HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 07/15/1997 A
City . of Kent
v City Council Meeting
Agenda
CITY OF
A :-
¢ ' Mayor Jim White
Council Members
Christi Houser, President
Jim Bennett Jon Johnson
Tim Clark Leona Orr
Connie Epperly Judy Woods }
July 15, 1997
Office of the City Clerk
CITY Of 1¢]1Jd'Z1V 1S
SUMMARY AGENDA
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
July 15, 1997
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
Jim White COUNCTT.MMID& : Christi Houser, President
MAYOR. Tim Clark Connie Epperly
Jim Bennett Leona Orr Judy_ Woods
Jon Johnson
CALL TO ORDER
FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL
1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A. Proclamation - National Night Out (6DD6D 1 TE/11�
Q, KENT C/7'17ENS 45SA) t/CiR ffARVEY
2, PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. LID 347 - Final Assessment Roll - Ordinance - 3 35
3 , CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes
B. Approval of Bills
C. Planning Assistant Position - Authorization
D. Site Manager Position - Green River Natural Resources
Enhancement Area - Authorization and Budget Adjustment
E. Russell Short Plat - Bill of Sale
F. 277th Corridor Pedestrian Bridge - Accept as Complete
G. Cott/L)c/L 196SEA)CE - -3DA) 'TDNNSOA)
4. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Pacific Terrace Final Plat
B. Swan Court Final Plat
C. Country View Estates II Final Plat 3 3 5 6
D. Curfew for Juveniles - Ordinances-3355
E. Juvenile Curfew and Parental Responsibility Ordinances
Committee Appointments
F. Golf RFP Committee - Confirmation
5. BIDS
A. Bowen Scarff/Mill Creek Bypass Culverts
6. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
7 . REPORTS
EXECUTIVE SESSION - Property Acquisition
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) Proclamation - National Night Out
R) �t � - '
�,n
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15 , 1997
Category Public Hearings
1. SUBJECT: LID 347 - FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for the Public
Hearing on confirmation of the Final Assessment Roll for LID
347 - Meeker Street/Russell Road Traffic Signal. The Public
Works Director will give a brief description of the project and
manner of assessment.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Director memorandum, ordinance and
vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Council 6/17/97
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT:
CLOSE HEARING:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember _moves, Councilmember seconds
to adopt Ordinance No. establishing the Final Assessment
Roll for LID 347 - Meeker St. /Russell Rd. Traffic Signal;
and
to make the Public Works Director memorandum a part of the
record.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION: �ii �Jhhit�Y
Council Agenda
Item No. 2A
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
TO: Mayor White and City Council
FROM: Don Wickstrom, Director of Public Works
RE: LID 347 - Meeker Street/Russell Road Traffic Signal
July 15, 1997 has been set for the confirmation hearing on the final assessment roll for the above
referenced project.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Several years ago the City proposed the installation of a traffic signal at the above referenced
intersection. With the increasing traffic levels at this intersection, ingress and egress for Russell
Road was becoming difficult and was an increasing traffic safety concern as demonstrated by
various traffic accidents. Also the City received numerous complaints regarding the need for a
signal. Therefore, the City pursued the installation of a traffic signal and budgeted a portion of
the funds for same.
To finance the balance of the project costs, the City pursued the formation of a Local
Improvement District (LID).
It should be noted that the City anticipated the eventual need for this signal years ago and
developers in the area have been required to sign LID participation covenants with the first one
executed in 1985 when the Riverwood Apartments applied for building permits.
A property owner meeting was held on March 20, 1996. The two owners in attendance
supported the need for a project. The Resolution of Intent was approved by City Council on
April 16, 1996 which set the formation public hearing date for May 7, 1996. Subsequently, City
Council passed ordinance No 3294 establishing LID 347.
PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
The project included the installation of a fully actuated 8-phase traffic signal with pedestrian
detection and crossing indications at the intersection of Russell Road and West Meeker Street.
�- In addition, a southbound to westbound right turn lane was installed. Also the intersection
approach profile on the north side was modified to improve sight distance to the east.
FUNDING SUMMARY
PRELIMINARY FINAL
LID Assessments $ 100,000 $ 86,868.13
City Funded 138,000 119,878.03
TOTAL PROJECT COST $238,000 $206,746.16
Project Fund9R23 $168,000 $119,878.03
City Assessment (Parks Property)
S 32,357.26 $ 28,108.15
ASSESSMENT METHOD
An LID assessment boundary was established which includes properties which utilize the Meeker
Street and Russell Road intersection for ingress and egress. The total LID cost is distributed over
these properties based on square footage. For properties with access from another direction, an
adjustment in the square footage assessed was made. South of Meeker, the assessments extend to
the end of Russell Road at the river. To the north, the assessment limit is halfway to James
Street, the next east/west street. See the attached assessment map which shows the assessed area.
Also in distributing the assessments, the square footage received a weighting factor based on the
zoning to compensate for different rates of traffic generation anticipated for each zone. The
benefit from a traffic signal is directly related to the use of the signal which can be determined
from trip generation factors. Therefore, each property's share of the cost was determined by
multiplying the square footage by a traffic generation weighting factor. The signal participation
covenants also contain language indicating that the costs would be distributed based on
anticipated trips.
The factors are as follows:
Commercial 22
Medium Density Multiple Family Residential 2.55
Mobile Home Park I
One exception was made. Parcel 2 which is zoned General Commercial contains a
motel. That portion of the property was treated as Medium Density Multiple
Family Residential for the weighting factor.
When this LID was originally estimated the distribution was strictly by square foot without the
weighting factor. Prior to forming the LID, the assessment distribution method was revised.
Adding the traffic weighting factor lowered the City's assessment and raised the other
assessments. In an effort to keep the privately owned property at the same LID total, the City
property assessment remained as originally calculated and the original private property assessment
was redistributed in accordance with the weighting factors.
Half of the LID assessment for private property was distributed to the properties south of the
intersection and the other half to the north. The City property was not considered in this
distribution.
PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT
Upon council passing the ordinance confirming the final assessment roll, there is a 30-day period
in which any portion or all of the assessment can be paid without interest charges. After the 30-
day period, the balance is paid over a ten year period wherein each year's payment is 1/10th of the
principal plus interest on the unpaid balance. The interest will be what the market dictates.
PROPERTY OWNER COMMENTS
The attached letter was received from Assessment No. ?. The City's letter of response is also
attached.
aAM347me
N O 11111
SCALE : 1 "=500'
TI
ASSESSMENT NUMBER- DAR
4
Q �
f
N
AREA ASSESSED
INDICATES L•I.D. COVENANT
\ W. MEEKER 51.
lI �
I I
/. NEW SIGNAL A 'p
e
1
I
/ I
L. I. D. 347 - MEEKER ST./RUSSELL RD SIGNAL
IdASP . STATE PROPERTIES TE No . 206-255-1777 ^'a'_ 2 • S7 : ` ��'-'
11 �� ;!►i�i,.ti Properties
May 12'r', 1997
V1A IFAC'SIM11.1 . '1•0.859- .559
NIT MCI]ill vesper
I'ngineca'il1g Sltpervisor
('11y of Ketrt
2'?0 4"' Avenue. S011111
Kent, Washington 980 12-5895
Ite. i.11) �47
Uear Mr vesper,
We arc in rvecipt of'your le:ticr dated May 7i1' as well as the suppolling docununtation
requcslcd. first of all, congralulaUonS on the Project corning in under budget That is
something that dQCSrt't occur very often on any project or business venture in this day and
agC.
Now, to the bu%iness at hand. Generally speaking, we reel there is a sizable disparity
between our assessment and that of Shafran's Mohilc Bone Park. Not so much in the
dollar tunount, bCeausc they are differing;uses and sizes, but more the manner in evhich
th0 ieSf.1CC ivc shams, and potr:ntrally others, were revised From our perspective the
formula does not appear to be entirely equitable
Thera are two area,. of concern with regard to the revised assessment. First, although the
mobile honk park property cunrntly generates fewer trips, those trips are primarily
focused directly onto Russell Road As you are probably wvare our main entrance and
exit is on Mce.ker Street. We certainly recognirc and agree that Plaza will have a
lx.riphural benefit from the break in traffic created by the light, as is the case with the
C'ity's golf courSe, but the light will mostly benefit the users of those propcilies with
primary cniranccs and exit', on Russell Road, such as the vacant lot on the northeast
corner of Russell and Mccker, Red Carpet Apartments, the mobile home park and the
King County Park.
Secondly, in our opinion, the size of the property as well as the potential use of the
property should be the most weighting factors in arriving at the assessment distribution
method due to the. long term benefit derived by the property and the property owner from
the initial assessment. The mobile borne park property may undoubtedly he sold or leased
r :Y it, yr
WASH . a"RTC
11 ��`i�i►�,�ic�►� S1<1I(i Properties
in the ful tire as may the corner properly. Let's say for cxa►nplc that a nimble apartment
complex is buill on the mobile home park property and a single user retail facility is built
on the corner property. The impact those properties, and uses, will then have on the light
and intersection as compared to the present financial benefit the property owners will
receive by way of an assessment based on their current use is not equitable Tspecially
due to the long term nature of the asscssment. We know the impact our properly creates
due to it's current use and we are willing to pay accordingiv for our fair share. When, and
if, the aforementioned development occurs on the other parcels the property owners will
be bcncfiting disproportionate to their initial contribution towtird�; the total assessment
1 am hopeful that you can appreciate our reasons for wanting another look at this process.
Since it only took one property owner's comments f'or the formula to be revised in the
first place we are conridcnt our comments will be given equal consideration.
Due to the timely nature of this issue, we would greatly appreciate your contacting; us
with your thoughts prior to the rinal decision.
Sincc►cly,
Ron Knight, Properly Manager
cc- Niramco Kent, Inc.
Management file
/rk
CITY OF11V�
Jim White, Mayor
May 13, 1997
Washington State Properties
Ron Knight, Property Manager
PO Box 6
Renton, Washington 98057
RE: LID 347 - Meeker Street/Russell Road Signal
Assessment #2 Piramco Kent, Inc.
Dear Mr. Knight:
Thank you for your early response to my request for comments on the LID 347 final
assessments.
You expressed two concerns. I believe that both issues were addressed in calculating
the assessments. Further explanation of how the assessment formula was applied is
given below.
We recognized that your property does have frontage and access on Meeker Street.
To compensate corner properties it is standard practice to bisect the corner by drawing
a line from the comer at the intersection back across the property until it intersects a
property line to establish a square footage calculation boundary. Please see the
attached map to see how this line was drawn. In this case the property on the Meeker
Street side of the line was not included in your assessment calculation. You were
assessed for 159.596 square feet out of a total of 209,196 square feet. This represents
a 24% reduction in size of the property.
The assessments are based on zoning rather than current use. The mobile home park
would have to be successful in obtaining a rezone to allow an apartment complex to be
built and there is no indication that such a request will be made or would be approved.
Therefore it is being assessed based on the current mobile home park zoning. The
corner-property is being assessed at the commercial rate in accordance with the zoning
which would include a retail facility.
- Actually your property received a break. The procedure of basing assessments on
zoning rather than current use was modified only for your property. As previously
explained, the north portion of your property where Best Western is located (55,800 _.
square feet or 35%) was assessed at the much lower rate for medium density multiple
family residential even though the zoning is general commercial. The facility is new and
we do not anticipate that it will be redeveloped in the near future. Therefore we decided
not to assess this portion in accordance with the zoning. This modification of the
assessment formula resulted in a reduction in your share of the assessment.
We believe that your concerns were addressed in the assessment distribution and that
your property has been treated in a fair manner.
I hope that this information has answered your concerns. Should you have additional
questions please call me at 859-3384. My fax number is 859-3559.
Very truly yours,
Merrill K. Vesper
Design Engineering Supervisor
LID 347-I.W PD/M K V
70.5
�. . !. �. 347
1306.55 _
w
% — - -
Al3
el,L,
10, z p
v✓
j O
i
MUD-:r►FL-It ,w
� �V. 3uo r -5 17, — 4
.1407-37-411,
j7-4/
GONtM�RGI AL
I 03 -79 C I .4, F c-ss
r
\•
� N B!-J7- 4/6'
N.
A 5 S E S S e p
R� Of
4.
CRY OF Ma
vaon+ M MPARTM xr , p M
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington,
approving and confirming the assessments and assessment
roll of Local Improvement District No . 347 for the
improvement to be made by the installation of a fully
actuated 8-phase traffic signal with pedestrian detection
and crossing indications at the intersection of West
Meeker Street and Russell Road, including the
installation of a southbound to westbound right turn
lane, and related improvements, as provided by Ordinance
No. 3294, and levying and assessing a part of the cost
and expense thereof against the several lots, tracts,
parcels of land and other property as shown on the
assessment roll .
WHEREAS, the assessment roll levying the special assessments
against the property located in Local Improvement District No. 347
in the City of Kent, Washington (the "City" ) , has been filed with
the City Clerk as provided by law; and
WHEREAS, notice of the time and place of hearing thereon and
making objections and protests to the roll was published at and for
the time and in the manner provided by law fixing the time and
place of hearing thereon for the 15th day of July, 1997, at the
hour of 7 : 00 p.m. , local time, in the Council Chambers in the City
Hall, Kent, Washington, and further notice thereof was mailed by
the City Clerk to each property owner shown on the roll; and
WHEREAS, at the time and place fixed and designated in the
notice the hearing was held, all written protests received were
considered and all persons appearing at the hearing who wished to
be heard were heard, and the City Council, sitting and acting as a
Board of Equalization for the purpose of considering the roll and
the special benefits to be received by each lot, parcel and tract
0293234.03
of land shown upon such roll, including the increase and
enhancement of the fair market value of each such parcel of land by
reason of the improvement, overruled all such protests; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as
follows :
Section 1 . The assessments and assessment roll of Local
Improvement District No. 347, which has been created and
established for the purpose of installation of a fully actuated
8-phase traffic signal with pedestrian detection and crossing
indications at the intersection of West Meeker Street and Russell
Road, including the installation of a southbound to westbound right
turn lane, and related improvements, as provided by Ordinance
No. 3294 , as the same now stand shall be and the same are approved
and confirmed in all things and respects in the total amount of
$86, 868 . 13 .
Section 2 . Each of the lots, tracts, parcels of land and
other property shown upon the assessment roll is determined and
declared to be specially benefited by this improvement in at least
the amount charged against the same, and the assessment appearing
against the same is in proportion to the several assessments
appearing upon the roll . There is levied and assessed against each
lot, tract or parcel of land and other property appearing upon the
roll the amount finally charged against the same thereon.
Section 3 . The assessment roll as approved and confirmed
shall be filed with the Finance Division Director of the City for
collection and the Finance Division Director is authorized and
0293234.03
-2-
directed to publish notice as required by law stating that the roll
is in her hands for collection and that payment of any assessment
thereon or any portion of such assessment can be made at any time
within 30 days from the date of first publication of such notice
without penalty, interest or cost, and that thereafter the sum
remaining unpaid may be paid in ten equal annual installments . The
estimated interest rate is stated to be 7 . 00-. per annum, with the
exact interest rate to be fixed in the ordinance authorizing the
issuance and sale of the local improvement bonds for Local
Improvement District No. 347 . The first installment of assessments
on the assessment roll shall become due and payable during the 30-
day period succeeding the date one year after the date of first
publication by the Finance Division Director of notice that the
assessment roll is in her hands for collection and annually
thereafter each succeeding installment shall become due and payable
in like manner. If the whole or any portion of the assessment
remains unpaid after the first 30-day period, interest upon the
whole unpaid sum shall be charged at the rate as determined above,
and each year thereafter one of the installments, together with
interest due on the unpaid balance, shall be collected. Any
installment not paid prior to expiration of the 30-day period
during which such installment is due and payable shall thereupon
become delinquent . Each delinquent installment shall be subject,
at the time of delinquency, to a charge of 9% penalty levied on
both principal and interest due upon that installment, and all
delinquent installments also shall be charged interest at the rate
0293234.03
-3-
as determined above. The collection of such delinquent
installments shall be enforced in the manner provided by law.
