada and j
1975.77 Relocated to Vancouver,
story hig
hrise >x award winning townhouses on False Creek. r•
Partner
in 1977.
1977 independent from the VancouvE
Opened Seattle office for R.i.A. Architects with David Miller.
19 7 Mr. Hull and Mr. Miller became
and changed rle firm name
and Designer: The Miller/Hull Partnership
Recent P►ojeds as partner-in-
arf Garfield Community Center, Seattle. Currently in schem
• SeaTac Community Center, City of SeaTac, WA
Bellevue,
WA
• Highland Community Center Gymnasium,
• Snake Lake Nature Center, Tacoma, WA
• Theler Nature Center Feasibility Study, Belfair, WA
eler Bay Wetlands, City of Kirkland, Currently in Desk
Curren
JuaniOlympia, WA, Currently
Conibear Shell House, University of Washing o
Nisqualiy Reach Nature Center,
Camaraderie lCenter & Shelte
Campfire Wrangler Camp,
Adams Elementary School, Seattle, WA
Seattle Central Comm-^''ity
St. Thomas Elementary School, Medina, W
Wood TechnologY Facility, Seattle, WA
Metro Water Quality Laboratory,
Boeing Developmental Center Cafeteria, Seattle, OVA
MillerlHull
Philip Christofides, AIA
Born April 27, 1959
Registered Architect, State of Washington
Associate Architect, The Miller/Hull Partnership
Education
1988 Master of Architecture, University of Washington. Thesis: Urban Courtyard Housing
1983 B.A., History, University of Washington
1983 B.A., Art, University of Washington
Teaching Experience
Teaching Assistant, Architectural History, University of Washington 1985-86
Awards
1993 Sunset Western Home Citation Award, Chris tofides/Arrellona Residence
1993 Sunset Western Home Citation Award, Marquand Residence
1993 Merit Award, Masonry Institute of Washington, Adams Elementary School
1990 AIA Merit Award, Seattle Chapter, 705 Charles St.
1989 AIA Merit Award, Seattle Chapter, The Evergreen State College Art Studios
1989 AIA People's Choice Award, Seattle Chapter, Bolen Cabin
1989 Sunset Western Home Merit Award, Bolen Cabin
1987 Prize Winner, 74th Annual Paris Prize Competition
1986 Charles Winthrop Lea Memorial Award
1986 Naramore Scholarship
1985 National AIA Scholarship
Publications/Articles
1992 PACIFIC MAGAZINE, July, Stone/Mahn Residence and Christofides/Arellano Residence
1992 METROPOLITAN HOME, July, Bolen Cabin
1990 ARCHITECTURAL RECORD April, The Evergreen State College Art Studios
1989 SUNSET MAGAZINE The Bolen Cabin
Summary of experience
Public Work
1992- Garfield Community Center (in design), Designer/Project Manager
A new 17,000 square foot community center in Seattle's Central Area for the
Seattle Parks Department.
1992- Heald Hall (Feasibility study/pre-design), Project Architect
Feasability study for renovation and recladding of a 5 story lab building at WSU in Pullman.
1992- Seattle Water Lab (In programming), Designer/Project Manager
A new research and analysis laboratory for the City of Seattle Water Department.
1992- McCollum Park Er Ride (In design), Lead Designer
A new freestanding 600 ft. covered walkway and bus loading terminal for
Snohomish County Transit.
1992 SeaTac Community Center, Project Architect
New multi -purpose Community Center with athletic facilities and classrooms for the
new City of SeaTac.
Miller Hull
Philip Christofides, AIA
Public Work, Continued...
1991- Passenger Only Ferry Terminal, Project Architect
A pier supported terminal and float on Seattles waterfront.
1991- Buckley Trail Park, Lead Designer
Covered picnic and interpretive shelters (with Bruce Dees & Assoc.)
1989-90 705 Charles St., Design team leader - Schematics through Construction Documents.
A 36,000 s.f. building for the City of Seattle Engineering Department, including
shops, storage, staging and truck fleet parking.
1988- 7 0 7 0 8th Ave. S.
Renovation of a 20,000 s.f. shop and warehouse facility for the City of Seattle
Engineering Department.
1987 The Evergreen State College Art Studios, Led Design Development and C.D. production.
A 12,000 s.f. fine arts building with painting and drawing studios and classrooms.
1986-88 Adams Elementary School Classrooms & Cafeteria, Member of design team through C.A.
A new wing of 35,000 s.f. and an additional 20,000 s.f. of renovation to an existing school.
Master Planning Experience
1989-90 Charles St. Maintenance Complex
Master planning of a six square block maintenance complex for the City of Seattle
involving engineering, traffic, and other City departments. Existing buildings,
storage yards, planning for three new buildings, vehicle circulation and parking
studies were involved.
1987 Lake Washington United Methodist Church
Planning for a new 2 phase sanctuary and multi -purpose facility and renovation of an
existing school and church.
1986 Wood Technology Campus
Master planning for the renovation of an existing technology training campus and
organization of new parking and a new building.
Multi Family Housing
1992 McClair Court, Lead Designer, Project Manager.
A 9 unit, affordable housing project in Seattle's Central Area that will be a turn -key
project for a non-profit agency client.
1991 Northaven Assisted Care Facility, Design team member.
A new 5 floor assisted care SRO building with mixed use and cafeteria at main floor.
1989 Marina Shores Condominium, Lead Designer, Project Manager.
Master planning and schematics for a 34 unit condominium project in Moses Lake
including common facilities.
Single Family Houses (Designer/Project Manager)
1992
Marquand Shelter
1990
Fodem Cabin
1992
Page House (under construction)
1989
Hale House
1992
Sargent Addition
1989
Stone/Mahn House
1991
Chris to fides/Arellono House
1988
Bolen Cabin
1991
Shaul House
1988
McConoughy Remodel
MillerlHull
Parks Department Experience
City of Bellevue Parks and Recreation Department
• Wilburton Hills Park Restrooms
• Highland Community Center Addition
• Lake Hills Community Center
• Bellevue Senior Center Feasibility Study
• Bellevue Senior Center
• Bellevue Municipal Golfcourse
Clubhouse Renovation
City of Seattle Parks & Recreation Dept.
• Garfield Community Center
Kirkland Parks & Recreation Department
• Juanita Bay Park
• Kirkland Community Center
• Youth Activity Room Renovation
• Everest Ballpark Improvements
King County Parks Department
• Cedar Hills Activities Building
• North Seatac Community Center
RELATED PUBLIC AGENCY EXPERIENCE
Washington Department of Wildlife
• Nisqually Reach Nature Center
University of Washington
• Conibear Launch House
• Conibear Shell House
City of Edmonds Parks Department
• Bracketts Landing Interp. Shelter
Tacoma Parks & Recreation
• Snake Lake Nature Center
Pierce County Parks & Recreation Dept.
• Buckley Trail Park
Renton Parks & Recreation Dept.
• Cedar River Natural Zone
Snohomish County Parks & Rec. Dept.
• Meadowdale Beach Picnic Shelters,
Restrooms and Park Ranger's Cabin
Whatcom County
• Lake Samish Rowing Facility
City of Auburn
• Les Cove Community Center
King County Council of Campfire
• Wrangler Camp
• Camaraderie Center
• Picnic Shelters
King County Parks Department
North SeaToc Community Center
Millerlftll
Repeat Client List
In over 15 years of practice, evidence of client satisfaction is illustrated by our record of public
clients who have awarded Miller/Hull additional design service contracts:
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
12 Projects
- Health Sciences Complex Study
- Health Sciences E-Court Addition
- Health Sciences D-Wing Renovation
- Health Sciences E-Court Phase II
- Physical Plant Long Range Master Plan
- Health Sciences E&F Wings Renovations
- Health Sciences T-Wing Remodel
- Fisheries Teaching & Research Laboratory
- Henderson Hall Laboratory Addition
- Magnusen Health Sciences Renovations & Additions
- Conibear Shell House
- Coaches Launch House
SEATTLE CENTRAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE
7 Projects
- Marine Technology Campus Master Plan
- Marine Technology Site Development Phase I
- Marine Technology Facility Phase II
- Marine Technology Facility Phase III Study
- Campus Facilities Study
- Wood Technology Shops
- Gompers Shop Study
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY
2 Projects
- Food Services Building Addition
- Heald Hall Laboratory Renewal
EVERGREEN STATE COLLEGE
2 Projects
- Campus Activities Building
- Lab Annex Phase II
KIRKLAND PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT
4 Projects
- Kirkland Community Center
- Youth Activity Room Renovation
- Everest Park Improvements
- Juanita Bay Park
CITY OF BELLEVUE
7 Projects
- Lake Hills Community Center
- Senior Center Feasibility Study
- Bellevue Senior Center
- Highland Community Center
- Golf Course Clubhouse Addition
- Wilburton Hills Park
- Fire Station No. 8
KING COUNTY
6 Projects
- Cedar Hills Activities Building
- Superior Courtrooms Renovation
- Federal Way District Court
Storage Addition
- North District Service Center
Remodel
- Federal Way District Courtroom
Addition
- North SeaTac Community Center
METRO OF METROPOLITAN SEATTLE
3 Projects
- Metro Laboratory Site Selection
- Metro Maintenance Facility
- Metro Water Quality Laboratory
HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT
2 Projects
- Sunnydale Community Center
Phase I
- Sunnydale Community Center
Phase II
MillerlHull
Awards & Recognition
Design capabilities
represent one of the
strongest aspects of the
Miller/Null architectural
practice.
