HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 06/20/1995 ..............
Cmtyof Kent
CRY Council Meeting
Agenda
CITY OF
A
��l1�lBC��p
Mayor Jim White
Council Members
Judy Woods, President
Jim Bennett Jon Johnson
Tim Clark Paul Mann
Christi Houser Leona Orr
June 20, 1995
Office of the City Clerk
���� SUMMARY AGENDA
CITY OF
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 20, 1995
Council Chambers
7 : 00 p.m.
�Tvua:s�
MAYOR: Jim White COUNCILMEMBERS: Judy Woods, President
Jim Bennett Tim Clark Christi Houser
Jon Johnson Paul Mann Leona Orr
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Asia Pac is Trade Exchange Report
Rabb, — Ke3ota4�" fv,• AR-0- t-�
2 . PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Beck Annexation Zoning AZ-95-2 (2nd Hearing)
3 . CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes
B. Approval of Bills
C. Third Avenue Bridge Water Main Replacement - Acceptance
D. Recycling Programs - Consultant Agreement
E. 71st Avenue South Street Vacation - Resolution Setting
Hearing Date !y 71
F. Naden Avenue RV Parking Area - Water & Sewer Service
G. FEMA Floodplain Maps - Ordinance ; ;,', ` a
�{ 196th Corridor Railroad Grade Separation - Resolution Y3-'�
I. Surplus of City-Owned Houses
J. Director of Golf
K. Council AbsencesFl�
L. 26th Place South Street Vacation - Ordinance '? n, 3
A. jp( m 5 m 1 1 b Szv�cr�
4 . OTHER BUSINESS
A. Performing Arts Center Final Report - Acceptance
B. 1994 Editions of Uniform Building Code; Uniform
Mechanical Code and Related Fee Schedules - Ordinance &
Resolution) 2
C . Se w er4e 5�s' &,,,rc`3 - 1 35
5. BIDS
A. Titus Street Storm Rebuild
B. 1995 Asphalt Overlays
C. Mill Creek Box Culverts
6. �CONTINUE/D,,r,.C."OMMMUNICATIONS/
Mr.
7 . 1REPORTS
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.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City in advance for more information. For
TDD relay service call 1-800-635-9993 or the City of Kent(206) 854-6587.
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) Asia Pacific Trade Exchange Report
»..,..
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20, 1995
Category Public Hearings
1. SUBJECT: BECK ANNEXATION ZONING AZ-95-2
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This is the second of two required
hearings for the proposed initial zoning of the Beck Annexation
area. The first hearing was held on May 16, 1995. The
Planning Commission recommends approval of Zoning Alternative
#3 which is included in the Council packet.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo; staff report of April 17, 1995; and Planning
Commission minutes of April 24 , 1995
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Commission
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NOV_ YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT-
CLOSE HEARING:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to approve/disapprove/modify the Planning Commission' s recom-
mendation of approval of the Beck Annexation area initial
zoning designation as outlined in Alternative #3 , and direct
the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 2A✓
CITY OF J_Q ILP12 L1
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
June 20, 1995
TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: KEVIN O'NEILL, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: BECK ANNEXATION AREA INITIAL ZONING #AZ-95-2 -CITY COUNCIL
HEARING
On May 16, 1995, the City Council held the first of their public hearings on initial zoning
for the Beck annexation area. There was no public testimony received at the March
21 hearing. On June 20 the second public hearing will be conducted, since City code
requires the City Council to hold two public hearings on interim zoning for annexation
areas.
Attached is the proposed zoning recommended by the Planning Commission at their
April 24, 1995 hearing. At their hearing, the Commission considered three alternative
zoning designations prepared by staff, which are outlined in the attached staff report.
After considering the public testimony and asking questions of staff, the Commission
is recommending a zoning configuration which most closely resembled Alternative 3 as
outlined in the staff report, although this alternative was amended by designating all
parcels identified as R1-12 in the alternative to R1-20. The zoning recommended by
the Planning Commission is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation
for this area, which is SF6, Single Family Residential.
Planning Department staff will be available at the June 20 hearing to further explain the
proposed zoning for the Beck annexation area.
KON/mp:kon:beckcc2.mem
Attachments
cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
CITY OF 1 V\LL�121SV
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
May 10, 1995
TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: KEVIN O'NEILL, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: BECK ANNEXATION AREA INITIAL ZONING #AZ-95-2 - PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Attached is the Planning Commission's recommended zoning for the Beck annexation
area. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the initial zoning for
the Beck area on April 24, 1995, and made their recommendation at the April 24
meeting (see attached minutes).
At the public hearing, the Planning Commission considered three alternative zoning
designations prepared by staff, which are outlined in the attached staff report. After
considering the public testimony and asking questions of staff, the Commission is
recommending a zoning configuration which most closely resembled Alternative 3 as
outlined in the staff report, although this alternative was amended by designating all
parcels identified as R1-12 in the alternative to R1-20. The zoning recommended by
the Planning Commission is consistent with the recently adopted Comprehensive Land
Use Plan Map designation for this area, which is SF6, Single Family Residential.
By City ordinance, the City Council must hold two public hearings on the
recommended zoning. The first hearing is scheduled for May 16, 1995, and the
second hearing is scheduled for June 20, 1995, since by State law the hearings are
required to be at least 30 days apart.
Planning Department staff will be available at the May 16 hearing to further explain
the recommended zoning for the Beck annexation area.
KON/mp:a:beckazcc.mem
Attachments
cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
CITY OF
CITY OF KENT
- PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
April 17, 1995
TO: KENT MORRILL, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: KEVIN O'NEILL, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: PROPOSED BECK ANNEXATION AREA INITIAL ZONING #AZ-95-2
Introduction
In February of 1995, the City Council approved the annexation of the area known as the Beck
Annexation Area into the City of Kent. This area, which is approximately 218 acres, is
generally located north of South 240th Street adjacent to 94th Avenue South (by approximately
1250 feet to the east and 600 feet to the west of 94th Avenue), extending northerly to
approximately South 222nd Street (see attached Vicinity Map). The subject area is south of the
recently annexed Everson and Jones/Hobbs annexation areas. Zoning for the Everson annexation
area was approved by the City Council in September, 1994, while zoning for the Jones/Hobbs
annexation area is currently being considered by the Council.
Subsequent to the annexation of the Beck annexation area by the City, the entire area was zoned
R1-20 (Single-Family Residential), pursuant to Section 15.03.020(E)(2) of the Kent Zoning
Code. The purpose of this process is to establish initial zoning for the annexation area, as
outlined in Section 15.09.055 of the Zoning Code.
This report will outline background information on the area, including the previous zoning of
the area while it was still located in unincorporated King County. The report will then outline
three alternatives for zoning of the area for the Planning Commission's consideration at the April
24 hearing.
Existing Land Uses
The entire annexation area is characterized by low density single-family residential development.
The majority of parcels both within and adjacent to the annexation area are larger than one acre,
and several of the parcels are larger than four acres. There are two recently platted subdivisions
located within the annexation area: Wildberry, with lot sizes averaging approximately 9,500
square feet, and Rosemary Glen, with lot sizes averaging approximately 13,500 square feet. Lot
sizes are larger in the Rosemary Glen subdivision due to the topography in this area. The areas
to the west of the annexation area are developed as multi-family residential uses, and the area
MEMO TO: Keni Morrill, Chair, and Planning Commission Members
SUBJECT: Annexation Area Initial Zoning #AZ-95-$
PAGE 2
to the south area developed with single-family residential development with lot sizes ranging
approximately from 7,200 square feet to 10,000 square feet. The areas to the east and north of
the annexation area are generally characterized with low density single-family development. The
attached vicinity map shows parcel lines in the annexation area and in the surrounding vicinity.
Environmental Constraints
The annexation area is distinguished for the most part by moderate west-facing slopes.
However, the western portion of the annexation area to the west of 94th Avenue South has
slopes well in excess of 25 percent, and a large portion of this area is designated as a Severe
Hazard Area on the City's Hazard Area Development Limitations map. The zoning code does
not allows any impervious surfaces in areas designated as Severe Hazard Areas, which means
that these areas cannot be developed. Also, the eastern and northeastern portions of the
annexation area are intersected by both Benson Creek and the south fork of Garrison Creek.
Both Benson Creek and Garrison Creek are designated as major creeks on the Kent Hazard Area
Development Limitations map, and are designated as Class II salmonid creeks in the Soos Creek
Community Plan. The steep slopes adjacent to Garrison Creek are designated as ravines on the
Hazard Area Limitation map, and as Seismic Hazard and Erosion Hazard areas in the Soos
Creek Community Plan. Under the City of Kent zoning code, no impervious surfaces are
allowed within 75 feet from the top of a ravine or 50 feet from a major creek. These
requirements will also limit development opportunities on some of the parcels located within the
annexation area.
The parcels within and surrounding the annexation area are heavily vegetated with around shrubs
and trees, many of which are significant trees, meaning that they have a caliper of 6 inches or
Greater. There do not appear to be any wetlands in the vicinity; however, surface water
management wi11 likely be a significant issue for any new development in the area, due to the
slopes and proximity to Benson and Garrison Creek.
Previous King Countv Zoning
Prior to being annexed to the City of Kent, and subject area was located within the Soos Creek
Community Planning area in King County. The Soos Creek Community Plan, and
accompanying area zoning, were adopted by the King County Council in 1991.
The previous King County zoning for most of the subject area was GR-S-P, Growth Reserve,
with an underlying zoning of RS-7200-P. The areas which were already subdivided were zoned
RS-7200-P. The GR-5 zoning district was an interim zoning district permitted one unit per five
acres until December 31, 1994, at which time the underlying zoning west into effect. In this
case, the underlying zoning is RS-7200 zoning. GR-5 zoning was applied in the Soos Creek
Community Plan to all undeveloped and underdeveloped land located adjacent to an incorporated
MEMO TO: ent Morrill, Chair, and Planning Commission Members
SUBJECT: cR nnexation Area Initial Zoning #AZ-95,-:P,
PAGE 3
city. The RS-7200 zoning district allowed one unit per 7,200 square feet of land, and is
comparable to the R1-7.2 zoning district within the City of Kent. The P-suffix in the previous
King County zoning refers to specific requirements regarding environmental protection and
development standards.
In early February, 1995, new zoning went into effect for King County, based on the newly
adopted King County Comprehensive Plan. Under the newly adopted zoning code, the Beck
annexation area was zoned R-6. The R-6 zoning designation allows six units per acre, which
is roughly equivalent to the previous zoning of RS-7200. However, the development regulations
for the R-6 zone, such as minimum lot width, were changed under the new designation.
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Analvsis
The subject area is designated as Single Family 1-8 units per acre in the Soos Creek Community
Plan, and as Urban Residential 4-12 units per acre in the newly adopted King County
Comprehensive Plan. The Kent Comprehensive Plan designates the subject area as Single
Family, while the East Hill Subarea Plan designates the area as SF 6, which allows single-family
residential development at densities of four-to-six units per acre. The East Hill Plan also
designates the area along Garrison Creek as Constrained Areas, which are defined as areas
classified as environmentally sensitive due to natural hazards (landslide, seismic, erosion, and
flooding potential) and areas which support unique, fragile or valuable resources.
The property surrounding the subject area is characterized by a variety of zoning designations.
The land to the west of the subject area is generally zoned for multifamily residential uses, with
the steep hillsides along the western edge of the subject area providing separation between the
parcels .in the annexation area and the multifamily developments to the west. The areas
surrounding the subject property to the south, east and north are zoned for single-family
residential use, with the predominant zoning being either R1-9.6 or R1-7.2.
Zoning Alternatives
Three zoning alternatives are presented below for the subject area. All alternatives show the
area being zoned as single-family residential, which is consistent with both the City of Kent and
King County Comprehensive Plans. The difference between the alternatives relates to the
density of single-family development which would be permitted in the area. The zoning
alternatives are shown on the attached maps.
Alternative 1
This alternative would simply convert the previous King County zoning of R6 to the Kent zoning
designation of R1-7.2 for the entire annexation area. This alternative would be the most similar
MEMO TO: Kggt orrill, Chair, and Planning Commission Members
SUBJECT: - exation Area Initial Zoning #AZ-95=
PAGE 4
to the previous King County zoning. However, it would also place R1-7.2 zoning on parcels
located on the western edge of the annexation area with very steep slopes.
Alternative 2
In this alternative the western edge of the annexation area would be designated R1-12, while the
remainder of the area would be designated as R1-7.2. The proposed zoning of R1-12 on the
western edge of the area would reflect the steep slopes in this area.
Alternative 3
This alternative is similar to Alternative 2, except that the most extreme slopes along the western
edge of the property (those areas designated as Severe Hazard Areas) would be designated Rl-
20, with the southwestern portion of the area being zoned R1-12. As in the first two
alternatives, the remainder of the area would be zoned R1-7.2.
Summary
Each of the alternatives is designed around zoning most, or all, of the annexation area R1-7.2.
This is in recognition of the extensive process that has gone on in zoning this area since 1990,
through both the Soos Creek Community Plan and the recently adopted King County
development code amendments. Alternatives 2 and 3, however, propose zoning the western
portion for lower densities, due to the steep slopes in this area. It has been the City's practice
in the past to zone environmentally constrained areas for lower densities. There are also some
constrained areas in the northeastern portion of the area; however, this area has already been
platted, and the subdivision was designed with larger lots to acknowledge the topography of the
area. Since this area has already been built, it is proposed to be designated R1-7.2 to be
consistent with the previous King County zoning.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the zoning
designation outlined in Alternative 2 for the Beck Annexation Area.
KO
cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
to
Em if,MMM
iit
M
MaO�.ME
0'
MEN
A V v
AM
MRM
to
tv
t!!A
gt�
MUMS
In
R74
mom
-Po A
witto
A. —MAIM�944!
BECK ANNEXATION AREA
BECK CITY LIMITS
3 336TH 37 �\ a , a - = � cc TN c7
S' O NI Qm ]T8 W C O C J 10 4
218TH 3T 21 FT, IT
I T 1r-- �,'�• 3 TH
+ N FL
1
C=\Jl JL
E 220TH IT � 215TN .
w N/ > I 222 tL �
c v
a'.
n .tr of SE z 220]
J. C
7T Gam" JJJw aT �� Lt n G
�J
222N0 3T SE<221H
3 NO � ui
a >
V c a
_ 3E 224TX 3T - -
. —
225 e 22V PL -
� cc -
d 225TH PL225
r
NJCL a P 3 22 H 3T _ ] mrnc
] CT +T ]E 22]TX ]T w, r
� :E z3aTN
If 221 ST PL
NUVAC LN a .I62M➢:". _-- 3E 232 37 2]2M0 IT
- - - =U 222VO FL
0
v `
K 21STM 37 \"
2-n PL
y O
_ ��� :, :•TTM 3r
SOUL➢ROM MAY
Sri
> u!
2]9TN
20
]£ c L'9TH 7 p1 i 2
]T
m ` S ZADTH ST�' 5 rL ` PL _
C.
03
] 2V 13T 3T
PI A IT ¢ o m - c: �� 11 J 242N0 3T I ,_
J�f' ul m pi :C��'r`NZMD CT
CMlu , TENPE ANCE 3T Qi v ]
z:
4MITH gT s_! 244TX �CmVV 7T c_E 244TH 3T
n I
m n0 > >. kg..2VV CT
IT to ,q ¢: jr-
FL
h F
a� u�I 5�ZV5 PL
t�C -Yr
ram^ °C �' �"� UV LAND ]C 2VSTN sJ U3QVS FL
i I II i^y a .. m� oli-y�
cr)
BECK
...... ....
ANNEXATION
All
P:7-5
WE =A ZONING
V4
ml .. ........
ALTERNATIVE I
T
%
SE
..... .... ..
i®R
EEO BECK
ZONE
SE,-232 ST BOUNDARY
CITY LIMITS
WN-1
--- . ...... ...
2 B H cq
4/14/95
BECK
ANNEXATION
....... ZONING
T.0
ALTERNATIVE
P.
SE
jl
INN
E gtl
BECK
SE,,2�32� IT
ZONE
BOUNDARY
CITY LIMITS
/0
1 H
17
8 H.
4/14/95
C
cr) Y BECK
Nif7
ZONING
Dg,
-w-
ALTERNATIVE 3
Aa
5-
SE
r
tq.z ��o- P-7,27w
215
... .......jgk;�
U
07
AA�
5 E 31
NZ
-TT-F -F 12aL BECK
ZONE
I SE,232 ST
BOUNDARY
ni
CITY LIMITS
S —. ramV
O
gz
xt� gg,
4t1m gg
I Li
... .......
2 8 H
t
a gar
4/14/95
Kent Planning Commission
April 24, 1995
Chair Morrill commented that each of the Commissioners, if they so wished, could submit a
minority report to the City Council. Chair Morrill requested that a minority report be prepared
for his signature. Commissioner Nuss requested that her name be added to the report.
The hearing was closed at 7:30 PM.
BECK ANNEXATION ZONING ##AZ-95-2
Kevin O'Neill, Planning Department, presented the Beck annexation zoning report. Mr. O'Neill
gave a brief history of the area. A viewfoil was shown depicting the location of the potential
annexation and the topography of the area. This area was originally in King County's Soos
Creek Community planning area. There are three zoning alternatives recommended by staff:
Alternative 1: This alternative would simply convert the previous King County zoning
of R6 to the Kent zoning designation of R1-7.2 for the entire annexation
area.
Alternative 2: In this alternative the western edge of the annexation area would be
designated R1-12 while the remainder of the area would be designated R1- _-
7.2.
Alternative 3: This alternative is similar to Alternative 2, except that the most extreme
slopes along the western edge of the property would be designated R1-20,
with the southwester portion of the area being zoned R1-12. The
remainder of the area would be zoned R1-7.2.
Staff recommended Alternative 2.
Chair Morrill called for public comment.
ROBERT KIGA, 9440 S. 233rd Place, Kent, WA 98031, commented his major concern with
development along 94th Avenue S. is the availability of a wide enough road. Presently 94th
Avenue narrows as it migrates towards James Street. He felt the road should be widened if
there is any development in the area.
JUDITH MCDOUGALL, 23405 94TH AVENUE S., Kent, WA 98031, commented she lives
on the west side of 94th. Ms. McDougall stated 94th is not wide enough to handle any traffic.
THEODORE POLK, 24415 64TH AVENUE S., KENT, WA 98031, asked if the zoning Rl-
12, allows one residence per acre.
NZCA-95-1 Adult Use Zoning
NAZ-95-2 Beck Annexation Zoning 4
Kent Planning Commission
April 24, 1995
Mr. O'Neill commented R1-12 allows one dwelling unit per 12,000 square feet or about three
and a half units per acre.
JIM MUIR, 23007 96TH AVENUE S., KENT, WA 98031, asked what was the difference
between the County's zoning and the City's.
Mr. O'Neill explained that under King County's development regulations, R-6 zoning means six
units per acre. The units can be placed anywhere on the site .as long as the minimum
development standards are met. However, Kent's R1-7.2 means each lot needs to be at least
7,200 square feet. As the Commission is aware, the staff is reviewing policies in its
Comprehensive Plan to support lot averaging and clustering. A proposal concerning this type
of development will be brought to the Commission next month for consideration.
Mr. Muir commented that if lot averaging was allowed, either alternative 2 or 3 would be
acceptable.
AMY FORBIS, 23306 94TH COURT S., KENT WA 98031, commented she is against lot
clustering or more multifamily construction in the area. She recommends that the Commission
adopt alternative 3.
MIKE ROBINSON, 9409 S. 232ND, KENT, WA 98031, was not in favor of any of the
alternatives. He felt the lots should be larger. Mr. Robinson thought that the area should be
zoned R1-20.
No further public comments were made.
Chair Morrill requested Kevin O'Neill respond to some of the questions asked by the public.
Mr. O'Neill commented that 94th Avenue is currently widest in the areas adjacent to existing
plats. As additional properties bordering 94th Avenue develop, road widening would take place.
Mr. O'Neill wasn't aware of any City plans to independently widen the road at this time.