Section 4 . This ordinance shall take effect and be in force
five (5) days from and after its passage and five (5) days
following its publication as required by law.
By
JIM WHITE, Mayor
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Special Counsel and Bond
Counsel for the' City
Passed the day of July, 1997 .
Approved the day of July, 1997 .
Published the day of July, 1997 .
I certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, City Clerk
0293234.03
-4-
.u................
CONSENT CALENDAR
3 . City council Action:
Councilmember4/0-u� moves, Councilmember Ohtl
seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through G be approved.
Discussion TLo /J
Action
3A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
July 1, 1997 .
3B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through May 30 and
paid on May 30, 1997, with the additional approval of payment
of bills received through June 16 and paid on June 16, 1997
after auditing by the Operations Committee on July 1, 1997 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
5/30/97 184656-184896 $ 509 , 499 . 66
5/30/97 184897-185273 1, 760 , 962 . 33
$2 , 270, 461. 99
6/16/97 185274-185537 $1, 624 , 513 . 66
6/16/97 185538-185924 891, 758 . 94
$2 , 516, 272 . 60
Approval of checks issued for payroll for June 16 through
June 30, 1997 and paid on July 3 , 1997 :
Date Check Numbers Amount
7/3/97 Checks 220750-221124 $ 266, 751. 33
7/3/97 Advices 47394-47871 625 , 544 . 88
$ 892 , 296 . 21
Council Agenda
Item No. 3 A-B
Kent, Washington
July 1, 1997
Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at
7: 00 p.m. by Mayor White. Present: Councilmembers Bennett,
Epperly, Houser, Johnson, and Orr, Operations Director/Chief of
Staff McFall, City Attorney Lubovich, Police Chief Crawford, Fire
Chief Angelo, Public Works Director Wickstrom, Planning Director
Harris, and Parks Director Hodgson. Approximately 25 people were
at the meeting.
PUBLIC Introduction of Mavor's Appointee. Mayor White
COMMUNICATIONS introduced Pastor Johnny Williams as his
appointee to serve on the Human Services
Commission.
Employee of the Month. Mayor White announced
that Linda Phillips, Planner with the Kent
Planning Department, has been chosen as the July
Employee of the Month. He noted that Linda is
committed to Kent' s Downtown Plan and that
recently she had secured additional funds from
the State for the design of gateways for down-
town. The Mayor noted that Linda' s long hours
are legendary in the City, and he thanked her for
all of her dedicated work. He added that she is
certainly deserving of the July Employee of the
Month award, and then he presented Linda with the
plaque.
Planning Director Harris noted that it is a
pleasure working with Linda, and he also noted
that she works very well with the customers,
employees, and with other departments in the
City. He noted that it is a pleasure to honor
Linda for this whole month, and he thanked her
for all of the great work she has done.
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager, noted that
Linda' s long work hours are notorious and that
the quality of her work along with her people
skills is top-notch. He added that he has
enjoyed working with her, and that this award is
very well deserved.
CONSENT HOUSER MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A
CALENDAR through N be approved. Orr seconded and the
motion carried.
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A)
Approval of the Minutes. -APPROVAL of the minutes
of the regular Council meeting of June 17, 1997 .
1
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
TELECOMMUNI- (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2A)
CATIONS Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. The City
has completed its research and analysis of
various issues affecting the design, construction
and location of wireless telecommunication
facilities in the City of Kent. Based on this
research, City staff have prepared a zoning code
amendment aimed at regulating wireless tele-
communications facilities in the City. This
ordinance was discussed and amended pursuant to
comments made at a Land Use Planning Board
workshop on June 9 and at a public hearing on the
proposed ordinance held on June 23 . At the con-
clusion of their June 23 hearing, the Land Use
and Planning Board recommended the proposed
ordinance with some revisions, all of which have
been incorporated.
Assistant City Attorney Brubaker explained that
there are a few more suggestion modifications to
add to the ordinance that is in the Council
agenda packets. He noted that a new version of
the ordinance has been distributed to the Council
for review. He explained that the changes
basically deal with substantive changes, clarifi-
cations, and added standards so that the Planning
Department or Hearing Examiner would have ascer-
tainable standards whereby to make their
decisions.
Brubaker pointed out that a change has been made
on Page 5 to clarify that modifications to
existing wireless telecommunications facilities
are not exempt from this ordinance. He noted
that the word "structural" has been deleted on
Page 9, Section 4, because it could also be non-
structural information the City needs in order to
make a decision. He explained that the industry
was concerned that the City would be seeking
proprietary information, but he stated that it
isn't the City' s intent to do so although the
City does need the ability to get all of the
information necessary to make a decision.
Brubaker noted that "structural" does not really
satisfy as a limiting word so it is his recom-
mendation to delete the word altogether. He
noted that "Height" Restrictions, on Page 10
(Subsection B) , for co-location of towers is a
clarification of the original intent, and that
Subsection C adds a standard for the Planning
2
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
TELECOMMUNI- Department where a decision shall be made if
CATIONS consistent with the purposes and goals of the
chapter. He noted that on Page 12 there is
another substantive change that adds the follow-
ing language "unless the time for determination
is extended by agreement of the City and the
applicant. " He explained that if both parties or
either party feels they need more time an
agreement can be made under the ordinance. On
Page 17, he noted that there is another change
which is a clarification of the existing
language.
Mayor White then declared the public hearing
open. There were no comments from the audience.
ORR MOVED to close the public hearing. Epperly
seconded and the motion carried.
EPPERLY MOVED to adopt Ordinance No. 3353,
enacting controls on the issuance of Land Use and
Development permits for wireless telecommunica-
tions facilities in the City of Kent. Orr
seconded and the motion carried.
(PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2B)
Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Moratorium_
Extension. The City currently has in effect a
moratorium on the issuance of Land Use and
Development permits for commercial wireless
telecommunications facilities, which expires on
July 7 , 1997. If the City does not enact a
zoning code amendment to regulate the design,
construction, and location of these facilities by
that date, then it will be necessary to consider
extending the current moratorium until the City
enacts regulations for these telecommunications
facilities. Otherwise, the current moratorium
will expire before the effective date of the
regulatory ordinance. Finally, in order to
extend the moratorium, State law requires that
the City hold a public hearing on the matter
prior to enacting the extension.
City Attorney Lubovich explained that the
moratorium extension is no longer necessary since
the Council adopted the wireless telecommunica-
tions ordinance.
EPPERLY MOVED that the public hearing on the
wireless telecommunications facilities moratorium
3
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997 _.
TELECOMMUNI- extension be cancelled and that the proposed
CATIONS motion on the moratorium extension resolution be
withdrawn. Orr seconded and the motion carried.
FIRE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
anernency Nedical Services Levy. ADOPTION of
Resolution No 1492 authorizing the County to
put an Emergency Medical Services Levy on the
November ballot with a levy rate of 29 cents per
thousand dollars of assessed valuation.
Every six (6) years the public needs to re-
authorize the EMS Levy if the delivery of the
current level of Advanced Life Support and Basic
Life Support Services throughout the County is to
continue. The Strategic Plan identified a levy
rate of 29 . 5 cents per thousand dollars of
assessed valuation based upon several assump-
tions, including the County's Budget Office
projections about future potential increases in
assessed valuation. Since then the County has
revised their projections and now feels the same
revenue will be generated by a 29 cents per
thousand dollars of assessed valuation rate.
This is an average rate, since over the life of
the levy the rate for a given year may change due
to inflation, actual demand for allocation of
resources and the success of the proposed methods
to try to control demand for service.
SOUTH KING (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
COUNTY South Ring County Narcotics Task Force Grant
NARCOTICS Administration. APPROVAL to take over financial
TASK FORCE administration of the grant that partially funds
GRANT the South King County Narcotics Task Force effec-
tive July 1, 1997 . Kent has been a member of the
Task Force since its inception in 1988 . Renton
has been the lead agency for grant administration
for the past nine years. During the present
fiscal year, however, the Task Force Executive
Board made the decision to pass this responsi-
bility on to the City of Kent. In July, the City
will receive a payment of $6, 000 from the Task
Force to partially cover additional costs that
may be incurred by our Financial Services
Division in taking over this responsibility.
CURFEW (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2C)
Juvenile Curfew and Parental Responsibility.
This is the date set for the hearing on the
4
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
CURFEW proposed curfew ordinance to be submitted to the
voters as a ballot proposition. The proposed
ordinance would repeal the existing curfew law
adopted by the voters in April 1995, pursuant to
an initiative petition and further add a new
chapter to Title 9 of the Kent City Code esta-
blishing a new curfew law for the City of Kent.
City Attorney Lubovich explained that the pro-
posed ordinance is being considered tonight to
replace the existing curfew that was enacted by
the citizens of Kent in 1995. He noted that the
proposed ordinance was drafted at the direction
of Council and that he will go over some of the
points of the draft ordinance as well as some of
the changes proposed with another ordinance
drafted and distributed to the Council this
evening.
He explained that the proposed ordinance, like
the current curfew, is a curfew and parental
responsibility ordinance that makes it a viola-
tion for the juvenile to be out beyond the curfew
time, and is a violation for the parent allowing
the juvenile to be out at night. He pointed out
that the draft. ordinance affects juveniles under
the age of 18, as does the current initiative,
but that the hours in the draft ordinance are
12 : 01 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily where the current
curfew is Sunday through Thursday evenings
10: o0 p.m. to 6: 00 a.m. , and Saturday and Sunday
from 12 : 00 a.m. to 6 : 00 a.m.
Lubovich explained that the exemptions from
violation are as follows: (1) If the juvenile is
accompanied by a parent or guardian; (2) The
juvenile is traveling to an official school,
political, religious, or recreational activity;
(3) The juvenile is involved in an emergency;
(4) The juvenile is in a motor vehicle engaged in
Interstate travel; (5) The juvenile is on the
sidewalk of his/her home or that of a neighbor;
(6) The juvenile is on an errand pursuant to
instructions from the parent or guardian; (7) The
juvenile is engaged in lawful employment and
traveling directly to and from the place of
employment; (8) An additional exemption added:
the juvenile is exercising his/her first
amendment rights; (9) Another added exemption: if
the juvenile is in a lawful establishment and
5
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
CURFEW going to or from that establishment; (10) The
juvenile is going to or from the residence of
another with the permission or consent of the
parent or guardian; (11) Another addition: the
juvenile is legally emancipated by statute.
Lubovich noted that the ordinance included in the
Council packet does not provide for the taking of
a juvenile into custody, but that he recommends
the new curfew ordinance include it. He ex-
plained that when a Police Officer stops to
question a juvenile and if the officer believes
there is a violation of the curfew then he can
take the juvenile into custody. He noted that
the first violation for either the parent or
juvenile is a warning (written or verbal) , the
second violation in a twelve month period is a
$100 fine, and the third or subsequent violation
would be a $250 fine.
Lubovich explained the proposed changes to the
new ordinance distributed to Council this evening
as follows: (1) On Page 7, under Curfew and
Parental Responsibility Prohibitions, he clari-
fied that it is not a violation if the activity
is permitted under the exemptions section in the
ordinance; (2) On Page 8, traveling in a motor
vehicle engaged in Interstate travel, he recom-
mends that it be with the consent of the parent
or guardian otherwise juveniles could be driving
around all night long; (3) On Page 8 Item 7 , he
noted that some clean-up language was done to
make it clear that it is a recreational as well
as religious school or other type activity so
that it is not limiting; (4) On Page 9 Item 8, he
clarified the language to say "lawfully present
within an establishment or turning to or from an
establishment. " He explained that if the
juvenile is on a place of business, like a movie
theatre, gas station, store, or doing something
lawful and traveling to or from that establish-
ment, then it would be exempt from violation.
Lubovich also explained that the exemptions in
the Bellingham ordinance were too vague and not
specific enough to withstand the Court of
Appeals. He noted that the courts want the
exemptions to be very clear so the juveniles know
if that activity is exempt or not; and that a
juvenile doing lawful activities should not be
6
Kent City Council Minutes July 11 1997
CURFEW punished as opposed to the juveniles engaged in
criminal activities. He noted that the vagueness
and nexus issues with the curfew and activities
are a real problem.
Lubovich noted that juvenile curfew violations,
by State Law, are civil infractions and can only
be cited as an infraction and not a misdemeanor.
He also noted that the State Law does provide for
a juvenile to be taken into custody for violating
a curfew and that it is his recommendation to
follow the State Statute RCW 13 . 32A. He clari-
fied that taking a juvenile into custody is not a
mandatory procedure but that if an officer is
allowed to direct the juvenile home or take him/
her into temporary custody, it allows the officer
some discretion in handling the situation.
Lubovich noted that the three areas the Council
needs to look at are: (a) Records to establish
the need for a curfew for the activity the City
is trying to prohibit; (b) 1st Amendment -
Freedom of Expression Rights of the juveniles;
and (c) More defined exemptions so that the
lawful activities are clear for the juvenile to
understand. He noted that staff recommends this
item be referred to the next Council meeting for
further consideration and action in order to meet
the September primary. He explained that this is
an ordinance that has to be approved by the
voters since the original curfew was enacted by
the voters, and that only the voters can amend or
repeal it. He noted that adoption of this
ordinance will send it to the voters to repeal
the current ordinance and enact the new one.
He also recommended that the Council authorize
the City Clerk to start collecting names for
interested individuals to write pro and against
statements for the voters pamphlet and present
them to the Council at the next meeting.
Upon Houser' s question, Lubovich explained that
the City does not want to be transporting
juveniles throughout the County or Region, but
if the juvenile is in the local area and the
officer wants to take the juvenile home that
would be okay. He suggested that those juveniles
who are from other areas might be taken to the
Police Station until the parents or guardian are
contacted to come and pick them up. He noted
7
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
CURFEW that one of the other suggestions Council might
want to consider, which is not included in the
ordinance presented to Council, is that if the
parent or guardian does not come to pick up the
juvenile then the City could make it a separate
violation. He noted that otherwise the juvenile
would be directed home, taken to their home, or
taken to an extended family member' s home.
Lubovich noted that there are other options
which are set forth in the new ordinance and
permitted according to State Statute if a parent
or guardian does not pick up the juvenile such as
taking them- to the Department of Social and
Health Services office but it depends on what
Council decides to do.
Orr noted that part of the discretionary power of
the Police Department in deciding whether or not
to take the juvenile into custody could be used
as a protective device because if a child is in a
situation where they are endangered on the
streets it could be used to get them out of that
situation.
Lubovich clarified for Houser that a police
officer can currently take a juvenile into pro-
tective custody.
Mayor White declared the public hearing open.
Floyd Bacon, 24311 - 35th Avenue South, Kent,
noted that last winter his mailbox was bent
completely over and laid down on the street
along with other mailboxes that were damaged. He
noted that three individuals were seen around
10:00 p.m. in the area but that he wasn't sure if
they were involved in this situation so he
decided to call the City. He was informed that
if a juvenile is going from point A to point B,
it is allowed but he questioned the Council as to
whether or not the Police, when called, are going
to respond and check out situations because there
has been vandalism and thefts in his neighborhood
which is primarily residential without theaters
or businesses close by.
HOUSER MOVED to close the public hearing. . Orr
seconded.
8
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
CURFEW Lubovich noted that the real problem with curfew
ordinances in the State is that, according to the
Courts, juveniles have the same constitutional
rights to be out at night as adults and the
Courts have recognized that there are some excep-
tions to these rights but that they have to be
demonstrated which has created the difficulty in
dealing with these, ordinances.
There was no further discussion and the motion to
close the public hearing then carried.
BENNETT MOVED to put the Kent Police Department
Memorandum dated 7/1/97 into the public record.
Orr seconded and the motion carried.
BENNETT MOVED to schedule this matter for the
July 15, 1997 , Council meeting for further con-
sideration and action on the proposed ordinance.
Johnson seconded and the motion carried.
BENNETT MOVED to authorize the City Clerk to
collect names of interested persons to serve on
committees to draft arguments advocating
"approval" and "disapproval" statements for the
ballot proposition, and to present the names of
interested persons to the Council at the July 15,
1997 meeting. Houser seconded and the motion
carried.