1993
Sunset Magazlne/AIA
Merit Award
Roundy House
Coupeville, WA
Sunset Magazine/AIA
Citation Award
Marquand Residence
Yakima County, WA
Sunsent Magazine/AIA
Citation Award
Noyes/Ryan Cabin
Decatur Island, WA
Metal in Architecture
Award
Boeing Cafeteria
Tukwila, Washington
Masonry Institute of
Washington
Merit Award
Adams Elementary School,
Seattle, Washington
1992
Citation for Future Work,
AIA Seattle Chapter
Lakeside School Art Bldg,
Seattle, Washington
Honor Award, AIA
Regional
Noyes/ Ryan Cabin,
Decatur Island
1997
'ecord Houses Award For
Excellence In Planning br
Design
Noyes/ Ryan Cabin,
Decatur Island
Honor Award, AIA Seattle
Chapter
Jackson Cabin,Decatur
Island
Merit Award, AIA Seattle
Chapter
BoeingCafeteria, Tukwila
Citation for Future Work,
AIA Seattle Chapter
Poschman Residence,
Orcas Island, Washington
National Wood Council
Design Award
Noyes/Ryan Cabin, Decatur
Island
Western Regional AIA
Honor Award
S.C.C.C. Marine
Technology Facility, Seattle
Daily Journal of Com-
merce/AIA Project of the
Month, July
Fisheries Teaching &
Research Building
Seattle, Washington
1990
Merit Award, AIA Seattle
Chapter
Noyes/Ryan Cabin, Decatur
Island, Washington
Merit Award, AIA Seattle
Chapter
Future Project, Passenger
Only Ferry Terminal Seattle
Merit Award, AIA Seattle
Chapter
Future Project, Charles St.
Maintenance Facility,
Seattle
7989
Sunset Magazine AIA
Western Home Merit
Award
Bolen Cottage, Decatur
Island, Washington
A.S.L.A. Merit Award
Meadowdale Beach Park,
Lynwood, Washington
Merit Award, AIA Seattle
Chapter
Art Studios, Evergreen
State College, Olympia,
Washington
People's Choice Award,
AIA Seattle
Bolen Cabin, Decatur
Island, Washington
The Gorton/Bounds Cabin,
Decatur Island
7987
Sunset Magazine Honor
Award
Gorton/Bounds Cabin,
Decatur Island, WA
Sunset Magazine Merit
Award
Metzner Residence,
Everett, Washington
High Honor Award,
National Lab of The Year
Competition
The Metro Water Quality
Laboratory, Seattle
Honor Award, AIA
Seattle Chapter
S.C.C.C. Marine
Technology Facility, Seattle
7986
Honor Award & People's
Choice Award, AIA
Seattle Chapter
The Metro Water Quality
Laboratory, Seattle
1985
Honor Award, American
Wood Council of
Washington D.C.
The Aware Women's
Shelter, Juneau, Alaska
1985
Honor Award, AIA,
Seattle Chapter
The Aware Women's
Shelter, Juneau, Alaska
Honor Award & People's
Choice Award, AIA
Seattle Chapter
1983
Sunset Magazine Honor
Award Western Home
Awards
Mercy Residence, Lake
Marcel, Carnation, Wash-
ington
Honor Award, AIA Seattle
Chapter
Cedar Hills Activities
Building, Maple Valley,
Washington
Citation Award,
American Wood Council
Cedar Hills Activities
Building, Maple Valley,
Washington
1981
National Plywood Design
Awards Citation of Merit
Cedar Hills Activities
Building, Maple Valley,
Washington
AIA Home of the Month
Mercy Residence , Lake
Marcel, Carnation, WA
1980
The Fifth National
Passive Solar Awards
Competition Finalist
Award, '
Solar Design, Kimmik
Residence, Cie Elum,
Washington
Hansen Residence
Moses Lake, Washington
MillerlHull
Design Publication Recognition
1993
Steel Profile
March
Boeing Cafeteria
Seattle, WA
Daily Journal of
Commerce,
April, Project of the Month
Wood Technology Facility
Seattle, WA
1992
Architecture Magazine
October
The Boeing Cafeteria
Seattle, WA
Architecture Magazine
September
Passenger Ferry Terminal
Seattle, WA
Daily Journal of
Commerce,
Aug., Project of the Month
The Boeing Cafeteria
Seattle, WA
Pacific Magazine
Seattle Times, August 16
"The Calming Effect"
featuring the Noyes/Ryan
Cabin on Decatur Island
Pacific Magazine
Seattle Times, August 2
"From Scratch" featuring
Stone/Mahn residence and
Christofides/Arellano house
Metropolitan Home
July, Bolen Cabin,
Decatur Island,WA
Hauser
Hamburg, Germany
March, Noyes/Ryan Cabin
Decatur Island, WA
1991
Architectural Record
April, Record Houses
Noyes/Ryan Cabin,
Decatur Island, WA
Metropolitan Home
June, Noyes/Ryan Cabin,
Decatur Island, WA
Daily Journal of
Commerce
June, Project of the Month
Fisheries Teaching &
Research Building
Seattle, WA
Sunset Magazine
February, Dees Residence,
Lake Louise, WA
1990
Architectural Record
May, Evergreen College Art
Studios, Olympia, WA
Ottagono
Milan, Italy
Firm Profile with selected
works
1989
Architectural Record
Magazine
February,
Marine Technology Facility,
Seattle Central
Community College,
Seattle, WA
Hauser
Hamburg, Germany
November, Gorton Bounds
Cabin, Decatur Island, WA
1988
Pacific Magazine
Seattle Times, January,
"Functional Splendor"
Features Holmberg
Residence, Lake
Sammamish, WA
Sunset Magazine
August,
Gorton/Bounds Cabin,
Decatur Island, WA
Featured on cover
Progressive Architecture
Magazine
December
The Gorton Bounds Cabin,
Decatur Island, WA
1987
Home Magazine
July, "Cabin Fever"
Gorton/Bounds Cabin,
Decatur Island, WA
The Seattle Weekly
July 7, "A Place In The
Country" Gorton/Bounds
Cabin, Decatur Island, WA
Column 5
University of Washington
Journal of Architecture,
"Dave Miller & Bob Hull,
Partners in Architecture"
The Seattle Weekly
The Best of Seattle Issue,
Best All -Around Architec-
tural Firm, Metro Lab
Research & Development
Magazine
May
1987 Lab of The Year
High Honor Award Winner
Metro Lab, Seattle, WA
Sunset Magazine
October. The Metzger
Residence, Marysville, WA.
Cover story
1986
Progressive Architecture
Magazine
April, The AWARE Shelter,
Juneau, Alaska.
The Seattle Weekly
May 7, "Is There A New
Northwest Style?"
AWARE Shelter
& Gorton/Bounds Cabin
Washington Magazine
July, "Homes, Architects of
the Eighties"
1983
Progressive Architecture
Magazine
April, Energy Portfolio —
features two residences by
Miller/Hull
Sunset Magazine
May, "Plants Step Down
Entry "Mercy Residence,
Carnation, WA
Sunset Magazine
October
Western Home Awards Issue
Mercy Residence
Carnation, WA
1982
Arcade, The Northwest
Journal for Architecture and
Design
August/September "Miller/
Hull's New Northwest Ver-
nacular"
1981
Earth Sheltering: The Form
of Energy & The Energy of
Form -
A book illustrating two resi-
dences by Miller/Hull. Pub-
lished by Pergamon Press
Pacific Magazine
Seattle Times, March 22,
"Northwest Architecture,
Livino Beneath The Eartl-
Sunset Magazine
November, "Disappearing
Walls," Hull Residence,
Seattle, WA
LANGLOW/HALL ASSOCIATES
2033 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1010
Seattle, WA 98421
206-441-4255 (phone)
206-441-5278 (fax)
Langlow/Hall Associates, Inc., specializes in community relations and facilitation for both
public and private clients. A 100% women -owned firm, they have a 17-year track record of
providing thoughtful, effective and creative public involvement, strategic planning and
consensus -building services for clients in business and government. Langlow/Hall Associates
is a Washington corporation and a certified WBE in the state of Washington.