Mr. O'Neill reiterated that the Comprehensive Plan cluster housing proposal has not been
considered by the Planning Commission. He remarked that it is not the intent of the "clustering"
proposal to allow multifamily as part of the clustering development. The use of the land would
be single family but the way the units would be configured on the property would allow more
flexibility in development.
Commissioner Stringham asked if the area was zoned R1-20 could it potentially create problems
for those property owners whose property is currently less than 20,000 square feet in size.
#ZCA-95-1 Adult Use Zoning
#AZ-95-2 Beck Annotation Zoning 5
Kent Planning Commission
April 24, 1995
Mr. O'Neill stated that if the property was zoned R1-20, any lots that would be less than 20,000
square feet in size would be considered legal nonconforming.
Mr. O'Neill explained that staff is recommending Alternative #2 because there is already R1-12
zoning in place to the north of this area. Staff tries not to create disjointed zoning designations.
There is no R1-20 zoning directly bordering this area. This area has very steep slopes and the
parcels that have steep slopes will be difficult to develop regardless of the zoning designation
because of the City's current hazard area regulations. The intent of the R1-12 zoning
designation is to provide some limited development potential in this area.
Commissioner Dahle MOVED and Commissioner Nuss SECONDED to accept Alternative #3.
Commissioner Stringham made a friendly amendment to change the one R1-12 area to R1-20.
Commissioner Dahle accepted the amendment.
MOTION carried with six votes for and one vote against motion.
Mr. Satterstrom explained this item will be placed on the May 16, 1995 City Council agenda.
There also will be another hearing 30 days from the May 16th date.
Commissioner Dahle MOVED and Commission Nuss SECONDED to close the hearing at 8:25
PM. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jecoes arras
rding Secretary
c:pcmin4.24
#ZCA-95-1 Adult Use Zoning
#AZ-95-2 Beck Annexation Zoning 6
CONSENT CALENDAR
3 . City Council Action: �- /�
Councilmember b" CL moves, Councilmember fVt1-
seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through Ii" be approved.
m
Discussion /1
Action
1/3A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
June 6, 1995 .
'/3B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through May 31 and
paid on May 31, 1995 after auditing by the Operations Committee
on June 19, 1995. The Operations Committee meeting of June 14 ,
1995 was cancelled.
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
5/31/95 155558-156251 $1, 749, 548 .21
Approval of checks issued for payroll for May 16 through
May 31, 1995 and paid on June 5, 1995:
Date Check Numbers Amount
6/5/95 Checks 203520-203917 $270, 690. 68
Advices 24717-25103 478 , 796. 84
$749, 487 . 52
Council Agenga�
Item No. 3 A-B
Kent, Washington
June 6, 1995
Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at
7: 00 p.m. by Mayor White. Present: Councilmembers Clark, Houser,
Johnson, Mann, Orr and Woods, Operations Director/Chief of Staff
McFall, City Attorney Lubovich, Planning Director Harris, Public
Works Director Wickstrom, Fire Chief Angelo, Parks Director
Hodgson, Information Services Director Spang and Finance Director
Miller. Councilmember Bennett was excused from the meeting.
Approximately 40 people were at the meeting.
PUBLIC Property Acquisition. McFall noted that the
COMMUNICATIONS Executive Session scheduled to discuss property
acquisition is no longer necessary and asked that
it be removed from the agenda.
Employee Team of the Month. Mayor White
announced that the Meridian Annexation Team
consisting of Carol Storm, Barbara Carrier,
Kurt Palowez, Marty Mulholland, Brenda Jacober,
Margaret Porter and Tom Brubaker has been
selected as Employee Team of the Month for June.
He commended the team for their efforts to
organize and finalize the Meridian Annexation
petition effort. Certificates of Appreciation
were presented to team members by Operations
Director McFall.
Introduction of Pavilion Construction Team from
Yanqzhou, China. Mayor White noted that the City
of Yangzhou has presented the City of Kent with a
Friendship Pavilion. Arthur Martin, Coordinator
for the project, introduced the construction team
and their interpreter, and invited all citizens
to visit the Pavilion at the corner of Railroad
Avenue and Smith Street. The Mayor announced
that the Pavilion will be dedicated at 5: 00 p.m.
on June 14th and that the Mayor of Yanqzhou will
be present.
Mr. Zhou, leader of the delegation, said they
were warmly welcomed by the City of Kent, and
commended Mr. Martin for making all the arrange-
ments, for providing transportation every day,
and for seeing that construction problems were
solved and the project progressed smoothly. He
said the Pavilion represents friendship between
the two cities, and thanked Mayor White for his
encouragement and attention. He expressed
appreciation for this opportunity to visit and
work in Kent, and thanked everyone on behalf of
the construction delegation.
1
June 6, 1995
PUBLIC Mayor White said the Pavilion is a work of art,
COMMUNICATIONS and it will greatly enhance International Park.
Kent Lions Club Day. The Mayor read a pro-
clamation stating that the Kent Lions Club has
many programs that benefit the citizens of Kent,
and that members have also worked to benefit
programs extending beyond the boundary of Kent to
foster goodwill. He noted that Kent Cornucopia
Days is their largest project, and that it has
been an annual festival for approximately 24
years. He proclaimed June 10, 1995 as Kent Lions
Club Day in the City and urged all citizens to
honor members of the Kent Lions Club for their
many contributions to society. The Mayor thanked
the members of the club and expressed pride in
the Cornucopia Days festival.
Kent Community Foundation Month. Mayor White
proclaimed June 1995 as Kent Community Foundation
Month in the City and encouraged all citizens to
recognize and appreciate the outstanding con-
tribution that the Foundation makes to the City
through its many generous donations of time,
money and services. He explained that this past
year the Foundation provided over $17 , 000 to
various school programs, and that each year since
its inception, the Foundation has distributed
$2500 in scholarships to Kent School District
students. He presented the proclamation to Brad
Bell, who expressed appreciation for this honor.
Hire A Veteran Week. The Mayor introduced Gene
Wiley of the Job Service Center, and read a
proclamation declaring June 18-24 , 1995, as Hire
A Veteran Week in the City of Kent. Mayor White
noted that veterans face challenges as they
return to civilian life, and that the State of
Washington and the Employment Security Department
support the Veterans' Bill of Rights and the
development of employment and training oppor-
tunities to improve the quality of life for
veterans and their families. Mr. Wiley stated
that their goal is to place 1, 000 veterans this
year and thanked the City for their help.
2
June 6, 1995
PUBLIC Flag Day. Mayor White noted that the first
COMMUNICATIONS official flag of the United States was adopted on
June 14, 1777, and that by Act of Congress dated
August 3 , 1949 , June 14th of each year was
designated "National Flag Day". He declared
June 14, 1995, as Flag Day in the City of Kent
and urged all citizens to pause at 7 : 00 p.m. EDT
on this date for the fourteenth annual Pause for
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, and to
join all Americans in reciting the Pledge of
Allegiance to our Flag and Nation.
CONSENT WOODS MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through
CALENDAR M be approved. Orr seconded and the motion
carried.
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A)
Approval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of
the regular Council meeting of May 16, 1995, with
the following corrections:
1. Kent Springs Transmission Main III .
Ordinance No. should read 3227 rather than
3327 .
2 . FEMA Floodblain Map Update. Ordinance No.
should read 3228 rather than 3328 .
.WATER (BIDS - ITEM 5B)
98th Avenue South Regional Treatment/Detention
Pond. The bid opening for this project was held
on Friday, June 2 . The Public Works Director
noted that the low bid was submitted by Scoccolo
Construction in the amount of $1,487, 750. 27 and
recommended acceptance. MANN MOVED that the 98th
Avenue Regional Treatment/Detention Pond project
be awarded to Scoccolo Construction in the amount
of $1, 487,750. 27. Houser seconded and the motion
carried.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3J)
Rent School Site No. 21. AUTHORIZATION to accept
the Bill of Sale for Neely-O'Brien Elementary
(Kent Elementary School Site #21) submitted by
Kent School District No. 415 for 1, 938 feet of
water main extension and 475 feet of sidewalk
improvements and release of bonds after expira-
tion period, as recommended by the Public Works
Director. The project is located at 6300 South
236th Street.
3
June 6, 1995
TRAFFIC (PETITION)
CONTROL vicinity of 100th Avenue SE and 244th SE. Vonda
Finseth, 10006 SE 244th Court, submitted a
petition opposing the future extensions of 100th
Avenue SE from SE 244th to SE 240th, and SE 244th
Street from 100th Avenue SE to 104th Avenue SE.
WOODS MOVED to make the petition a part of the
record. Orr seconded and the motion carried.
The petition was referred to the Public Works
Committee, with a request that all signers be
notified of the Committee meeting date.
PUBLIC (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3K)
WORKS Lake Fenwick Aeration. ACCEPT the contract with
McClure & Sons, Inc. for the Lake Fenwick
Hypolimnetic Aeration project as complete and
release retainage after State releases, as
recommended by the Public Works Director. The
original contract was $184, 405 . 26; the final
construction cost was $176, 386. 43 .
SURPLUS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3I)
VEHICLES Surplus vehicles. AUTHORIZATION to declare
certain Equipment Rental vehicles no longer
needed by the City as surplus, authorization to
sell them at the State of Washington auction, and
authorization to sell Police patrol cars which
are being replaced at a fair market price to
other rural Police Departments, as recommended by
the Public Works Committee.
PLATS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H)
Kingstone Preliminary Plat Time Extension_
SU-94-11. AUTHORIZATION to approve a one-year
extension of the Kingstone Preliminary Plat
#SU-94-11 to April 13 , 1996, as recommended by
the Planning Committee on May 16, 1995 .
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
Rachael Place Final Plat FSU-94-4. ' This date has
been set to consider an application for the
Rachael Place Final Plat. This property is 2 . 5
acres in size and is located in the southeast
corner of 5th Street and Crow Street. The
Council approved the Rachael Place preliminary
plat on September 20, 1994 . ORR MOVED to approve
the Rachael Place Final Plat No. FSU-94-4 with .18
conditions, as recommended by staff. Houser
seconded and the motion carried.
4
June 6, 1995
GROWTH (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G)
MANAGEMENT 1994 GMA Grant Funds. AUTHORIZATION for the
City to accept 1994 Growth Management Act grant
dollars in the amount of $55,754 , to reduce the
overstated budget for 1993 by $18, 451, and to
establish a budget for 1995 in the amount of
$37 , 303 . The Planning Committee made this
recommendation on May 16, 1995.
ZONING CODE (OTHER BUSINESS - 4B)
AMENDMENT MA Industrial Agricultural Zoning District
Change ZCA-95-4 . The Planning Commission has
recommended a Zoning Code Amendment to allow
recreational vehicle parks in the MA (Industrial
Agricultural) zone. The Planning Commission
hearing was held on May 2 , 1995. ORR MOVED to
adopt Ordinance No. 3231 amending the Zoning and
Recreational Vehicle Park Codes to allow re-
creational vehicle parks in the MA (Industrial
Agricultural) zone. Woods seconded and the
motion carried.
PUBLIC SAFETY (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
Sale and Discharge of Fireworks. ADOPTION of
Ordinance No. 3229 relating to the sale and
discharge of fireworks.
The City, through Chapter 13 . 05 of the Kent City
Code, has restricted the sale of fireworks to the
period from June 28 through July 4 , and has
restricted the discharge of fireworks to July 4 .
The State Legislature, through Substitute Senate
Bill 5997, has authorized New Year's as an addi-
tional season for the discharge of fireworks.
Pursuant to the legislation, the City may pro-
hibit the sale or discharge 'of common fireworks
on New Year' s by enacting an ordinance pro-
hibiting such within 60 days of the effective
date of the legislation. The effective date of
the legislation was April 17 . As a result ,of
this legislation, this ordinance was drafted
amending the Code to prohibit the sale and
discharge of fireworks during New Year' s and to
make other related modifications.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
Interference at Public Events. ADOPTION of
Ordinance No. 3239 relating to criminal activity
at public events.
5
June 6, 1995
PUBLIC SAFETY The City believes that Cornucopia Days, as well
as other civic events, should remain a family
event -- secure, and absent the fear and intimi-
dation which has resulted in recent years from
crowd behavior. This ordinance was created in
response to concerns related to this type of
behavior, and the Police Department' s inability
to remove or ban persons previously arrested from
a public place/event. It contains a trespass
provision and creates a criminal offense for
interference with public events.
COUNCIL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3M)
(ADDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WOODS)
Council Absence. APPROVAL of an excused absence
for Councilmember Bennett, who could not be in
attendance tonight.
HUMAN RESOURCES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E)
Graphics/Cable TV Position. AUTHORIZATION for a
. 5 FTE and budget change necessary for CATV
character generation and graphics, including
funds for temporary help during peak workloads.
Staffing for the City' s central graphics, cable
tv and printing functions has been reduced in
recent years. Meanwhile, the workload has
increased in graphics and cable tv, causing
excessive overtime.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F)
Finance Position. AUTHORIZATION for an AFSCME
Administrative Assistant position in the Finance
Department, as recommended by the Operations
Committee at their May 24 , 1995 meeting. Finance
is still down seven full time positions since the
budget cuts during 1991 and 1992 . This position
will be critical to the Finance Management staff
as the City begins to prepare for the growth from
the annexation and Capital Facility Plan update.
No budget change will be required as salary
savings from the Budget Analyst position vacant
from January to April and other Finance Division
savings will provide funding.
PARKS & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3L)
RECREATION Kiwanis Tot Lot #1. ACCEPTANCE of the Kiwanis .
Tot Lot #1 Project as complete and release of
retainage to Parkwood Services, Inc. , upon
receipt of State releases.
6
June 6, 1995
PARKS & (BIDS - ITEM 5A)
RECREATION Kiwanis Tot Lot No. 2 . Parkwood Services was the
only bidder on the Kiwanis Tot Lot #2 Project.
Staff recommends that they be awarded the con-
tract at $48, 676. 54, plus Washington State Sales
Tax, for Base Bid and Alternates 2 and 3 . HOUSER
MOVED to award the Kiwanis Tot Lot #2 Project to
Parkwood Services for Base Bid and Alternates
2 and 3 in the amount of $48 , 676. 54, plus
Washington State Sales Tax. Woods seconded and
the motion carried. Mayor White noted that the
Kiwanians have planted flowers at Willis and
First, and said it looks very nice.
FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B)
Approval of Bills. APPROVAL of payment of the
bills received through May 15 and paid on May 15,
1995 after auditing by the Operations Committee
on May 24 , 1995 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
5/15/95 155019-155557 $1, 635, 501. 72
Approval of checks issued for Payroll for May 1
through May 15, 1995 and paid on May 19, 1995 :
Date Check Numbers Amount
5/19/95 Checks 203160-203519 $269,838 . 03
Advice 24336-24716 491, 238 . 63
$761, 076. 66
REPORTS Planning Committee. Orr announced that the next
meeting will be held on June 20, at 4 : 00 p.m.
Orr requested an audit of cellular phone usage.
She asked for information as to who has cellular
phones and how much calling has been done in the
last six months. The Mayor said a report will be
available soon.
Orr then introduced her father and sister who are
visiting from Montana.
Administrative Reports. McFall noted that the
City has been working with the Kent Downtown
Partnership on the possibility of acquiring a
more permanent location for the Saturday Market.
He said a purchase and sales agreement has
7
June 6, 1995
REPORTS tentatively been entered into, and that some
funds must be expended to determine the final
feasibility recommendation for consideration by
the Council. He requested that the Council
authorize $10, 000 for that purpose. HOUSER MOVED
that a capital project budget be authorized for
the Saturday Market Facility Project, and that
$10, 000 be appropriated from the CIP fund balance
to fund preliminary feasibility studies for said
project. Woods seconded and the motion carried.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7 :40 p.m.
Brenda J obe , CMC
City Cie k
8
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: THIRD AVENUE BRIDGE WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT f
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Director, ccept as complete the contract with Gary Harpe
Construction for the Third Avenue Bridge Water Main Repl cement
project and release of retainage after State releases. . The
original contract was $18, 174 . 35. The final construction cost
was $19, 138 . 02 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ✓ YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3CV
„z 7 fvr IWARQ
F• W HARRI �' cm
ST �, HARRISON ST a �:aana �, ST
_ < M ER'= ST
Z .”W' MEEKER4 2 ST
g 216TH ST 2 4 owe'r > ST
uD
' St E
< < W < GOWE
a
< TLU� Sta - KENT UTr Meu < `
IAJTCHFi g < ELE N roucc o° 51b to
181 W TITU gT,
r >
SAAR
W w < ST
STR AL WAY
3;
4 WILU h WAY Y
g 4 ST
M r Z•
W W ~ > = 51Ef U
< < < z C
�+ W Ro ST
Ru
r
!\ \\ \ 1 W W 'sT
.
Flrt ^ i <16
rpof rr
c
< } °8
g ° PROJECT LOCATION
it
W N N
2 24 0 ` T 24
--- -- 25 0 W 25
b ~ fI
N
h
i 259m sT S
JAauKF
ILCO
_ I
• s � aloEft L,
s 262NO ST 2STST S 262N
ST
i
ii
� I a
0
a 266TH ST
W
� a
J
°1 W
W
w
y<
25 > iA 25
35= 36 36
6
� s
3
THOMAS STREET m O W L
INTEP- ----
181 �
3RD AVENUE BRIDGE WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT
� t
8T
...............
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: RECYCLING PROGRAMS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As re ended by the Public Works
Committee and upon concurrence w' h the City Attorney and
Public Works Director, Authorizati for the Mayor to sign the
Consultant Services Agreement with cific Energy Institute for
the purpose of conducting waste and cycling audits, develop-
ing educational materials and pilot p ojects to increase the
diversion rate of recycled materials. The amount of this
contract is $50, 756. 00 with the monies drawn from a King County
grant for $116, 000. 00.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee minutes, Public Works
Director memorandum, and PEI Consultant agreement
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ✓ YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3D V"
basin they're in, the same M&O cost is paid which is the cost to operate the City's entire
system. On top of that are capital costs which are related to projects within the particular
basin. For example, in Mill Creek Basin there is the Valley Detention Project. In the other
basins there are water quality issues that are being addressed so not all charges relate
to detention. So, what do we give the credit to?
Wickstrom said that this will involve additional staff to operate and maintain an accounting
and credit system as well as inspections to make sure that these systems are operating
yearly in order to be eligible for credit. He said it will be a cumbersome process and
another issue is, there is no new money to give this credit - it would all come from utility
revenue which means that if you give credit the money would have to come from the other
customers. (Rate adjustment) Because of all this, we do not support adding a credit for
detention particularly since we presently have one for retention and that's strictly a
developer option.
Tim Clark stated that if we have customers who have made the effort to basically make the
system work better by actually having invested in a significant detention system, then we
raise the utility rate, it seems unfair to simply not acknowledge that some people made an
effort to actually do something to make the system work a little better. He stated that he
does concur with the need to constantly assess the 195 sites. He then asked Brubaker
if we were to select a standard, for example, someone with a detention facility capable of
handling a large amount of water; would that be considered a fair standard and still meet
a sense of parody in terms of people having to pay a rate versus those who would be given
a credit? Brubaker said this could be a problem.
Clark asked Wickstrom, how many of the 195 sites are "significant" facilities? Wickstrom
stated that all the facilities are being built to handle their own runoff- they are not being
built to handle more than just their own contribution to the system. It's much the same as
mitigating traffic impact - creating a water problem by releasing a much greater volume
than the land originally had. He said it is hard to say what's "significant".
The committee recommended that Wickstrom look into what it would cost to implement a
program for operation and maintenance for further discussion. Wickstrom noted that
another issue we are concerned about is, the National Marine Fisheries will make a
determination by the end of July, whether Coho is an endangered species - Coho lives
in all the streams - so that's another significant issue we need to be concerned about.
Recycling Programs - Consultant Agreement
Wickstrom explained that this consultant will be working with Robyn Bartelt in enhancing
our volunteer recycling program in the multi-family area where we do not have the authority
to require recycling so we present programs to them. Similarly in the commercial end
where we are trying to promote recycling in order for us to get to that 50% reduction in our
waste stream by the end of this year and 65% by '96 and '97. Also, it involves enhancing
our yardwaste program and supply materials to the public about what they can do with the
yardwaste versus composting and hauling. He noted that the money is coming from the
King County grant of $116,000.