Mayor White thanked the Council and noted that he
originally supported the first curfew all the way
through. He also expressed that with the con-
cerns of the City Attorney, he supports what is
being proposed now.
Lubovich noted that he will be making adjustments
to the proposed ordinance and will include any
changes the Council may have. Mayor White
encouraged Lubovich to draft the very best possi-
ble ordinance that will withstand challenges.
Orr agreed with the Mayor and added that as far
as giving the officer discretion as to whether or
not to take a juvenile into custody, it can work
both ways. She noted that it can work for the
protection of the child as well as protection of
the neighborhood if the child is completely out
of control and can't be just urged to go home.
M She requested that taking a juvenile into custody
be included in the proposed ordinance.
9
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
HEALTH & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H)
SANITATION Kent Motel. ACCEPT the bill of sale for Kent
Motel submitted by Michael Cohen dba M.C.
Construction for continuous operation and
maintenance of 425 feet of waterline, 512 feet
of street improvements, 112 feet of storm sewers
and release of bonds after the expiration period,
as recommended by the Public Works Director. The
project is located in the vicinity of East Valley
Highway and S. 224th Street.
DOWNTOWN (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
ACTION PLAN Downtown Strategic Action Plan. On June 2, 1997 ,
the Land Use and Planning Board made a recom-
mendation to the City Council on the proposed
Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The Planning
Board held several workshops on the Plan,
beginning in January 1997 and culminating in
public hearings held on May 27 and June 2, 1997 .
The Downtown Strategic Plan is an action-oriented
subarea plan and integrated environmental impact
statement; it outlines a host of land use,
infrastructure design, and development actions
which help to strengthen the economic and social
stature of downtown Kent.
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager, gave a review
of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. He noted
that the City. Council and City Administration
have felt very strongly about the downtown area
since 1966 and that the Downtown Plan is cur-
rently listed as the #7 priority on the Council's
Target Issues. He explained that the Planning
Department had applied for a PERF (Planning and
Environmental Review Funding) Grant over a year
ago and has now received a $150, 000 grant from
the Department of Community Trade and Economic
Development to do the Downtown Plan. Satterstrom
noted that the City Council put in $25, 000 to do
a market analysis, and that the City received a
large share of State monies to conduct the
Strategic Plan. He noted that the effort has
been so successful along the way, and that the
State has been so pleased with the process of it
that they also included an additional $10, 000
in May to bring their total contribution to
$160, 000. 00 to help the City define the community
focal point. He explained that the Strategic
Action Plan lists a series of actions and
strategies that, if implemented, will achieve
10
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
DOWNTOWN that plan. He noted that the PERF grant
ACTION PLAN integrates both the Growth Management and the
State Environmental Policy Act, and that it will
achieve a relatively stream-lined process for
development in Downtown (any development that is
consistent with the vision) .
Satterstrom .explained that the Strategic Action
Plan does not replace the existing Downtown Plan,
the Land Use Plan, or the zoning. He noted that
the proposed Strategic Action Plan does modify or
does suggest some slight modifications to the
Downtown Land Use Plan but that it is mainly
concerned with the actions necessary to implement
the Plan. He explained that there has been
extensive public review and opportunities for
input along the way with the kick off starting on
July 31, 1996, followed by eight public work-
shops, numerous Stake Holder Board Meetings, four
Workshops with the Land Use and Planning Board
which also held two public hearings, and two
workshops with the Council back in January and
March to try to keep the Council updated 'on this
process.
Linda Phillips,' Planner with the Kent Planning
Department, thanked all the In-House people,
consultants, and the people from the community
who took part and gave so much time and effort to
this project. She noted that the potential for
the downtown area is enormous. She also noted
that the Land Use and Planning Board approved the
Downtown Strategic Action Plan. Phillips
outlined the Land Use & Planning Board recom-
mendations to the City Council as follows:
(1) Further study of the commuter rail station
location alternatives, both north and south;
(2) The North Park area east of Fourth Avenue
North on the north side of James Street should
retain the existing single family residential
designation on the Comprehensive Plan map and in
the zoning code; (3) The single family residen-
tial designated area north of James Street
between 4th Avenue North and Fifth Avenue
North should be designated mixed use on the
Comprehensive Plan Map and in the zoning code as
recommended by staff; (4) Eliminate the con-
ceptual parking area shown on the plan graphic of
the Commons Play Field; (5) Create angle parking
on the west side of an improved Fifth Avenue
11
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997 _..
DOWNTOWN South adjacent to the Commons Play Field, north
ACTION PLAN of James Street, and create a drop off and pick
up area for children along this improved right-
of-way; (6) Study traffic patterns in North Park
for ingress, egress and safety; (7) Study the
parking for the uplands playfield located between
Meeker Street and Smith Street adjacent to the
Union Pacific Railroad; (8) Develop realistic
costs associated with the plan actions;
(9) Develop a gateway area at the Intersection
of North Central Avenue and the Valley Freeway
(SR 167) .
Phillips explained that a model of downtown Kent
will be provided and changed, to reflect the
growth and development of the City. He noted
that the model will be a good tool for planners
as well as business and community people with a
view. She also noted that if the Plan is adopted
then a downtown promotional video and a market
analysis brochure will be released to tell people
what downtown can offer and give a good enthusi-
astic view of the potential downtown. She noted
that presentation graphics of the downtown vision
if it developed to the density and size that is
recommended by' the Comprehensive Plan, the
Downtown Plan, and the Downtown Strategic Action
Plan will be available also. Phillips noted that
these things will be finalized when the plan is
adopted because they are dependent on the makeup
of the Plan at the time that it is adopted.
ORR MOVED to accept the Downtown Strategic Action
Plan as recommended by the Land Use and Planning
Board and forward it to the next Planning
Committee Meeting on July 15, 1997 at 4 : 00 p.m.
for further consideration. Houser seconded.
Upon Mayor White's question, Orr explained that
the Plan is to have some public meetings on this,
if necessary, and that several individuals have
contacted her who want to meet with the Council
in a less formal setting than a full Council
meeting. She noted that this could be accom-
plished better on a Committee level and then make
a firm recommendation back to the full Council.
The motion then carried.
12
Kent City Council Minutes July 11 1997
ANNEXATION (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E)
green River Annexation. ADOPTION of Resolution
No. 1493 authorizing an election for the Green
River Annexation. The City Council Planning
Committee recommends that the area be annexed
through a ballot measure. If approved by the
Boundary Review Board, the election should occur
in either the primary election in September or
the general election in November.
PLATS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3L)
Pacific Terrace Final Plat, SET July 15, 1997 ,
as the date for a public meeting to consider a
final plat application by Pacific Industries,
Inc. The preliminary subdivision was approved by
the City Council, as recommended by the Hearing
Examiner, on August 61 1996. The plat is 4 .79
acres, consists of 25 lots, and is located at
10605, 10707 , and 10717 SE 248th Street in Kent.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3M)
Swan Court Final Plat. SET July 15, 1997, as the
date for a public meeting to consider a final
_. plat application by Swanson Homes. The pre-
liminary subdivision was approved by the City
Council, as recommended by the Hearing Examiner,
on July 16, 1996. The plat is 4 .57 acres, con-
sists of 16 lots, and is located south of SE
240th Street between 112th Avenue SE and 114th
Place SE if extended.
(CONSENT CALENDAR —ITEM 3N)
Country View Estates II Final Plat. SET July 15,
1997, as the date for a public meeting to con-
sider a final plat application by Shamrock
Development Corporation. The preliminary sub-
division was approved by the City Council, as
recommended by the Hearing Examiner, on July 16,
1996. The plat is 3 .65 acres, consists of 13
lots, and is located at 22600 100th Avenue SE.
PUBLIC WORKS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F)
Surplus Vehicles. AUTHORIZATION to declare
certain Equipment Rental vehicles no longer
needed by the City as surplus and authorize the
sale thereof at the next state auction, as
recommended by the Public Works Committee.
13
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
PUBLIC WORKS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G)
oil Rebate Grant Funds AUTHORIZATION for the
Mayor to sign the grant agreement with WSDOT for
funds received in the amount of $49, 860, and
direct staff to establish a budget for same and
also authorize said funds to be spent for the
Commuter Shuttle Service Demonstration project,
as recommended by the Public Works committee.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3J)
Meeker Street and RussellRoad Signal ACCEPT as
complete the Meeker/Russell Signalization
Improvements project and release of retainage to
Mer-Con Inc. , upon standard releases from the
State, and release of any liens, as recommended
by the Public Works Committee. The original
contract amount was $69 ,769. 15. The final con-
struction cost was $82 , 218.46. The overage on
this project was due to an increase in quantities
because of the complexity of the project.
Adequate funds exist within the project budget
to cover this overage.
WATER (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3I)
240th/212th Watermain Bridge Improvements.
ACCEPT as complete the 240th/212th Watermain-
Bridge Improvements project and release of
retainage to Frank Coluccio Construction upon
standard releases from the State, and release of
any liens, as recommended by the Public Works
Director. The original contract amount was
$196,715. 17. The final construction cost was
$198, 012 . 14 .
(BIDS - ITEM 5B)
Kent Springs Customer Removal Watermains (152nd
Avenue 8 E To 156th Avenue S.E. ) . The bid
opening for this project was held on June 18th
with three bids received. The low bid was
submitted by Kar-Vel Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $353 , 841. 28 . The Engineer' s estimate
was $353 , 754.73 . The project consists of
removing existing transmission main customers and
transferring them over to Water District ill.
The Public Works Director recommends awarding the
contract to Kar-Vel Construction, Inc.
EPPERLY MOVED that the Kent Springs customer
Removal Watermains contract be awarded to Kar-Vel
Construction, Inc. for the bid amount of
$353 , 841. 28 . Orr seconded and the motion carried.
14
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
APPOINTMENTS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3K)
gutean Services Commission CONFIRMATION of the
Mayor' s appointment of Pastor Johnny Williams to
serve as a member of the Kent Human Services
Commission. He currently serves as Pastor of the
Word of Praise Ministry. Paster Williams is a
long-time Kent resident and his children attended
Kent schools. He has also owned his own business
in Kent for more than nine years. He is espe-
cially interested in helping the homeless and
believes strongly in assisting them to be self
sufficient. He helps them find employment and
has had a good success rate in hiring them to
work for his own business.
Pastor Williams will represent the religious
community and will replace Rev. Ray Morrison, who
resigned, and his new appointment will continue
until 1/1/99.
FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B)
_An_vroval of Bills. No checks were approved
because of committee schedule changes.
Approval of checks issued for Payroll for June 1
through June 15, 1997 , and paid on June 20, 1997:
Date Check Numbers Amount
6/20/97 Checks 220414-220749 $ 261, 298. 67
6/20/97 Advices 46921-47393 657 ,499 . 93
$ 918 , 798. 60
REPORTS planning Committee. Orr noted that the next
Planning Committee will be held on July 15th at
4 : 00 p.m.
Parks Committee. Johnson noted that the Parks
Committee would like to have any names for the
Golf Task Force submitted to the Mayor's Office
by this coming Thursday.
Mayor White clarified that this is the group that
will review the RFP's and make a recommendation
to the Council.
Administrative Reports. McFall noted that an
Executive Session is scheduled for about 20
minutes and that Council action is anticipated on
one of the litigation matters.
15
Kent City Council Minutes July 1, 1997
REPORTS John Duncalf, 41802 53rd Avenue South, Seattle,
presented the Council with a 291 signature peti-
tion in favor of the continued management and
administration by the current contractor of the
Riverbend Golf Course. He noted that this is a
friendly comment, and that he felt the current
management does a super job. He noted that the
individuals who signed the petition feel strongly
about this issue and that they just wanted to
make a statement.
ORR MOVED to make this petition a part of the
public record. Johnson seconded and the motion
carried.
EXECUTIVE The meeting recessed to executive session at
SESSION 8:00 p.m. and reconvened at 8 : 34 p.m.
LITIGATION HOUSER MOVED that the franchise provision exten-
sion agreement with TCI of Washington, Inc. be
approved subject to approval of final language by
the City Attorney or if no agreement is reached,
authorize establishment of a public hearing date
to address issues of default under the franchise.
Orr seconded and the motion carried, with Bennett
opposed.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8 : 35 p.m.
Donna Swaw
Deputy City Clerk
16
................
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15, 1997
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: PLANNING ASSISTANT POSITION - AUTHORIZATION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Operations
Committee, authorization to convert the Planning Intern
position (an 8-month position) in the Planning Department to a
regular, full-time Planning Assistant position, with benefits.
The final pay scale level will be determined by Employee
Services following creation of a job description. The Planning
Department has the funding resources to pay for this position
through December 21, 1997 , with unused salaries, and then
incorporate it into the 1998 Salaries and Benefits Schedule.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo of 6/26/97
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCALIPERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS•
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3C
CITY OF
Jim White, Mayor
Planning Department (253)859-3390/FAX(253)850-2544
James P. Harris,Planning Director
MEMORANDUM
June 26, 1997
TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR
CITY COUNCIL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
FROM: FRED N. SATTERSTROM, PLANNING MANAGER
RE: CREATION OF A PLANNING ASSISTANT POSITION (CONVERSION OF
EXISTING PLANNING INTERN POSITION)
Proposal:
-- The Planning Services Division is requesting to convert the existing Planning Intern position (8-month
employee,no benefits)to that of a Planning Assistant(regular,full-time employee with benefits). We propose
to utilize existing funding from a variety of sources to fund this position through the 1997 budget year.
Administration has tentatively approved this proposal contingent upon the final review and approval of the
City Council Operations Committee.
Backeround:
Presently,the Planning Intern position is funded at$24,500 annually,which pays for 8-months full-time work
with four(4) months at 69 hours or less. The duties and responsibilities of the Intern are diverse, helping out
in long-range planning as well as permit processing, but at a somewhat lower technical level than that of a
Planner. Over the years, the Intern position has become integral to the operation of the Planning Services
Division. That is, the Intern is involved on a day-to-day basis with minor development plan review, site
inspections, public notice posting, zoning counter work, customer contact, and the like. The Intern is not
stowed away in the back room, unsupervised,plugging away at some low priority project.
While the Intern has become an essential part of the Division, the 8-month position does not constitute a firm
nor a long-term commitment to the employee. Therefore, we have experienced a relatively high degree of
turn-over recently. Armin Quilici resigned in November, and now Kim Marousek has resigned after only five
months with the City.
A permanent position with benefits would help to retain an individual in this capacity while also allowing for
w additional work hours over the course of the year. Further, it is proposed to create a new job description- i.e.,
"Planning Assistant" -at a lower pay level than that:ofPlanner.. I am currently in preliminary discussions with
Planning Assistant Memo
June 26, 1997
Page 2
Employee Services regarding the specific job duties, qualifications and pay level. At this time, it is
anticipated that the position would be compensated at a pay level between 25 and 28 since the position's
responsibilities of the Planning Assistant position would be less than that of Planner which is compensated
at level 32. Creation of the Planning Assistant position, compensated at this lower level, would save dollars
over the long run while creating some room for upward mobility in the Planning Services Division. Also,
since the Planning Assistant would perform many of the more "routine" duties, such as posting, it would
contribute to more efficient utilization of staff resources.
Fundine:
The annual cost for a Planning Assistant position paid at level 28 would be$47,496, including benefits. Were
this position to be filled by August 1997, the cost for five(5)months of employment would be approximately
$19,790. Beginning in 1998, this position would be added to the General Fund. The $19,790 cost for 5
months of 1997 could come from the following sources:
1. Unexpended Planning Intern funds$14,384
2. Unexpended Salaries (18.40)$ 5,600 _.
012hons:
There are other options to the above proposal. One alternative would be to create a Planner position at the
existing 32 pay level. While this alternative is satisfactory, a lower-paid position could save money while
fulfilling many of the duties and responsibilities now handled by planners at a higher pay scale- A second
option is to contract for services, hiring out certain work to contract employees or consultants. This
alternative is usually expensive as well as cumbersome. A third alternative is to do nothing, which would
amount to continuing the present practice of hiring an 8-month employee. This option is not working well
for reasons cited earlier in this report.