The firm provides the expertise needed to establish informed partnerships with agencies,
citizens, and community groups. To accomplish this, Langlow/Hall Associates offers a full
range of community relations and communications services tailored to the specific needs of
each client and project. They have extensive experience with a wide variety of projects in
the areas of transportation, facilities planning, land use, water resources, energy, stormwater
drainage, solid waste, recycling, hazardous waste cleanups, and the siting of controversial
facilities.
Langlow/Hall Associates emphasizes identifying and assessing key issues; developing
community relations plans and policies; explaining technical plans in non -technical language;
managing public and organization meetings and workshops; establishing and staffing advisory
committees; preparing targeted information materials and presentations; and involving
affected groups in planning processes.
Recent clients include:
Washington State Department of Transportation
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Bonneville Power Administration
Snohomish County Planning Department
Port of Seattle
Washington Wildlife Commission
Skagit County Department of Public Works
City of Seattle Department of Parks and Recreation
King County Department of Parks, Planning and Resources
City of Seattle Water Department
Langlow,%Hall Associates, inc.
2033 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1010
Seattle, 'Washington 98121-252o
Phone: (206) 4414255
Fax (206) 441-5278
C
LANGLOW/HALL ASSOCIATES
Representative Projet-`-
■ Snohomish County Survey and Visual Preference Assessment
Langlow/Hall is working with Hewitt Isley to design, conduct and document eight visual preference workshops
throughout Snohomish County, obtaining opinions on issues such as growth; densities, housing types, and rural
and urban character.
■ Overlake Land Use Analysis
Langlow/Hall is also working with Hewitt Islet' in developing and facilitating workshops, with informational
materials, for the cities of Bellevue and Redmond, determining neighborhood views on the land use future for
Overlake.
■ Land Use Policies, Pierce County
Langlow/Hall designed and facilitated six community workshops to test concepts of density, housing types,
zoning and transportation, providing guidance for the development of county -wide land use policies.
■ Parks and Recreation COMPLAN, City of Seattle
Langlow/Hall designed a series of workshops, conducted by city staff, to obtain broad public input for the City of
Seattle's parks and recreation COMPLAN.
■ Community Centers Design, City of Seattle
Langlow/Hall designed, facilitated and documented 12 public workshops to test design concepts and obtain
L
detailed community input on the design of community centers in the Garfield, Rainier and Delridge
neighborhoods.
■ Design Review Workshops, City of Seattle
.Langlow/Hall assisted in designing, facilitating and documenting a series of community workshops to discuss
design review guidelines for future development and land use in Seattle neighborhoods; visual preference
techniques allowed residents a chance to learn about possibilities for future use that would encourage diversity
while maintaining neighborhood character.
■ Water Supply Plan, Seattle Water Department
Langlow/Hall designed and conducted a series of regional public workshops to elicit detailed comment on
complex issues of environmental values, economics, public health, and water resource and supply preferences.
■ Public Involvement Training for Staff, Snohomish County
Langlow/Hall designed and presented a two-part workshop for engineers, planners and public involvement staff,
called Public Involvement: Tools & Techniques A Guide for Program Managers.
■ Action Plan, Washington Wildlife Commission
Langlow/Hall developed, facilitated and documented a public involvement and policy development program for
the Commission's action plan on state wildlife issues, including six in-depth workshops throughout the state on
issues of values, land use, financing and environmental protection.
■ Downtown Plan and Capital Improvement Program, City of Redmond
Langlow/Hall designed, conducted and documented a day -long visioning workshop for Redmond's downtown
plan, as well as focus groups and community workshops for Redmond's first comprehensive Capital Improvement
Program.
■ Cottage Lake park Master Plan, King County
Langlow/Hall facilitated a citizen advisory committee and public meetings to develop a program and master
for a new park.
KRISTIE LANGLOW
President, Langlow/Hall Associates
Background Ms. Langlow has 25 years of experience with community
decision making, facilitation and consensus development in
both the public and private sectors. To this assignment she
brings extensive experience in developing innovative methods
for gathering citizen comment and initiating change. As
Information Services Manager for the City of Seattle's
Department of Community Development, she planned and
executed a series of complex public education efforts. As an
external consultant, she has focused on designing decision
making processes for agency leaders. A skilled facilitator, she
is known for her capacity to design and conduct effective
meetings on controversial, environmentally sensitive and
technical subjects.
She is able to provide specific strategies for effective public
discussions. She is frequently called upon to provide
teambuilding for management groups; she understands how to
establish an atmosphere which fosters productive citizen
involvement.
Relevant Project manager for the Skagit County Drainage Study
Experience where she is coordinating and facilitating public meetings
P and a citizen's advisory committee. She oversees the
development of public eduction materials for the project
including newsletters, media releases, flyers and
presentation materials. She managed an in-depth issue
assessment for the study.
• Conducted an issues assessment for Snohomish County
Public Works Department to analyze the effectiveness of
the agency's public involvement activities and provided
training on improving public meetings.
• Devised a decision making process and consensus building
format for the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Board. Facilitated a series of Board, Staff and
Management Team, meetings to test priorities, establish
direction and create a sense of common purpose.
• Facilitated a series of public meetings to gather
neighborhood input on major design changes for Seattle
Parks Department Community Centers.
• Provided employees of the City of Bellevue's Design
Development Division with workshops on meeting
facilitation, meeting design and consensus building.
• For the Bonneville Power Administration, developed a
public involvement strategy to address the challenge of
maximizing customer support for the 1992 Resource
Program.
Kristie Langlow
• Produced and distributed more than 80 public service
announcements for television and radio for Seattle City
Light, the Seattle -King County Health Department, the
Seattle Public Library and other agencies.
• Featured as a. speaker on strategic planning by the
Consulting Engineers Council of Washington, the
American Society of Landscape Architects and the Society
for Marketing Professional Services.
Education A.B., cum laude, Whitman College
M.A., University of Montana
University of Washington Certified Professional Trainer
Advanced work in strategic planning, organizational
development, grantsmanship, and communications.
MIMI SHERIDAN
Vice President, Langlow/Hall Associates
Background Ms. Sheridan has had more than fifteen years experience in
public involvement and information programs. She is
particularly experienced in conducting and interpreting public
opinion surveys on potentially controversial subjects and in
planning and implementing effective community relations
programs. Much of her work in this arena has focused on
transportation planning, land use issues, and planning for
stormwater, groundwater, solid waste and hazardous waste
management.
Her background also includes research and writing of public
information and education materials and media relations. Ms.
Sheridan has planned and coordinated numerous public
meetings and workshops to encourage effective participation
on specific projects or issues. Her tasks have ranged from
small issues assessments to large-scale surveys and from simple
community relations plans to overall management of planning
and information programs with budgets in excess of $100,000.
Relevant Worked with citizen advisory committees to develop and
Experience implement stormwater or groundwater education programs
P in Island County and the cities of Sumner, Des Moines,
Blaine and Yakima. Developed brochures, slide shows and
news releases and coordinated public meetings on
stormwater and water quality issues.
Planned and implemented appropriate and effective
strategies to involve the general public in the design of
numerous transportation planning and road improvement
projects in King, Snohomish, Chelan, Douglas, Kitsap and
Yakima counties. Strategies included in-depth survey and
interview techniques, newsletters, fact sheets, media
relations citizen advisory committees and public meetings
and open houses.
• Assisted the City of Redmond with a citizen planning
effort for its capital improvement program and downtown
plan. Work included focus groups, surveys and a visioning
workshop.
• Assisted with workshop planning and facilitation for
Pierce County and the Seattle Office of Long Range
Planning to identify and formulate land use policies and
community design guidelines.
Mimi Sheridan
• Assisted in the design of public involvement and media
plans and information materials for solid waste and
household hazardous waste management plans for
Snohomish, Spokane, Yakima, Chelan, Benton and
Franklin counties.
• Designed and conducted surveys to identify critical issues
for major long range planning efforts for the City of
Seattle Parks, Water and Lighting Departments and the
Washington State Wildlife Commission; analyzed survey
results and potential impacts and identified methods for
addressing the issues.
• Planned public information and involvement programs for
several hazardous waste cleanup projects, including
writing and producing brochures, fact sheets, press
releases, and public service announcements. Included
media relations and contacts with community groups.
B.A., University of California, Santa Barbara, Political Science
Education and History, 1970
M.S., Oregon State University, Higher Education Adminis-
tration, 1973
'1
MURASE
FIRM BACKGROUND associates
Murase associates has a broad background in urban and park design, recreation and campus
planning, natural and cultural resource inventory, and design work in other areas of landscape
architectural practice. The firm has been a consultant for the cities of Seattle, Bellevue, Olympia,
Everett, Portland, Eugene, and Grants Pass, as well as for the University of Washington,
Washington State University, and the University of Oregon.
The firm is a minority owned business established in 1982 to provide a full range of services in
landscape architecture. With 24 professional and technical support staff, Murase serves both
public and private clients from offices in Seattle and Portland. All of our personnel have worked
successfully in teams with public agencies, facility planners, engineers, architects, and developers
to create projects which have been widely recognized. The firm's key personnel possess from
15 to 26 years of experience in their field. Our office utilizes computer -aided design with Auto-
Cadd release l 1 and 12 software.