In response to Clark, Bartelt stated that the containers are provided- by the disposal
companies. She stated that this is basically an educational program. The consultant will
be doing site visits and taking audits
Committee unanimously recommended that the Mayor be authorized to sign the Consultant
Services Agreement with Pacific Energy Institute.
Titus Street Storm Rebuild - Bid
Wickstrom stated that the bids received on this project were all within $334,000 - $378,000
(7 bids submitted) - our estimate was $265,000. The low bidder was Shoreline
Construction who is presently doing the work on 4th & James (near the Justice Center).
He said that because of the grouping of the bids, we feel we have a fair bid because of the
number we received and where they all stood with respect to each other. Wickstrom said
we have the money in the various project funds so we are asking to award this contract to
Shoreline Construction. In response to Clark, Wickstrom said the power lines are
overhead in this area.
Committee unanimously recommended that Shoreline Construction be awarded the
contract for the Titus Street Storm Rebuild project.
71 st Avenue South Street Vacation
Wickstrom stated that this is a vacation request at 180th near West Valley Highway. The
petitioner is asking that a small piece from 181 st and 72nd Ave be vacated. We are
asking that a hearing date be set for this proposed vacation.
Committee unanimously recommended adopting a Resolution setting a hearing date for
the 71 st Ave South Street Vacation.
Utility Service to Naden Ave RV Parking Area
Wickstrom stated that the RV club has asked, thru Councilman Bennett, that we install a
utility service (a sewer dump station) and a water service. In order to do this, it would cost
about $20,000 - the big cost would be the sewer because we have to connect it to the
Auburn Sewer Interceptor. The money is available in the miscellaneous sewer and water
improvement funds, if Council wants to earmark it for that. Bennett suggested making this
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
June 12, 1995
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don WickstromV
RE: Recycling Programs - Consultant Agreement
We are presently involved in the promotion and expansion of recycling programs
for businesses, multifamily and single family residences. We have prepared the
attached Consultant Agreement with Pacific Energy Institute to provide services
for conducting waste and recycling audits, developing educational materials and
pilot projects to increase the diversion rate of recycled materials. The monies
therefore are coming from a King County grant we received for same. As such, no
new budget impact is associated herewith.
ACTION: Upon concurrence of the City Attorney and Public Works Director,
authorize the Mayor to sign the Consultant Services Agreement with
Pacific Energy Institute.
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF KENT AND PACIFIC ENERGY INSTITUTE.
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Kent, a Washington
municipal corporation (hereinafter the "City"), and Pacific Energy Institute (P.E.I.)
organized under the laws of the State of Washington, located and doing business at 101
Yesler Way, Suite 606, Seattle, Washington 98104, (hereinafter the "Consultant").
Recitals
1. The City is presently engaged in the promotion & expansion of recycling
programs for multifamily, businesses and single family residence and desires that the
Consultant perform services necessary to provide consultation and advice to the City on
the preparation of plans, specifications, and cost estimates for conducting waste and
recycling audits, developing educational materials and pilot projects to increase the
diversion rate of recycled materials.
2. The Consultant agrees to perform the services more specifically described
in the Scope of Work, dated June 1, 1995, including any addenda thereto as of the
effective date of this agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit A which is incorporated herein
by this reference as if fully set forth.
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.
CONSULTANT A--Page 1 of 14 Rev. 3/11/94:tct
II. Payment
A. The City shall pay the Consultant an amount based on time and materials,
an amount not to exceed fifty thousand seven hundred fifty six dollars
($50,756.00) for the services described in Section I herein. This is the
maximum amount to be paid under this Agreement for Tasks I-V 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. The Consultant's billing
rates shall be as delineated in Exhibit A.
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.
CONSULTANT K--Page 2 o: 14 Rev. 3/12/94:tcc
Ill. 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 365 calendar days of the execution of this
Agreement; provided however, that additional time shall be granted by the City for
excusable delays or extra work, as described in Section VI.(D) below.
CONSULTANT X- Page 3 of 14 Rev. 3/11/94: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 400 West Gowe, 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 canceled 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 it was hired by the City based on the
Consultant's representation that employees identified in the Scope of Work,
attached hereto as Exhibit A, 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 Scope of Work are unavailable 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 the City, in writing, if any employee
identified in the Scope of Work is unavailable to perform the services
CONSULTANT R--Page 4 of 14 Rev. 3/11/94:tcb
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 consistent with the standard of care in Consultant's
profession, 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.
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
CONSULTANT K--Page 5 of 14 Rev. 3/11/94:Ccb
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 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.
CONSULTANT K- Page 6 0_' 14 Rev. 3/11/94:tcb
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 hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence.
CONSULTANT R--Page 7 of 14 Rev. 3/11194:tcb
IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE
INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONSULTANTS WAIVER
OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE
PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
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 . 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
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.
CONSULTANT &--page 8 of 14 Rev. 3!11/94:tcb
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 (3C) 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 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.
CONSULTANT B--Page 9 0£ 14 Rev. 3/11/95:tcb
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 data,
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 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.
CONSULTANT K--page 10 of 14 Rev. 3/11/94;Lcb
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.
XVI. Non-Waiver of Breach
CONSULTANT K--Page 11 of 14 Rev. 3!11/94:tcb
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 hereunder shall become effective upon the date of mailing by registered or certified
CONSULTANT &--Page 12 of 14 Re%. 3/11!Q4:tcb
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, the terms of this
agreement 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 any of the Exhibits
to this Agreement conflict with any language contained in this 14-page Agreement, this
Agreement shall prevail.
CONSULTANT R--Page 13 of 14 Rev. 3/11/9S:tc:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on this day of
1995.
THE CITY OF KENT
BY: BY:
Its Principal Director of Public Works
BY:
Mayor
Notices to be sent to:
Mr. Don Wickstrom, P.E.
CONSULTANT Director of Public Works
The City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kent City Attorney
ATTEST:
Kent City Clerk
CONSULTK.pwk
CONSULTANT X- page 14 of 14 Rev. 3/11/94:ccb
PEI Scope of Work and Budget
June 1, 1995
PROJECT TITLE: Waste Reduction/Recvcling Program
PROJECT MANAGER: Robyn Bartelt
Conservation Specialist
City of Kent
220 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98040
TEL. 859-6573
FAX 859-3559
CONTRACTOR: Pacific Energy Institute
101 Yesler Way, Suite 606
Seattle, WA 98104
TEL. 628-0460
FAX 628-0953
PROJECT TASKS
Task 1: Promotion of Kent Multifamily Recycling Programs
Pacific Energy Institute (PEI) will work with the City of Kent to promote the
collection of recyclables and yard waste from all multifamily properties. The program
goal is to help the City reach its waste reduction and recycling goals of 50 percent of
the waste stream by 1995 and 65 percent by 2000. As of November 1994, the
participation rate in the multifamily sector is roughly 40 percent. PEI staff will work
with the City to promote participation in waste reduction, recycling, and recycled
product procurement programs in the multifamily sector through the development of
educational materials, informational brochures, and by providing on-site waste
consultations for multifamily complexes. Waste consultations offer direct technical
assistance and education in waste reduction, recycling, and recycled product
procurement. Multi-family property owners/managers that receive waste consultations
will receive a written report that contains specific recommendations for waste reduction
and recycling including how money aught be saved by implementing those
recommendations. PEI staff will provide follow up assistance by telephone and in person
to assure that the report was received and to determine if more technical assistance is
needed. At the request of multifamily owner, PEI will provide follow-up assistance for
up to six months to assure continued support and to offer recycling expertise.
The goal of this program is to increase participation in recycling programs to 70
percent of the City multifamily complexes by the end of 1995. In addition, PEI staff
will promote the purchase of recycled products to the multifamily sector.
1
brochures. Distribution will be done through direct mailings (where possible mailings will
include multiple items), distribution at special City events such as Dent Special Collection
Events, and door to door distribution. PEI staff will conduct on-site waste consultations with
multifamily owners and managers as needed. PEI will assist the Cite in program promotion
done through the City of Kent's "Enviromnental News" and local papers. PEI will work
with the City to monitor program progress and assist in reporting to the Cite the following
information: 1) number of educational materials printed/distributed; 2) the number of
follow-up calls made; 3) the number of on-site consultations; 4) the number of presentations
and persons attending; 5) the increase in the number of multifamily buildings participating
in waste reduction, recycling, and recycled product procurement activities. 6) monitoring
increases in tonnage's of materials being recycled; and 7) monitoring multifamily diversion
rates.
Activities;
Develop multifamily door hangers
Develop multifamily brochures
Print brochures
Mail brochures
Follow-up calls to multifamily properties
On-site consultations as requested
Project promotion and news articles
Educational presentations to employees;tenants as requested
Schedule
All project activities will be completed between June 1, 1995 and June 31, 1996.
Task : Promotion of Kent Busi less Recycling Programs
Pacific EnerK, Institute (PEI) will work with the Citv of Kent to promote the collection of
recyclables and yard waste from the City commercial sector. The program goal is to help the
City reach its waste reduction and recycling goals of 50 percent of the waste stream by 199-5
and 6_5 percent by 2000. As of November 1994, the participation rate m the commnercial
sector is roughly 25 percent. PEI staff will work with the City to promote participation in
waste reduction, recycling, and recycled product procurement programs in the commercial
sector through the use of educational materials, informational brochures, and on-site waste
consultations to Citv businesses.
The goal of this project is to increase participation rates to 50 percent for the
commercial sector by the end of 1995 with an overall diversion rate of 50 percent. In
addition, the City will promote the purchase of recycled products to the business sector.
Work related to this project will be completed by the City's Conservation Specialist and
by contracting for professional services. Activities will include production and
distribution of informational/educational materials such as brochures and a list of area
recycling service providers. Wherever possible, the City will use King County
educational materials and brochures. Distribution will include direct mailings (where
possible mailings will include multiple items), distribution at special City events such
as Kent Special Collection Events, and door to door distribution. The City will conduct
on-site waste consultations with commercial businesses owners and managers as needed
(consultations will include an individual consultation report). Additional program
promotion will be done through the City of Kent's "Environmental News" and local
papers. The City will work in coordination with the King County Solid Waste
Division's recycling programs. Measurable results will include: 1) the number of
brochures printed/mailed; 2) the number of follow-up calls made; 3) the number of on-
site consultations done; 4) the number of presentations and persons attending; and, 5)
the increase in businesses participating in waste reduction, recycling, and recycled
product procurement activities, 6) monitoring increases in tonnage's of materials being
recycled; and 7) monitoring business sector diversion rates.
Activities
Develop educational brochure
Develop list of area recycling service providers
Print brochures
Mail brochures
Follow-up calls to business
On-site consultations as requested
Business consultations reports
Project promotion and news articles
Educational presentations to business groups as requested
Schedule
All project activities will be completed between June 1, 1995 and June 31, 1996.
Task 3 Auxiliary Residential/Commercial Yard Waste Program: Single Family
Educational Programs Regarding Yard Waste Reduction
The City of Kent recognizes that yard waste is an easily recyclable material. The City
has banned yard waste from collection with commercial garbage collection. This was
enacted on December 1, 1994, and is consistent with the requirements of the 1992 King
County comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. Because of the yard waste ban,
Kent needs to provide alternatives to yard waste collection that promote yard waste
reduction and composting in single family residents. While the City provides for
curbside collection of yard waste, yard waste reduction alternatives save the energy and
3
resources used to collect and process yard waste at a central composting facility.
Presently, the City has implemented a single family curbside yard waste collection
program. The City will implement a yard waste reduction program stressing grass
cycling and backyard composting. Kent residents will come to understand that: 1) yard
waste is an easily recyclable material; 2) yard waste makes up an average of 20% of a
household waste stream; 3) leaving grass clippings on the lawn is an environmental13'
safe way of lawn care; and, 4) back yard composting is an option to disposing of yard
waste through collection programs. Grant funds will be used to develop, print, and
distribute a brochure that provides information on grass cycling and back yard
composting. Wherever possible, the City will use King County and other existing
educational materials and brochures. Distribution will include direct mailings (where
possible mailings will include multiple items) and distribution at special City events
such as Kent Special Collection Events.
The City will also distribute backyard composting kits to Kent residents. The kits will
be distributed at existing City of Kent Special Collection Events and promoted in the
event flyer. Educational materials on grass cycling and back yard composting will be
distributed with each kit. It is anticipated that the City will distribute compost kits at a
City cost $47.50 per kit and a user cost of $10.00 per kit. Compost kit cost to the City
will be roughly $16,500.00.
It is anticipated that a significant a:..cant of staff time will be needed to promote
programs and respond to inquiries.
Work related to this project will be completed by the City's Conservation Specialist and
by contracting for professional services. Measurable results will include: 1) the number
of brochures printed and distributed; 2) the number of backyard composting kits
distributed; 3) distribution of a follow-up survey of to those who received compost lots
and an analysis of the responses; 4) the number of newspapers articles containing press
releases; 5) the number of presentations on yard waste prevention; 6) monitoring
increases in tonnage's of yard waste being recycled; and 7) monitoring residential yard
waste diversion rates.
Activities
Develop brochure
Print brochures
Mail brochures
Purchase and distribute backyard composting kits
Project promotion
Educational presentations on yard waste reduction
Address inquiries
Monitor changes to waste stream
Prepare final report
4
Schedule
All project activities will be completed between June 1, 1995 and June 31, 1996.
Task 4 Supplemental Programs: Single Family Waste Reduction and Recycling Booklet
The City of Kent has curbside recycling services available to single family households
throughout the City. Kent recognizes that this program is successful but is interested in
ways of making the program even more successful. Kent wants to meet its waste
reduction and recycling goals which means more City residents need to participate in
waste reduction and recycling programs and more recyclable materials need to be
removed from the waste stream. The City will promote waste reduction, recycling
programs, and the purchase of recycled products to Kent residents. The City will
prepare an educational booklet that describes and promotes the variety of recycling
opportunities available using City sponsored or private sector programs. The booklet
will be intended for use as a reference guide and will include waste reduction, reuse,
recycling, and recycled product procurement opportunities for Kent residents.
Presently, the participation rate in the single family curbside recycling program is 85
percent. Through the educational booklet the City will promote the recycling of
materials not collected in the current City programs. Kent residents will come to
understand that: 1) waste reduction the easiest way to reduce the City waste stream;
and, 2) there are options available to disposing of household waste beyond curbside
collection programs. Grant funds will be used to develop, p int, a.d distrbute the
educational booklet. Wherever possible, the City will use King County and other
existing educational materials and brochures. Distribution will include direct mailings
(where possible mailings will include multiple items) and distribution at special City
events such as Kent Special Collection Events.
It is anticipated that a significant amount of staff time will be needed to promote
programs and respond to inquiries.
Work related to this project will be completed by the City's Conservation Specialist and
by contracting for professional services. Measurable results will include: 1) number of
booklets printed and distributed; 2) monitoring increases in tonnage's of single family
recyclables; and 3) monitoring single fanuly residential waste diversion rates.
Activities
Develop educational booklet
Prepare press release
Print and mail booklet
Monitor changes to waste stream
Prepare final report
Schedule
All project activities will be completed between June 1, 1995 and June 31, 1996.
5
Task 5 Supplemental Programs: Single Family Recycling Program Pilot Projects
The City of Kent has curbside recycling services available to single-family households.
Kent recognizes that this program is successful but is interested in ways of making the
program even more successful. Kent wants to meet its waste reduction and recycling
goals which means more City residents need to participate in waste reduction and
recycling programs and more recyclable materials need to be removed from the waste
stream. The City will study, and if feasible, implement collection of such recyclable
materials as polycoated paperboard, used motor oil, aerosol cans, and other secondary
recvclable materials in household curbside collection program. Collection of such
materials is being done in other local communities. The City will review other City
programs to help determine if these materials can be feasibly included in the Kent
program. Kent will work towards implementing collection of additional materials if
practicable and at reasonable costs. By including more materials, the City intends to
further reduce the amount of material going into the local landfill and reach the City
recycling goals.
Presently, the participation rate in the single family curbside recycling program is 85
percent. Grant funds will be used to study the feasibility of including more recyclable
materials in the current program, obtain bids to provide new services, and implement
the collection of new materials. Funds will be used to develop, print, and distribute the
informational materials announcing the collection of new materials and any collection
program restrictions. Wherever possible, tine City will use King County and other
existing educational materials and brochures. Distribution will include direct mailinas
(where possible mailings will include multiple items) and distribution at special City
events such as Kent Special Collection Events.
It is anticipated that a significant amount of staff time will be needed to promote
programs and address inquiries.
Work related to this project will be completed by the City's Conservation Specialist and
by contracting for professional services. Measurable results will include: 1) number of
new materials studied; 2) the number of new recyclable materials collected, 3) the
amount of new materials collected, 4) monitoring increases in tonnage's of single
family recyclables; and 5) monitoring single family residential waste diversion rates.
Activities
Feasibility study of new materials
Obtain bids to provide new services
Implement the collection of new materials.
Develop informational material
Print informational material
Mail informational material in City utility bills
Prepare press release
Monitor changes to waste stream
Prepare final report
6
Schedule
All project activities will be completed between June 1, 1995 and June 31, 1996.
Changes and additions to this Scope of Work will be made subject to prior approval by
the King County Solid Waste Division.
7
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20, 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: 71ST AVENUE SOUTH STREET VACATION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, adoption of Resolution No. jq,3c2 setting August 1,
1995, as the public hearing date for the 71st Avenue South
Street Vacation.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee minutes, Public Works
Director memorandum, and vicinity map; Resolution
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3E'/
waste stream by the end of this year and 65% by '96 and '97. Also, it involves enhancing
our yardwaste program and supply materials to the public about what they can do with the
yardwaste versus composting and hauling. He noted that the money is coming from the
King County grant of $116,000.
In response to Clark, Bartelt stated that the containers are provided by the disposal
companies. She stated that this is basically an educational program. The consultant will
be doing site visits and taking audits
Committee unanimously recommended that the Mayor be authorized to sign the Consultant
Services Agreement with Pacific Energy Institute.
Titus Street Storm Rebuild - Bid
Wickstrom stated that the bids received on this project were all within $334,000 - $378,000
(7 bids submitted) - our estimate was $265,000. The low bidder was Shoreline
Construction who is presently doing the work on 4th & James (near the Justice Center).
He said that because of the grouping of the bids, we feel we have a fair bid because of the
number we received and where they all stood with respect to each other. Wickstrom said
we have the money in the various project funds so we are asking to award this contract to
Shoreline Construction. In response to Clark, Wickstrom said the power lines are
overhead in this area.
Committee unanimously recommended that Shoreline Construction be awarded the
contract for the Titus Street Storm Rebuild project.
(� 71 st Avenue South Street Vacation
Wickstrom stated that this is a vacation request at 180th near West Valley Highway. The
petitioner is asking that a small piece from 181 st and 72nd Ave be vacated. We are
asking that a hearing date be set for this proposed vacation.
Committee unanimously recommended adopting a Resolution setting a hearing date for
the 71 st Ave South Street Vacation.
Utility Service to Naden Ave RV Parking Area
Wickstrom stated that the RV club has asked, thru Councilman Bennett, that we install a
utility service (a sewer dump station) and a water service. In order to do this, it would cost
about $20,000 - the big cost would be the sewer because we have to connect it to the
Auburn Sewer Interceptor. The money is available in the miscellaneous sewer and water
improvement funds, if Council wants to earmark it for that. Bennett suggested making this
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
June 12, 1995
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom ��
RE: 71 st Avenue South Street Vacation
We have received a request for street vacation for a portion of 71 st Avenue South
from Bruce Creager, Barghausen Consulting Engineers. The petitioner is
requesting the street vacation for the purpose of acquiring it to satisfy a portion of
the landscaping requirements of the A&H Company site at 180th & West
Valley Highway.
ACTION: Recommend adoption of Resolution # to set the hearing
date for the 71 st Avenue South Street Vacation.