Recommendation:
The Planning Services Division requests the Operation Committee approval to convert the Planning Intem
position to a regular, full-time Planning Assistant position, with benefits, funded at a level between 25-28,
final pay scale level to be determined by Employee Services following creation of a job description.
AAPLANASST.ION
cc: James P. Hams, Planning Director
Brent McFall, Director of Operations
Sue Viseth, Employee Services Division Manager _.
4r ` ' -
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15, 1997
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: SITE MANAGER POSITION - GREEN RIVER NATURAL
RESOURCES ENHANCEMENT AREA - AUTHORIZATION AND
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Operations
Committee, authorization to create a. Site Manager position for
the Green River Natural Resources Enhancement Area project to
be funded out of the drainage utility. The final pay scale
will be determined by Employee Services following creation of a
job description.
3 . EXHIBITS: Director of Operations memorandum and Director of
Public Works memorandum
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations 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. 3D
- MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 27, 1997
TO: Jon Johnson, Operations Committee Chair
Jim Bennett, Operations Committee Member
Leona Orr, Operations Committee Member
CC: City Council Members
FROM: J. Brent McFall, Director of Operations 441r,14(
SUBJECT: Site Manager Position-Green River Natural Resources Enhancement Area Project
I concur with Don Wickstrom and Bill Wohnsids need assessment and would recommend committee
approval of the creation of the subject Site Manager Position. As outlined in the attached
memorandums, hiring this position now will save in consulting fees and not impact the general fund.
Following approval of this position, Employee Services will create a job description and pay level
based on the attached job duties.
w Proposed motion: Recommend creation of a Site Manager position for the Green River Natural
Resources Enhancement Area project to be funded out of the drainage utility. Final pay scale to be
determined by Employee Services following.creation of a job description.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
RE
June 20, 1997
Brent McFall OFF/CFOF�5199j
TO: I�I
FROM: Don WickstromJU�I
RE: Site Manage Position
Attached is a memo from Bill Wolinski to me requesting early implementation of the
Site Manager position for the Green River Natural Resources Enhancement Area Project
(Lagoon Conversion) for which I concur. As you are aware this is a 300 acre site that
will be open to the public. Further, it will include a 4 acre operating native plant
nursery, all of which will require on-going maintenance. In addition, due to the size of
the site, visual presence is necessary for security and vandalism prevention purposes.
Under the Corps permit we are required to monitor the site for the next ten years. A
synopsis of the monitoring requirements is attached. The Corps permit assumes and we
must assure that the planting regime that establishes itself is the one they approved To
do so will require a lot of initial care and maintenance of the plantings. Even upon
establishment of the plantings, there is on-going maintenance to retain the balance
between flood control and the health of the ecosystem. The flood control aspects
themselves will also require a significant amount of on-going maintenance and operation
work. Presently our consultant is completing the facility's operation and maintenance
manual but the bottom line however is, there will be a need for an on-site manager and
by hiring now we could save on consulting fees.
Since this is a drainage area facility, long-term maintenance costs thereof would be a
utility expense and as such there would be no impact on the general fund
C6 r 2 2 p
o E ■ n ' cr
§
� m _
0
ƒ
. � .
k
_
� , c
ƒ f ■ � CD
' 0 ' —
E
3 » § E % 00
§ o
i22 /n �
' � O
; n § 7 _ � o �
C
IV
CD n
§ n 7 a , CD
i §
, c A ■
E2 E � � CD
ƒ � r $ § &
m � sm f
J � /` .
«
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
May 9, 1997
TO: Don Wickstrom
FROM: . Bill Wolinsid
RE: Position Request
I am writing to request your consideration for creating a full time permanent position
of Site Manager for the Green River Natural Resources Enhancement Area. I have
enclosed a draft position description for your review.
There are several important advantages for taking action at this time. Two major
contracts involving the site are to be initiated this summer. The first contract
involves the initial landscaping of.the site comprising of the planting and
establishment of approximately $500,000 of wetland trees, shrubs and plants. The
second contract involves the construction and initial start-up of the native plant
nursery. The preliminary cost estimate for providing inspection services for the two
contracts is in excess of $70,000. The Site Manager would be capable of performing
these services while gaining valuable knowledge on the details of the plant materials,
installation and maintenance.
The initial cost savings on inspection would, for the most part, offset the expense of
creating and filling the position at this time. As a condition of obtaining the Corps of
Engineers permit for the construction of the Green River Natural Resources
Enhancement Area Project, the City is required to perform monitoring of water
quality, fish utilization, wildlife use and wetland establishment for a period of ten
years. By assigning these responsibilities to the Site Manager substantial cost savings
can be realized. I will provide you with additional information or explanation if
needed.
Position: SITE MANAGER for the Green River Natural Resources Enhancement Area
Description: This full-time position in the Public Works Department, Engineering Division will be -
responsible for management and operation of the newly-constructed Green River Natural Resources
Enhancement Area(GRNREA). Representative duties will include:
• Working with and managing all aspects of plant nursery operation, including plant propagation
and maintenance, equipment and supply procurement and maintenance, arboreteum development,
supervision of site activities, employees and volunteers; coordination with local agencies, other
city departments, and volunteer and school groups.
• Oversee operation and management of approximately 300 acre GRNREA site, performing such
varied tasks as water level management, organizing and participating in planting and plant
maintenance activities, monitoring wildlife use, coordinating with appropriate parties involved in
data acquisition, equipment repair and maintenance, etc.
• Participate in various public presentations on the facility to school groups, volunteers,agencies
and the general public. Participating in meetings on various project elements.
• Reviewing consultant monitoring reports and participating in data acquisition as necessary.
MWim ,mQualifications: In order to perform this job effectively, the Site Manager will have the
following education and experience:
• Hands-on and management level experience working at a plant nursery
• Knowledge of Pacific Northwest plants and animals -
• Minimum 2 (4?) years of college level course work in biology, botany, wetland ecology, wildlife
management or natural resource management, OR equivalent level of experience working in one
of these areas.
• Demonstrated ability to communicate effectively with a wide variety of groups (department stag,
agency staff, volunteers, general public, etc.)
• Skill in developing promotional and educational materials
• Knowledge of budgeting and financial management practices, procedures and methods, including
grant writing and developing requests for proposals
• Develop and monitor public preservation programs
• Recruit, train, supervise and evaluate part-time employees and volunteers
Desirable Qualifications: include...
• Habitat management experience
• Knowledge of basic computer software programs, such as Word, Excel, facility management
programs, etc.
• Ability to work independently and to self-motivate and think proactively
• Physical fitness in order to perform some moderately strenuous physical work, such as walking,
lifting, minor equipment maintenance, etc....
Approximate Salary Range: $ 30,000-50,000 annually (?)
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15 , 1997
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: RUSSELL SHORT PLAT - BILL OF SALE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Director, authorization to accept the bill of sale for Russell
Short Plat submitted by Michael A. Russell & Sonja D. Russell
for continuous operation and maintenance of 230 feet of street
improvements, 20 feet of storm sewers, and release of bonds
after the expiration period. The project is located in the
vicinity of South 222nd Street and 94th Avenue South
3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(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. 3E
F L)
NOS F N W p Qom.
._..- � � ¢m SE 210TH
S 211TH ST
i a 0 211
S 212TH ST - r F.. ..- y��� 'ar1\O�+mI W SE 2IT-
SE213THH FE...212T qST .,.._..__ Fl. '2lSE
___ `�..:.... .._
�..� CT
4 '/f 213 PL 213TH i Sr 2137H Pl. = r ro c^
W
214 PL W '¢ �Vlp °' Qj 214/PL Y J
v....
216TH ST
216TH ST
OD d
1. .• OO 6 i _ _ C
S ) �
I W� I •J
r • e O: 01 �� ' H6 F
2101H ST ..... _ ,T ¢ PL
.___._......._.... L
z�eTH sue. _. - i _ _
.' ..� SEL21
m :9E 220TH 9T
w 22PYT 222 PL
a' '• _. �o
m
SE
PROJECT LOCATION
o/ 222ND ST Z! •�- 8._222N0 ST _
IST
S 222ND ST )\J
--Fn �. ri n 2713 LN
!!S
iti .^, ._.. 1,l s. 23F�1
224:PL _•
2
�9 225 SI_N SE ,•^�2'
SE^22STM PL 2 W r._.�
w i w \ 2 L ¢
\ J
p i 226TH 9T
E 2271N g
.. ...._... 9 22 TH ST 228 CT[� TH S ..,.29
229, o N2
!E 2 N
L �T' T SE 226TH ST. ..`-r. •.>
ST x
f2
I
l Dt230._5i.�..._
3E 231 57 ...._— z30 PC .,231$T_S7
232ND
O
m S 232ND m SE 232 ST l^
m
NOYRC IN j
t o
Lx >
N 233 PL ?�3 s
CT 1 Zr ----------
O
Tn / 1
00 m c
,"'4 PL it W W Qv 01��57 _o_j-�� -
S
�06�SE 296TH ST
SE 236T
-H PL 23_6 eL
th l¢L237TH ST
BOUT DRON NRT Yg2rSON 237TH ¢ w' >
m SE 238TH ST
W <fr W �i
z m I' ¢�'a P` ¢ S 236TH mi i ._.. ¢ W
_ _ F
I ..GEORGE �� w e o i - i SE ry 239TH ST
T�-lws
2 V'IE- CT 238Tj1. m��./ P PLS 240TH STS 239T L
m
w o 9 2413T sT m�
CE R
t12ND ST
PIONEER ST ¢
- 242HO LTA
r m
MLMILL TEMP RNCE ST m 9 2fro-
AN
w SMITH ST N 244TH w
w' a� RUSSELL SHORT PLAT
a!NRRD -�q '
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15 1997
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: 277TH CORRIDOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE - ACCEPT AS
COMPLETE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Director, accept as complete the S. 277th Corridor Pedestrian
Bridge project and release of retainage to DMB Contractors upon
standard releases from the State, and release of any liens.
The original contract amount was $495,843 .72 . The final
Construction cost was $539, 144 . 58. The overage was due to the
purchase of additional required material for the project after
the bid was released. Adequate funds exist within the project
budget to cover this overage.
3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(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. 3F
SL 79TN RYES
r/ N as
BNRR
BOTH AVE S
� I m
1 � ?
1 1
a EAST VALLEY RD.
9 b
O
I i 85TH AVE S
8STH RIVE 5 1 ` MAPLE LANE
y S 3Atl
\_i-' / 1
88TH AVE S �`�
~ / r
1 , ,
0 ST NE
� r
1 /
/
97TH PL
� / Z
lum
r
D c
...... _J 99TM'L 99TH PL
—1 m m
10157
102NO VE
10STH AYE SE 1067M AVE SE
o �2�
' J j
m /
311VE
108TH AVE SE
10U Ni m o Q109.i �GDCTti 41IOTMAYE 110i-_1117" CT 111TN AYE3 3AM A1T11
CT \ 112TH AVE SE
11YTH AVE 5E S 277TH CORRIDOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
l
1
G
;, ,
��
� �
� �.
� �
',
Kent City Council Meeting
_. Date July 15 1997
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: PACIFIC TERRACE FINAL PLAT FSU-96-12
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set to consider the
Pacific Terrace Final Plat. The plat • is 4 . 79 acres in size and
is located at 10605, 10707 ,. and 10717 SE 248th Street. The
preliminary plat was approved by the- City Council on August 6,
1996.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo, map, City Council minutes of 8/6/96
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff
(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
to approve the Pacific Terrace Final Plat with 23 conditions,
as recommended by staff.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4A
CITY OF T_0t?\,4_t!21Sff1T
Jim White, Mayor
Planning Department (206)859-3390/FAX(206) 850-2544
James P. Harris, Planning Director
MEMORANDUM
July 15, .1997
MEMO TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: PACIFIC TERRACE FINAL PLAT#FSU-96-12
On August 6, 1996, the City Council approved the Pacific Terrace Preliminary Subdivision SU-96-
12, a 25-lot single family residential plat. The site is approximately 4.79 acres in size and is located
a 10605, 10707, 10717 SE 248th Street in Kent, Washington. The property is presently zoned SR-6,
Single Family Residential, with a 5,700 square foot minimum lot size. Twenty-three conditions
w were part of the Council's approval. The applicant has now complied with these conditions as listed
below and has made an application for a final plat. Staff recommends approval of this application.
A. Prior to recordation of the PACIFIC TERRACE subdivision:
1. The subdivider/developer shall comply with all applicable conditions of the
Determination ofNon-Significance for the Pacific Terrace Subdivision(ENV-96-29).
a) The. subdivider/developer shall execute an environmental mitigation
agreement to participate in, and pay a fair share of the construction costs of
the City's South 272nd/277th Street Corridor Project. The minimum benefit
to the subdivider/developer is estimated at$23,496 based upon 22 AM/PM
Peak Hour Trips and the capacity of the South 272nd/277th Street Corridor.
The final benefit value will be determined based on the number of lots
approved upon the final plat map multiplied times $1068 ( in 1986 dollars )
and as adjusted for inflation.
b) The subdivider/developer shall construct a 5 foot wide paved shoulder as a
pedestrian walkway along South 248th Street from the easterly terminus of
the sidewalk improvements on South 248th Street,constructed in conjunction
with this plat to 109th Avenue Southeast.
C) The subdivider/developer shall revise the configuration of Lots 24 and 25 to
consolidate access via 26-foot wide private access tract, per City Standards
a gravity sanitary sewer system to serve all lots. The sewer system shall be
1204th AVE. SO. 'KEST.WASH INMON 001'_ TELEPHONF. 1_0618iQ-1400/FAX a 4ao 7a.t
Pacific Terrace Final Plat#FSU-96-12
July 15, 1997 -
extended to Southeast 248th Street and along the entire plat frontage thereon,
and shall be sized to serve all off-site properties within the same service area.
d) All existing driveway(s)onto Southeast 248th Street shall be eliminated, and
moved/reconfigured to place them onto 108th Court Southeast.
e) The subdivider/developer shall waive abutter's access rights across the entire
frontage of the subdivision on Southeast 248th Street, east of 108th Court
Southeast, as well as across the entire frontage of Lot 2 -- except as required
for Mitigation Measure#4. Said access restriction shall be clearly stated upon
the face of the subdivision map.
f) The subdivider/developer shall execute a signal participation covenant to
financially participate in, and pay a proportionate cost of the, the future
installation of a fully-actuated traffic signalization system(s) at the
intersection of Southeast 248th Street at 116th Avenue Southeast.
2. Prior to preliminary plat approval the owner/subdivider for this development shall
submit a detailed drainage plan including: infiltration retention for the 100-year, 24-
hour design storm (preferred ), or detention meeting the requirements for open pond
detention meeting the requirements for the Hill if the owner/ subdivider's engineer
provides evidence that infiltration is not feasible; above ground stormwater
treatment; conveyance and full flow velocities for the 100-year, 24-hour design
storm; and a detailed downstream analysis for at least one-quarter mile downstream
from the point of discharge from the proposed plat. This drainage plan will clearly
identify the existing and future capacity of each link in the drainage system for the
one-quarter mile downstream analysis if 100 percent infiltration retention is not used.
This drainage plan will include as-built calculations for live storage in the two
downstream private detention systems if 100 percent infiltration retention is not used.
The stormwater drainage plan shall include at least those strategies identified on page
2 of Exhibit 2 including providing additional detention for the apartment sites,
lowering the overflow pipe of the Kent Meadows Apartment lake, raising the rim
elevation of the catch basin numbered Point 1 in the Kent Meadows Apartments and
replacing the 12 inch pipe under 109th Avenue SE.
3. The owner/subdivider shall dedicate sufficient right-of--way, across the entire
subdivision frontage on Southeast 248th Street, for the widening of Southeast 248th
Street to City Standards for a Residential Collector roadway augmented with bicycle
lanes for a total half-street right-of-way width of 31.5 feet. This deed of right-of-way
shall be provided based upon a survey to be performed by a licensed land surveyor
of the subject property. Southeast 248th Street, and shall clearly delineate the
existing public right-of-way, curb lines, pavement edges, and public improvements
Pacific Terrace Final Plat#FSU-96-12
July 15, 1997
W on Southeast 248th Street, and any additional right-of-way needed to widen
Southeast 248th Street as noted.