Robert Murase, principal, is a nationally -recognized landscape architect. He has consistently
achieved a standard of design excellence and visual beauty in his work, which has been honored
since 1980 by the American Society of Landscape Architecture through their annual awards. His
projects have also received awards from the American Institute of Architects.
The firm is committed to providing the client and community with work distinguished by its
design quality, human sensitivity, and suitability to the environment. Our firm is guided by this
philosophy and has developed a management approach that enables us to realize these intentions
in our work. By our definition, design excellence also embodies concern for aesthetics and
safety, and respect for cost effectiveness. Our aim is to provide places which are timeless, and
ultimately become an extension of the community fabric.
ROBERT K. MURASE, ASLA
PRINCIPAL
■
Bob Murase, principal of Murase
associates, has 26 years experience in
landscape architectural Planning and
design in the United States, Japan, and
the Pacific Basin. His work has been
Published by Landscape Architecture,
Garden Design, Ville Giardini, Japan
Architecture, Northwest Magazine,
Building Stone Magazine, GA Homes,
and Arcade. His projects have been
recognized in the following books:
Designing the New Landscape, a recent
British publication by Sutherland Lyle
with foreword by Sir Geoffery Jellicoe
on forty landscape designs world-wide;
Northwest Homes, by Humphrey, Albert,
Jensen; Profiles in Landscape
Architecture, 1992; Touching the Stones,
a book on the Japanese American
Historical Plaza (1992 publication date),
and a Japanese publication, Graphic
Sha's Urban Landscapes, 1992.
His works include urban design projects,
recreation master planning, landscape
planning and detailed designs for a
variety of project types and scale. A
nationally -recognized landscape architect,
Mr. Murase has consistently achieved a
standard of design excellence and visual
beauty for which he has been awarded
national design awards from the
American Society of Landscape
Architects and other institutions. He has
a strong design reputation for developing
special places -- plazas, courtyards, water
cascades, and fountains -- with a
dedication to craft that becomes art.
Some of Mr. Murase's current projects
include development of Yao Garden as
part of the Bellevue Botanical Garden;
the Trailblazer's Arena plaza design; a
private garden in Lake Tahoe, CA;
design guidelines for the renovation of
Seattle Center, and the open space areas
of Crater Lake National Park Lodge and
Activitv Center
s
Education:
University of California, Berkeley,
Bachelor of Landscape Architecture,
1963
Registration:
Oregon 1983, Washington 1984
Professional Activities:
Speaker, Chicago Botanic Garden
Symposium, 1992: Speaker, Niigata
Waterfront Symposium, 1992: Awards
Jury, Yokohama Waterfront Master Plan
Competition, 1992; National Awards
Committee, 1992; National Awards
Committee, American Society of
Landscape Architects, 1992; Board
Member, Oregon Architectural
Foundation, 1992; Featured Lecturer,
Design Series, Smithsonian Institute,
1991, Special Lecturer, University of
Virginia, 1991; Board of
Directors/Design Chair, Oregon Nikkei
Endowment, 1989-present; Selection
Committee, Oregon Arts Commission,
1991; Design Forum, New York
Botanical Garden, 1990; Lecturer,
Harvard University, 1990; Lecturer,
National Wildlife Federation, Virginia,
1990; Special Speaker, 80th Anniversary
of Seattle Arboretum, 1990; Lecturer,
University of Portland, 1990; Lecturer,
University of Oregon Fine Arts
Department, 1990; Lecturer, Oregon
School of Design, 1989; Design Jury,
Bumbershoot Festival, 1988; Design
Jury, Artquake, 1987; Visiting Lecturer,
University of Washington Department of
Landscape Architecture, 1987, Lecturer,
Oregon School of Design, 1987; Board
Member, Contemporary Crafts Gallery,
1987; Board Member, Columbia
Mokuyokai, 1987.
BRAD R. KUROKAWA, ASLA
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
■
Brad Kurokawa, landscape architect,
brings over ten years of experience in
landscape architectural design, planning
and project management to projects that
he is involved in. Mr. Kurokawa has a
broad background having worked in both
large multi -disciplinary firms and small
landscape architectural offices. His
current projects include landscape design
for the Children's Hospital & Medical
Center expansion; rooftop courtyard
design for The Rainier luxury apartment
towers in Seattle; and landscape design
and construction for Garfield Community
Center in Seattle's Central District.
Some of his past projects include
landscape design and construction review
for Seattle Center's Broad Street Entry;
large scale land planning for the 4,500
acre Hana Ranch and Hotel Hana-Maui
resort in Hana, Maui; urban design for
the world Trade Center in Bangkok,
Thailand; and site design for the Tropical
Rain Forest Exhibit at Woodland Park
Zoo in Seattle, Washington.
An eclectic by nature, Mr. Kurokawa
enjoys the full spectrum of the design
process from conceptualization to
construction implementation with
emphasis on detail design development
evolving from strong design concepts.
His interests in fine craftsmanship,
gardening and construction technology
contribute to his breadth of experience
and desire to create special places in the
landscape.
s
Education:
BLA, University of Washington;
Seattle,WA; 1982
Phi Beta Kappa Honorary Society;
University of Washington; 1982
Registration:
Washington 1985
Professional Activities:
Lecturer, Department of Landscape
Architecture, University of Washington;
1985,1990.
Guest Design Critic, Department of
Landscape Architecture, University of
Washington, 1982-84, 1988; University
of California - Berkeley, Continuing
Education, 1986.
Member, Seattle Tilth.
Federal Aviation Administration
Environmental Award, Ruby Chow Park
at King County Airport; Seattle, WA.
1986.
(-C)M MT 1NTTY/CIVIC CENTERS
s
Garfield Community Center
Seattle, Washington
Working closely with Miller Hull Architects,
Murase associates designed the site plan for the
Garfield Community Center in the heart of
Seattle's Central District. The site program,
developed with the Seattle Parks Department,
required a new playground, outdoor gathering
spaces, tennis courts, parking, planting areas,
and improved pedestrian circulation.
The intent of the plan was to link all of these
activities together in a cohesive, thoughtful way
that encourages interaction and a stronger
sense of community. Activities for small
children, teenagers, and adults were
incorporated into the plan, which needed to
reflect the culturally and ethnically diverse
neighborhood. Considerations for intensive
pedestrian activity around the site required
resolving issues of clear circulation, increased
maintenance, visibility, and security. Murase
associates' responsibilities included complete
site planning and design through construction,
coordination of local artists, and integration of
the community's input and suggestions.
Creating a new building that fits comfortably into
the context of the Central District and forms a
dynamic edge to Garfield's historic playfields
were the primary goals of this project.
■
Naselle Library
Naselle, Washington
The small coastal community of Naselle,
Washington, requested Murase associates
provide them with landscape architectural
services for a new regional library and
community center With Clint Pherson
Architects, we developed a site plan that
encompasses not only a pleasant setting for the
library, but a landmark site with the opportunity
for picnicking, community festivities, and passive
recreation in a park -like setting. Groves of
flowering trees, expansive lawn areas and
traditional plantings around the building and
paths accentuate its qualities as a civic garden
and special addition to the face of Naselle.
■
Japanese American Historical Plaza
Portland, Oregon
This riverfront park is comprised of a central
plaza surrounded by four symbolic gateways. It
is an acknowledgement of the tragic internment
of Japanese -American citizens during World
War II. The garden forms the terminus of the
Tom McCall Waterfront Park along the
Willamette River, and is adjacent to Portland's
historic Japan Town. A rough-hewn stone wall,
integrated with land forms and parallel to the
river, is central to the design. Etched in natural
stones set in and along the wall, haiku poetry in
Japanese and English reveals the history of
Japanese -Americans from the early Issei
immigration to the present.
This project has received the 1990 Honor Award
by the American Institute of Architects, Oregon,
and the People's Choice Award, American
Institute of Architects, Oregon.
s
Everett International Friendship Garden
Everett, Washington
The Mayor's Office of the City of Everett
commissioned Murase associates to provide
planning and design services for a 30-acre park
on a large bluff overlooking the Puget Sound.
The site accommodates a community center, an
urban horticulture center, an arboretum,
conservatory, reception hall, maintenance
facilities, and support facilities. As an extension
of their friendship and sisterhood with the City of
Iwakuni, Japan, 8.5 acres of this park will be
devoted to the development of a Japanese
Garden. This garden is the park's focal point
and includes a tea garden, ponds, streams, tree
groves and pavilions.
e
Kubota Gardens
Seattle, Washington
Kubota Gardens was developed as a Japanese
garden and nursery over a fifty- year period by
the Kubota family. The 20-acre site was
designated a Historical Landmark by the City of
Seattle in 1980.