64 _(TYP.) ... - il� 1
D I I
r 1
i
In I
1 Ic
D !r
O Im Z
n Z; i
n
D
L1
n d I
D
-o a
W m
_ BUILDINGETBACK LINE
� 2
L DSCAPING O
-20' LAN APING--�.
EX, EP
D
S0. 181st ST.
Ylc�
�D pjti � j moo
N N
r nn
Z ? Y <O zw
m o
.m r� 4 nv_�
D m
Z
� <r
n DA
u� (n m_l C Z y
D
wo r (J C 0
D � ,I , m
0 � x Z
M. - m C
> o Co M
0 �; M M m
M, (n oo
n
I
-� BUILD G'
SETBA K LI I It
D r ro 20' M(N.
Op �O 26__LANDS r APING it
NON
a u�
y II�J Qi/ I N—
n
m
e te, SO. 180th ST. Nod E
w;
o =
D p �
¢ a< m
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City of Kent,Washington,regarding
the vacation of a portion of 71 st Avenue South, an existing public
street, lying between So. 180th and 181 st Streets in the City of Kent,
and setting the public hearing on the proposed street vacation for
August 1, 1995. .
WHEREAS,a petition has been filed by various property owners to vacate a portion
of 71 st Avenue South,an existing public street, lying between So. 180th and 181 st Streets in the City
of Kent, King County, Washington; and
WHEREAS, these property owners own at least two-thirds of the property abutting that
portion of 71 st Avenue South that is now being sought to be vacated; and
WHEREAS, the petition is in all respects proper. NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. A public hearing on the street vacation petition requesting the vacation
of a portion of 71 st Avenue South shall be held at a regular meeting of the Kent City Council at 7:00
p.m., Tuesday, August 1, 1995, in the Council Chambers of City Hall located at 220 4th Avenue
South, Kent, Washington, 98032.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall give proper notice of the hearing and cause the notice
to be posted as provided by law.
1
Section 3. The Planning director shall obtain the necessary approval or rejection or
other information from the Public Works Department and other appropriate departments and shall
transmit information to the Council so that the Council may consider the matter at its regularly
scheduled meeting on August 1, 1995.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington this
day of , 1995.
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this_day.of , 1995
JIM WHITE, 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 , 1995.
(SEAL)
STVAC#10.res BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
2
APPLICANT:
Jerald 0. McCaugh I allle: Bruce K. Creager, AICP
CITY OF KENT U LS v Barghausen Consu tang ngineers, Inc.
220 So. Qth Ave. D ddress: 18215 72nd Avenue South
Kent, 14A 98032 JU14 - 5 1995
CITY OF KENT. Kent, Wa 98032
CITY CLERK 1'110110; (206) 251-6222
STREET AND/OR ALLEY VACATION APPLICATION AND PETITION
Dear Mayor and Kent City Council :
We, the undersigned abutting' property owners, hereby respectfully request that
certain portion of 71st hereby be vacated. (General Location)
Ave. So. and so.181st St.
Legal Description c
r A d
See Attached Legal Description )VAII) 519Y'
h)J.)
GIl''i OF KENT
I'E'FtM11 CENTEr+
BRIEF STATEMENT WHY VACATION IS BEING SOUGHT
To acquire property that is not needed for public street purposes.
Sufficient proof, copy of deed contract etc. supported by King County
Tax Rolls shall be submitted for verification of signatures. -Without
these a "CURRENT" title report shall be required. When Corporations ,
Partnerships etc. are being signed for, then proof of individual 's
authority to sign for same shall also be submitted.
Attach a color coded map of a scale of not less than 1" = 200' of the area
sought for vacation. (NOTE) I-lap must correspond with legal description.
ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS TAX LOT N
SIG TURES AND ADDRESSES LOT, BLOCK & PLAT/SEC. T1,111. RG
x Tax Account #000020-0009-07
- -J eph Holton
2 9S South Breezy Pt. R
(Tax Lot 119007 in Sec 36; Township
23 N, Range 4E; a portion of
Donald Anderson
1614 Roanoke Way Henry Adams Donation Claim No. 43)
$150.00 Fee Paid Treasurer's Receipt No.
Appraisal Fee Paid Treasurer's Receipt No.
Land Value Paid Treasurer's Receipt No.
Deed Accepted Date
Trade Accepted Date'
oUUWic ��
� U
JUN - 5 1995
CITY OF KENT
ROAD VACATION CITY CLERK
That portion of the U-turn route as shown on Sheets 3 and 4 of 8, SR-181 South Corporate Limits of
Tukwila to Foster Interchange right-of-way plans, being a portion, of the Henry Adams Donation Claim
No. 43 in Section 36, Township 23 North, Rage 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, lying South
and East of the following described line:
COMMENCING at a point 30 feet South of, when measured at right angles to U-turn route centerline
Station 4+30;
THENCE South 881 16' 31" East, 35.30 feet parallel to and 30 feet South of said U-turn route
centerline to a point on a curve the radius point of which bears South 200 23' 03" East and the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING of herein described line;
THENCE Northeasterly along the arc of a curve concave to the Southeast having a radius of 68.00 feet,
through a central angle of 220 06' 32" and an arc length of 26.24 feet;
THENCE South 88° 16' 31 " East, 55.36 feet to a point of curvature;
THENCE Northeasterly and Northerly along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 75.00 feet,
through a central angle of 89' 58' _15" and an arc length of 117.77 feet;
THENCE North 01 ° 45' 14" East, 172.84 feet to a point of curvature;
THENCE Northeasterly along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 29.00 feet, through a
central angle of 340 08' 54" and an arc length of 17.28 feet to a point on a line 30 feet East of when
measured at right angles to U-turn route centerline and the terminus of herein described line.
Subject to an utility easement 2 feet in width lying to the right of the above-described line.
Project: 72nd Avenue South and 180th Street
April 20, 1995
4917L.002
DJSIkr
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20, 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: NADEN AVENUE RV PARKING AREA - WATER & SEWER
SERVICE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approval of a request from a local RV
club to install a dump station and water service at the Naden
Avenue R.V. Parking area. This is estimated to cost-app=cW-4---
y $20, 000. The monies are available in the Miscellaneous
Watermain Improvement Fund (W40) and Miscellaneous Sewer
Improvement Fund (D20) . No budget request is needed. It has
been recommended by the Public Works Committee that these
utility services be installed at the Naden Avenue R.V. Parking
area.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee minutes, Public Works
Director memorandum, and vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCALIPERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ e�?Q 000
SOURCE OF FUNDS: F
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3F✓
waste stream by the end of this year and 65% by '96 and '97. Also, it involves enhancing
our yardwaste program and supply materials to the public about what they can do with the
yardwaste versus composting and hauling. He noted that the money is coming from the
King County grant of $116,000.
In response to Clark, Bartelt stated that the containers are provided by the disposal
companies. She stated that this is basically an educational program. The consultant will
be doing site visits and taking audits
Committee unanimously recommended that the Mayor be authorized to sign the Consultant
Services Agreement with Pacific Energy Institute.
Titus Street Storm Rebuild - Bid_
Wickstrom stated that the bids received on this project were all within $334,000 - $378,000
(7 bids submitted) - our estimate was $265,000. The low bidder was Shoreline
Construction who is presently doing the work on 4th & James (near the Justice Center).
He said that because of the grouping of the bids, we feel we have a fair bid because of the
number we received and where they all stood with respect to each other. Wickstrom said
we have the money in the various project funds so we are asking to award this contract to
Shoreline Construction. In response to Clark, Wickstrom said the power lines are
overhead in this area.
Committee unanimously recommended that Shoreline Construction be awarded the
contract for the Titus Street Storm Rebuild project.
71 st Avenue South Street Vacation
Wickstrom stated that this is a vacation request at 180th near West Valley Highway. The
petitioner is asking that a small piece from 181 st and 72nd Ave be vacated. We are
asking that a hearing date be set for this proposed vacation.
Committee unanimously recommended adopting a Resolution setting a hearing date for
the 71 st Ave South Street Vacation.
Utility Service to Naden Ave RV Parking Area
Wickstrom stated that the RV club has asked, thru Councilman Bennett. that we install a
utility service (a sewer dump station) and a water service. In order to do this, t would cost
about S20,OCO - the big cost would be the sewer because we have to connect it to the
Auburn Sewer Interceptor. The money is available in the miscellaneous sewer and water
imorovement funds, if Council wants to earmark it for that. Bennett suggested making this
3
� J
a coin-operated facility. Wickstrom said we could check into that and see if we could make
it an option.
In response to Bennett, Wickstrom said this is a small enough project that we could solicit
proposals rather than going out to bid. He said hopefully, we will have it completed by
September.
Committee unanimously recommended installing utility service at Naden Avenue R.V.
parking area.
FEMA Floodpllain Maps
Wickstrom explained that the Ordinance which originally adopted the new maps needs to
be amended in accordance with FEMA's recent review. FEMA has made some minor
changes - one was related to manufactured homes requiring that they cannot be built
within the 100 year floodplain unless they are brought up to the 100 year floodplain
elevation. FEMA also wanted a different date for the adoption of the maps.
Committee unanimously recommended amending Ordinance #3328 deleting a portion of
Para. 190(D) associated with Manufactured Homes and adopting June 16, 1995 as the
effective date of the new digitized maps.
ADDED ITEMS - BRUBAKER
Metricom, Inc.
Brubaker explained that Metricom has a device which straps to utility poles and draws
power from the poles and works on a radio frequency band; provides a radio frequency
link-up from a portable computer into their device and from there it goes into all the internet
services. Brubaker said Metricom has obtained approval from Puget Power to use their
poles however, they will still need a street franchise agreement if they come into Kent.
Brubaker said the City's Info Services person has looked at their product. He further said
this is unlike TCI in that there is no undergrounding. This is a self-contained unit.
Brubaker said he recommends that the City enter into a franchise agreement with
Metricom, Inc. This would be a 5 year franchise; no franchise fee other than the initial
signature fee. We could also include a paragraph which says that if you enter into an
agreement in another city in the State of WA where a franchise fee is imposed, we will
receive the same fee. He said we would charge them a monthly fee which would be fairly
small. Brubaker suggested that, if the Committee were amenable to this, he would draft
a franchise ordinance for introduction at the next meeting for a first reading and it could
be negotiated and modified after that point.
Clark suggested that Brubaker discuss this with Parks Dept. to see if there is any use to
4
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
June 12, 1995
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstromn `�V
RE: Utility Service to Naden Ave RV Parking Area
This item is being brought forth at the request of Councilman Bennett. He has
received a request from our local RV club to install an RV dump station and a
water service at our Naden Ave RV parking area. To do so we estimate the cost
thereof at $19,560.00 ($15,660.00 for sewer and $3,900.00 for water). Monies
for same are available in the Miscellaneous Watermain Improvement Fund (W40)
and the Miscellaneous Sewer Improvement Fund (D20). As such, no budget
request is needed however, because this is a $20,000.00 expenditure, we are
seeking Council concurrence. on providing said utility services.
ACTION: Recommend authorizing installing utility service (sewer and water) at
Naden Ave. R.V. parking area.
4.`• \ <
I INDUSTRIAL AREA �' N 'w / I �d
\ <
�
IDIX� 'p MAT
to NOVAK L '
167
POPU TION-1 1400 z <
POP ATION-2 500 ' l
POP ATION -3 , 40 < S. 234TH i Zz
ST
I
< W < < •Y.
COU ST
C Z q Lam.
Ix < WAY
CLOUDY 57
S 238TH S - > W Lou Y ST z >
< f Cl S <
G O
I ryry
� Y
ST > >
z s 5 z < <
j sT 14113 z 1 Ea ST '" <
2 4 4 z z
23 i 24 ® ,' h\,111;t. KIiMT W W
KENT JR.H1. 24 > <
UM ST ! COMMONS -� < �ADSCHOO le FW< E n
a ' PROJECT LOCATIONr F404EER a aa{ z a
1 Z I M IL " E �'
(PVT) 2 MI A 'K6 f. F- J W
W J I�I.A '1 A.11 < T
i I z t< ST z z
W SMITH ST
_ W SMITH ST 4 gME KEN ® _
Y NT
':��. z o z SR.
WARD
W HARRI ET L HARRISON ST N ;L3R 4R I! z CTR b
2 a ST Z U-REITF
z 2 /yy• MEEKER ST z M KE{i ST b m
® � a0
246TH ST 4 2 W nl
2 lil 4 W > OOWE ST E < ST �W r � 09
STRE T ror' < KENT (TTT w T u I 516 a 4E1� S� TAC041A �Tr
z - *tDUCE �y
181 0 rim �� ST O E DEAN o `
ST 44 ST
q p \ W an Y SAAR i ST + f <n - ��, e
<; I'Al(K: cv SATR AL
Z E OU18E
4 WILUS 4 ST WAY O W
z i a
IW 1,•1 > Z 3116 W WAiP'
< SEATT
W RO ST .I RU W K
♦, �1.1\\ \\I� FireI'\I'1. W W
Station 'A < < K Y Z CH>
n U
M. _� Z ST 1
D: _ �^ 01� ST
1^ CARTE
t 1 ¢ < MARION ST
wpri
ST cE
2 � 24 0 < r z 24 19 2
-- 25 T -W 25 30
U
n
1y
a
S 2S9 K
W � • NADEN AVENUE R.V. PARKING AREA
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAPS
2 . SUMMARY STA EMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, [doption of Ordinance No: 3 ay amending Ordinances
Nos. 2867 and 3;i28 by deleting a porti n of the paragraph
associated with Manufactured Homes and
�a opting June 16, 1995 as
the effective date of the new FEMA maps.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee minutes and Public Works
Director memorandum ; Ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ✓ YES
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3G V
a coin-operated facility. Wickstrom said we could check into that and see if we could make
it an option.
In response to Bennett, Wickstrom said this is a small enough project that we could solicit
proposals rather than going out to bid. He said hopefully, we will have it completed by
September.
Committee unanimously recommended installing utility service at Naden Avenue R.V.
parking area.
FEMA Floodplain Maps
Wickstrom explained that the Ordinance which originally adopted the new maps needs to
be amended in accordance with FEMA's recent review. FEMA has made some minor
changes - one was related to manufactured homes requiring that they cannot be built
within the 100 year floodplain unless they are brought up to the 100 year floodplain
elevation. FEMA also wanted a different date for the adoption of the maps.
Committee unanimously recommended amending Ordinance #3328 deleting a portion of
Para. 190(D) associated with Manufactured Homes and adopting June 16, 1995 as the
effective date of the new digitized maps.
ADDEDITEMS - BRUBAKER
Metricom Inc.
Brubaker explained that Metricom has a device which straps to utility poles and draws
power from the poles and works on a radio frequency band; provides a radio frequency
link-up from a portable computer into their device and from there it goes into all the internet
services. Brubaker said Metricom has obtained approval from Puget Power to use their
poles however, they will still need a street franchise agreement if they come into Kent.
Brubaker said the City's Info Services person has looked at their product. He further said
this is unlike TCI in that there is no undergrounding. This is a self-contained unit.
Brubaker said he recommends that the City enter into a franchise agreement with
Metricom, Inc. This would be a 5 year franchise; no franchise fee other than the initial
signature fee. We could also include a paragraph which says that if you enter into an
agreement in another city in the State of WA where a franchise fee is. imposed, we will
receive the same fee. He said we would charge them a monthly fee which would be fairly
small. Brubaker suggested that, if the Committee were amenable to this, he would draft
a franchise ordinance for introduction at the next meeting for a first reading and it could
be negotiated and modified after that point.
Clark suggested that Brubaker discuss this with Parks Dept. to see if there is any use to
4
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
June 12, 1995
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom b
RE: FEMA Floodplain Maps
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has reviewed our amended
Ordinance #3328 which adopts the floodplain regulations as set forth by FEMA.
However in their review, they have required us to delete a portion of Paragraph
190 'D' associated with Manufactured Homes. (copy attached) We have also
been advised to adopt the actual King County map date of June 16, 1995 as the
effective date of the new digitized maps, rather than September 30, 1994 in order
to comply with Federal Regulations.
ACTION: Recommend amending Ordinance #3328 deleting a portion of Para.
190 (D) associated with Manufactured Homes and adopting June 16,
1995 as the effective date of the new digitized maps.
I en
MAN�c'i
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region X
iy *fi 130 228th Street, Southwest
° Bothell, WA 98021.9796 !"P`
June 6, 1995
Mr. Don Wickstrom, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Kent City Hall
220 4th Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032-5895
Dear Mr. Wickstrom:
We reviewed Kent Ordinance No. 3328 which adopted amendments to your
floodplain regulations to incorporate the digitized King County Flood Insurance
Rate Map series. We also reviewed Ordinance No. 2867, which was amended by
3328.
The amendment to change the date of the Flood Insurance Study for the City of
Kent is sufficient to ensure continued compliance in the National Flood Insurance
Program. However, in reviewing the 1989 Ordinance No. 2867, we did find a
deficiency that needs to be corrected. The deficiency is found at Section
14.22.190 D dealing with manufactured homes in flood hazard areas. In the late
1980s, there was much controversy over the requirement to 'elevate manufactured
homes. The provision you have is reflective of where this matter was at a certain
point in time; however, it is not reflective of how it was finally worked out.
In order to make the manufactured home provision compliant with the current
regulations, all that would be necessary would be to retain the first sentence of
190 D, and eliminate all the remainder of that paragraph. This would reflect the
fact that all manufactured homes do have to be elevated if they are to be placed
anywhere in flood hazard areas, including in existing manufactured home parks.
It is critical that this change be made in order to ensure that the City of Kent
remains compliant with all NFIP regulations. In the process, it is advised that you
also amend Ordinance No. 3328 to adopt the actual King County map date of
June 16, 1995. That is the effective date of the new digitized maps. The date
you have, September 30, 1994, was the date of the preliminary study and maps.
Since the preliminary is superseded by the final version, the date should be
changed while you are making the other change for elevation of manufactured
homes. We would normally accept the date of the preliminary maps, but if a
change is being made for other purposes, we would specify the need to make the
date change also.
2
Because the changes necessary in Kent's ordinances are minor, we suggest that
the City make these changes within 60 days of receipt of this letter, or by
August 15, 1995. Please let us know if you cannot make this date for any
reason, or we will assume that the deadline will be met. If you have any
questions, please call George Currin, who is our representative in the State of
Washington. Mr. Currin can be reached at (206) 487-4679.
Sincerely,
Charles L. Steele, Director
Mitigation Division
i
provisions of this subsection based on their development and-or
review of the structural design specifications and plans. Such
certifications shall be provided to the official as set forth in
KCC 14 .22.160B.
4 Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not
floodoroofede must meet the same standards for space below the
lowest floor as described in KCC 14 .22 .190A.2.
5 Applicants floodoroofing nonresidential
buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be
based on rates that are one foot below the floodoroofed level
(e.g. a building floodoroofed to one foot above the base flood
level will be rated as at the base flood level) .
in C. Critical Facility. Construction of new critical
� facilities shall be to the extent possible located outside the
'J7
limits of the base flood plain. Construction of new critical
0 facilities shall be permissible within the base flood plain if no
n
00 feasible alternative site is available. Critical facilities
constructed within the base flood plain shall have the lowest
floor elevated to three feet or more above the level of the base
flood elevation at the site Floodoroofing and sealing measures
must be taken to ensure that toxic substances will not be
disolaced by or released into flood waters. Access routes
elevated to or above the level of the base flood plain shall be
orovided to all criticals facilities to the extent possible.
D. Manufactured Homes. All manufactured homes to be
placed or substantially improved within Zones Al-30, AH, and AE on
the community's FIRM shall be elevated on a permanent foundation
such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is one foot or
more above the Base Flood Elevation; and be securely anchored to
an adequately anchored foundation system in accordance with the
provisions of KCC 14 122 180A 2 This paragraph applies to
manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved in an
expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision.
This paragraph does not apply to manufactured homes to be placed
or substantially improved in an existing manufactured home park or
subdivision except where the repair reconstruction, or
26 -
improvement of the streets, utilities and pads equal or exceeds 50
percent of the value of the streetsf utilities and pads before the
repair, reconstruction or improvement has commenced.