4. The owner/subdivider shall dedicate sufficient right-of-way for the construction of
the plat street to City Standards for a Residential Street,minimum right-of-way width
of 49 feet, including a minimum 51.5-foot radius [at property line, 45-foot radius at
curb line] in the turnaround.
5. The owner/subdivider shall provide engineering drawings for review and approval
by the City, and either construct or bond for the following.
a. A gravity sanitary sewer system to serve all lots. The septic systems serving
the existing homes within the proposed plat shall be abandoned in accordance
with King County Health Dept regulations.
b. A water system meeting domestic and fire flow requirements for all lots.
C. A 32-foot wide paved roadway; concrete curbs and gutters; five [ 5 ]-foot
wide concrete sidewalks along both sides of the 108th Court Southeast; 35-
foot radius curb returns at all internal street intersections [ the 'eyebrow'
located approximately 100-feet south of Southeast 248th Street] and at the
intersection of 108th Court Southeast at Southeast 248th Street; street
lighting; storm drainage; street channelization; utilities and appurtenances.
d. A 35-foot wide paved roadway across the entire subdivision frontage of
South 248th Street. Said improvements shall include a 23-foot wide half
street improvement on the southerly side of the right-of-way centerline, or
future roadway centerline as determined by the City based on the survey
required in condition B.1 above, (one half of a residential collector street plus
a bicycle lane), and a 12-foot wide westbound travel lane on the northerly
side of the centerline. The improvements shall also include concrete curbs
and gutters; five [ 5 ]-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the southerly side of
South 248th Street; street lighting; storm drainage; street channelization;
utilities and appurtenances, 35-foot radius curb returns at the intersection of
South 248th Street at the plat street, plus adequate transitions to the east and
west of the subdivision.
Finally, these improvements shall include, if necessary, an overlay of the
existing roadway pavement on Southeast 248th Street, as necessary, to
provide a 2% crown across the pavement; and, as necessary to meet City
Standards for roadway pavement section-for a Residential Collector roadway.
3
Pacific Terrace Final Plat#FSU-96-12
July 15, 1997
6. The owner/subdivider shall dedicate all necessary public right-of-way for the
improvements listed in Condition A.3 above, and provide all public and private
easements necessary for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the required
improvements.
7. Noted on the face of the plat shall be the following access restrictions:
a. Lots 23 and 2 shall have no vehicular access from South 248th Street.
b. Lots 25 and 24 shall be restricted to one common/shared driveway centered
on their mutual property line, plus each lot shall have a paved turn-around
(vehicle) located within the Lot proper (no backing out onto South 248th
Street will be allowed). Said turn-around facility shall be denoted in the
building plan on the respective Lot in order to secure a Building Permit
thereon.
C. Lot i shall have the same turn-around provisions as noted for Lots 24 and 25.
8. The developer shall submit detailed Grading and Temporary Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plans to the City Public Works Department for review and
approval prior to any on-site work. Design of temporary erosion controls shall be in
accordance with Kent Construction Standards.
9. To prevent or minimize water pollution after construction, the site design shall
incorporate Best Management Practices, or BMPs, wherever practicable. BMPs are
specific structures or actions intended to prevent pollution at the source. Examples
of BMPs include storm drain stenciling, covered storage areas, periodic sweeping of
materials off of pavement surfaces before they can wash down into the storm drain,
and trash bins with impervious lids.
10. Dedicate five percent (5%) of the total plat area being developed as open space park
land or pay a fee in lieu of dedication as set forth in Ordinance No. 2975.
B. Prior to issuance of a development permit on any lot in the PACIFIC TERRACE
subdivision #SU 96-12:
1. The subdivider/developer shall construct the improvements noted in Section A,
above.
2. A tree plan for the general site, for the roadway, and for all individual lots showing
all trees six inches in diameter or greater, and their relationship to any proposed
structure, must be approved by the Kent Planning Department prior to approval and
construction of the final roadway design and prior to the issuance of a development
4
Pacific Terrace Final Plat#FSU-96-12
July 15, 1997
permit for any lot. No trees of six inch caliper or greater shall be removed from any
lot except in conformance with a tree plan approved by the Kent Planning
Department.
JPH/mp:c:su9612cc.fp
5
SOUTHEAST 2-481h S I Ft_r.:
`-----
____ 324.79'
N W43-W W w 438A6' -
-77
88.06' S7.<9'' 15J' o
57 '9
' 70.00' C --
I 15 a1 L -50
SEE NOI E,14n
r �) SHEET 3 OF 3
15'r-S10RM
i _ . e < ' 523E rn ry
DRAINAGE 85 - 0 5 c - a�< 24 25
EASEMENT SIUE i
2 EASEMENI 05' ....
o
o - CIA o 00p C2a rt 7 `p2.60 w z z
j z wR C2 C23 rn 57.29' 57.29
�(
C3 22 v m N 8843'1 a" W I 1 4.58 -
N 1 70.00 101 76 o
N 88'43'14" W 171.76' C4 5.80'-- '� z w7
N 68'43'14" w
\\'y �. 21
84.46 C5 tJ 50..38'13" E
4.00
s �yti 2' E
w 3 5 1 5'R S� �� 555 0 n
C4 cl C r� C6 v, l� by v,• N 7 1308a n
N ,•, ^ N C7 C8 \Sr C22
o TRACT 'A' 0 05� �o '� ,ti5 \ 20 O En eO�
Z w DEDICATED TO THE C21 N V
c11r OF kENr s�o`y N 84-16'31.. E co (�
�.
• a��07� C9 w C20 19 m
o y 6 0 0
46.39' f14.16' "' " N 88-21'09" w
86.50' S1.36' rn
N 818Y.Wow W 154.25 N 88-21'09" w N � 102 02' -
102 14 LLI rn 18 p Q
0
o I u? 00
m 7
�
, W^
fJ-
QN 88'2109 IN
101 96' ZADUS LECTI1 � ov
Rv LLO EDELTA235 N 88'2109 w
_ QC_�5.00' '. 02 8' Z13-49'05" 116.50' 2810
S00 3.SI 17
1541 > 88.21'09
17,578 "20
A 22'33'39 Wo 101.91 qg085 25.00
27
33'22'a4'
6 a ' 30.00' -9 88-21'09" w O
51.50' 29.07 102.41' ir
' S
5 57'13'27" 15.00' t a.98 j - n -5' 0 25' "' 16 ' 0 O 4
C9_- at'00'S _ 53.69 LA � 9 C10, I C19 E[Rl Z T
`10---y--53'01'21..- 15.00'_-37.96' �' �' �' C18 j1 I
41,13'S5" St50' d r1 t� 0 0l
�Ip- 43.03- 26' 51.50'_ 25.00' N '733y3.. W7R1 / N a�
ci -17'49'08 51.50 -_ - g 3a.
ri4 12 34-59'30" 51.50' 23.6' J C17 15�5- -i3--}1'S -' 51.50' 28.67 Z
14--07.49051 0' 25.00' C.{' W p
Ci7 19--45•51•19 51.50 at. 2 N o t0 \ ,y 6 W
32''_6'06' 51.50'_ 29.15 j� Y
`t'0
J In 1�1 5'pa..
i.t9 16 53'Ot'20" 15.00' 13.88' n o '� .;13 51.5'R Ct6 8R ,1..
19 16'18'32" 125.00' _35.58' �1- Z �� 05 IR1
110
08" 125.00 40.55' h9'L2�`; C 1 a i _C 15 .y
21 06*06'S8" 125.00 13.34
N 90 EE NOTE? 5
20-19'16" 75.00' 26.60' No. 1 - o �S. 14
w
2 20'19 t 7" 75.00' 26.60' BEEO ro i1
90'00'00" 15.00' 23.56' n ��rya p 0
' 13 �sv_ o
o /, 12 J m
ry
to r s
46.1 1' 94 42' 93.00' 2 I J 2 59.01
_ 313.65 -
N 8853'09'W 254.64'
uE if+ nE.1/A J. Sw /•. SEC. 20-22-5 CORUER
LAKE VILLAS APARTMENTS
GRAPHIC SCALE
50
O 25 50 1
;uNi r raOuureEUT iN CASE. 40, r11Rn�DALEY-RAI F
QP ,1 AASM� t215 �_E tt'
` C KEIII, :fAV51
( IN FEET 1 C vr+Or1E-i_0611354
1 loch = 50 tt
-111 1WERED 1)rl 22962 p 2 I �,�, A
� Et
ArID 73. JipV4tl A" SA \L
,1i E,AE DE3CRIPT10N E 44t lAh�
i ql rnqurI OF SECTION nn ePv qo 4 ..a �-
August 6, 1996
PLAT (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
Pacific Terrace Preliminary Plat SU-96-12 .
This date has been set to consider the Hearing
Examiner' s recommendation for conditional
approval of an application by Pacific Industries,
Inc. for a 25-lot single family residential
preliminary subdivision. The property is located
at 10605 , 10707, and 10717 SE 248th Street in
Kent.
ORR MOVED to accept the Findings of the Hearing
Examiner and to adopt the Hearing Examiner' s
recommendation of approval with 23 conditions of
the Pacific Terrace Preliminary Plat, a 25-lot
single family residential preliminary sub-
division. Houser seconded and the motion
carried.
FINANCE (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2A)
1997 Preliminary Budget. This date has been set
for the first public hearing on the 1997 budget.
The next hearing will be held on November 5, 1996
with adoption planned for November. Public input
is desired and welcome as the City begins to
prepare for the 1997 budget.
Mayor White opened the public hearing. There
were no comments from the audience, and HOUSER
MOVED to close the public hearing. Woods
seconded and the motion carried.
(PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 2B)
1997-2002 Cavital• Pacilities Plan. This date has
been set to receive public input on the 1997-2002
Capital Facilities Plan. The Capital Facilities
Plan includes all expenditures for the next six
years as described in the City' s Capital Facility
portion of the Comprehensive Plan. The plan can
be amended each year but must be presented to the
Planning Director by September 1. Public input
is encouraged as this plan is finalized for
the City of Kent's Capital Facilities and
Infrastructure Improvements.
Mayor White opened the public hearing. There
were no comments from the audience, and ROUSER
MOVED to close the public hearing. Woods
seconded and the motion carried.
3
...............
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15. 1997
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: SWAN COURT FINAL PLAT FSU-95-4
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set to consider the
Swan Court Final Plat. The plat is 4 .57 acres in size and is
located south of SE 240th Street between 112th Avenue SE and
114th Place SE, if extended. The preliminary plat was approved
by the City Council on July 16, 1996.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo, map and City Council minutes of 7/16/96
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 1
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
Fsu-95-�{
to approve the Swan Court Final Plat with 25 conditions, as
recommended by staff.
DISCUSSION: �2 -
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4B
CITY OF 'Q\.,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
Jim White, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
July 15, 1997
MEMO TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: SWAN COURT FINAL PLAT #FSU-95-4
On July 16, 1996, the City Council approved the Swan Court Preliminary Subdivision SU-95-4, a
16-lot single family residential plat. The site is approximately 4.57 acres in size and is located south
of SE 240th Street between 112th Avenue SE and 114th Place SE if extended. The property is
presently zoned SR-6, Single Family Residential, with a 5,700 square foot minimum lot size.
Twenty-five conditions were part of the Council's approval. The applicant has now complied with
these conditions as listed below and has made an application for a final plat. Staff recommends
approval of this application.
A. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH RECORDATION OF FINAL PLAT:
1. The subdivider shall execute an environmental mitigation agreement to participate
in, and pay a fair share of the construction costs of the City's South 272nd/277th
Street Corridor Project. The minimum benefit to the subdivider is estimated at
S16,020 based upon 15 trips and the capacity of the South 272nd/277th Street
Corridor. The final benefit value will be based on the number of lots approved on
the final plat map multiplied times 51,068 (in 1986 dollars) and as adjusted for
inflation.
2. The subdivider shall waive abutter's access rights across the entire subdivision
frontage of SE 240th Street. This access restriction condition shall be clearly
stated and shown on the face of the subdivision map.
3. The subdivider shall submit a wetland delineation report to the Kent Public Works
Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of any permits and any
on-site work. The contents of this report shall conform to the requirements of
Kent's Construction Standards, the Kent Werland Management Code, and the 1987
Army Corps of Engineers delineation manual. The approved delineated wetland
boundary shall be surveyed and marked with permanent monuments approved by
the Department of Public Works. For this project that werland delineation shall
include all of that portion of the weaand directly west of the proposed subdivision.
The report shall include a fr:11 size (22 inch by 36 inch or 24 inch by 36 inch)
1
P rr-
Swan Court Final Plat #FSU-95-4
July 15, 1997
wetland map prepared to scale by a licensed professional surveyor which shows the
wetland boundary and the approved wetland buffers and the areas bf each. The
report shall also specifically address hydrology and hydroperiod of the wetland and
will provide controls to ensure that the wedand hydrology and hydroperiod shall
not be significantly changed as a result of this development, particularly as it
applies to the proposed sanitary sewer connection, but also as it applies to any
other underground utility which may effect the wetland hydrology.
4. The subdivider shall submit td the Kent Public Works Department for review and
approval a mitigation plan for any work within existing wetlands or wetland
buffers in conformance to the City of Kent Wetlands Management Code. Any
offsite mitigation will require approved easements and/or similar provisions for
parcels within the same. The subdivider shall secure Army Corps of Engineers
approval thereof if applicable.
5. The subdivider shall protect as a separate sensitive area tract in accordance with
the Kent Wetland Management Code the approved and preserved, and/or enhanced
or created wedand(s) and it's buffer(s). This tract shall be consistent with the
wetland map contained within the wetland delineation report and/or wedand
mitigation plan as appropriate. The subdivider shall isolate from intrusion and/or
disturbance, by using either landscaping, or other appropriate screens, as well as
an approved fence line and buffer areas thereof.
6. The subdivider shall place before, during, and after, construction, fences and signs
as approved by the Department of Public Works at the wetland buffer edge to
protect the wetlands and their buffers. and to inform and educate owners and
nearbv residents about the value of wetlands.
7. For anv enhanced and/or created wetlands the subdivider shall provide to the City
a wetland mitigation bond in the amount of 1_25% of the estimated cost for
construction and maintenance for at least three years, plus an additional 10% of the
total cost to cover inflation and administrative review fees shall be posted by the
applicant.
S. The subdivide shall submit detailed Excavation and Fill Plans, Temporary
Drainage Plans, Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plans, and Stormwater
Drainage Plans in compliance to the Construction Standards to Public Works for
review and approval.
9. The subdivider shall provide engineering drawings for review and approval by the
City, and either construct or bond for the following:
a. A graviry saanitarr, serve: system to serve all lots.
Swan Court Final Plat #FSU-95-4
July 15, 1997
b. A water system meeting domestic and fire flow requirements for all lots.
C. A storm drainage system meeting the Kent Standards for conveyance,
detention/retendon, water quality treatment, etc. The minimum detention
standard to be met for this project shall be that for Hillside development.
It should be noted that the indicated tract for both wetland and stormwater
is not large enough to meet the space requirements for both, and is
inconsistent with the requirements of the Wetland Management Code.
Further, because this' development directly discharges stormwater to a
wetland and then to a portion of Upper Garrison Creek which has identified
flood problems, the following stormwater requirements are applicable:
1. An infiltration system is the preferred detendon/retention alternative
an shall be required unless proven unfeasible by the applicant's
design engineer.
2. The required downstream analysis for this development will include
an analysis for both capacity and erosion potential from the point of
discharge to 108th Avenue SE. Should capacity be insufficient to
convey the release rate otherwise permitted by the-Construction
Standards, the applicant shall either provide necessary offsire
improvements OR further restrict the release rate of stormwater to
ensure that the capacity of the existing creek and City storm
drainage system will not be exceeded. Similarly, should the erosion
problem be exacerbated by the proposed release conditions, then the
applicant will have to further restrict the release of stormwater from
this development.