Our firm developed a master plan with display
areas, ponds and hillside gardens, pavilions and
overlooks, and building and site amenities to
house cultural, service and maintenance
activities. The plan preserves the integrity of the
site and gardens, while extending the dream of
the Kubota family, to further the understanding
of Japanese culture in American society.
e
Meadowbrook Nursing Home
Seattle, Washington
This existing 81-bed facility in North Seattle is
currently undergoing a major remodel with
additions to the building and site amenities.
Murase associates have been working with the
owner and architects on the site development
and landscape design to address circulation,
parking, and other functional requirements. In
addition, our firm has developed garden,
courtyard, and landscape focal points throughout
the facility. Pleasant views, seasonal change,
and variety in the garden areas have been
critical components in our approach to the
landscape design.
■
Seattle Children's Theatre
Seattle, Washington
Murase associates developed the landscape
design for the new Seattle Children's Theatre
and its surrounding area at Seattle Center. The
design incorporated several existing trees and
landscape features critical to the site, and
responded to the long range goals of the Seattle
Center. Plantings and paving at the entry create
a playful environment complementary to
children's anticipation of attending a live
performance.
Throughout the site, the landscape supports the
scale and qualities of the building and reinforces
the contribution of the facility to the structure and
character of this campus landscape. Our
participation also included cost estimates,
preparation of construction documents, and
construction administration.
Mittleman Jewish Community Center
Portland, Oregon
Working with the Center's Board of Directors,
Murase associates helped to develop a long-
range Master Plan for the Center. A two -phased
plan was produced which included
improvements concerning facility space, parking,
sports courts, and pedestrian circulation.
GARFIELD COMMUNITY CENTER
Seattle, Washington
.n
n�
n•m'�Zt''Tiourrit dnnuyu mup r J�"Jf' `fn"�
nNruunS VlWrid4eM l!��t. .;i��-__.,�■
.mm+ra�uue
wr B.II it<I a. / u
Murase associates,
working closely with
Miller/Hull Architects,
designed the site plan for
the Garfield Community
Center in the heart of
Seattle's Central District.
The site program,
developed with the seattle
Parks Department, called
for a new playground, -
outdoor gathering spaces,
tennis courts, parking,
planting areas, and
improved pedestrian
circulation, all on a
relatively small site.
The intent of the plan was
to link all of these
activities together in a
cohesive, thoughtful way
East Cherry
that encourages
interaction and a stronger
sense of community.
Activities for small
children, teenagers, and
adults were incorporated
into the plan, which
needed to reflect the
culturally and
ethnically diverse
neighborhood.
Considerations for
intensive pedestrian
activity around the site
required resolving issues
of clear circulation,
increased maintenance,
visibility, and security.
Murase associates'
responsibilities include
complete site planning
and design through
I ;ICI;
construction, coordination
of local artists, and
integrating the diverse
wishes of the neighbor-
hood. The goal for the
project was for the
community to feel that
their new building would
"fit" comfortably within the
context of the Central
District, and form a
dynamic urban edge to
Garfield's historic
playfields.
Client: City of Seattle
Site:` Seattie, WA
rti�,r .1
llilill 1
MuanSE
associates
COVINGTON RESOURCE LIBRARY
Kent, Washington
The King County Library System recently
embarked on an expansion program for several
facilities on diverse sites throughout the Seattle
metropolitan area. As the landscape
architectural component of the design team,
Murase associates assisted the client in final site
selection, site analysis, and a pre -design charette.
The purpose of this effort was to determine site
feasibility, opportunities and constraints, develop
design goals and to explore alternative solutions
to building location, parking, circulation,
pedestrian linkages, and preservation of forest
areas on the site.
CLIENT: King County Library System
ew BIPp��
II;
1
i/
po«mI.
J5a..a.
S.E. 272nd Street
T Q � �aMIEtp SGylphv
',icy �, �0:,•=t\
uenry � J�{
I_ V N Site Plan
)r.Yi FI.IE
WARM SPRINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION CENTER
Warm Springs, Oregon
GG
i
" r'1
O
A unique non-traditional
playground was created
for the cultural center
serving 500 young children
from this Central Oregon
Indian community. Major
design features of the play
area included a dry stream
bed, spray pools, gardens
in which the children are
encouraged to participate,
and pathways. Each
design component is
intended to reflect values
of the three local tribes
who will be utilizing the
center.
Client: Confederated Tribes of
Warm Springs
Site: Warm Springs. Oregon
LkOB1,NSON
C O M P A N Y
RENT YOUTH/TEEN CENTER
PROJECT PROFILE
COMPANY BACKGROUND
2811 East Madison, Suite 203
Seattle, WA 98112 • (206) 329-5394
The Robinson Company was established in 1985 to provide cost
estimates for Architects and Owners throughout the Northwest. Since
that time we have provided over 1200 cost estimates for projects in
both the public and private sectors. All estimates are computerized
and can be provided in CSI divisions or Uniformat. Estimates can be
done at the feasibility, programming, schematic, design development
and working drawings levels. Early cost models are developed to help
either establish or confirm the budget. These cost models can be
developed at the feasibility or programming stage, prior to any
drawings. The Robinson Company has worked on many municipal
buildings and community centers and we are sensitive to the costs of
construction associated with these types of buildings. We are very
familiar with the Value Engineering process. Our staff has
participated as team members on over a dozen V.E. teams. Kirk
Robinson has led six V.E. studies primarily for the Seattle
Department of Parks and Recreation. We also perform life cycle cost
analysis on the majority of our projects.
STAFF
The Robinson Company includes 5 estimators all of whom are from the
General Contracting industry. The person in charge of the Kent
Youth/Teen Center will be Kirk Robinson. Kirk has over 20 years
experience in construction and cost estimating. He has worked for
major General Contractors in both Denver, CO. and Seattle, WA. For 8
years he has been the President of the Robinson Company. His
leadership and reviews on every -project assure a consistent final
product which is both very accurate and within the client's schedule.
RELEVANT PROJECTS
Garfield Community Center
Value: $2,700,000
Delridge Community Center
Value: $2,800,000
Meadowbrook Community Center
Value: $3,000,000
Rainier Community Center
Value: $3,100,000
Bitter Lake Community Center
Value: $2,800,000
Issaquah Community Center
Value: $3,000,000
A corporation specializing in: COST ESTIMATING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Kent Youth/Teen Center
Page 2
RELEVANT PROJECTS CONT.
Pt. Townsend Community Center
Value: $575,000
Black Diamond Community Center
Value: $460,000
The Robinson Company staff has between
estimator. Our staff is very familiar
construction and sensitive to the costs
market. We work closely with the Owner
materials which are best for the Owner
analysis. This includes architectural,
materials.
Highline Community Center
Value: $875,000
Lynnwood Civic Center
Value: $530,000
5 and 40 years experience per
with Community center
of construction in the Kent
and Architect to determine
through extensive life -cycle
mechanical, and electrical
Since life -cycle cost versus first cost is always an important
consideration, our approach on every project is to work closely with
the Architect on material selection. At the schematic level we
assist the client by pricing and performing life -cycle analysis for
each building system. This allows the Architect and Owner to select
the materials which will not only meet their first cost limit but
also provide a sound product throughout the life of the building.
Finding the optimum point where first rate materials can be used
while staying within the budget is a challenge we try to achieve on
every project.
Daily interaction with an extensive range of subcontractors and
suppliers allows us to provide clients with accurate, realistic
information on costs, constructability and product availability.
Access to a diverse network of specialty consultants and contractors
allows us to provide information on specialized and unusual building
materials. Our construction background is unique for professional
cost estimators and will be a valuable asset as this project evolves.
The Robinson Company has also led and participated on many Value
Engineering workshops. Over the last six months we have facilitated
V.E. workshops on five new community centers for the Department of
Parks and Recreation. These workshops have focused on first -cost
savings & maintenance improvements. We have also helped guide each
community center to meet standards of buildings which are
environmentally compatible.
RESUME
Kirk Robinson — President
THE
AROBINSON
^`�TM+COMPANY
2811 East Madison, Suite 203
Seattle, WA 98112 • (206) 329-5394
Kirk Robinson graduated from the University of Colorado in 1977 with a Bachelor
of Science degree in Architectural Engineering.
Kirk worked as a Project Manager and Estimator for two prominent firms in the
West. From 1978 to 1980 he managed the remodeling division at the Al Cohen
Construction Company in Denver, Colorado. Responsibilities included estimating
and managing difficult remodels ranging from small office spaces to large
department stores and club renovations. These projects ranged in value from
$25,000 to $4,500,000.
From 1980 to 1985, as a Project Manager and Estimator for Lease Crutcher
Construction Company in Redmond, Washington, he managed and estimated a
variety of complex projects. These projects included jails, office buildings,
hospitals, senior housing, schools, shopping centers and multi -family housing.
These projects ranged in value from $50,000 to $25,000,000.
As President of the Robinson Company from 1985 to the present, Kirk has
supervised and managed a corporation which performs cost estimating (over 125
cost estimates per year) and construction management (average of $3,000,000
per year).