14 22 200 FLOODWAYS Within the floodway of the areas
of special flood hazardr the following provisions apply:
A. Prohibit encroachments including fill, new
constructiont substantial imDrovementst and other development
unless certification by a registered professional engineer or
architect is provided demonstrating that encroachments shall not
result in any increase in flood levels durinq the occurrence of
the base flood discharge.
a' B. Construction or reconstruction of residential
In structures is prohibited within designated floodways, except for
O
(i) repairs, reconstructiont or improvements to a structure which
O do not increase the ground floor area• and (ii) repairs,
O reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which
w� does not exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure
either, (A) before the repair, reconstruction, or repair is
started, or (B) if the structure has been damaged, and is being
restored, before the damage occurred. Work done on structures to
comply with existing health, sanitary, or safety codes or to
structures identified as historic places shall not be included in
the 50 percent determination.
C. If KCC 14 22 200A is satisfied all new construction
and substantial improvements shall comply with all applicable
flood hazard reduction provisions of KCC 14 .22.180.
19 22 210 WETLANDS MANAGEMENT. To the extent possible
adverse impacts to wetlands should be avoided as such:
A. Proposals for development within base flood plains
shall be reviewed by both issuing departments and Public Works
Department for their possible impacts on wetlands located within
the flood plain.
- 29 -
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, amending Kent City Code Section 14.09.060
and 14.09.180(4) (KCC Ordinance No.2867 as amended by
Ordinance 3328) relating to areas of special flood hazards.
WHEREAS, the Kent City Council has adopted floodplain guidelines and maps
established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA"); and
WHEREAS, the floodplain maps have been updated by FEMA through a
revised flood insurance study and, therefore, the city code should be amended to incorporate
the updated study and maps; and
WHEREAS, the City has received notice from FEMA of required amendments
that should be incorporated into existing sections of the Kent City Code. NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Kent City Code Section 14.09.060 is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 14.09.060. Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard.
The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency in a scientific and engineering report entitled "Flood Insurance
Study for King County, Washington and Incorporated Areas," dated September-39
4994 June 16 1995, with accompanying flood insurance maps'is hereby adopted by
reference and declared to be a part of this chapter as if stated verbatim. The flood
insurance study is on file and available for examination at the office of the department
of public works.
SECTION 2, Section 14.09.180 of the Kent City Code as it pertains to
Manufactured homes, is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 14.09.180. Specific Standards.
In all areas of special flood hazards where base flood elevation data has been
provided as set forth in section 14.09.060 or section 14.09.140, the following
provisions are required:
1. Residential construction.
a. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential
structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated one
(1) foot or more above base flood elevation.
b. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding
are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic
flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of
floodwaters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be
certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet
or exceed the following minimum criteria:
2
(1) A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not
less than one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed
areas subject to flooding shall be provided.
(2) The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot
above grade.
(3) Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other
coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic
entry and exit of floodwaters.
2. Nonresidential construction. New construction and substantial improvement of
any commercial, industrial or other nonresidential structure shall either have the
lowest floor, including basement, elevated one (1) foot or more above the level
of the base flood elevation; or, together with attendant utility and sanitary
facilities, shall:
a. Be floodproofed so that below one (1) foot above the base flood level the
structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the
passage of water;
b. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy;
C. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the
design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted
3
standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on
their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications
and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the official as set forth
in section 14.09.150 2;
d. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not floodproofed, must meet
the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in
subsection Lb. of this section.
e. Applicants floodproofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that
flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below
the floodproofed level (e.g. a building floodproofed to one foot above
the base flood level will be rated as at the base flood level).
3. Critical facility. Construction of new critical facilities shall be, to the extent
possible, located outside the limits of the base floodplain. Construction of new
critical facilities shall be permissible within the base floodplain if no feasible
alternative site is available. Critical facilities constructed within the base
floodplain shall have the lowest floor elevated to three (3) feet or more above
the level of the base flood elevation at the site. Floodproofing and sealing
measures must be taken to ensure that toxic substances will not be displaced by
or released into floodwaters. Access routes elevated to or above the level of the
base flood- plain shall be provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible.
4. Manufactured homes. All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially
improved within zones Al-30, AH, and AE on the community's FIRM shall be
4
elevated on a permanent foundation such that the lowest floor of the
manufactured home is one (1) foot or more above the base flood elevation; and
be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system in
accordance with the provisions of section 14.09.170 Lb. This subseetion
applies to inaftufaetered hernes to be plaeed of: stbstantially improved
expansion to an extsting maftdfaeedred hafne park or stbdivision. This
the repair, reeonstmetion, or improvement of the str efs, utilities and pads eqttal
SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any
other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in
force thirty (30) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
5
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED day of 11995.
APPROVED day of 11995.
PUBLISHED day of 1995.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. _, passed by the
City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent
as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
FEMAMAPS.pwk
6
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: 196TH CORRIDOR RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION f
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of Resolution No. 14433 to
petition the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission
to seek a determination that an above-grade railroad crossing
should be constructed as part of the City's proposed 196th
Street Corridor project. woods hokj +Vxo-t -rke rc5olu4i'"
al
Co&aihs 1annqua wl-,. Ck kn� 6L11A 4 t1
v)V,.;C)A Ctp" r50 t- `F" a�c,e,�da �c.caCaU� .
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee minutes and resolution
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3H✓
enhance services from Parks. Wickstrom suggested the possibility of meter-reading from
this service.
Committee unanimously recommended that Brubaker begin the preliminary work on a
franchise agreement with Metricom, Inc.
—►196th Corridor
Brubaker stated that this project calls for the construction of a bridge over both railroads.
He said there is a statute that allows the city to petition to the WUTC for the railroad to
fund a portion of our cost in constructing the bridge. The first step in doing that is to pass
a resolution stating that it is a determination of the City Council that a bridge over the
railroad is the most appropriate method of crossing the tracks rather than an at-grade
crossing.
Committee unanimously recommended that a resolution be adopted to petition to the
WUTC for a portion of the funding to construct a bridge over the railroad in the 196th St
Corridor project.
Signature Point Area (left turn lane) - Bennett
Bennett asked about the design of the left turn lane on WA Ave in front of Signature Point
stating that you need to actually go into the oncoming traffic lane in order to make a left
turn. Wickstrom said that the State did not want the Signature Point people to make a left
turn there - the traffic would get backed up. However, they did allow the office complex
in the area to come out and turn left.
Meeting adjourned: 5:30 p.m.
5
V RESOLUTION NO. 33
V
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of
the City of Kent, Washington, authorizing City
staff to submit an application to the Washington
Utilities and Transportation Commission to seek a
determination that an above-grade railroad
crossing should be constructed as part of the City's
proposed 196th Street Corridor.
WHEREAS, the Green River Valley in the City of Kent, and also the cities of Renton
and Auburn, has experienced significant, unprecedented growth and urbanization in the second
half of the twentieth century and should continue to experience similar urbanization and
growth well into the twenty-first century; and
WHEREAS, this valley area, specifically including and affecting the City of Kent, has
developed significant commercial and industrial centers in Kent, Tukwila, Renton and Auburn
that serve the greater Seattle region, the Pacific Northwest, and the Pacific Rim nations; and
WHEREAS, as part of this urbanization and growth, the City, neighboring
jurisdictions, the State of Washington and other regional agencies have developed major
transportation routes, including the 1-5 and I-405 corridors, SR 18 and SR 167, and the East
and West Valley Highways, all of which serve these commercial and industrial centers, the
greater Seattle region, the Pacific Northwest, and the Pacific Rim nations through the ports of
Seattle and Tacoma; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kent and other local jurisdictions within the Green River
Valley support these major transportation routes with a network of major and minor arterial
roadways; and
1
WHEREAS, the City of Kent's transportation and utility infrastructure within the
Green River Valley serves and will continue to serve as a crucial link to the flow of commerce
in this significant region; and
WHEREAS, the current roadway infrastructure within the City's Green River Valley
area does not sufficiently serve local and regional needs for efficient east-west transportation in
a manner that effectively accommodates this unprecedented urbanization and growth; and
WHEREAS, in order to address the established need for improved east-west
transportation facilities in and across the Green River Valley, the City, both on its own and in
conjunction with neighboring cities, Metropolitan King County, and the State of Washington,
has undertaken various studies and developed various plans to address these needs; and
WHEREAS, as a result of these studies and plans, which are ongoing in nature, the
City, in cooperation with neighboring cities, Metropolitan King County, and the State of
Washington, has determined the need for certain east-west highway arterial corridors across
the Green River Valley; and
WHEREAS, one of the east-west corridors proposed for development as a result of
these studies is the City's proposed "196th Street Corridor," which shall extend from the East
Valley Highway on the east to Orillia Road on the west; and
WHEREAS, the City is currently conducting environmental review in the form of an
Environmental Impact Statement on the 196th Street Corridor, which evaluates the significant
impacts and proposed mitigation measures for this project; and
WHEREAS, the City's proposed 196th Street Corridor project will cross the north-
south mainline routes routes of the Union Pacific Railroad Company (one mainline track) and
the Burlington Northern Railroad Company (two mainline tracks)
2
WHEREAS, the City, and in fact most of the Green River Valley, is bisected by the
north-south mainline routes of the Union Pacific Railroad Company and the Burlington
Northern Railroad Company; and
WHEREAS, rail traffic in the City of Kent and the Green River Valley has also
increased concurrently with this unprecedented urbanization and growth, forming part of the
overall transportation network that facilitates and serves this commercial and industrial center;
and
WHEREAS, rail traffic in the City of Kent and the Green River Valley is expected to
increase in the future and, in particular, passenger rail traffic is expected to increase
significantly over one or more of these north-south rail mainlines through "heavy rail"
passenger commuter service, which will likely be implemented as part of an overall regional
effort to mitigate existing and future traffic congestion; and
WHEREAS, the construction of rail spur tracks from these mainlines that serve
railroad customers in the City of Kent and the Green River Valley has also significantly
increased, along with rail traffic on these spurs, in order to serve the businesses that have
located here, by supplying those businesses with materials and supplies and by distributing
their products; and
WHEREAS, no grade separated railroad crossings of any east-west routes across these
north-south railroad mainlines exist within the city limits of the City of Kent; and
WHEREAS, no grade separated railroad crossings of any east-west routes in the Green
River Valley across these north-south railroad mainline routes exist from I-405 in the City of
Renton to 15th Street NW in the City of Auburn, which area encompasses the majority of the
urbanized Green River Valley; and
3
WHEREAS, the lack of any grade separated crossings in Kent and most of the Green
River Valley, in light of the increased traffic from the significant growth and urbanization that
has and will continue to occur in this area, has caused significant increases in rail and
vehicular traffic congestion at existing at-grade crossings, thereby constituting a public life and
safety hazard not only for the citizens of this region, but also for the respective railroad
companies; and
WHEREAS, the lack of any grade separated crossings in Kent and the Green River
Valley, in light of the increased traffic from the significant growth that has and will continue
to occur in this area, has caused significant increases in rail and vehicular traffic congestion at
existing at-grade crossings, thereby impeding the efficient flow of vehicular traffic in this area
and restricting the travelling speeds of rail traffic in this area; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that the development of grade separated rail
crossings over certain east-west routes is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare;
and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that constructing a grade separated crossing at an
existing east-west route would cause the City to temporarily close that east-west crossing (and
temporarily close access from adjoining collector arterials) during construction, thereby
creating an unacceptable obstruction to traffic flows in the region, because the existing east-
west corridors cannot adequately serve existing demands; and
WHEREAS, the City's proposed 196th Street Corridor, if adopted following
completion of the environmental review process, would create a new right of way over that
portion of 196th Street affecting the railroad mainlines; and
WHEREAS, construction of an above-grade crossing as part of the 196th Street
Corridor would not affect current traffic flow on existing east-west routes or their connecting
4
collector arterials during construction of the above-grade crossing, because the 196th Street
crossing would be part of an entirely new route in the crossing area; and
WHEREAS, construction of an at-grade crossing on the City's proposed 196th Street
Corridor would only further degrade the City's, the railroads' and the region's transportation
and public safety problems; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the City should construct an above-
grade overpass crossing for that portion of the City's proposed 196th Street Corridor where
the railroad tracks of the Union Pacific Railroad Company and the Burlington Northern
Railroad Company intersect the City's proposed roadway. NOW, THEREFORE,
The City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, does hereby resolve as follows:
Section 1. The City Council finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct in all
respects and are incorporated into the body of this Resolution.
Section 2. The City should construct an above-grade railroad overpass crossing for
that portion of the City's proposed 196th Street Corridor where the railroad tracks of the
Union Pacific Railroad Company and the Burlington Northern Railroad Company intersect the
City's proposed roadway.
Section 3. The City of Kent, on its own and in conjunction with various other
agencies, has conducted feasibility studies and environmental review related to the construction
of an at-grade crossing or an underpass, and the City has determined that an at-grade crossing
or an underpass is not practical or feasible.
Section 4. In order to promote public safety, the flow of vehicular traffic, the flow of
rail traffic, and the flow of commerce in the City of Kent and throughout the region, the
5
construction of an overpass over the tracks of the Burlington Northern Railroad Company and
the Union Pacific Railroad Company as part of the City's proposed 196th Street Corridor
would be the most feasible and financially sound alternative.
Section 5. The City of Kent, pursuant to Chapter 81.53 of the Revised Code of
Washington (particularly including, without limitation, RCW 81.53.020, -.030, -.060, -.110,
and -.130), shall file a proper application with the Washington Utilities and Transportation
Commission for authority to construct an overpass for vehicular traffic over the railroad tracks
of the Union Pacific Railroad Company and the Burlington Northern Railroad Company where
those tracks intersect the City's proposed roadway.
Section 6. The City Council's determination to file this application before the
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission constitutes additional preliminary
planning as authorized under WAC 197-11-070(4). The City is not at this time committing
itself to proceed with its 196th Street Corridor project. The City will decide whether or not
to proceed with the construction of the 196th Street Corridor following completion of the
environmental review process.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, this
day of , 1995.
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this day of
1995.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
6
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, on the day of
1995.
(SEAL)
CITY CLERK
1960PASS.pwk
7
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: SURPLUS OF CITY-OWNED HOUSES
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization for the Parks Department
to declare the following City-owned houses surplus, in order
to advertise them to the highest bidder(s) : 24623 Russell Road
(Riverbend Golf Course Driving Range) ; 8121 South 259th
(Corrections Facility) ; 24615 26th Place South (Parkside
Wetlands) ; and 11459 SE 266th (Public Works) .
3 . EXHIBITS: None
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Parks Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3I ✓
.............
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20, 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: DIRECTOR OF GOLF
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization to appoint Brett Wilkinson
as Director of Golf at the Riverbend Golf Complex, per recom-
mendation from John Hodgson and Jim Stone, S. S.M.D.
3 . EXHIBITS: None
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff S.S.M.D. and Parks Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ✓ YES
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS,*
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3JV
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: COUNCIL ABSENCES
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approval of requests from Councilmembers
Clark and Houser for excused absences from City Council
meetings.
Councilmember Christi Houser has requested an excused absence
from the June 20, 1995 City Council meeting. She will be out
of town and unable to attend.
Councilmember Tim Clark has requested an excused absence from
the July 5, 1995 City Council meeting. He will be out of town
and unable to attend.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandums from Councilmember Clark and
Councilmember Houser
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Councilmember Houser and Councilmember Clark
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ✓ YES
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
--
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3K'/'
MEMORANDUM
TO: JIM WHITE, MAYOR ff
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CHRISTI HOUSER, COUNCILMEMBER
DATE: JUNE 15, 1995
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL EXCUSED ABSENCE
I would like to request an excused absence from the June 20, 1995 City Council meeting . I will be
out of town and unable to attend.
Thank you for your consideration.
CH:jb
MEMORANDUM
TO: JIM WHITE, MAYOR
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
� j
FROM: TIM CLARK, COUNCILMEMBER /, �f
DATE: JUNE 19, 1995 I
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL EXCUSED ABSENCE
I would like to request an excused absence from the July 5, 1995 City Council meeting . I will be out
of town and unable to attend.
Thank you for your consideration.
TC:j b
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: 26TH PLACE SOUTH STREET VACATION - ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of Ordinance No. 3a 33 vacating
a portion of 26th Place South.
Council approved this street vacation on May 2 , 1995, subject
to conditions which have now been met.
3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: City Council
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ✓ YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3L ✓
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington,
relating to the vacation of streets, vacating that portion of 26th
Place South, a dedicated but unopened street, lying west of Pacific
Highway in the City of Kent, King County, Washington.
WHEREAS, application was filed with the City of Kent by Duane L. Ott, owner of
property abutting the applicable portion of 26th Place South, for the vacation of a portion of
a dedicated, unopened segment of 26th Place South lying west of Pacific Highway in the
City of Kent (See Exhibit A); and
WHEREAS, the Kent Planning Director processed this petition and secured technical
facts pertinent to the question of this vacation along with a recommendation as to approval
or rejection by the Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, the Kent City Council, by Resolution 1425 fixed a time when said
petition would be heard and the hearing was held with proper notice on May 2, 1995, at 7:00
p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Kent City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department and Planning Director recommended that
the City Council approve the application upon the applicant's fulfillment of certain
conditions; and
1
WHEREAS, after the public hearing on March 5, 1995, the City Council approved
the vacation so long as the applicant first fulfilled all the conditions recommended by staff,
and
WHEREAS, the applicant has now fulfilled all of the conditions imposed by
Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the street sought to be vacated is: (1) an
unopened, dedicated street not presently being used as a street; (2) not abutting on a body of
water and therefore not suitable for acquisition for port purposes, boat moorage or launching
sites, park, viewpoint, recreational or education purposes, or other public use; and (3) a
vacation which is in the public interest; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the preparation of an ordinance vacating
the portion of said street; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The forgoing recitals are incorporated as if fully set forth herein.
Section 2. Pursuant to the street vacation application of Duane L. Ott, which is
attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference, that portion of 26th Place South,
which is more particularly described in Exhibit B, which Exhibit is incorporated herein by
this reference, is hereby vacated.
Section 3. No vested rights shall be affected by the provisions of this ordinance.
2
Section 4. This ordinance shall be in effect and be in force thirty (30) days from the
time of its final passage as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED the day of , 1995.
APPROVED the day of 1995.
PUBLISHED the_day of 1995.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. passed by
the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of
Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
STVACN99.ORD
3
/ZI•tAIL T0: •, APPLICANT: •
%' �l�t1NE L T Geralil0. I•tc�aughah � � �.� Name: U
( CITY OF KENT"-
220 So. 4th Ayytc�1 p q )gyp, Address: 2`(g PFlCrFIG 4, 5,
Kent, 14A 90O�J2
CITY OFKEI\I-f Ke_r—} U)��sH �$a3
PERMIT CENT/
rRs I L�pla Phone:
STREET A110/011 ALLEY VACATION APPLICATION AIID PETITION
Dear Hayor and Kent City Council :
We, the and rsigned abutting property owners, hereby respectfully request that
certain J26 hereby be vacated. (General Location)
�hw� Legal Description HEMD
Ov t oil O r-a Pt.
i n e b e�Lu zt (?tpc It z I D Z CITY OF KENT
-t�wTbRutQf3gN RFrGUTS - rct Vo(umZ I o-� {)1P,75 CITY CLERK
toe z �� KinC� Ce;un4y,WASWrtt,(,7r6.T/ /frv) Rl0fl71-1 o-P So. 7-YST'� S y
fallo Sec Eho� Alo, }h L N6 Lot 11 . [;iceK �� , 5oc�[� o � /Uor�}fL
I t 32
BRIEF STATEMENT WHY VACATION IS BEING SOUGHT
( 7A15 J)Jo er'f�) I,W\Ic.(7 we SCzIC V`o L)actaje Al7s R-.uet
Ov',cSin(�,.Z ufyN CT"TCnvr1\(aN au�o� �6f"julc[ rTrs c\oc2GRac N W d; Q2os/�
. f1.N. lJNS rceNCt SLp GOR WE Wi'51} ro /f9UG17' el,%-17-c/D 5',1 ,i-�✓=
Csat) Rod (13hPL`rSvN°.1L FRo PtRr\( Tbbii(t 1-GT5 r�, (3Eeo(.uA4),D 17L50 /?SO
'tHb e iyc� lteri ('r�aIZ5 nen-l- xu tizI egos rerto �..�•�� a Wtff41 3 Qafh �r
ib'lNe.;v alv¢c uy xslhln(:st1E 0 PC.P(34 C .