3. Stormwater detention shall not occur within the wetland or wetland
buffers with express approval of the City of Kent Public Works
Department following a finding that the stormwater detention will
not adversely impact the wetland area..
4. The stormwater shall leave the subject parcel via an open
conveyance system: -direct piping of stormwater from the parcel the
south terminus of 112th Avenue SE shall not be permitted.
5. An above ground stormwater treatment system is required with the
following options therefore listed in preferred order: infiltration
after pretreatment (preferred); constructed wetland; wemond;
extended detention pond; biofiltradon Swale; or anv combination of
the above options acceptable to Public Works.
Swan Court Final Plat #FSU-95-4
July 15, 1997
6. The conveyance system shall be sized to service the drainage basin
and shall be extended to the eastern property line of this plat.
�..' A 32-foot-wide paved roadway; concrete curbs and gutters; five
foot wide concrete sidewalks alone both sides of the plat street;
street lightine; storm drainage; street channelization; utilities and
appurtenances, and cul de sac turnaround on proposed
113th Place SE 'per City Standards. This shall include a minimum
49 foot right of way alone the roadway an a minimum 51.5 foot (at
right of way line--45 foot at curb line)radius curb returns, with 5
foot sidewalks on both sides and utility strips at the 'eyebrow'
intersection southerly of Lot 16, and 35 foot radius curb returns at
the intersection of SE 240t1i Street at l lith Place SE.
These improvements shall include a conventional turnaround at the
southerly terminus of 113th Place SE, or design alternative
approved by the City Fire Marshal.
The exi zing driveways on SE 240th Street shall be_remove- and
replaced with Ciry Standard curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
10. The subdivider, shall dedicate all necessary public right of way for the
improvements listed in Section "A" and provide all public and private
easements necessary for the ccnsLLuction. operation, and maintenance of the
required improvements identified in Section "A", above.
11. The subdivider shall develop and execute an agreement subiecr to review
and approval by the Public Works Director to run with the properry
obligating and requiring all prope^y owners within this subdivision to
maintain, replace, and renew the landscape areas within the 'stands and pay
all costs thereof.
B. PRIOR TO THE TSS1TANCE OF D 17 OEyl NT 7EZ ON a,NY CT:
1. The subdivider shall construct the improvements noted in Secton A. 9 a-d.
above.
The subdivider/developer shall submit a detailed tree plan which shows the
location of all sienificant trees of sir inch caliper or greater. These trees
should be shown in re'.ationship to any proposed site improvements during
trade and fill and proposed building foomrints.
Development on all lots snail protect solar access to orope^es to the .ortin
of each lot according tc the caicuianons identified in Ke^t Lonna Cade
section 15.08.224.
I ry ty>=y 40"15 _ 68.95'
_. IN CONC CASE 7811
53.20_
' � tt9I00'
(12/96) --� to
-------
p
T ' LOT 16 1 24.50' 24.50' 1 LOT 1
o; LOT 15 � 7.275 sq-It. ' I 7.952 sq.ft. �n
m; 7,344 sgAt. 0.2 acres a) 0.2 acres
i Z i ; N 3 Y1 '
0.2 acres � �
i
NLBB-46'27y-W > Eu C r i p_
0
1
o LOT 2 ',1 I 0
J� LJ p 7,280 sq.ft. ^
sO_ r` 0.2 acres
o, -I Li.l
C LOT -14; n N 88'46'23" W
w 7,279 sq.ft 63.00' U - S 88 33=' t -
0.2 acres
L o� LOT 3 0
tN--8W4623" N +' 7,260 sq.ft. o
--- o n
r----73.4U-- n 0.2 acres
N
� M '' r `-' 24.50' 24.50' '--S-SB`45'33='-E-� N
v' 10' UTILITY EASMEMT
(V (TYPICAL)
�� 1 --}04.-00'--- fD N LOT 12 � � I �
n, (
co m; LOT 13 h
W.
7,347 sq.tt , to g 774 sq.tt. kO 4 p
b I a LOT o
#. D.2 acres acres N p
w cO 0.2 rn -� 7,290 sq.fl. p
to, M � r
0."I acres �� L•5-8B'46-23' -E- 1" S 8846 3" E oIIn
______g},66 ___ N
.7-}ll r
o' LOT 10 LOT 11 'I 24.50'1 24.50' a LOT 5
}} 7,263 sq.ft. O
7,200 sgAt ¢ O
130, 0.2 acres C5 70.2 acres
- 0.2 acres $ � o 0
t n 0.2 acres r
10,. UTILITY EASMEN;f
((TYPICAL)
IONit=BBV6 23= Mf-- S 88'46 33" E
r----}04.d0
T�1 W I LOT .R
�f 1 r,; LOT 9 S So, 7,05o csq.Rres M
rn, 7,275 sq.fl _ C1 0.2 ocres 0
rri' 0.2 acres _ IG { �. \ n t)
1f) -- T— ,`, c� 0.
`-� � 105.70` {� °' 3'04" � I �1n E C -E
08' 33.6a �o �I1 98-my----, p
72 07
LOT 7 to
_ c V o.
Z v 7,o45 sq.ft.
15, SANITARY SEWER G 0.2 acres
EASEMENT S S
M
EDGE WETLAND AREA
All � o �� � STORM TRACT
FFAACIUTY
h 4 14.551 sgAt.
jU.S acres
L r- TRACT B 1\15' SANITARY SEWER
NEW WE T4LAND AREA A EASEMENT
•'�• '�` `1L- 0. ,1crep - G do DISTANCES 3 j��T 8� -
FOR SEA
I -`y OF SANITA Y SEWER EASEMEN gr32' sq it
SE€ DETAIL N PAGE 2 of 3 M 1 rj.2 acres r
r a l ' m
' �T
July 16, 1996
TRAFFIC city' s receipt of all required permits and
CONTROL approvals within a time frame determined appro-
priate by the Public Works Director.
FLOOD CONTROL (BIDS - ITEM 5A)
Installation of Mill Creek Box Cu..lverts Bid
opening was held on Wednesday, June 26th with 5
bids received. The low bid was submitted by
Tri-State Construction of Bellevue, in the amount
of $701, 937 . 00. The Engineer' s estimate was
$777, 875. Oo. The project consists of installing
box culverts in three locations to help alleviate
flooding along Mill Creek and Central Avenue.
It is the recommendation of the Public Works
Director that the Installation of Mill Creek Box
Culverts contract be awarded to Tri-State
Construction for the bid amount of $701, 937 . 00 .
CLARK SO MOVED. Woods seconded and the motion
carried.
PLATS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
Pacific Terrace Preliminary Plat SU-96-12 .
AUTHORIZATION to set August 61 1996, as the date
for a public meeting to consider the Hearing _..
Examiner's recommendation of approval for a
preliminary plat application by Pacific
Industries. The property is located at 10605,
10707 , and 10717 SE 248th Street.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4C)
Country view Estates II Preliminary Plat _SU-95-5.
This date has been set to consider the Hearing
Examiner' s recommendation for conditional ap-
proval of an application by Shamrock Development
Corporation for a 13-lot single family residen-
tial preliminary subdivision. The property is
located at 22600 100th Avenue SE.
ORR MOVED to accept the Findings of the Hearing
Examiner and to adopt the Hearing Examiner' s
recommendation of approval with 19 conditions of
the Country View Estates II Preliminary Plat
SU-95-5 13-lot single family residential pre-
liminary subdivision. Johnson seconded and the
motion carried.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4D)
Swan court Preliminary Plat SU-95-4 . This date
has been set to consider the Hearing Examiner' s
recommendation for conditional approval of an _
4
July 16 , 1996
PLATS application by Curtis LaPierre for a 16-10t
single family residential preliminary sub-
division. The property is located south of SE
240th Street between 112th Avenue SE and 114th
Place SE if extended.
Clark noted that this plat has twenty-five
conditions and that there are wetlands on one
end of it. He voiced concern about water run-off
and flooding, and Matt Jackson of the Planning
Department stated that money has been invested in
drainage in that area. Public Works Director
Wickstrom noted that the drainage problems have
been solved as part of the Upper Garrison Creek
Conveyance System and the Garrison Creek
Detention Pond.
ORR MOVED to accept the Findings of the Hearing
Examiner and to adopt the Hearing Examiners
recommendation of approval with 25 conditions of
the Swan Court Preliminary Plat 16-lot single
family residential preliminary subdivision.
Bennett seconded and the motion carried.
~' REZONES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
Hillside Manor Rezone RZ-96-1. ADOPTION of
Ordinance No. 3304 rezoning approximately 4. 3
acres from SR-4. 5, Single Family Residential to
SR-6, Single Family Residential, as discussed
at the Council meeting of July 2 , 1996.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
Strawberry Lane Rezone RZ-96-2 . The Hearing
Examiner has recommended approval of an
application by Jerry Prouty and Bill Ruth of
Barghausen Consulting Engineers , Inc. , to rezone
approximately 8 . 33 acres of property from SR-4 . 5
and SR-6 (Single Family Residential, maximum
densities of 4 . 5 and 6 units per acre) to SR-8
(Single Family Residential, maximum allowable
density of 8 units per acre) . The property is
located south of S. 240th Street, and east and
west of 100th Avenue South.
ORR MOVED to modify the Findings of the Hearing
Examiner, to modify the Hearing Examiner' s
recommendation of approval of the Strawberry Lane
Rezone No. RZ-96-2 as follows: that Parcel
No. 1922059007 located west of 100th Avenue S.E.
- shall be rezoned from SR-4 . 5 to SR-6 (single
family residential with a maximum density of six
5
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15 , 1997
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: COUNTRY VIEW ESTATES II FINAL PLAT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set to consider the
Country View Estates II Final Plat. The plat is 3 . 65 acres in
size and is located at 22600 100th Avenue SE. The preliminary
plat was approved by the City Council on July 16, 1996.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo, map and City Council minutes of 7/16/96
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff
(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
to approve the Country View Estates II Final Plat with 20
conditions, as recommended by staff.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION: ✓Yh.o7%.4ry /l�1��'c�+
Council Agenda
Item No. 4C
CITY OF
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
- (206) 859-3390 Jim White, Mayor
�uqu�a�
MEMORANDUM
July 16, 1996
MEMO TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: COUNTRY VIEW ESTATES FINAL PLAT #FSU-95-05
On July 16, 1996, the City Council approved the Country View Estates Preliminary Subdivision
SU-95-5, a 13-lot single family residential plat. The site is approximately 3.65 acres in size and
is located at 22600 100th Avenue SE in Kent, Washington. The property is presently zoned SR-
4.5, Single Family Residential, with a 7,600 square foot minimum lot size. Nineteen conditions
were part of the Council's approval. The applicant has now complied with these conditions as
listed below and has made an application for a final plat. Staff recommends approval of this
application:
A. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL PLAT:
1. The subdivider shall execute an environmental mitigation agreement to participate
in, and pay a fair share of the construction costs of the City's South 224th/228th
Street Corridor Project. The minimum benefit to the subdivider is estimated at
$13,988 based upon 13 trips and the capacity of the South 224th/228th Street
Corridor. The final benefit value will be based on the number of lots approved on
the final plat map multiplied times $1.076 (in 1986 dollars) and as adjusted for
inflation.
2. The subdivider shall dedicate all right of way necessary to construct Southeast 226th
Street to City Standards for a Residential Street, 50 foot wide right of way, including
a minimum 51.5 foot right of way radius in the turnaround, and 25 foot right of way
radius for the curb returns at the intersection of Southeast 226th Street at 100th
Avenue Southeast.
3. The subdivider shall dedicate or grant a public easement to the City for a 3-foot-
wide strip across the entire subdivision frontage on 100th Avenue Southeast for the
widening of 100th Avenue Southeast to City Standards for a Residential Collector
Arterial augmented with bicycle lanes.
4. The subdivider shall provide engineering drawings for review and approval by the
City, and either construct or bond for the following:
a. A gravity sanitary sewer system to serve all lots.
'104m yVF <O KFvT N4SHINGTnN 9%Oz'__5xua TFLFPHnNF 1IIANc11-1vu1.'FA`( Ke'u_;'
Country View Estates Final Plat#FSU-95-05
July 16, 1996
b. A water system meeting domestic and fire flow requirements for all lots.
C. A storm drainage system meeting the Kent Standards for conveyance,
detention,water quality treatment, etc. The minimum detention standard to
be met for this project shall be that for Hillside development. The applicant
shall provide necessary improvements to restrict the release of stormwater to
ensure that the capacity of the existing downstream system will not be
exceeded or erosion exacerbated by the proposed development.
d. A 32-foot-wide paved roadway; concrete curbs and gutters; 5-foot-wide
concrete sidewalks along both sides of the plat street; street lighting; storm
drainage; street channelization; utilities and appurtenances, and cul-de-sac
turnaround on proposed SE 226th Place per City Standards. This shall
include a minimum 50 foot right of way along the roadway and a 51.5 foot
right of way radius in the cul de sac turnaround, (45 foot radius at the curb
line), 35 foot radius curb returns (at curb line), with 5 foot sidewalks and
utility strips, at the intersection of SE 226th Street at 100th Avenue SE.
e. A half street widening and reconstruction of 100th Avenue SE across the
entire subdivision frontage northerly to the improvements constructed for
County View Estates I to City Standards for a Residential collector Arterial
roadway. The paved half street roadway width shall be 23 feet from
centerline to face of curb and shall also include street lighting; 5-foot-wide
concrete sidewalks, landscaping, storm drainage; street channelization;
utilities and appurtenances.
These improvements shall also include sufficient pavement to provide a 12
foot wide southbound lane on the westerly side of the roadway centerline
across the entire frontage of the subdivision; and minimum 25:1 pavement
transitions to the existing edge of pavement to the north and south of the
subdivision.
In addition, the subdivider shall install "No Parking" signs across the entire
subdivision frontage on 100th Avenue Southeast.
Finally, these improvements shall include an overlay of the existing roadway
pavement, as necessary, across the entire subdivision frontage per limits of
paragraph one of Condition A.4.e. to provide a 2 percent crown across the
pavement. and. as necessary to meet City Standards for roadway pavement
section for a Residential Collector Arterial roadway.
f. The subdivider shall construct a 5-foot-wide graded gravel walkway on the
Country View Estates Final Plat#FSU-95-05
July 16, 1996
easterly side of 100th Avenue Southeast, from the southerly terminus of the
improvements required by (e) above, to the existing concrete sidewalk near
SE 228th Street.
5. The subdivider shall dedicate all necessary public right of way for the improvements
listed in Section A and provide all public and private easements necessary for the
construction, operation, and maintenance of the required improvements identifies in
Section A, above.
6. Comply with all applicable SEPA conditions (#ENV-96-16).
B. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ON ANY LOT:
1. The subdivider shall construct the on site improvements noted in Section AA, above.
C. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING
PERMIT ON ANY LOT:
1. The subdivider shall construct the off-site improvements noted in Section A.4,above.
2. The subdivider/developer shall submit a detailed tree plan which shows the location
of all significant trees of six inch caliper or greater. These trees should be shown in
relationship to any proposed site improvements during grade and fill and proposed
building footprints.
3. Development on all lots shall protect solar access to properties to the north of each
lot according to the calculations identified in Kent Zoning Code section 15.08.234.
4. Lots within 200 feet downslope of property with a 20 percent slope or greater are
subject to the view regulations of the Kent Zoning Code section 15.08.060.
JPH/mp:c:su9505 cc.fp
cc: Fred N. Satterstrom, Planning Manager
105 62 c
Tn
V,
Z7 4-
o
O'er
4-
WO1 10'231 15000
N0I*10'23:I C)
130 77 rn
C)m
CA
S01 10 23 W
15000
Nol 10 23 F
CR
130 78
14
SOV10 23 W
NO V10'23 E
130.79
DO, r SOI 10 23 W
15000 y Ali
,3 CQ
C�)
C,
p Om
qOI'10'23:'E
106.34
(�)
SO6,18O5 W
Om 12253 U1 Cq
b� C2 C6 o
506 is 0-5 W_�
N0I'10'23'E 90.01
28.04
NO ^m0 CR 0
0
000
MOO
00
105.00 551
3M84' An R4 70.00 75.00
N01'O8'24'F 501.OT13'W 33084
c c TRA C 7' 13
z
YZ
mo
501'06'25rW 1323. ALCULATED)
ct
10
July 16, 1996
- TRAFFIC City' s receipt of all required permits and
CONTROL approvals within a time frame determined appro-
priate by the Public Works Director.