Kirk Robinson has instructed for three years in the Associated General Contractors'
Supervisory Training Program. Courses taught include Planning & Scheduling
Contract Documents, Communications and Problem Solving/Decision Making.
A corporation specializing in: COST ESTIMATING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
1. SUBJECT:
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 17, 1993
Category Other Business
1994 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.f
-SET HEARIN6-DATE-
6)(-r lic4ed +4161f
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: 5Phe Planning Committee met at 4:00
o'clock today to consider setting So -'ember 7,— 1993,—ae t e
+h e date for a public hearing on the 1994 Community Development
Block Grant Program. She A)( vF-;_0 '�
3. EXHIBITS: None
4. RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, St
5.
, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
SONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
: Recommended Not Recommended
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember
seconds
to set September 7, 1993, as the date for a public hearing te-o-r-N
the 1994 Community development Block Grant (CDBG)
Program. �J6,tL_5er SeC.F;i df <� ��ti� FYrP YriOfi &Nt
0CLrr1"eat .
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4A'r
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 17, 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: INDOOR PAINTBALL ARENA - ZONING CODE AMENDMENT
#ZCA-93-5
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Planning Commission has recommended
amending the zoning code to permit indoor paintball operations
as a permitted use in both M-1 (Industrial Park) and M-2
(Limited Industrial) zoning districts. Ll&-r, CJ(-r's u�s�evt�
4cLy-f i s (\c4ed `{t Cti `�`41 e )o � k.., V'L i SS U,e- [micas b P ✓1
3. EXHIBITS: Mdmo and Planning Commission Minutes of 7/26/93
4. RECOMMENDED B : Planning Commission
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. UNBUDGETED FIS&L/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO�<_ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNE NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS
7.
Councilmember V move6-, Geunc —,n conds
to amend the Kent Zoning Code to permit indoor paintball opera-
tions as a permitted use in the M-1 (Industrial Park) and M-2
(Limited Industrial) zoning districts (ZCA-93-5), as recom-
mended by the Planning Commission and to direct the City
Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance. (,vk,+e 5ecv0ed
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
L 1;- 1 G 1 C4
Council Agenda
Item No. 4B''�
CITY OF WTVT4M
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
V79CAT§- MEMORANDUM
..August 17, 1993
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW INDOOR
PAINTBALL USES IN THE M-1 AND M-2 ZONING DISTRICTS
On July 26, 1993 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
consider a Regulatory Review request to permit indoor paintball
operations in the PSI-2, Limited Industrial zoning district. The
Commission recommends to the Council that such operations be
allowed as out right permitted uses in both the M-1, Industrial
Park zoning district and the M-2 district.
The Regulatory Review process was set up by the Council a number of
years ago to give citizens a chance to recommend changes to the
uses enumerated in the different zoning classifications in the
Zoning Code.
JPH/mp:paint.l
cc: Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Planning Commission Minutes
July 26, 193
the paintball arena use. He requested that the Commissioners approve
this request. Mr. Ryckman gave a brief critique on the paintball
sport. He stated this was a rapidly growing sport throughout the
United States. Mr. Ryckman stated his business has been in operation
for a year, but, because of phenomenal growth he needs more space.
Commissioner Dahle asked if someone came in with a similar type use,
would that use have to come before the Commission. Further, would this
permit exclude the paintball participants from going outdoors to
conduct their sport.
Mr. Harris responded that if a use came in that the Planning Department
consider similar, then an administrative decision would be made whether
or not it would be allowed in the M1 or M2 zone. If the paintball
players were to go outdoors that would be considered an accessory use
to the permitted use.
Public hearing was closed.' -
Commissioner Haylor MOVED to approve the Zoning Code amendment
#ZCA-93-5 that the M2, Limited Industrial, district, and the M1,
Industrial Park, district be amended to permit the siting of indoor
paintball facilities as a permitted use. Commissioner Dozier SECONDED.
A short discussion followed: Commissioner Ward called for the
question. MOTION carried.
The election of officers will be postponed until additional members are
appointed.
Mr. Harris remind the Commissioners that there will not be a workshop
meeting in August but there will be a public hearing on August 23 to
consider #ZCA-93-6, Churches allowed in the CM2, Commercial
Manufacturing, zoning district.
It was MOVED, SECONDED and APPROVED to adjourn the hearing at 7:30 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
James P. Harris, Secre
I
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
R E P O R T S
A. COUNCIL PRESID
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
C. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
�D. PLANNING COMMITTEE
"fE. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
F. PARKS COMMITTEE
'16. BUDGET COMMI
H. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
August 3, 1993
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC:
Christi Houser, Chair
Leona Orr
Jim White
Tony McCarthy, Roger Lubovich,
Charlie Lindsey, Alana McIalwain, Becky Fowler
Jean Parietti, Larry Metler
The meeting was called to order at 4:06 p.m. by Chairperson Houser.
APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS
All claims for the period ending 7/15/93 in the amount of $2,032,543.48, and claims for the
period ending 7/30/93 in the amount of $1,339,850.08 were approved.
SENIOR HOUSING PROTECT REPORT
Alana McIalwain, Administration Manager, explained that the following wish list items requested
by the Harrison House residents have already been purchased or plans have been made to
provide them: 1) counter tops for the 2nd and 3rd floor laundry rooms to fold clothes; 2) an
ironing board for each laundry room; 3) card tables and folding padded chairs; 4) a picnic table
in the yard; 5) additional shelving, conference tables and chairs on the 2nd and 4th floor lounges
and libraries; 6) benches in the parking area; 7) storage lockers; and 8) a wheel chair, donated
by Larry Metler. She noted that purchase of a van and a covered parking lot have not and
probably will not be done unless the Council chooses to purchase a 24-passenger van through
CIP funds for use at the Senior Center and Harrison House. Charlie Lindsey, Support Services
Manager, explained that because of concerns regarding casters on the chairs, it was decided to
put glides on in place of the casters. John Fiskum, Recreation Coordinator at the Senior Center,
noted that there is an existing service for grocery shopping which can be possibly extended to
include the Harrison House residents. McIalwain noted that two people from METRO were
invited to the meeting to discuss the DART and VanGo services offered through King County.
White suggested that they meet with the Harrison House residents rather than the Committee.
Larry Metler updated the Committee on the progress with the canopy and trellis. It was the
consensus of the Committee that the Senior Center staff and METRO meet with the residents
of the Harrison House to discus the services available and possibly work out new ones to
accommodate them.
RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT RACE TRACK IN AUBURN
Roger Lubovich, City Attorney, explained that Bill Doolittle had requested, at the last Council
meeting, the City Council support the proposed race track facility in Auburn through adoption
of a resolution. White expressed that he will support it because he sees a real benefit to the City
of Kent. Orr stated that she would support the resolution only if it is written in a way where
the site could be changed from one location to another, if necessary. White noted that a new
resolution could be brought to and passed by the Council if the site changes. Lubovich read the
draft resolution and Orr suggested that "horse race track" be replaced with "thoroughbred horse
racing facility" for the final resolution. White suggested that the resolution mention "that it will
economically benefit the citizens of Kent as well as Auburn and the surrounding areas". WHITE
SO MOVED to support the resolution. Orr seconded and the motion carried 3-0. It was agreed
upon that this item be added to the next Agenda under Consent Calendar.
The meeting adjourned at 4:33 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 20, 1993 5:30 PM
Committee Members Present
Leona Orr, Chair
Jon Johnson
Planning Staff
Jim Harris
Kevin O'Neill
Margaret Porter
Fred Satterstrom
City Attorney's Office
Laurie Evezich
Other City Staff
Tony McCarthy
Other Guests
List Available Upon Request
GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE - (F Satterstrom)
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom spoke in reference to a letter dated
June 28, 1993 from Cynthia Sullivan of the Growth Management Planning
Council about an appeal by the City of Snoqualmie in regards to
amendments ordered by the Central Puget Sound Growth Planning Hearings
Board to the Countywide Planning Policies. The City of Snoqualmie
alleged in their appeal that some of the policies in the Countywide
Planning were too specific and went beyond the authority that state law
of the Growth Management Act gave the County. The Board agreed with the
City of Snoqualmie on that point and the policies indeed were too
narrowly written particularly the policy as indicated on page 2
(Attachment A) in the June 28, 1993 letter. The City of Snoqualmie
indicated the policies were too specific in saying that we cannot expand
the existing land areas zoned for business or office. The Puget Sound
Growth Planning Hearings Board ruled that some of the policies went too
far and were invalid. The King County Council reconsidered some and
passed Ordinance No. 10840 in May and modified some of those policy
statements. The one that concerns the City of Kent is the first one
crossed out on page two, "jurisdictions shall not expand the existing
land area zoned for business/office parks" and the other changes deal
with rural centers. The City of Kent is being asked to concur these
changes to the Countywide Planning Policies by suburban cities and/or the
City of Seattle. Manager Satterstrom quoted a portion of the letter "a
City shall be deemed to have ratified the CPP unless, within ninety days
of its adoption by King County, the city by legislative action
disapproved the CPP." Chair Orr requested it be noted in the minutes
that since this change did not impact the City negatively, there is no
reason to draft a resolution. Councilmember Johnson MOVED and Chair Orr
SECONDED a motion to have other council members aware of the letter and
not to take any action. Motion carried. Mr. Satterstrom stated he would
send a cover letter with a copy of the June 28, 1993 letter from the
Growth Management Planning Council to explain this issue to all the City
Council members.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
JULY 20, 1993
PAGE 2
DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM/UPCOMING REQUESTS
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom
Department's Work Program for 1993.
to the Committee is to let them know
to the Work Program.
distributed copies of the Planning
The purpose of bringing this forward
where the Department is with regards
In the Environment and Land Use Management area, some impact has occurred
with the development of the new Office of Development Services (ODS).