I
Sufficient proof, copy of deed contract etc. supported by King County
Tax Rolls shall be submitted for verification of signatures. Without
these a "CURRENT" title report shall be required. Mien Corporations,
Partnerships etc. are being signed for, then proof of individual 's
authority to sign for same shall also be submitted.
Attach a color coded map of a scale of not less than 1" = 200' of the area
sought for vacation. (NOTE) Hap must correspond with legal description.
ADU7TI11G PWERTY OWNERS TAX LOT N
SIGNATURES AND/ ADDRESSES LOT, BLOCK & PLAT/SEC. T611I, RG
/ TizX-7X 3601_rr X I 3 h0
Lo-h a2•32 Clue x1 •TN'reP,b21jaVYerr/r75 3,.{Sce�%cn
/ v poi-wi,6/7 eta Pc4r5, S71 f.�rc.•_'a;o{�/d19rfCoca�J .
w45'Vrli-i 7-0N •
Go/So —0070 620 0 L7_3 -
• r LOTS //—�!• Q1 K i2.. , 2h 76rw rJ�4h �5'c+}673.
147E &5¢je 8 7
$¢c.Yia., ZI — To.✓••sh+o 2z 12.,.,+ti v'� [.J, hi.
$150.00 Fee Paid Treasurer's Receipt No,
Appraisal Fee Paid Treasurer's Receipt No.
Land Value Paid Treasurer's Receipt No.
Deed Accepted Date
Trade Accepted Date'
r194_11A .EXHIBIT A ( Z1���;�s )
ppr
Qe
I
zB "J --- Q
_ Q
-
!�4,A
TQ
IV ..
H
'l
G
JRVEYED FOR: �E�ilT.lO�O
A,pTy�/,e Ile ejWW _ SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
loll Firc ,5�ei9ht5O� Tncoino, /moo �i. This map correctly represents a s',
sle: / =/OD ' Drawn: under my direction in conformanc
Fu_sfo� - requirements of'the Survey Recor(
te: io 3 dS Revised:
request of
-veyed by: SADLER/BARNARD &ASSOC. in 19 +�
31218 Pacific Highway South ; ,+= ,. Signed and Se'aled
Federal Pray, Washington 98003 �-._;`,:mac i_.. lic. No. za5;oe
-)one: (206) 941--1599,927-8884 Dwg. No
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR 26TH PL SO S.T.V. 95-3
That portion of 26th Place South lying between Blocks 21 and 22 in
the plat of Interurban Heights 3rd Section in Volume 17 Page 87,
lying north of South 248th Street and lying south of the north line of
Lot 11 in said Block 22 extended east to the west line of said Block
21 .
EXHIBIT
C �\ 3 1111-1
�1 e C-1 tq L, U, u.w• � : ��� ��s 6CD cfs
� M
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20, 1995
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: PERFORMING ARTS CENTER FINAL REPORT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Mayor' s Blue Ribbon Committee, which
was formed to research the viability of a Performing Arts
Center in the City f Kent, requests acceptance of the
Consultant' s Final Keport and contin/Viee.
3 . EXHIBITS: Previously distributed at 6,
1995
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Blue Ribbon Commi ee and Staff
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, C96mission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL/IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTIO Councilmember moved, Councilmember seconds
to accept the Consultant's final &port and to authorize the
continuation of the Mayor' s Blue Ribbon Committee for the
Performing Arts Center.
DISCUSSION• r1A
ACTION: h
Council Agenda
Item No. 4A✓
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20, 1995
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: 1994 EDITIONS OF UNIFORM BUILDING CODE; UNIFORM
MECHANICAL CODE AND RELATED FEE SCHEDULES f
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: In accordance with state law (RCW 19 . 27;
Title 51 WAC) , Kent and other Washington cities and counties
will begin enforcement of the 1994 editions of the Uniform
Building Code and the Uniform Mechanical Code (with statewide
amendments) on June 30, 1995. The codes replace and supersede
the previous (1991) editions and will be applicable to permit
applications filed on or after June 30th.
These new editions contain updated schedules of fees for
permits and plan review. The schedules increase fees
approximately 40 percent above previous schedules. This
increase approximately equals the increase in the Consumer
Price Index since fees were last increased, with adoption of
the 1985 code editions' schedules (June 1986) .
This matter was discussed at the Operations Committee meeting
of June 19th, avid adof-h&vi uJas Y'CcOYO " ev J-e-j-
3 . EXHIBITS: Permit Fee Analysis, ordinance d resolution
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: �5
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Co fission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSONNEL I ACT: NO ✓ YES
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL A TZN:
rr\p Y-V" moved-, eouneilmembersecon
to adopt Ordinance No. 323� amending the Kent City Code relat-
ing to the 1994 Editions of the Uniform Building Code and the
Uniform Mechanical Codes to adopt Resolution No. �Y3V
adopting the fees for p mits under the Uniform Building Code,
the Uniform Mechanical ode, the Uniform Plumbing Code and the
Uniform Fire Code. Man Seconded o."d t1-. o{ion Ca,0r'1ed •
DISCUSSION• JEp
ACTION:
vy� hs®� C u��., Council Agenda
Vn Item No. 4BV
Permit Fee Increase Analysis
May, 1995
This is an analysis to determine probable 1995 and 1996 revenue increases from
adopting the fee schedules contained in the 1994 editions of the Uniform Mechanical
Code and the Uniform Building Code mid-year of 1995.
Background.
By state law, the 1994 editions of the Uniform Mechanical and Building Codes are in
effect statewide June 30, 1995, replacing the 1991 editions. These new code editions
contain fee schedules which increase building permit and plan review fees
approximately 40% and mechanical permit and plan review fees approximately 46%,
closely matching the Consumer Price Index increases since the last such increase.
Adoption and enforcement of these code editions is mandatory. Cities may adopt
alternative fee schedules if they choose. However, staff is recommending the fee
schedules called for in the codes. Kent's current fee schedules are unchanged since
1985.
Data.
Actual revenues derived from building permit fees, building permit plan review fees and
mechanical permit fees from January, 1994 through April, 1995 were examined and
used to project anticipated revenue increases from adoption of the new schedules.
One significant adjustment is that the substantial fees associated with the Regional
Justice Center were not included, as this one unusually large project would
unrealistically skew any projections. In addition, projections do not acknowledge any
added revenue from the Meridian Annexation revenue
Building Permit Plan Review fees.
These fees are collected at the time a permit application requiring review of plans is
filed with the city. If the increased fee schedule becomes effective July 1, a full six
months of increased fees would be collected during the remainder of the year.
The actual revenues collected in the first four months of 1994 compared to the last six
months are used to establish a ratio or prediction factor. The first 4 months of 1994
yielded $126,702 in plan review fees, while the last 6 months of 1994 yielded $98,887.
Therefore, the first 4 months produced 135% of the last 6 months' revenue (126,702
divided by 98,887 = 1.35).
The first 4 months of 1995 yielded $136,945 in plan review fees. Dividing this by the
1.35 factor produces a revenue projection of $101,441 for the last half of 1995, based
on last year's ratio and this year's activity level. Multiplying this number by .4 yields a
Permit Fee Increase Analysis May, 1995 Page 2
projected increase of$40,576 in building plan review fees for the last six months
of 1995 resulting from adoption of the new fee schedule.
Building permit fees.
These fees are collected at the time a building permit is issued, after the application is
filed, plan review fees collected, and plan review completed, but are determined by the
fee schedule in effect at the time an application is filed. As larger fees are normally
derived from more complex projects requiring extensive plan review, this analysis
addresses increases in building permit fees collected during the last four months of
1995, assuming an effective date of July 1 for the new fee schedule.
The first 4 months of 1994 yielded $146,743 in building permit fees, while the last 4
months yielded $98,498. Dividing 146,743 by 98,498 produces a prediction factor of
1.49. Dividing the total of the first 4 months of 1995 ($146,798) by this factor produces
a projected revenue of$98,522 in building permit fees for the last 4 months of 1995,
again based on last year's ratio and this year's activity level. Multiplying this figure by .4
yields a projected increase of$39,409 in building permit fees during the last 4
months of 1995 resulting from adoption of the new fee schedule.
Mechanical permit fees.
These fees are for "mechanical" permits - permits for installation of heating, ventilation,
air conditioning, refrigeration and similar systems. These are collected at the time the
permits are issued and include a modest plan review fee if review was needed. The
basis for calculating projected fee increases is for permits issued August through
December ( 5 months).
The first 4 months of 1994 produced mechanical permit and plan review fees totaling
$11, 003, while the last 5 months of 1994 produced $11, 145. Dividing 11,003 by
11,145 generates a projection factor of .99. The revenue from this source in the first 4
months of 1995 was $6,188 which, when divided by .99 and multiplied by .46, yields a
projected increase of$2,875 in mechanical permits during the last 5 months of
1995 from adoption of the new fee schedule.
Conclusion.
If the fee schedules contained in the 1994 editions of the Uniform Building and
Mechanical Codes are adopted effective July 1, 1995, a total of$82,860 additional
1995 revenue is conservatively expected to be gained from such adoption. Revenue
can be expected to show an approximate increase of$262,248 in 1996, based on
1994 activity levels, exclusive of revenue from the Regional Justice Center or the
Meridian Annexation.
is
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, amending Kent City
Code Chapter 14 . 02 relating to the Uniform
Building Code and Kent City Code Chapter
14 . 03 relating to the Uniform Mechanical Code
to adopt the 1994 editions of the same; and
further amending Kent City Code Chapter 14 . 07
relating to the energy and air quality codes .
WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 14 of the Kent City Code,
the City adopted the 1991 editions of the Uniform Building Code
and the Uniform Mechanical Code; and
WHEREAS, the 1994 edition of the Uniform Building Code
and the Uniform Mechanical Code will be in effect statewide
effective June 30 , 1995 pursuant to RCW 19 . 27 and Chapters 51-30
and 51-32 WAC; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 19 . 27, the Uniform Building
Code and the Uniform Mechanical Code are in effect in all cities,
including the City of Kent, as adopted by the State, therefore,
it is appropriate to amend the city code to formally adopt the
same; NOW, THEREFORE,
,face lsu �t�uu�e atCeim
li
!' THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS :
SECTION 1 . Kent City Code Chapter 14 . 02 is hereby
amended as follows :
CHAPTER 14 . 02 . BUILDING CODE
Sec. 14 . 02 . 010 . Adopted.
There is adopted by reference the Uniform Building
code, 199-1�4 Edition as amended by WAC ch. 51--2-93_Q as currently
enacted and as amended from time to time, and as amended in thin.
chapter. One (1) copy of this code is on file in the city clerk' s
office .
Sec. 14 .02 . 020 . Fees.
The city council shall , by resolution, establish the
fees to be assessed under Section 394--107 of the Uniform Building
Code . In the event any particular fee is not so established by
council resolution, the city shall assess fees in accordance with
the fee schedule for building permits set forth in Table No.
3—A1-A of the Uniform Building Code, as currently established or
hereafter amended.
2
i
Sec . 14 . 02 . 030 . Building code appendices adopted.
,
eh-apter 32—and ehRpt er :�G Divisions I . II and IV of Chapter 3 ,
Chapter 15 and Chapter 33 of the Appendix of the Uniform Building
Code, 199�4 Edition (as adopted in section 14 . 02 . 010) , are
adopted, except. that the director of public works shall have the
authority to enforce and interpret chapter 4433 of the Appendix
of the Uniform Building Code, 199-14 Edition, and accordingly, all
references to the "building official" in chapter 4433 of the
Appendix shall be substituted with the words, "director of public
works . "
Sec . 14 . 02 . 040 . Lot lines and setback lines .
Notwithstanding the authority of the building official
to administer and enforce the building code, the building
official shall have no duty to verify or establish lot lines or
setback lines . No such duty is created by this chapter, and none
shall be implied. The location of lot lines and/or setback lines
at a development and construction related thereto shall be the
responsibility of the applicant/owner.
See . 14 . 02 . 959 . Uni f_r building eede standards adopted
There is adapted by referenee—the Unn 4 _.., Bui a; _-mil_ Gede
St-a ems,1993 Edition as afne rded by iiAC eh. 5! as ----ent, ..
-1
file
3
I
j,
SECTION 2. Kent City Code Chapter 14 . 03 is hereby
amended as follows :
CHAPTER 14 . 03 . MECHANICAL CODE
l
Sec. 14 . 03 . 010 . Adopted.
There is hereby adopted by reference the Uniform
Mechanical Code, 1991-4 Edition, as published by the International
Conference of Building Officials as amended by WAC ch. 51-22132 as
currently enacted and as amended from time to time and as amended
in this chapter. One (1) copy is on file in the city clerk ' s
office .
See-14 . 03 . 029 . Amendments.
Section 394 , Fees is—amended to read as Eallews .
" (a) GeneLaal ..Fees shall be assessed 4n—aeeerlanee wYbh
the previs4mens of this seetd:en. lL
Sec. 14 . 03 . 020 . Fees.
!i
The city council shall by resolution establish the
fees to be assessed under Section 115 of the Uniform Mechanical
Code In the event any particular fee is not so established by
4
i
council resolution the city shall assess fees in accordance with
the fee schedule for mechanical permits set forth in Table No .
1 A of the Uniform Mechanical Code as currently established or
hereafter amended.
SECTION 3. Kent City Code Chapter 14 . 03 is hereby
amended as follows :
CHAPTER 14 . 07 . ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY CODES
Sec. 14 . 07 . 010 . Energy code adopted.
The 1991 Washington State Energy Code, as written by
the Washington State Building Code Council and filed as WAC ch.
51-11 is hereby adopted by reference .
Sec. 14 . 07 . 020 . Air quality code adopted.
The Washington State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality
Code, as written by the Washington State Building Code Council
and filed as WAC ch. 51-13 is hereby adopted by reference .
SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid
or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity
or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance .
5
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall
take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its
passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED day of 1995 .
APPROVED day of 1995 .
PUBLISHED day of 1995 .
6
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, adopting a schedule
of fees for permits under the Uniform
Building Code, the Uniform Mechanical Code,
the Uniform Plumbing Code and the Uniform
Fire Code .
WHEREAS, the City of Kent has previously adopted the
1991 editions of the uniform building, mechanical, plumbing, and
fire codes which allow the administrative authority in charge of
enforcing the codes to approve and issue permits under the same;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council is, concurrently with this
resolution, considering an ordinance to adopt the 1994 editions
of the Uniform Building Code and the Uniform Mechanical Code
recently adopted by the State; and
WHEREAS, the administrative authority is directed in
the uniform codes (as adopted by their respective ordinances) to
prepare a schedule of fees applicable to the various types of
permits, in amounts commensurate with the cost of administration
and inspection involved in the processing and issuance of the
permits thereby granted; and
WHEREAS, any such schedules adopted by the City Council
by resolution shall govern the amount of the fees which shall be
collected as a condition to processing and prior to issuance of
any such permit; and
WHEREAS, the 1994 editions of the Uniform Building .Code
and the Uniform Mechanical Code contain fee tables incorporating
fee increases above fees currently listed in prior code editions
and as adopted by the City of Kent by Resolutions No. 1308 and
1388 ; and
WHEREAS, these fees have not increased since June, 1986
and it is appropriate to adjust the fees to the schedules
proposed in the uniform codes; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS :
SECTION 1 . FEES ESTABLISHED. The following schedules
of fees shall govern the monetary charges for the processing and
issuance of permits under the Uniform Building, Mechanical ,
Plumbing, and Fire Codes :
A. BUILDING PERMIT FEES . Pursuant to Section
14 . 02 . 020 of the Kent City Code, Table 1-A of the 1994 edition of
the Uniform Building Code establishing building permit fees
(attached hereto as Exhibit A) , is hereby adopted as the City of
2
Kent ' s building permit fee schedule, with the following
modification:
1 . Basic plan review fees : The basic plan
review fee, after, and in addition to, the payment of the initial
plan review fee set forth in Section 107 . 3 of the 1994 edition of
the Uniform Building Code, shall be a fee of $50 . 00 for each
permit issued upon a certified basic plan. Additional plan
review fees shall also be assessed at an hourly rate as set forth
in Table 1-A for additional plan review required for changes,
additions, or revisions to plans .
2 . Administration of basicplans : Basic plans
shall be administered as follows :
a . "Basic plans" are defined as complete
plans for an entire detached single family residential building,
approved as such by the building official , which:
i . Are clearly marked as being
approved and certified as basics by the building official ;
ii . Bear the author' s (including but
not limited to architect, engineer, or others) acknowledgment and
approval of the plans submitted for use in the construction of a
number of buildings, without any limitation of quantity or
location. If any portion is designed by a licensed architect or
engineer, this acknowledgement shall bear the author ' s stamp and
signature .
3
iii . Basic plan review fees shall apply
only to detached single family residential buildings and shall
apply only to the originating owner or applicant .
iv. Changes to basic plans which alter
the exterior dimensions or structure of the building shall be
treated as a new permit application.
b. The process for administering basic
plans shall be as follows :
i . Any person may apply for plan
review and certification of a basic by filing with the building
official a written request for such plan review and
certification, along with two or more complete sets of plans and
the normal plan review fee .
ii . Upon completion and approval of
plan review, the applicant shall provide reproducible copies of
complete approved plans to the building official .
C . The City building official is authorized
and empowered to interpret and determine the applicability and
administration of the provisions of this resolution.
B . MECHANICAL PERMIT AND PLAN REVIEW FEES . Pursuant
to Section 14 . 03 . 020 of the Kent City Code, Table 1-A of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Mechanical Code establishing mechanical
permit fees (attached hereto as Exhibit B) is hereby adopted as
the City of Kent ' s mechanical permit fee schedule .
C. PLUMBING PERMIT FEES . Pursuant to Section
14 . 04 . 030 of the Kent City Code, Table 3-A of the 1991 edition of
4
the Uniform Plumbing Code establishing plumbing permit fees
(attached hereto as Exhibit C) is hereby adopted as the City of
Kent ' s plumbing permit fee schedule .
D. FIRE PERMIT FEES . Pursuant to Section 13 . 02 . 020
of the Kent City Code, fire permits or certificates issued under
the Uniform Fire Code shall be $42 . 00 per year. Whenever more
than one permit or certificate is required for the same location,
such permits or certificates may be consolidated into a single
permit or certificate .
SECTION 2. REPEALED. Resolution Nos . 1308 , 1341, and
1388 are hereby repealed in their entirety on the effective date
of this resolution.
SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this
resolution shall be June 30 , 1995 .
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this day of 1995 .
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this
day of 1995 .
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
5
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 1995 .
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
codes.res
6
1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1_A
TABLE 1-A—BUILDING PERMIT FEES
TOTAL VALUATION FEE
51.00 to S500.00 522.00
S501.00 to S2.000.00 S22.00 for the first S500.00 plus 52.75 for each additional
5100.00.or fraction thereof,to and including$2.000.00
52,001.00 to$25.000.00 S63.00 for the first 52,000.00 plus S12.50 far each additional
$1.000.00,or fraction thereof,to and including 525.000.00
S25,001.00 to$50,000.00 $352.00 for the first S25,000.00 plus S9.00 for each
additional 51,000.00,or fraction thereof,to and including
550,000.00
$50,001.00 to S100.000.00 $580.00 for the first$50,000.00 plus 56.25 for each
additional SI,000.00,or fraction thereof,to and including
S 100,000.00
5100,001.00 to$500.000.00 S895.00 for the first S100.000.00 plus 55.00 for each
additional$1.000.00,or fraction[hereof
S500,001.00 to S 1,000,000-00 $2,855.00 for the first S500,000.00 plus$4.25 for each
additional S1,000.00,or fraction thereof,to and including
51,000.00
5 1,000,00 1.00 and up $4,955.00 for the first 51,000,000.00 plus S2.75 for each
additional S 1.000..4&KO,or fraction thereof
Other Inspections and Fees:
I. Inspections outside of normal business hours ................................... $42.00 per hour'
(minimum charge—[wo hours)
2. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of
Section 108.8 ............................................................ $42.00 per hour*
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated ............................. S42.00 per hour'
(minimum charge—one-half hour)
4. Additional plan review required by changes.additions
or revisions to plans ............:.... ...................................... $42.00 per hour*
(minimum charge—one-half hour)
5. For use of outside consultants for plan checking and
inspections.or both ......................................................... Actual costs**
*Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction,whichever is the greatest.This cost shall include supervision.overhead.
equipment,hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved.