FLOOD CONTROL (BIDS - ITEM 5A)
Installation of Mill Creek Box Culverts. Bid
opening was held on Wednesday, June 26th with 5
bids received. The low bid was submitted by
Tri-State Construction of Bellevue, in the amount
of $701, 937 . 00 . The Engineer' s estimate was
$777 , 875. 00 . The project consists of installing
box culverts in three locations to help alleviate
flooding along Mill Creek and Central Avenue.
It is the recommendation of the Public Works
Director that the Installation of Mill Creek Box
Culverts contract be awarded to Tri-State
Construction for the bid amount of $701, 937 . 00 .
CLARK SO MOVED. Woods seconded and the motion
carried.
PLATS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
Pacific Terrace Preliminary Plat SU-96-12 .
AUTHORIZATION to set August 61 1996, as the date
for a public meeting to consider the Hearing
Examiner' s recommendation of approval for a
preliminary plat application by Pacific
Industries. The property is located at 10605,
10707 , and 10717 SE 248th Street.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4C)
Country view Estates II Preliminary Plat _SII-95-5 .
This date has been set to consider the Hearing
Examiner' s recommendation for conditional ap-
proval of an application by Shamrock Development
Corporation for a 13-lot single family residen-
tial preliminary subdivision. The property is
located at 22600 100th Avenue SE.
ORR MOVED to accept the Findings of the Hearing
Examiner and to adopt the Hearing Examiner' s
recommendation of approval with 19 conditions of
the Country View Estates II Preliminary Plat
SU-95-5 13-lot single family residential pre-
liminary subdivision. Johnson seconded and the
motion carried.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4D)
Swan Court Preliminary Plat SU-95-4 . This date
has been set to consider the Hearing Examiner' s
recommendation for conditional approval of an _
4
..........
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15. 1997
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: CURFEW FOR JUVENILES - ORDINANCES
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This- date is set for consideration of
the proposed curfew ordinance to be submitted to the voters as
a ballot proposition. The proposed ordinance would repeal the
existing curfew law adopted in April 1995 by the voters
pursuant to an initiative petition, and will replace the
existing curfew with a new curfew law added to Title 9 of the
Kent Criminal Code. Also included for further consideration is
a second ordinance authorizing the placement of the curfew
ordinance on the ballot at the fall primary election, if
possible, or the next available election.
3 . EXHIBITS: Proposed ordinances, memorandum to Mayor and
Council, and comparison of Curfew ordinances
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: N/A
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Councilmember 0_&t moves, Councilmember iy.9+•,&.<' seconds
to adopt Ordinance No. ;35 , subje o voter passage by
ballot proposition, repealing th xisting curfew law passed by
the voters pursuant to an ini ' tive petition and further
adding a new chapter to Tjtre 9 of the Kent City Code
pestablishing a new curf law for the City of Kent.
(2) Councilmember 0 A, moves, Councilmember seconds
to adopt Ordinance No. ;A5 submitti the curfew Ordinance
No. to the voters by ballot oposition at the next
available election and furthe owing that the City Clerk and
City Attorney be authorize o take all steps necessary and
10 e appropriate to do so.
DISCUSSION:
3355 ACTION:
0 5(o Council Agenda
Item No. 4D
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, referring Ordinance No.
which repeals City of Kent Initiative 101 and enacts a new
curfew law,to the King County Supervisor of Elections, and
seeking that a special election on the matter on the 1997
Primary Election date as specified by RCW 29.13.070, or at
the first available election date thereafter.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,WASHINGTON,DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. City of Kent Ordinance No. which proposes a new
City curfew law to the voters and which repeals the City's existing curfew law adopted in
1995 by the voters pursuant to City of Kent Initiative Petition 101, is hereby referred to the
King County Auditor as ex officio supervisor of elections,pursuant to RCW 29.13.020, for
presentation to the voters on the 1997 Primary Election date as specified by RCW
29.13.070.
!I
SECTION 2. For all the reasons established in Kent's Ordinance No.
including all recitals, the Kent City Council requests that, if necessary, the County
Auditor deem that an emergency exists requiring that the election on this matter be held on
the 1997 Primary Election date.
SECTION 3. If an election cannot be held on the 1997 Primary Election
date, the City of Kent requests that an election on this matter be scheduled at the first
available election date thereafter.
SECTION 4. - Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or _
sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain
in full force and effect.
SECTION 5. - Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force thirty (30) days from the time of its final approval and passage as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
i
BRENDA JACOBER. CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH. CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of 1997.
APPROVED: day of 1997.
PUBLISHED: day of , 1997.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. , passed
11 by the City Council of the City of Kent. Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the
i,
City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P ILAWIORDINANOJNITIATI ORD
j
1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, to be submitted to the voters of the
City by a ballot proposition for final passage and approval,
repealing the City's current curfew law set forth in Chapter
9.07 of the Kent City Code, entitled "Juvenile Safety and
Family Reconciliation" passed by the voters pursuant to an
initiative petition; and adding a new chapter to Title 9 of the
Kent City Code entitled "Curfew and Parental
Responsibility for Juveniles;" establishing a new curfew law
for juveniles and defining duties of parents or others in care
of juveniles: establishing certain exemptions and providing
for civil penalties.
j WHEREAS, the City Council finds that due to rapid growth and other
factors, the City is facing increasing concerns over the public safety of its citizens caused
by juvenile crime and delinquency which threatens peaceful citizens,residents,visitors.and
juveniles themselves, and further determines that this criminal activity, both individual and
i collectively, presents a clear and present danger to the citizenry, to the juveniles, and to the
public order and safety: and
WHEREAS,calls for service to the Kent Police Department have risen from
approximately 64,000 calls in 1995 to approximately 74,000 calls in 1996. and
WHEREAS. the economic cost of crime in the City of Kent continues to
III drain existingresources and that the effect on victims, both economic and psychological,
is traumatic and tragic. and
w 1 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that fighting crime effectively requires W
a multi-faceted effort, in part focusing on those age groups likely to commit crimes and
engage in acts of delinquency; and
WHEREAS,juveniles in the City of Kent have themselves become victims
of crime and violence, and that violent crimes against juveniles in the City of Kent have
increased over the last several years; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate to take measures in order to protect those
juveniles who are not subject to adequate parental control from harm to themselves, others,
or the property of others based upon certain proscribed conduct, and to foster better parental
responsibility among the parents and guardians of juveniles found within the City of Kent
to achieve better protection of the community and the juveniles; and
WHEREAS,juveniles who are not adequately supervised by their parents
and/or guardians have become engaged in criminal activity at certain times within the City.
Therefore, it is the intent of this chapter to impose measures to assist parents and/or
i
guardians or others responsible for juveniles to control and to protect their children and the
community; and
li
WHEREAS. from January 1. 1997 to June 30, 1997, crimes involving
juveniles between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. include fifty (50%) of the juvenile assaults
reported; ninety percent(90%)of the minor in possession incidents reported, many of those
involving malicious mischief and possession of drugs; seventy-one(71%)of the shoplifting
i
of beer incidents reported and fifty percent(50%) of automobile thefts or attempted thefts
reported. and
WHEREAS. there is a crime problem with juveniles throughout the City
I
during late evening and early morning hours, including crimes of violence and drug and
Juvenile Safety/Curfew
alcohol-related activity and thefts, and that since this problem cannot be identified to
specific areas of the City, to reasonably and adequately enforce a curfew ordinance, a City-
wide curfew is appropriate; and
WHEREAS, the combination of juveniles and alcohol and drug-related
criminal activity leads to public safety problems, including increased assaults and incidents
involving disorderly conduct and instances of the sale and delivery of controlled
substances; and
WHEREAS. this ordinance is enacted in recognition of the peculiar
vulnerability of juveniles, their frequent inability to make critical decisions in an informed,
mature manner, and the importance of the parental role in child rearing; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council to create and implement a
juvenile program to reduce juvenile crime and the direct and indirect consequences thereof,
to substantially reduce, if not eradicate, acts of crime and delinquency committed by
juveniles and to provide for the care, safety, and protection of law abiding juveniles and
other citizens, residents, and visitors; to reduce injuries to juveniles as victims while
promoting juvenile safety and well being; to provide additional options for dealing with
gang problems; and to reduce juvenile peer pressure to stay out late; and
WHEREAS. it is in the communitv's best interest to establish laws to assist
in these goals for the protection of juveniles from this type of criminal activity, as well as
Ito alleviate the instances of criminal activity caused by unsupervised juveniles and
I
establishing a curfew that will assist in this effort; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature passed Engrossed Second
Substitute House Bill 2319 during the 1994 legislative session adding a new section to
Chapter 35A.I I RCW providing that municipalities have the authority to enact an
3 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
ordinance for the purpose of preserving the public safety or reducing acts of violence by
or against juveniles that are occurring at such rates as to be beyond the capacity of the
police to assure public safety, establishing times and conditions under which juveniles may
be present on the public streets, in the public parks, or in any other public place during
specified hours, and further amending Chapter 13.32A RCW relating to curfews;
WHEREAS, as a result of concerns for juvenile crime and juvenile safety
in the City of Kent, an initiative petition was circulated by the citizens of the City of Kent
to establish a curfew within the City; and
WHEREAS, on February 7, 1995, the City Council heard testimony on
Initiative Petition 101 and moved to submit the initiative petition to establish a curfew to
I a special election; and
WHEREAS, during a special election held in April 1995. the citizens of the
City of Kent passed Initiative Petition 101 establishing a curfew for the City of Kent
seventy percent (70%) of the voters supporting the measure; and
WHEREAS. under the current curfew ordinance. Kent police officers have
the late evening and early morning hours and
numerous contacts with juveniles m g ,
had J
generally have experienced a positive response with juvenile compliance with the curfew;
and
WHEREAS. recent case law involving curfews has raised concerns about
the enforceability of certain provisions of Initiative Petition 101, which concerns were
discussed by the City Council during their regular meeting on June 17, 1997; and
-� WHEREAS. during said meeting, the City Council directed that a new
curfew ordinance be prepared and submitted to the electors of the City to repeal Initiative
4 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
Petition 101 and to add new chapter to Title 9 of the Kent City Code to establish a new
curfew law for the City; and
WHEREAS, after having held a hearing on the proposed curfew ordinance
on July 1, 1997, and having further considered the matter, the City Council believes it is
i
in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Kent to submit the ordinance to the electors
of the City for consideration; NOW THEREFORE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON,DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 9.07 of the Kent City Code entitled 'Juvenile Safety
and Family Reconciliation" is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Ili
SECTION 2. There is hereby added a new chapter, Chapter 9.09, entitled
"Curfew and Parental Responsibility for Juveniles," to read as follows:
CHAPTER 9.09. CURFEW AND PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR
JUVENILES.
I
Sec. 9.09.010. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to:
A. protect juveniles and other citizens, residents and visitors of the City of.
Kent from the danuers of crimes which occur on sidewalks, streets, and
public places during the late night and early morning hours:
B. decrease the amount of criminal activity engaged in by juveniles:
C. promote and enhance parental control over juveniles:
D. adopt and implement policies relating to juveniles that would minimize
impacts on juveniles engaging in and traveling to or from a lawful activity
or event: and
w 5 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
E. preserve the public safety and to reduce acts of violence by or against
juveniles that are occurring in Kent at rates beyond the capacity of the
police to assure public safety without the aid of a juvenile curfew.
Sec. 9.09.020. Definitions. In this chapter:
A. Aid and abet means that a parent or guardian, with knowledge that it will
promote or facilitate the commission of a curfew violation, either:
1. solicits, commands, encourages, helps, assists, or requests
a juvenile to commit the violation; or
2. aids or agrees to aid a juvenile or another person in planning
or committing the violation.
The word aid means all assistance whether given by words, acts,
encouragement, support, presence or neglect of parental or custodial
responsibilities for a juvenile required by any existing or hereafter enacted
statute of this state.
B. Curfew hours mean 12:01 a.m. until 6:00 a.m. daily.
C. Emergency means an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the
resulting state that calls for immediate action. The term includes, but is not
limited to, a lire, a natural disaster, an automobile accident, or any situation
requiring immediate action to prevent serious bodily injury or loss of life.
D. Establishment means any privately owned place of business operated for a
profit to which the public is invited, including but not limited to any store,
shop, restaurant, bowling alley, cafe. theater, drug store, golf course, pool
room, shopping center, video arcade, and any other place open to the
general public and devoted to business, amusement, or entertainment of the
general public or other lawful purpose.
E. Guardian means:
1. a person who, under court order,is the guardian of the person of a
juvenile: or
6 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
2. a public or private agency with whom a juvenile has been placed by
a court; or
3. a person who is at least eighteen(18)years of age and authorized by
a parent or guardian to have the care and custody of ajuvenile.
F. Juvenile means any person under 18 years of age.
G. Operator means any individual, firm, association, partnership, or
corporation operating, managing, or conducting any establishment. The
term includes the members or partners of an association or partnership and
the officers of a corporation.
H. Parent means a person who is a natural parent, adoptive parent, step-parent,
or foster parent of a juvenile.
I. Public place means any street, alley, highway, parking lot, sidewalk, park,
playground or place to which the general public has access and a right to
resort for business, entertainment, or other lawful purpose. Public place
shall include, but not be limited to any public facility or any establishment
µ such as a store, shop, restaurant, tavern, bowling alley, cafe, theater, drug
store, golf course, pool room, shopping center, and any other place open to
the general public and devoted to business, amusement or entertainment of
the general public or other lawful purpose, whether publicly or privately
owned or operated. It shall also include the front or immediate area of the
above, including, but not limited to, roads, sidewalks, alleyways, parking
� g _ P g
lots, parks or other similar ares open to the general public.
J. Remain means to:
1. linger or stay. or
?. fail to leave premises when requested to do so by a police officer or
the owner, operator, or other person in control of the premises of
any establishment or other public place.
I
7 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
K. Serious bodily injury means bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of
death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted
loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.
Sec. 9.09.030. Juvenile curfew. Except as set forth in Section 9.09.050, it shall
be a civil infraction for any juvenile to remain in any public place within the city during
curfew hours.
Sec. 9.09.040. Parental responsibility. Except as set forth in Section 9.09.050,
it shall be a civil infraction for any parent or guardian having custody or control of any
juvenile to knowingly aid or abet the juvenile to commit a curfew violation.
See. 9.09.050'. Exemptions.
A. It shall not be a violation of Section 9.07.030 and/or Section 9.09.040 that
the juvenile was:
1. accompanied by the juvenile's parent or guardian;
2. on an errand at the direction of the juvenile's parent or guardian,
without any detour or stop;
3. in a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel;
4. engaged in an employment activity, or going to or returning home
from an employment activity, without any detour or stop;
5. involved in an emergency;
6. on the sidewalk abutting the juvenile's residence or abutting the
residence of a next-door neighbor if the neighbor did not complain
to the police department about the juvenile's presence:
7. attending an official school, religious, recreational, or other activity
supervised by adults or sponsored by the City of Kent, a civic
organization, or another similar entity that takes responsibility for
the juvenile, or going to or returning home from such activity.
without any detour or stop:
8. lawfully present within or upon an establishment or going to or
returning home from such establishment without any detour or stop;
8 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
9. going to or returning from the residence of another without any
detour or stop.
10. exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States
Constitution, such as the free exercise or religion, freedom of
speech, and the right of assembly; or
11. married and thus has achieved the age of majority pursuant to the
Revised Code of Washington RCW 26.28.020, or has become
emancipated in accordance with Ch. 1�.64 RCW.