Planner Brad Hazeltine began working full-time with this new office on
Monday, July 19. However, some of the current planning workload went
with Brad. The down side in losing Brad is that he is an excellent
customer service representative at the Planning Department's counter, and
now the Department has had to double up with the remaining planners to
cover the counter. The landscape plan, environmental review, and land
use permits are going ahead as indicated on the Work Program chart.
Fred mentioned that the chart indicates there is not a lot of time
allocated for code enforcement, yet this is becoming a priority. With
the new Nuisance Committee that has been formed, Fred senses the Council
wants more priority on this issue and perhaps the number of hours spent
on code enforcement needs to be revised.
Fred mentioned the Work Program deferring code amendments and special
projects in 1993. Unfortunately, this is not happening. There has been
a number of people who have applied for regulatory reviews and the
Department has not been able to say "no". Special projects such as the
annexation, planning, and zoning for the Chestnut Ridge annexation area
have been deferred. This project will soon be coming to the Planning
Commission. A new project team has been formed to develop a proposal to
be taken to the Planning Commission and City Council.
Under the Research and Policy Development Section in the Work Program,
the Department is doing the best it can with the resources it has in
completing the mandates for Growth Management. He mentioned two items on
the City Council the evening of July loth will help the City meet the
mandates, i.e. Capital Facilities Planning funding and authorizing the
Department to go forward with an RFP on the Environmental Impact
Statement for the Comprehensive Plan.
Fred summarized that the Planning Department is tight and trying to
defray a lot of unanticipated projects due to lack of resources. Also,
the Department is focusing attention in the Research and Policy
Development area on accomplishing both a new comprehensive plan and
Development regulations by this time next. year.
Jim Harris added he has been doing all of SEPA, but next week he will be
relinquishing these duties to the planners, i.e. research, preparing
reports, etc. He stated that Growth Management needs to be on the front
burner. The Zoning code and Subdivision Code will need to updated too.
Chair Orr said that the Council needs to be informed about the workload
and if it is not possible to fit a project in, she would like us to speak
up about the Department's time and workload constraints. Mr. Satterstrom
added that the GIS planner, Curt Ryser, left the City to work for the
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
JULY 201 1993
PAGE 3
City of Federal Way. Administration is studying whether or not GIS
should be centralized or not.
Planning Director Harris reported that another major project is the
Chestnut Ridge Annexation. This involves implementing the zoning and
comprehensive plan for this area by November 6, 1993. Also, this
involves a mapping project, a mail notification of proposals to all
citizens that live or own property there, taking the Comprehensive Plan
and rezone proposal to the Planning Commission, and then recommending
this to the Council. This is an intensive project with 743 persons
living in this area.
Jim also mentioned the other major project is the potential annexation
areas project that needs to be done very soon. This involves negotiating
interlocal agreements with King County and seven cities that surround
Kent. Jim stated this is why he will be relinquishing SEPA to the
Planners so he can go on and do other things.
CHESTNUT RIDGE PROPOSAL - (G. Kresovich
Attorney George Kresovich explained to the Committee that his clients
have been working with King County for two years to build a development
of attached single family homes on property that is within the Chestnut
Ridge annexation area. The project is 48 units of attached single family
housing consisting of 24 structures. Each unit would be 1,800 square
feet priced from $175,000 to $200,000 aimed at individuals in their late
40's to early 50's who what the benefits of owning a single family home
but not the responsibilities of exterior maintenance and landscaping.
Mr. Kresovich's client has found this type of development to be extremely
desirable in the market place.
Mr. Kresovich's client was unaware of the fact that the Chestnut Ridge
area was being annexed into the City of Kent. They worked with King
County for two years on this project and were vested under the County's
land use laws, however, it is not clear in the State of Washington what
the annexation does to that vested right, and they cannot proceed with
the project under Kent's laws. Mr. Kresovich and his client feel the
practical way to solve the problem would be to develop a zoning ordinance
that would allow this type of development. They discussed with Planning
staff the concept of doing some type of contract rezone that would be
site specific. Had there been knowledge of the annexation beforehand,
this might have been the subject of an interlocal agreement where they
would have been allowed to proceed under the County's existing zoning
given how far the client had gone in the County's development process.
In his meeting with Planning staff Mr. Kresovich said that staff
suggested cluster zoning with appropriate stringent conditions would be
appropriate. Based on his understanding of what staff said, he would
like the Planning Committee to make a recommendation to the City Council
authorizing Planning staff to undertake this project.
Mr. Kresovich clarified for Chair Orr that attached single family housing
is a term used in the development industry to describe what has been
termed duplexes or townhomes. They are not stacked units like apartments
and have only one common wall. He also clarified that his goal is to
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
JULY 201 1993
PAGE 4
create an ordinance that will allow appropriate development on difficult
sites, not allow increased density, not change the nature of the existing
neighborhood, and that will allow this specific project to go ahead as
planned. He said he is not looking for the type of things you see in a
planned unit development, density bonuses or very small units.
Chair Orr clarified that this item was put on the agenda as an
information item and stressed that she is not prepared to take action on
the item at this meeting. She stressed that this type of project is
staff intensive. If the Council decides to undertake this, it will take
a considerable amount of time given the other priorities in the Planning
Department's work program.
In response to Mr. Kresovich's testimony, Planning Director Jim Harris
stated that one of the reasons Planning staff brought the Planning
Department work program to the Committee today was because of the
Chestnut Ridge item. Mr. Harris acknowledged that he understands that
Mr. Kresovich seeks a speedy resolution of this matter, but opined that
this is the very thing that is going to get the City into trouble by
going off on tangents while we are trying to set goals, policies and the
implementation devices for the Growth Management Act. He stated if staff
is working on this project at an early (late while trying to craft the
bigger picture for the Council, and if this project is done once we get
to the rest of the housing element of growth management, it may not work
when looked at with the bigger picture next summer. Next year may be too
late for Mr. Kresovich and his client, but for the Planning Department -
this year is too early.
Chair Orr stated she needs more information from the City Attorney's
office and Planning staff in order to make a decision. She explained
that the City of Kent is approximately 685 multifamily. She opined that
attached single family housing is a nice way of saying multi -family
housing. Doing something for the whole City will take a great deal of
staff time, public hearings and Planning Commission time. She stated
that Kent residents are not real excited about further opportunities for
anything other than detached single family housing. There is an extreme
shortage of detached single family housing, and people what to see more
detached single family housing built. It is difficult for Chair Orr to
ask staff to look at ways to accommodate other types of attached housing,
whatever it may be called. Staff may know what obligations, if any, the
City has in order to work with them site specific, and she needs this
information before she can make a recommendation.
Mr. Kresovich expressed surprised at Mr. Harris's comments because the
reason he came to the Council is at the suggestion of Planning staff.
The reason they are proposing a cluster zoning concept (they started out
with the idea that a site specific contract rezone would be the way to
proceed) is because Planning staff said that a cluster zoning concept is
something the City of Kent could usefully incorporate in its zoning code.
He is taken back by the statement that he and his client are pressing
this because their initial thrust was to look at a site specific contract
rezone given the special circumstances in this case. That's how this
would have been taken care of during the annexation process. In
annexation situations some type of interlocal agreement is commonly used.
Mr. Kresovich said he has dealt with a number of interlocal agreements
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
JULY 201 1993
PAGE 5
and that's what has been done with projects that are as far along in the
review process as this project. He explained that this is an immediate
problem for them and they want to work with the City of Kent in a
cooperative way to solve this problem. They would be happy to focus on
a site specific development proposal, contract rezone, authorizing this
project to be reviewed. This would not be staff intensive and would not
raise the issues that have been discussed at this meeting. It would call
for a public review process that they would have had to go through anyway
with King County. He prefers a site specific rezone which is what they
originally proposed to the City.
Chair Orr directed the Law Department to supply more information
regarding a site specific rezone contract, how it works and what it means
in light of the entire annexation picture. This information should be
brought back to a future meeting.