**Actual costs include administrative and overhead costs.
EXHIBIT
1-11
-_ -_ -- - -_ -:,___
-
n n
ji
c
c
€=
.-s.¢.w .".�z'c ULz u3.
u u
- n
M
L C
c c
2 � .. 7
Fr
EXHIBIT. f E
3
Table No. 3-A — PLUMBING PERMIT FEES
Permit Issuance
1 . For issuing each permit.............................................................$20.00
2. For issuing each supplemental permit ......................................$10.00
Unit Fee Schedule (in addition to Items 1 and 2 above)
1 . For each plumbing fixture on one trap or
a set of fixtures on one trap (including water,
drainage piping and backflow protection therefor) ......................$7.00
2. For each building sewer and each trailer park sewer ...............$15.00
3. Rainwater systems — per drain (inside building) .........................$7.00
4. For each cesspool (where permitted) .............. .........................$25.00
5. For each private sewage disposal system ................................$40.00
6. For each water heater and/or vent..............................................$7.00
7. For each gas-piping system of one to five 'outlets.......................$5.00
8. For each additional gas piping system outlet, per outlet.............$1 .00
9. For each industrial waste pretreatment
interceptor including its trap and vent, excepting
kitchen-type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps......$7.00
10. For each installation, alteration or repair of
water piping and/or water treating equipment, each ...................$7.00
11 . For each repair or alteration of
drainage or vent piping, each fixture...........................................$7.00
12. For each lawn sprinkler system on any one
meter including backflow protection devices therefor .................$7.00
13. For atmospheric-type vacuum
breakers not included in item 12:
1 to 5 ..$5.00
.........................................................................................
over5, each ................................................................................$1 .00
14. For each backflow protective device
other, than atmospheric type vacuum breakers:
2 inch diameter and smaller........................................................$7.00
over 2 inch diameter .................................................................$15.00
Other Inspections and Fees
j1 . Inspections outside of normal business hours.........................$30.00*
2. Reinspection fee .......................................................................$30.00
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated...............$30.00'
4. Additional plan review required
by changes, additions or revisions to
approved plans, (minimum charge — one-half hour)................$30.00'
*Or the total hourly cost to the.jurisdiction, whichever is greater.
This cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly
wages and fringe benefits of all the employees involved.
FXHIRIT c
VY-
r f^ I d 7"
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, finding that a portion of
the City's sewerage system is failing, that an
emergency exists, authorizing the City's Public
Works Director to take any and all acts necessary
to remedy the problem, and ratifying all acts of the
City taken with respect to this problem prior to the
passage of this Resolution.
WHEREAS, on or about Tuesday, June 20, 1995, the City's Public Works Department
became aware of a failure in its sewerage system in the vicinity of the intersection of SE 216th
Street and West Valley Highway in the City of Kent; and
WHEREAS, upon video inspection of the City's sewerage system at the above-
referenced location, City Public Works Department staff determined that the existing sewer
line and manhole were sinking, that the sewerage system lines connected to the manhole had
broken, that the system was degrading, and that all of these conditions were additionally
posing a significant health and safety threat to the affected City streets; and
WHEREAS, the City's Public Works Director, upon becoming aware of these problems,
took immediate steps to remedy this situation and further entered into a contract with
Shoreline Construction Company in order to repair the damage to the City's sewerage system.
NOW, THEREFORE,
The City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, does hereby resolve as follows:
i
Section 1 . The City Council finds that the City sewerage system in the vicinity of SE
216th Street and West Valley Highway has failed because the existing sewer line and manhole
at that location are sinking, the sewerage system lines connected to the manhole are broken,
the system is degrading and, further, all of these conditions are additionally posing a
significant safety threat to these affected City streets.
Section 2. The City Council further finds that, for all the foregoing reasons, a significant
threat to the health, safety and welfare of the Citizens of Kent exists.
Section 3. The City Council further finds that these conditions constitute an
emergency.
Section 4. The City's Public Works Director is authorized to take any and all necessary
acts to remedy this emergency situation, including waiving of public notice and bidding
requirements, to the extent those requirements may be applicable.
Section 5. To the extent feasible, in contracting to do any work necessary to remedy
this emergency situation, the Public Works Director shall use his best efforts to comply with
all local and state public bidding and contracting requirements.
Section 6. Any acts consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this
Resolution are ratified and confirmed.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, this
day of , 199_.
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this day of , 199
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
2
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, on the day of
199_.
(SEAL)
CITY CLERK
EMERGNCY.pwk
3
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: TITUS STREET STORM REBUILD
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Bid opening for this project was held on
Friday, June 2nd with 7 bids received. The low bid was sub-
mitted by Shoreline Construction in the amount of $302 ,791. 90 .
The Engineer's estimate was $265,706. 00. The project consists
of reconstructing and upsizing the storm sewer system on Titus
from 1st Avenue to 4th Avenue. Although the low bid is
actually 14 percent over the Engineer' s estimate, all of the
bids were fairly close. As such, it is obvious that the low
bid is a fair representation of the project cost. The monies
for this project are available within various funds associated
therewith. It has been recommended by the Public Works
Committee, that the Titus Street Storm Sewer Rebuild project be
awarded to Shoreline Construction in the amount of $302 ,791. 90.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee minutes, Public Works
Director memorandum, and vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee 3-0
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, et . )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ✓ YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $302 , 791. 0
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Downtown Stqjmdrain improvements, Misc. Water
Fund Misc. Sewer Fund and M' sc. Drainage Fund
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: L'
Councilmember 1L vV)'V moved, Councilmember Lwlr seconds
that the Titus Street Storm Sewer Rebuild project be awarded to
Shoreline Construction in the bid amount of $302 , 791. 90.
DISCUSSION: AX
ACTION• f lc_�
Council Agenda
Item No. 5A
waste stream by the end of this year and 65% by '96 and '97. Also, it involves enhancing
our yardwaste program and supply materials to the public about what they can do with the
yardwaste versus composting and hauling. He noted that the money is coming from the
King County grant of$116,000.
In response to Clark, Bartelt stated that the containers are provided by the disposal
companies. She stated that this is basically an educational program. The consultant will
be doing site visits and taking audits
Committee unanimously recommended that the Mayor be authorized to sign the Consultant
Services Agreement with Pacific Energy Institute.
Titus Street Storm Rebuild - Bid
Wickstrom stated that the bids received on this project were all within $334,000 - $378,000
(7 bids submitted) - our estimate was $265,000. The low bidder was Shoreline
Construction who is presently doing the work on 4th & James (near the Justice Center).
He said that because of the grouping of the bids, we feel we have a fair bid because of the
number we received and where they all stood with respect to each other. Wickstrom said
we have the money in the various project funds so we are asking to award this contract to
Shoreline Construction. In response to Clark, Wickstrom said the power lines are
overhead in this area.
Committee unanimously recommended that Shoreline Construction be awarded the
contract for the Titus Street Storm Rebuild project.
71 st Avenue South Street Vacation
Wickstrom stated that this is a vacation request at 180th near West Valley Highway. The
petitioner is asking that a small piece from 181 st and 72nd Ave be vacated. We are
asking that a hearing date be set for this proposed vacation.
Committee unanimously recommended adopting a Resolution setting a hearing date for
the 71 st Ave South Street Vacation.
Utility Service to Naden Ave RV Parking Area
Wickstrom stated that the RV club has asked, thru Councilman Bennett, that we install a
utility service (a sewer dump station) and a water service. In order to do this, it would cost
about $20,000 - the big cost would be the sewer because we have to connect it to the
Auburn Sewer Interceptor. The money is available in the miscellaneous sewer and water
improvement funds, if Council wants to earmark it for that. Bennett suggested making this
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
June 12, 1995
TO: Public Works Com tree
FROM: Don Wickstrom
RE: Titus Street Storm Rebuild
This project involves reconstructing and upsizing the storm sewer system on Titus
Street from 1st Ave. to 4th Ave to eliminate a flooding problem that occurs with
each heavy rainfall event. The project also includes sidewalk rehab, street tree
replacement and an asphalt overlay of Titus St. from the railroad tracks to 4th
Avenue. The bid opening for same was held on June 2nd with seven bids
received. The low bidder was Shoreline Construction with a bid amount of
$302,791 .90. The engineer's estimate was $265,706.00.
While the monies for this project are available within various funds associated
therewith, we are bringing it to the Committee because it is over our 10%
guideline (actually 14% over engineer's estimate) per when a bid goes to Public
Works Committee versus directly to Council. Since we had seven bids, all of
which were fairly close, it is obvious the low bid is a fair representation of the
project cost. As such, the Public Works Department recommends awarding the
contract to Shoreline Construction in the amount of $302,791 .90.
ACTION: Recommend awarding contract for the Titus Street Storm Rebuild to
Shoreline Construction in the amount of 5302,791 .90.
S. 234 In /
TH F z�
5T m-
COLA ST t t
CLOUDY Si w 'i i WAY �44�
S 238TH S �' 1 < - W CLOU Y)ST 277
O< fY
q�� <
ry ' Z. ST
14113
4 AMES 8T
23124 ® •_>' /,uN ;t.. �cl 4 KBMT W
I KENT ri.�� rul.l, :,. I�. JR.M1. > a a
24
31" ST •1 COMMONSW - --"- > SCHOOL a E
'I + aAthletic Fkf CE 5T
PROJECT LOCATION Ir i�- F4 EER S z z F
lPvr) " S �I M ILLA E RA £ ST
`y. M I'ILWAKF H W
W SMITHsT
W, IT ST z Z L
Z ga SMITH ST 4 � 04�KE KENT SMITHg+ -
W HARRI d ST L'Vr z Z g F- WAR 7� CTR .•f.�i y..
..'G_ HARRISON
ST a W �. » m J .
D ua,�na 8T
z a I $ L:_REI7 ' A
Z tW' MEEKER 4 2 ST 't M ERz ST m� _\h a4 �: '•��bi7
2 4 lei- Power i F mom~_ .- _ y
B -K u b �< W a GOWE ST c ¢ aT 4r r °�s,� .I.is •t J".
sta
-STREET x
CHG = W KENT ,� T < I T 6 "�p9�4 TACOdIIA ST �,' 90.
< ELEM 6 °S 'AYE• » a: CHERRY OL
181rim
8 _ W TU ST 0 E DEAN C �HILL ST C
> Aa ST W ST� a E
LSAAR a ST `i f f'y • 3 �� 4Q, ! =� --
SAAR ALPIN y E 6tl IgERSOii ST
E
» 4 WILUS 4 ST ! WAY
W O �5 16 ST
8
W RO ST .2. W °R a SEATTL.E ST
d L
'1 » .I RU Li E E >
Y ; 2 ° FIWA�I� I•\1(h
Ww a E CHICACuO
Fire
Station " < < a: Y z cH' kGO
y » °
m i M z ST F E LAUREL
» ITW
M U E HEMLOCK
CARTER
` I < MARI �*ST
1D E FILraERT STI
q > vl h ; rn w J ST p w Z
- - 2 124 0 + F 24 19 g E
25
° 'i� z
g W 25 30
°
II zW J W
C.) O i < MAF
» <
lm O
U al b
3 , 259TH ST S 259TH 8T
K.C.AUKEEN
COURT .:
< JAIL �I� �
I.
a ..
f �F
ALDER LN
3 262ND ST 23757 S 262ND
Vl
pq
W
� 1
t
TITUS STREET STORM SEWER REBUILD
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
JUNE 20, 1995
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Don Wickstrom Ww
RE: Titus Street Storm Rebuild
Bid opening for this project was held on Friday, June 2nd with 7 bids received.
The low bid was submitted by Shoreline Construction in the amount of
$302,791 .90. The engineer's estimate was $265,706.00.
BID SUMMARY
Shoreline Construction 302,791 .90
Lakeridge Paving 334,517.10
Gary Merlino Construction 335,033.90
Glacier Construction 337,530.00
Westwater Construction 344,649.00
VLS Construction 347,912.80
Robison Construction 378,640.47
Engineer's Estimate 265,706.00
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Shoreline Construction
be awarded the Titus Street Storm Rebuild project for the bid amount of
$302,791 .90.
.............
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: 1995 ASPHALT OVERLAYS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Bid opening for this project was held on
Wednesday, June 14th with 2 bids received. The low bid was
submitted by M.A. Segale in the amount of $288,823 . 30. The
Engineer' s estimate was $302 , 729 . 20. The project consists of
asphalt concrete pavement work and replacement of channeliza-
tion.
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that this
project be awarded to M.A. Segale in the amount of
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Director memorandum
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director 7
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCALIPERSONNEL IMPACT: N YES
z gs, 923.30
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $�
SOURCE OF FUNDS: 1995 Asphalt Overla Fund
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember!M/ an(�_moves, Cou cilmember seconds
that the 1995 Asphalt Overlays project be awarded to M.A.
Segale in the amount of $
DISCUSSION• �1C�
ACTION• "
Council Agenda
Item No. 5B✓
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
JUNE 20, 1995
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Don Wickstromod
RE: 1995 Asphalt Overlays
Bid opening for this project was held on Wednesday, June 14th with 2 bids
received. The low bid was submitted by M. A. Segale in the amount of
$288,823.30. The engineer's estimate was $302,729.20
BID SUMMARY
M. A. Segale 288,823.30
Western Asphalt, Inc. 312,622.43
Engineer's Estimate 302,729.20
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that M. A. Segale be
awarded the 1995 Asphalt Overlays project for the bid amount of $288,823,30,
Kent City Council Meeting
Date June 20 , 1995
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: MILL CREEK BOX CULVERTS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Bid opening for this project was held
on Friday, June 16. Due---to--t-1me- *eci
Works Director -
ec a
P�b l i c t,.)o r Ks D i r e�fn,� lv �'c ks�-r orv� n v I-ed t I�a� -i-w--o
loio{S We.�e feceiJed a " hie tb � b,'d w615 �owi
e a w� owe f oZ37, loo. oo , 4e
k;s 1 s -e- t-cue vv�a ros
p���e c ci �d I Ltc�1 �t.a „ 2 �nQtia ILa ; r`^al o.J �J d b�
U 2So oao . oa • I feco rW(,vN3eel tbut �►��
0,vVA(dec� fl\C COni-00.Cl
3 . EXHIBITS• Map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Work Director
(Committee, Staff, Exami er, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSO EL IMPACT: NO YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REOUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Mil Creek Box Culvert Fund
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: //,, __
Councilmember Ct VVYJ moved, Councilmember Wc�'J seconds
sk �� Co�4r�
that the Mill CreekKulverts be awarded to /; �. • E•
in the bid amount of $ 237, In,
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 5C1/
T�> I .� •1 ST
� er Sub Station ' '�
S 222NU
11 12 12 ~ 7
u 13 1 0 13 18
N
� � r
y S227TH P� N�OFRT
PROJECT LOCATION ,� INTC 6
_ •
Z , r-
r f 2MTH ST f 22 ST
2 4 a a
INDUSTRIAL AREA a
Y Z
HMAK
167
I
S. iiiii ]F- EL Z
ST
cc
I �
x �."
COLS ST
• ri
LDRON cc % C.:•� .. �i� WAY
CLOUDY ST '^ " <
238TH S I > W CLOU Yy ST w <
U
r MOE y0� s
ry� YfT Z5 x <✓ o = 5� Y = < tl #a < f <
�3 s 1 '
z a Es ST � ` z � s
23 ; 24 a
KiNT 24 ? q
KEN
; la.n\tltl.n �. JR.H1. y a
cOMMON3 't '� SCHOOL. < E y a k
SAM 8T ` < < �Athletic Fld CE $T _
�<Z PI EER f. x
G
E RA E ST $
(Pvt) z z MILWAI'KK1: Z I w ILLA a
�4ao I•I.nv t'l i:l.tl Y M Q l< ST Z Z Z
W SMITH ST < Z < W SMITH ST 1.f _ILKEI KEN SMITH ST =
.r.,�. 2 G 1.Y << `IMF SR. 'j V�� ,
W HARRI 9n L' HARRISON ST N q a WAR m CTR :': F�,✓1;1�}�,..`,. :,.
_ LZRAR ST 2 4 U-REIT •�. � �+�'1'
_ < M KERZ ST
2 W• MEEKERa 2 ST w�,� i �y, „
�2 4 < wuU w 40SYf S®®4 E < ST rW r M� y " .�.J 'I r WE
< STREET WILUS Sta b= KENT 77 Hnu T e M f. fM7b�P TACOMA STCaq
sp INTCHQ < ELEkf *raxE R� S16 19 AVF a CHERRY
1$i Q W TI gT� ayl E DEAN <HILL ST
W a ST ? ZT�� E tyl1CLYN ST
✓ \ Y i
W w) SAAR
<-4 < ERSON g7
S AR ALPIN $
E OUIf3
4 » WAY
YVILLIS 4 . ST
a Z < I°�C Ern-
W W > = 516 {wlJ rlfv� 1' ST
> > SEATTLE ST C
•f RU ELL < rvch
r,-moo
0.
Fire
Station
MILL CREEK BOX CULVERTS
.. >
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
JUNE 20, 1995
TO: Mayor & City CouunndI
FROM: Don Wickstro m VJ "�
RE: Mill Creek Box Culverts Supply Contract
Bid opening for this contract was held on Friday, June 16th with 2 bids received.
The low bid was submitted by P.I.P.E. Inc. in the amount of $237,100.00. The
engineer's estimate was $250,000.00
BID SUMMARY
P.I.P.E. Inc. 237,100.00
Oldcastle Precast, Inc. 261 ,992.00
Engineer's Estimate 250,000.00
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that P.I.P.E. Inc. be
awarded the Mill Creek Box Culverts Supply Contract for the bid amount of
$237,100.00
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
R E P O R T S
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
C. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
D. PLANNING COMMITTEE
E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
/r
F. PARKS COMMITTEE
G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
L�-
CITY OF I)V L� /� ZS
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING CONR/ITTEE MINUTES
VVUCT May 16, 1995 g : 0 0 PM
Committee Members Present Ci=v Attorney' s Office
Leona Orr, Chair Laurie Evezich
Jon Johnson Roger Lubovich
Tim Clark
Planning Staff Ot=-per City Staff
Jim Harris
Margaret Porter Other Guests
Kevin O'Neill
Fred Satterstrom Holly Nydegger
Linda Phillips J. Steve Harer
Ma-rilyn Caretti
Iris Stripling
Janette Nuss
Ralph Fitzthum
AMENDMENT PROCEDURES FOR KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - (K. O'Neill)
Senior Planner Kevin O'Neill summarized the three added sections of the
Amendment Procedures for the Kent Comprehensive Plan as requested at
the last meeting. The three added sections were Standard of Review
(12 . 02 . 050) , Hearing Procedures - notice requirement 12 . 02 . 060, and
City Council action (12 . 02 . 070) .
Kevin explained that Section 12 . 02 . 050 spells out three criteria which
both staff and ultimately the Council would consider when looking at
either text or map amendments relating to findings that the Council
would make in terms of if the amendments are to be adopted.
He stated that Section 12 . 02 . 060 relates to hearing procedures . There
are different notice procedures whether there is a text amendment or a
map amendment . If it is a map amendment, it would be advertised and
noticed the same as a rezone .
In regards to the last Section 12 . 02 . 070, there was some discussion at
the last meeting relating to needing a time frame within which the
Council would make their determination or decision once they had
received the information. This section provides a sixty (60) day time-
line once the Council receives the recommendation (s) .
Kevin also pointed out a very small change to Section 12 . 02 . 030 , Time
of filing. This change clarifies that the Planning Department has the
responsibility of establishing the application procedures and
determining whether or not an application is complete or not . The
underlined sentence below was added:
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MAY 16 , 1995
PAGE 2
"Annual amendments to the comprehensive plan shall be submi-::ted to
the Kent Planning Department by September 1 of each calendar year.
Requests for amendments shall be submitted on forms prescribed by
the Planning Department . Incomplete amendment applications will
not be accented for filing. Requests received each year after
September 1 shall be considered in the following year' s
comprehensive plan amendment process . "
Kevin asked the Committee members for questions . Councilmember 0ohnson
expressed concern as to whether Section 12 . 02 . 060, "notification of all
property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the affected property"
is adequate language .
Fred replied that discretion will take place on a comprehensive plan
amendment of at least 200 feet and probably more . Fred explained
comprehensive plan amendments are different because they are more in a
policy making role . It' s not like a Hearing Examiner interpretting
policy in a quasi-judicial role .
Fred gave an example if a potential comprehensive plan amendment
occurred to North Park located on James Street . If an application was
submitted, their application proposal has the signatures of the
affected property owners directly related to this particular
application. When the Planning Department staff reviews the
application, they look at it in a broad area and determine whether this
is a plan amendment or a policy role . When this is brought to the
Planning Commission and City Council, the Department would provide many
alternatives and alter the boundary lines . These changes would go
beyond the property owners listed on the actual application. If the
Department had taken the 200 foot limitation literally, the Department
could be ultimately holding a public hearing and going for a
recommendation that involves people that weren' t notified. Related to
the North Park example, Fred stated the Department would be notifying
people beyond the application and include notification of all affected
property oweners based on the staff' s alternatives and then a 200 foot
radius .
There was much discussion on this . Chair Orr stated she agreed with
Fred and suggested stating "at least 200 feet" .
Assistant Attorney Evezich commented this language could work against
the City since there is a burden on the City if the language is not as
clear as possible .
Roger Lubovich expressed concern about leaving areas open for
discretion which could lead to discretionary action against the City.
Fred reported that there is a section in the City code that gives the
Planning Director some authority to broaden the notification area. The
language does not say at least 200 feet but more if in the judgment of
the Planning Director a larger area is necessary.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MAY 16 , 1995
PAGE 3
Laurie Evezich suggested not changing the language but reminded the
Committee that the Planning Director would have to temper his
discretion from being arbitrary and capricious by treating each
instance with the same considerations, whatever they were, each and
every time .
Mr. Harris suggested the Zoning Code language be referenced in the
ordinance or flat out change the language to 300 feet or 400 feet so no
discretionary language could be challenged.
Ms . Evezich stated to keep mind that this is 200 feet of the affected
property, which is potentially not a single applicant, is a designation
on a map of a very broad area. So 200 feet around or within that area
is like putting a buffer of 200 feet around that area. In addition, it
looks like we' re talking about looking at the cumulative impacts of all
of the planning map applications each year. There is a large number of
people so are likely to get notice of all of the potential impacts of
all of the plan map application amendments . There was a lot of
discussion on notification and who wwould be notified with this
language .
Chair Orr brought up another concern on Section 12 .02 . 060 - Hearing
Procedures, and asked if the City is required by some State law for
these amendments to go the Planning Commission. Laurie said yes .
Mr. Harris commented that the City of Kent is a code City and that we
have to go through the process of a Planning Commission, via City Clerk
and Mayor' s office to make changes to our City code .
Chair Orr asked that this item be pulled from the City Council agenda
scheduled for tonight' s meeting. She asked that this item be brought
back to the Committee meeting schedule for June 20, 1995 and for this
item and ordinance be put on the June 20th City Council agenda.
ADULT USE ZONING #ZCA-95-1 - (F. Satterstrom)
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom briefly went over the staff report
and mentioned that pages two and four were mistakenly omitted and the
missing pages were handed out at the meeting. He reported to the
Committee that the staff recommended Alternative #4 , which was the one
that had the most sites (32 potential sites) . He reported that the
Planning Commission did not have a majority vote to come up with a
recommendation. They held hearings on February 27, March 27, and April
24 , 1995 .
City Attorney Roger Lubovich suggested something that the Committee
might want to consider. He suggested the City consider looking into
this matter at the same time that the Planning Department does the
Growth Management Act zoning changes related to the Comprehensive Plan
which are coming up soon. He recommended this because the zoning map
may .have some impact in how many sites would be available, potential
issues related to mixed use residential , and issues related to the fact
the City recently adopted new licensing regulations that broadens the
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MAY 16, 1995
PAGE 4
definition of facilities subject to adult entertainment licensing.
Roger recommends the City amend the Zoning Code to meet the newly
adopted licensing regulations . Roger has already started a drafting a
draft ordinance .
Chair Orr stated she doesn' t have any problem with doing this except
for the concern on the second moratorium that is in effect right now.
She asked if the City would be able to successfully adopt a third one .
If the can, she does not have a problem with his suggestion. She
recommends that Roger bring back a proposal that encumbances all of the
changes . She thinks the better job the Council can do to resolve all
of the issues, the better off the City will be .
Mr. Harris commented that he thinks the Council needs to keep this in
abeyance or defer action on this issue until after the Planning
Commission has done everything they need to do on the Zoning Code .
Chair Orr asked Roger to find out if in fact the City can extend the
moratorium if the City needs to do this . She said she would like to
keep this issue at the Planning Committee and make a recommendation to
the full Council without this issue going back to the Planning
Commission (because the Planning Commission already has shown us that
the majority is not willing to deal with this) . She would like to
incorporate this issue after the zoning changes have been done on the
Kent Comprehensive Plan to be able to see the whole picture before this
adult use zoning issue can be fully resolved.
Roger said the Council currently has a recommendation which is a "no
recommendation" from the Planning Commission right now. The Committee
can either act on it now or hold this in abeyance until later and take
another review of this to make sure this is not impacted after the Kent
Comprhensive zoning changes have been done . Roger also stated he
doesn' t see a problem in extending the moratorium.
Marilyn Caretti, 4604 Somerset Court, Kent, WA 98032 , turned in for
the record today 240 signatures that are from both east and west hill
and others supporting staff' f alternative #4 recommendation.
Planning Commission member, Janette Nuss, 26220 42 S . , Kent, WA 98032,
asked if the Council had received the Findings report she had submitted
to the City Council . Leona mentioned this was received at the last
Council meeting. Janette reported she had contacted nine (9) different
cities in Western Washington regarding this adult use issue and she
explained why., After this research, she stated it confirmed her belief
that option #4 was truly the best option for the City to go with and
hopes the Council will see this too .
Councilmember Clark made the MOTION and Councilmember Johnson SECONDED
a motion to review adult use zoning concurrently with Growth Management
implementing zoning. Motion carried.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MAY 16 , 1995
PAGE 5
AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A BUDGET TO THE 1994 GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT
GRANT (GMA) GRANT FUNDS RECEIVED - (M. Porter)
Administrative Assistant Margaret Porter went over the memo enclosed in
the agenda packet . The following action was requested by the City
Council Planning Committee as follows :
1) For the City of Kent to receive the 1994 Growth Management
Act grant dollars of $55 , 754 and to reduce the overstated
budget for 1993 of ($18 , 451) ;
2) Authorization to establish a budget for 1995 of $37, 303 ; and
3) To forward this item to the City Council on June 6 , 1995 for
approval .
Councilmember Clark MOVED and Councilmember Johnson SECONDED a motion
to approve the aforementioned three (3) actions . Motion carried.
REGULATORY REVIEW• HARER - (F. Satterstrom)
Mr. Satterstrom reported that Mr. Harer submitted a regulatory review
request proposal to amend the Mobile Home Park Code to allow more than
one single family dwelling in a mobile home park. Currently, the code
allows one permanent, single family structure in a mobile home park,
and that dwelling must be used by the manager or owner.
This application stems from a code violation. A service building in a
mobile home park had been converted to a residential dwelling without
a building permit when it was discovered by the code enforcement
officer. When the applicant applied for a building permit and was
routed to the Planning Department, the conflict with the mobile home
park code was discovered at that time .
Fred asked Mr. Harer for clarification about his stated language in the
application of "multiple single family dwellings" . It is an existing
building of a previous laundary room with all the plumbing and
electrical in and it could be made into a one-bedroom unit .
Chair Orr clarified that Mr. Harer is asking for some sort of action
that allows the building to exist before Mr. Harer can be expected to
see if it exists in a way that Mr. Harer can use it . Fred said he has
been told by the Planning Department that this is not an authorized
use; therefore, the Department would be inclined to decline the permit .
Mr. Harer has submitted for a change in the code to see whether or not
the City would want to change the code requirement . If the code
requirements are changed to allow another unit, then the processing of
the permit could be done but right now the permit is on hold pending
the outcome of the regulatory review.
Mr. Satterstrom stated the action that the Committee members would
take, if you want to approve this, would be move this forward for a
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MAY 16 , 1995
PAGE 6
public hearing at the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission
would make a recommendation to the Council .
Chair Orr recommended some useful and helpful language . Instead of
using the words "multiple single family dwellings" , she recommended to
say "existing structures being able to be converted to residential
uses" .
Councilmember Clark MOVED and Councilmember Johnson SECONDED a motion
to forward the Harer regulatory review to the Planning Commission for
a hearing. Motion carried.
REGULATORY REVIEW• FITZTHUM - (F. Satterstrom)
Mr. Satterstrom reported that Mr. Fitzthum submitted an application for
a regulatory review proposes to add automobile repair as a principally
permitted use in the M-1 (Industrial Park) zone . This amendment
proposal would allow automobile repair in the M1 zoning district . Mr.
Fitzthum asked about whether a home occupation would allowed because he
buys a damaged car at an auto auction, fixes it, and takes the vehicle
back to the Auburn auction and sells it . There are not the ordinary
customers coming and going on the property etc . There was discussion
of a concern in the past the Chamber of Commerce testifying before the
Planning Commission of being opposed to adding commercial uses in the
M-1 zone . Currently, automobile repair is allowed in DC, CC, and CM-2
zones, which are hundreds of acres in the City already. Chair Orr
requested that this item be brought back to the Committee at the next
meeting of June 20 , 1995 to get more information and gets the Chamber' s
feeling about this type of use, particularly since this is not an
ordinary auto repair business like the code now refers to .
KINGSTONE PRELIMINARY PLAT (#SU-94-11) TIME EXTENSION - (J. Harris)
Mr. Harris briefly stated this preliminary plat was approval by King
County in April 1992 and a one-year extention is being requested.
Councilmember Johnson MOVED and Councilmember Clark SECONDED a motion
to approve a one-year extention of the Kingstone Preliminary Plat #SU-
94-11 and to forward this item to the City Council on June 6 , 1995 .
. Motion carried.
mp.pco516 .min
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
JUNE 12,1995
PRESENT: Paul Mann Jim Huntington
Tim Clark John Hillman
Jim Bennett Robyn Bartelt
Don Wickstrom Barbara Ivanof
Tom Brubaker
Eddy Chu
Credit - One Site Detention System
Wickstrom explained that when Council adopted the rates for the Drainage Utility System,
Jon Johnson asked us to look into a credit for on-site detention. He stated that we
presently have a credit system for retention. He said that there are two types of systems
noting that it is the developer's option as to which one he wants to install. Retention
replicates nature and the water is either percolated back into the ground or it evaporates,
or a combination of both. A detention system is a temporary storage and then releases
the water at a slower rate which will hopefully, not cause any conflicts downstream. He
said that when the ordinance was adopted in 1984 - 1985, there was a preference
incentive for retention systems and that's why there is a credit in the ordinance. Retention
systems are not something developers prefer because there is no positive assurance that
the water will be gone. Most developers have chosen a detention system. Wickstrom said
there are approximately 195 facilities on-site which were developed under various
standards - many of the systems maintenance have been questionable of these privately
owned, operating systems. He said this brings up a lot of questions of when should we
give credit. The Dept of Fisheries has usurped our authority and they do require on-site
detention/retention in the Puget Sound Basin. Dept of Ecology is also requiring us to have
it in our design standards - we are just in the process of getting certification of design
standards for D.O.E., which then the Dept of Fisheries would allow us to do all the review
versus having the review go thru them (Fisheries).
Wickstrom again stated that we have 195 detention systems all in various states of
operation - all designed to various standards. If we were to implement a program, we
would have to re-review those engineering designs and calculations, field review them to
see if they are being operated and maintained correctly; inspect them on a yearly basis to
insure the credit and to justify yearly renewal of that credit. Also, we need to ask what that
credit would go against? We have about 5 or 6 different rates covering our 17 different
basins. That charge is made up of a basic M&O cost where everybody, no matter which
1
basin they're in, the same M&O cost is paid which is the cost to operate the City's entire
system. On top of that are capital costs which are related to projects within the particular
basin. For example, in Mill Creek Basin there is the Valley Detention Project. In the other
basins there are water quality issues that are being addressed so not all charges relate
to detention. So, what do we give the credit to?
Wickstrom said that this will involve additional staff to operate and maintain an accounting
and credit system as well as inspections to make sure that these systems are operating
yearly in order to be eligible for credit. He said it will be a cumbersome process and
another issue is, there is no new money to give this credit - it would all come from utility
revenue which means that if you give credit the money would have to come from the other
customers. (Rate adjustment) Because of all this, we do not support adding a credit for
detention particularly since we presently have one for retention and that's strictly a
developer option.
Tim Clark stated that if we have customers who have made the effort to basically make the
system work better by actually having invested in a significant detention system, then we
raise the utility rate, it seems unfair to simply not acknowledge that some people made an
effort to actually do something to make the system work a little better. He stated that he
does concur with the need to constantly assess the 195 sites. He then asked Brubaker
if we were to select a standard, for example, someone with a detention facility capable of
handling a large amount of water; would that be considered a fair standard and still meet
a sense of parody in terms of people having to pay a rate versus those who would be given
a credit? Brubaker said this could be a problem.
Clark asked Wickstrom, how many of the 195 sites are "significant" facilities? Wickstrom
stated that all the facilities are being built to handle their own runoff- they are not being
built to handle more than just their own contribution to the system. It's much the same as
mitigating traffic impact - creating a water problem by releasing a much greater volume
than the land originally had. He said it is hard to say what's "significant".
The committee recommended that Wickstrom look into what it would cost to implement a
program for operation and maintenance for further discussion. Wickstrom noted that
another issue we are concerned about is, the National Marine Fisheries will make a
determination by the end of July, whether Coho is an endangered species - Coho lives
in all the streams - so that's another significant issue we need to be concerned about.
Recycling Programs - Consultant Agreement
Wickstrom explained that this consultant will be working with Robyn Bartelt in enhancing
our volunteer recycling program in the multi-family area where we do not have the authority
to require recycling so we present programs to them. Similarly in the commercial end
where we are trying to promote recycling in order for us to get to that 50% reduction in our
2
waste stream by the end of this year and 65% by '96 and '97. Also, it involves enhancing
our yardwaste program and supply materials to the public about what they can do with the
yardwaste versus composting and hauling. He noted that the money is coming from the
King County grant of $116,000.
In response to Clark, Bartelt stated that the containers are provided by the disposal
companies. She stated that this is basically an educational program. The consultant will
be doing site visits and taking audits
Committee unanimously recommended that the Mayor be authorized to sign the Consultant
Services Agreement with Pacific Energy Institute.
Titus Street Storm Rebuild - Bid
Wickstrom stated that the bids received on this project were all within $334,000 - $378,000
(7 bids submitted) - our estimate was $265,000. The low bidder was Shoreline
Construction who is presently doing the work on 4th & James (near the Justice Center).
He said that because of the grouping of the bids, we feel we have a fair bid because of the
number we received and where they all stood with respect to each other. Wickstrom said
we have the money in the various project funds so we are asking to award this contract to
Shoreline Construction. In response to Clark, Wickstrom said the power lines are
overhead in this area.
Committee unanimously recommended that Shoreline Construction be awarded the
contract for the Titus Street Storm Rebuild project.
71 st Avenue South Street Vacation
Wickstrom stated that this is a vacation request at 180th near West Valley Highway. The
petitioner is asking that a small piece from 181 st and 72nd Ave be vacated. We are
asking that a hearing date be set for this proposed vacation.
Committee unanimously recommended adopting a Resolution setting a hearing date for
the 71 st Ave South Street Vacation.
Utility Service to Naden Ave RV Parking Area
Wickstrom stated that the RV club has asked, thru Councilman Bennett, that we install a
utility service (a sewer dump station) and a water service. In order to do this, it would cost
about $20,000 - the big cost would be the sewer because we have to connect it to the
Auburn Sewer Interceptor. The money is available in the miscellaneous sewer and water
improvement funds, if Council wants to earmark it for that. Bennett suggested making this
3
a coin-operated facility. Wickstrom said we could check into that and see if we could make
it an option.
In response to Bennett, Wickstrom said this is a small enough project that we could solicit
proposals rather than going out to bid. He said hopefully, we will have it completed by
September.
Committee unanimously recommended installing utility service at Naden Avenue R.V.
parking area.
FEMA Floodplain Maps
Wickstrom explained that the Ordinance which originally adopted the new maps needs to
be amended in accordance with FEMA's recent review. FEMA has made some minor
changes - one was related to manufactured homes requiring that they cannot be built
within the 100 year floodplain unless they are brought up to the 100 year floodplain
elevation. FEMA also wanted a different date for the adoption of the maps.
Committee unanimously recommended amending Ordinance #3328 deleting a portion of
Para. 190(D) associated with Manufactured Homes and adopting June 16, 1995 as the
effective date of the new digitized maps.
ADDED ITEMS - BRUBAKER
Metricom, Inc.
Brubaker explained that Metricom has a device which straps to utility poles and draws
power from the poles and works on a radio frequency band; provides a radio frequency
link-up from a portable computer into their device and from there it goes into all the internet
services. Brubaker said Metricom has obtained approval from Puget Power to use their
poles however, they will still need a street franchise agreement if they come into Kent.
Brubaker said the City's Info Services person has looked at their product. He further said
this is unlike TCI in that there is no undergrounding. This is a self-contained unit.
Brubaker said he recommends that the City enter into a franchise agreement with
Metricom, Inc. This would be a 5 year franchise; no franchise fee other than the initial
signature fee. We could also include a paragraph which says that if you enter into an
agreement in another city in the State of WA where a franchise fee is imposed, we will
receive the same fee. He said we would charge them a monthly fee which would be fairly
small. Brubaker suggested that, if the Committee were amenable to this, he would draft
a franchise ordinance for introduction at the next meeting for a first reading and it could
be negotiated and modified after that point.
Clark suggested that Brubaker discuss this with Parks Dept. to see if there is any use to
4
enhance services from Parks. Wickstrom suggested the possibility of meter-reading from
this service.
Committee unanimously recommended that Brubaker begin the preliminary work on a
franchise agreement with Metricom, Inc.
196th Corridor
Brubaker stated that this project calls for the construction of a bridge over both railroads.
He said there is a statute that allows the city to petition to the WUTC for the railroad to
fund a portion of our cost in constructing the bridge. The first step in doing that is to pass
a resolution stating that it is a determination of the City Council that a bridge over the
railroad is the most appropriate method of crossing the tracks rather than an at-grade
crossing.
Committee unanimously recommended that a resolution be adopted to petition to the
WUTC for a portion of the funding to construct a bridge over the railroad in the 196th St
Corridor project.
Signature Point Area (left turn lane) - Bennett
Bennett asked about the design of the left turn lane on WA Ave in front of Signature Point
stating that you need to actually go into the oncoming traffic lane in order to make a left
turn. Wickstrom said that the State did not want the Signature Point people to make a left
turn there - the traffic would get backed up. However, they did allow the office complex
in the area to come out and turn left.
Meeting adjourned: 5:30 p.m.
5