J. Sandlin, Attorney, representing the homeowners adjacent to the
proposed development, stated that a notice of appeal has been filed with
King County concerning the determination of nonsignificance (DNS) of the
proposed modification of land use for this property. The County legal
department learned that they do not have jurisdiction for this and
forwarded it to Kent. A courtesy copy of the appeal has been submitted
to the Kent Law Department.
George Kresovich clarified for Chair Orr that the County issued a DNS,
actually they were planning to issue a DNS and publish it on a Tuesday,
and they were informed on the Friday before that,the annexation had taken
place and was final. No applications regarding this project have been
submitted to the City of Kent. There is no law in the State of
Washington regarding what happens to a vested right at the time of
annexation, and decisions in other states probably do not apply because
they do not have Washington's vested right doctrine. It's an open
question as to what rights they have to proceed with the project. They
have discussed this with the Kent City Attorney's office, and this is one
reason why they decided the best way to proceed would be to come forward
to the City to see if there is a way to resolve this without going to
court.
J. Sandlin stated for the record that it is his understanding that there
are no vested rights here. He opined that they are trying to bootstrap
vested rights and acquire title that does not exist. He stated the
vested rights in the vested rights doctrine are always subject to police
power, fish and wildlife, the State Department of Wildlife and other
environmental concerns. Therefore, vested rights is a relative term and
not something cast in concrete.
Bruce McTavish, landowner adjacent to the subject property, submitted
detailed written opposition to any downzoning of the subject property
based on the following nine points:
1. The proposed development is on land that has steep, erodible slopes.
2. The hillside is filled with water seepage areas. Wetland areas and
seeps have been noted on the hillside of the subject property.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
JULY 20, 1993
PAGE 6
3. The area is habitat for numerous wildlife species. The area is
upstream from documented and especially important coho salmon
bearing Springbrook Creek. Garrison Creek, which would suffer from
road washout and siltation, feeds directly into Springbrook Creek.
The proposed development will have its ingress and egress at a
critical point in the ravine above Garrison Creek.
4. The existing land area, with its protective vegetation, acts as an
effective noise and pollution barrier for the residential area to
the east of Highway 167.
5. The current zoning determined in the Soos Creek Community Plan is
one unit per 7200 square feet.
6. This property has been noted as a landslide potential and seismic
activity zone.
7. Traffic for existing residents is difficult and especially dangerous
during peak hours.
8. The proposed development would put its residents at excessive fire
risk.
9. An additional population of children who move into this high density
neighborhood would impact the schools considerably.
J. Sandlin, representing the Chestnut Ridge Homeowners Association,
stated the association has great concern regarding changes that are being
proposed because there are a number of large, undeveloped areas in the
Chestnut Ridge annexation area. Their concern is if a precedent is set
for developing two unit homes, then four and six unit developments will
be built escalating to apartments. Loopholes continue to be developed,
and they are very concerned about any change away from single family
residences in the area.
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom announced that as a result of the
Chestnut Ridge annexation, the City is obligated to develop a zoning plan
for the annexed area. The City is beginning the process of developing
the zoning. Interim zoning between now and adoption of a new zoning plan
is R1-20, single family residential, minimum lot size of 20,000 square
feet. This will not affect residents very much in permitting except if
someone wants to subdivide. He reiterated that the annexation area is
currently zoned R1-20 and will remain so until the annexation zoning
process is complete. All residents will be notified of the process.
Chair Orr assured all citizens that they will be notified of all public
meetings that deal with the zoning process.
SHORT PLAT AMENDMENTS - (J. Harris)
Mr. Harris distributed a memo on his proposal for short subdivision.
modifications. He proposes to leave the Short Subdivision section of the
Subdivision Code essentially as it stands today, except for the a few
changes. The proposal is to still keep the Short Plat Committee; notify
all adjacent property owners and residents within 200 feet of the
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
JULY 20, 1993
PAGE 7
property to be short subdivided; post one notice of the application on or
adjacent to the land to be short subdivided; permit the public to make a
written response to the proposed short subdivision application within 15
days from the date of the mailed notice and the posting, whichever is
later; and the Short Subdivision Committee will not take action on an
application until after the 15 day period has passed. chair Orr
commented that she would like to see language added about notification of
persons with larger lots or acreage. Jim said he would add that specific
language that has been discussed at prior meetings. Chair Orr requested
this item be brought back to the Committee on September 21 and forwarded
to the City Council on October 5, 1993.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
PC0720.MIN
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
AUGUST 2, 1993
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT
STAFF PRESENT:
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC:
Paul Mann
Leona Orr
Jon Johnson
Chief Crawford
Chief Angelo
Roger Lubovich
Dave Haenel
Tony McCarthy
Ken Chatwin
Bill Doolittle
Numerous unidentified citizens
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chairman Mann.
BEST WESTERN CHOICE LODGE - PARKING RIGHTS INFRINGEMENT
Kathy Madison, Manager of the Best Western Choice Lodge at 24415 Russell Road, outlined
the problems they have been experiencing for the last four months with the Cafe Avanti as
follows: 1) noise from loud music; 2) parking; 3) security; 4) lost revenue; 5) guests unable to
sleep and having to be moved in the middle of the night; 6) fights in the parking lot resulting
in injured patrons of the night club; 7) littering; 8) urinating in the parking lot; 9) drug deals
taking place on the golf course; 10) car thefts; 11) car alarms going off all night long, and;
12) cars cruising around the parking lot. She noted that the Police and Fire Departments have
responded to numerous calls and that multi -meetings have taken place with Bruce Pierce, Cafe
Avanti Manager, to help come up with solutions to the problems. Mann explained that the noise
ordinance, which deals with noise levels, gives the Police Officers a tool to deal with these types
of problems, but Chief Crawford noted that noise ordinances do not usually hold up in court as
well as disorderly conduct. He explained that the Police Department has been working very
hard for a solution because the Best Western does have a legitimate complaint, but that
Mr. Pierce has also been very cooperative in changing things that have been requested. He
noted that the real problem seems to be location with competing and conflicting interests all
blended together in one area with the Best Western, the Mobile Home Park, and the Red Carpet
Apartments being a quieter environment. Upon Mann's concern, City Attorney Lubovich
explained that revisions to the noise ordinance are being considered to make it more clear as to
what the Police Department will do and respond to as well as what the Building Official will be
responsible for doing and responding to. He noted that there are two very distinct and different
types of enforcement which they are working on to clarify. Upon Johnson's question, Assistant
City Attorney Haenel noted that something could be adopted into the Kent City Code regulating
the hours of business for all nightclub establishments, if the Council so chooses. Crawford
noted that the Washington State Liquor Control Board regulates that the Cafe Avanti can sell
liquor between 2:00 a.m. and 4:00 a.m., and that the Mayor is on record as not contesting the
hours of operation as long as the laws are being adhered to. Orr expressed that the Cafe Avanti
is a legitimate business and that the only thing the City can do is limit the hours of operation
which will not solve the problems, but if they are in violation of the noise ordinance something
should be done. Mann requested that a Building Official measure the level of noise at the Cafe
Avanti and document it so the Committee can determine what amount of noise they are dealing
with. Mann also requested that this issue be continued to the next meeting with Mr. Pierce
being invited to attend and address the problems. Fire Chief Angelo explained that the City does
have the equipment necessary to do a noise level study but that he would have to find someone
trained in operating the equipment. Haenel noted that these issues are in the Code Book, but
that enforcement needs to be more clearly defined.
POLICE RANGE SOUNDPROOFING PROPOSAL
Ken Chatwin, Risk Manager, explained that a noise level study was done and that the noise level
could not be reduced below the 85 decimal level even with the very best hearing aids, earplugs
and earmuffs. He noted that some type of noise absorption needs to be done and that an outside
consultant recommends insulating the ceiling around the doors, lining the walls around the
shooting stations, putting in movable walls to accommodate angle shooting, and placing extra
glass in the control room area to take care of the dead air space. Chatwin clarified that the
request is for financing to sound proof the shooting range from the Public Safety Bond Issue.
McCarthy noted thatthere is approximately $74,000 in the fund and that $20,000 could be used
for this project. JOHNSON MOVED approval to use S20,000 out of the Public Safety Bond
Issue for soundproofing the Police Shooting Range. Orr seconded and the motion carried 3-0.
Orr commented that this should have been done right at the beginning.
BRIEFING ON VILLAGE GREEN FIRE
Chief Angelo noted that fire calls have gone up by 5 % from 1986 to 1993 with the same number
of fire units available. He explained that the Fire Department is being pressed more and more
by the environment, by society, and by situations and alarms, but that they will do as much as
possible with what they have without risk to the firefighters. Angelo noted that the Kent Fire
Department was recently awarded the State -Wide Emergency Medical Services Provider -of -the -
Year Award which demonstrates a good attitude of giving everything and doing their best. He
then briefed the Committee on the Village Green Apartments fire and showed a video of the
incident.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m.