B. It shall not be a violation of section 9.09.040 when any parent or guardian,
I `
unable to control the whereabouts and activities of a juvenile in their care,
custody, or control, has contacted the City of Kent Police Department and
reported such juvenile as possibly appearing in locations and at times that
i
would violate this chapter.
See. 9.09.060. Enforcement.
A. Prior to the issuance of a verbal or written warning or a Notice of Civil
Infraction, a police officer shall ask the apparent offender's name, age,
address, and the reason for being in the public place. The officer shall not
issue a warning or citation or take further action under this section unless
the officer reasonably believes a violation has occurred and that based on
any response and other circumstances• no exemption exists under section
9.07.050.
B. Pursuant to RCW 13.32A.050(1 )(b), a police officer, who reasonably
believes that ajuvenile is in violation of section 9.09.030, shall have the
�I
authority to take the juvenile into custody. Pursuant to RCW 13.32A.060.
I,
an officer taking a juvenile into custody shall inform the juvenile of the
reason for such custodv and shall either:
1. Transport the juvenile to his or her home or to a parent or guardian
at his or her lace of em to ment if
v no parent or guardian is at
P P
home. The parent r guardian
ar o uar tan may request that the officer take the
P b Y 9
9 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
juvenile to the home of an adult extended family member,
responsible adult, crisis residential center,the Department of Social
and Health Services, or a licensed youth shelter. In responding to
the request of the parent or guardian, the officer shall take the
juvenile to a requested place which, in the officer's belief, is within
a reasonable distance of the parent or guardian's home. The officer
releasing a juvenile into the custody of a parent, guardian, an adult
extended family member, responsible adult, or a licensed youth
shelter shall inform the person receiving the child of the reason for
taking the child into custody and inform all parties of the nature and
location of appropriate services available in the community; or
2. After attempting to notify the parent or guardian, take the juvenile
to a designated crisis residential center's secure facility, or a center's
semi-secure facility if a secure facility is full, not available, or not
located within a reasonable distance:
(a) if a juvenile expresses fear or distress at the prospect of
being returned to his or her home which leads the officer to
believe there is a possibility that the child is experiencing
some type of child abuse or negligence, as defined in RCW
26.44.020: or
(b) if it is not practical to transport the juvenile to his or her
home or place of the parent or guardian's employment; or
e t custody
re is no anent or guardian available to accept .
c if the P
O P b
of the child; or
3. After attempting to notify the parent or guardian, if a crisis
residential center is full, not available, or not located within a
reasonable distance, the officer may request the Department of
Social and Health Services to accept custody of the juvenile. If the
Department determines that an appropriate placement is currently
10 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
available, the Department shall accept custody and place the
juvenile in an out-of-home placement. If the Department declines
to accept custody of the juvenile, the officer may release the
juvenile after attempting to take the juvenile to the following, in the
order listed:
(a) the home of an adult extended family member;
(b) a responsible adult:
(c) a licensed youth shelter.
The officer shall immediately notify the Department of Social and
Health Services if no placement option is available and the child is
released.
C. An officer's responsibilities under section 9.09.060(8), after taking a juvenile into
custody for a curfew violation, shall be changed, expanded or limited without
further amendment to be consistent with the provisions of RCW 13.32A.050 and
.060 as now or hereafter amended.
y Sec. 9.09.070 Violations and Penalties.
A. It shall be a civil infraction to commit a violation of section 9.09.030 or
9.09.040. The Kent Municipal Court shall have jurisdiction over all civil
infractions issued under this chapter. Civil infractions shall be issued and
processed in accordance with RCW Chapter 7.80 as currently enacted or as
hereinafter amended, which is incorporated herein by reference.
B. A person found to have committed a civil infraction shall be assessed a
monetary penalty as follows:
1. the first violation shall be subject to a verbal or written warning.
2. the second violation within a one-year period shall be subject to a
civil penalty of$100.
3. the third or subsequent violation within a one-year period shall be
subject to a civil penalty of$250.
11 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
Sec. 9.09.080. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences
of this Chapter 0.09 of the Kent City Code are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Chapter and the same
shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION3. - Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or
sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain
in full force and effect.
SECTION 4. - E fective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force immediately upon passage by a majority of votes cast by the electors of the City of
Kent and upon certification by the King County Records and Elections Division as
provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER. CITY CLERK
I
j APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH. CITY .ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of 1997.
APPROVED: day of 1997.
I
PUBLISHED: day of 1997.
�I
I
1 Juvenile Safety/Curfew
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
PASSED by a majority of votes cast by the electors of the City of Kent on the day
of , 1997.
I herebv certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. , passed
by a majority of votes cast by the electors of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
i
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P-.V.AVAORDINAN097CURFEW OR'_
�I
I
it
Li Juvenile Safety/Curfew
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
interoffice
M E M O R A N D U M
to. Jim White, Mayor
City Council
from: Roger Lubovich
re: Proposed Curfew Ordinance
date: July 1, 1997
As you know, in 1994, a citizens group proposed a curfew ordinance for the City of Kent
The ordinance was submitted to the Council for consideration. Council elected not to enact the
curfew ordinance. Subsequently, this citizen's group circulated an initiative petition containing a
w curfew ordinance. The matter was submitted to the Council for consideration. The Council
moved to send the curfew initiative to the public for a vote. The public approved the initiative by
a seventy-percent(70%) margin on April of 1995. Since the curfew was established pursuant to
an initiative petition, it cannot be amended or repealed by the City Council without a vote of the
citizens.
On June 2, 1997,Division I of the Court of Appeals held that Bellingham's curfew ordinance
was unconstitutional. J.D. v. State. Wn.App. (1997). (Attached.) This case has raised
concerns over the City's initiative petition curfew ordinance.
In considering the City of Seattle's ordinance in 1973, the Washington State Supreme Court
in Pullman v. Seattle, 82 Wn.2d 794(1973) held that ordinances must be specific in their prohibition
and necessary in curing a demonstrable social evil. In an attempt to meet this criteria, the City of
Bellingham collected evidence which indicated that significant juvenile crime was occurring in their
central business district. Accordingly, Bellingham drafted an ordinance imposing a curfew only in
the central business district. In considering the Bellingham ordinance, the Court in J.D. v. State
stated that juveniles have the same fundamental right to be out in public at night as adults;therefore,
strict constitutional scrutiny is applied in reviewing these ordinances. The Court also found that
there was plenty of evidence of juvenile crime in the central business district, however, it
nevertheless held that the ordinance was unconstitutional because there was not a sufficient ne..tus
between the curfew and juvenile victimization or crime rates to withstand strict scrutiny; therefore,
the ordinance was not narrowly tailored to deal with those engaged in criminal activity.
Additionally,the Court in J.D. v. State held that there must be an exemption for juveniles to exercise
their first amendment rights.
This case and the Pullman case make it very difficult for any City curfew to pass
constitutional scrutiny. Any curfew ordinance needs to be very specific in what the problems are
and the prohibitions must be narrowly tailored to address those problems. It must also have evidence
to support the ordinance.
P.'LAW WTTORNEY.SROGMt%MEMOS1MAYOP-%M .
937 P.2d 630 �,Z j � So bill) Page l
(Cite as: 937 P.2d 630)
STATE of Washington, Respondent, not restrict adults' rights; however, state's right to
V. restrict minors' fundamental rights is not unlimited.
J.D., DOB 5-22-79, Appellant.
(4] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 83(4.1)
No.�797-8-I. 92k83(4.1)
In context of youth curfew ordinance aimed at
Court of Appeals of Washington, minors 15 years of age or younger, minors had same
Division 1. right to freedom of movements as adults; minors
under 15 years of age were not peculiarly vulnerable
June 2, 1997. to crime, curfew did not aid minors in making
essential decisions, a minor's choice to stay out past
Minor was convicted in the Superior Court, a certain time, for whatever reason, was not the
Whatcom County, Frank Morrow, J., of resisting kind of important life decision that state had interest
arrest. Defendant appealed. State moved to dismiss in making for minor, and curfew interfered with
conviction. The Court of Appeals, Agid, J., held parental control. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 1, 5;
that: (1) youth curfew ordinance unconstitutionally Bellingham, Wash., Code 10.62.030.
infringed on minors' freedom of movement and 4 INFANTS
freedom of expressic and (2) ordinance �� Zllkl3 13
unconstitutionally vague.
In context of youth curfew ordinance aimed at
Motion granted; ordinance declared minors 15 years of age or younger, minors had same
unconstitutional. right to freedom of movements as adults; minors
under 15 years of age were not peculiarly vulnerable
[1] CRIMINAL LAW to crime, curfew did not aid minors in making
110ki131(4) c&= 1131(4) essential decisions, a minor's choice to stay out past
Court of Appeals will ordinarily not review moot a certain time, for.whatever reason, was not the
case unless it presents issues of continuing public kind of Important life decision that state had interest
interest or Court determines that decision on the in making for minor, and curfew interfered with
merits is appropriate, considering the public or parental control. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 1, 5;
private nature of question presented, desirability of Bellingham, Wash., Code 10.62.030.
authoritative determination which will provide future CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
guidance to public (ificers, and likelihood that (5] 83(4.1)
question will recur. 92k83(4.1)
Constitutionality of youth curfew ordinance aimed at
[2] CRIMINAL LAW minors who were 15 years of age or younger would
110k1131(4) cE;= 1131(4) be analyzed under strict scrutiny test, as ordinance
Though defendant's appeal of conviction for impacted fundamental right to freedom of
resisting arrest was moot, due to Court of Appeals' movement. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 1, 5;
grant of State's motion to dismiss conviction, review Bellingham, Wash., Code 10.62.030.
of case was appropriate, as it raised questions
concerning constitutiality of youth curfew [6] INFANTS 13
ordinances; given the number of extant curfew 211k13
ordinances, pervasive nature of problem they sought Minor curfew ordinances may be constitutionally
to confront, and lack of any guidance on how permissible where they are specific in their
prohibition and necessary in curing demons
municipality could enact constitutionally-valid
ordinance, public interest mandated opinion. West's social evil.
RCWA 9A.76.040.
[7] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW g3(4.1)
[3] INFANTS 92k83(4.1)
13 c
211k13 Before municipality can enact valid legislation which
When state has strong interest in protecting minors, infringes on fundamental right like freedom of
w it may restrict their rights in ways in which it could movement, government must prove compelling
Copr. C West 1997 No Claim to Ong. U.S. Govt. Works
937 P.2d 630 Page 2
(Cite as: 937 P.2d 630)
need; however, government need not have scientific 21lk13
or exact proof of need for legislation. U.S.C.A. Youth curfew ordinance which was aimed at minors
Const.Amends. 1, 5. 15 years of age or younger, which only permitted
minors engaged in "activities" to be in public areas
(81 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 82(1) of central business district during enumerated hours,
92k82(1) and which contained no specific exception for
Evidentiary nexus between law's purpose and effect expressive activities, impermissibly infringed on
must exist, for law to be narrowly tailored to meet minors' freedom of expression. U.S.C.A.
governmental purpose, as required under strict Const.Amends. 1, 5; Bellingham, Wash., Code
constitutional scrutiny. 10.62.030.
[91 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 83(4.1) [11] MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS 594(2)
92k83(4.1) 268k594(2)
Youth curfew ordinance aimed at minors 15 years of To survive vagueness challenge, ordinance must be
age or younger, and enacted in response to rising sufficiently clear to give person of ordinary
crime rate in area that was "magnet for juvenile intelligence fair notice of what conduct is prohibited
gatherings," unconstitutionally infringed on minors' and provide explicit standards for officers enforcing
freedom of movement; though city had compelling the law.
interest in crime prevention and protecting minors
from becoming victimgordinance was not narrowly [12] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 82(6.1)
tailored to interest, as only evidence showed that 92k82(6.1)
curfew had no impact at all on juvenile crime. Youth curfew ordinance which excepted minors en
U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 1, 5; Bellingham, route to or from "an activity including, but not
Wash., Code 10.62.030. limited to, dance, theater presentations, and sporting
events," was unconstitutionally vague; ordinance
[91INFANTS was unclear about what was and was not an
;211k13 13 a exempted activity. Bellingham, Wash., Code
Youth curfew ordinance aimed at minors 15 years of 10.62.030.
age or younger, and enacted in response to rising
crime rate in area th�tt was "magnet for juvenile [121 INFANTS 13
gatherings," unconstitufionally infringed on minors' 211k13
freedom of movement; though city had compelling Youth curfew ordinance which excepted minors en
interest in crime prevention and protecting minors route to or from "an activity including, but not
from becoming victims, ordinance was not narrowly limited to, dance, theater presentations, and sporting
tailored to interest, as only evidence showed that events," was unconstitutionally vague; ordinance
curfew had no impact at all on juvenile crime. was unclear about what was and was not an
U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 1, 5; Bellingham, exempted activity. Bellingham, Wash., Code
Wash., Code 10.62.030. 10.62.030.
*632 Breean L. Beggs, Brett & Daugert,
[101 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1(4) Bellingham, for Appellant.
92k90.1(4)
Youth curfew ordinance which was aimed at minors Royce S. Buckingham, Whatcom County
15 years of age or younger, which only permitted Prosecuting Arry., Bellingham, for Respondent.
minors engaged in "activities" to be in public areas
of central business district during enumerated hours, Joan E. Hoisington, Bellingham City Attorney,
and which contained no specific exception for Bellingham. for Amicus, City of Bellingham.
expressive activities, impermissibly infringed on
minors' freedom of expression. U.S.C.A. Kraig L. Baker, Seattle, for American Civil
Const.Amends. 1, 5; Bellingham, Wash., Code Liberties Union.
10.62.030.
AGID, Judge.
(101INFANTS 13C�
Copr. C West 1997 No Claim to Ong. U.S. Govt. Works
937 P.2d 630 Page 3
(Cite as: 937 P.2d 630, *632)
J.D. appeals his conviction for resisting arrest. He reach this issue because we dismiss his conviction
admits that he ran from an officer who tried to cite for resisting arrest and Bellingham has repealed this
him for violating the Bellingham curfew, BMC provision.
10.62, but argues that he was entitled to passively
resist the citation because the curfew is Bellingham Officers Sasaki and Johnson contacted
unconstitutional. The State moved to dismiss J.D.'s 15-year-old J.D. at 12:45 a.m. on November 6,
conviction under RAP 7.2(e). We grant the State's 1993, under the stop and identify provision,
motion and dismiss J.D.'s conviction. In so doing, intending to cite him for a curfew violation. The
we render the appeal moot. We conclude, however, officers had seen J.D. several times that night and
that the constitutional issues it presents fall into that warned him that he would be cited if he refused to
narrow category of moot cases requiring review and leave the CBD. J.D. walked away from the officers
reach the merits of J.D.'s appeal. We hold that the as they approached him and eventually began to run.
Bellingham curfew ordinance in effect when J.D. Sasaki caught J.D., knocked him to the ground and
was arrested, and as later amended, infringes on arrested him. Sasaki broke J.D.'s arm during the
minors' fundamental freedom of movement and arrest, and he had emergency surgery the following
expression and it is not narrowly tailored to address day. The State eventually charged J.D. with
the-problem of juvenile crime. We also hold that it resisting *633 arrest under RCW 9A.76.040. A
is unconstitutionally vague. superior court commissioner found tbat the
Bellingham curfew was unconstitutional and
FACTS dismissed the resisting arrest charges. The State
moved for reconsideration and a superior court
In 1992, the City of Bellingham enacted a youth judge reinstated the charges, finding that the officers
curfew in an attempt to curb increasing crime in the were acting in good faith. [FN3]
central business district (CBD). The City Council
found that the area was "a magnet for juvenile FN3. J.D. argues here and in the trial court that he
" was entitled to passively resist the officers because
gatherings, that drugs and alcohol were common at
the gatherings, and that assaults and disorderly they were ail statute m cite him tinder an
conduct were increasingas a result. Under the law, unconstitutional statute. The State argues that
Winning from officers is equivalent to an assault on
minors 15 years old or younger are prohibited from officers and is prohibited tinder State v. Mierz, 127
being in any public area of the CBD between 10 Wash.2d 460, 901 P.2d 286(1995). While we need
p.m. and 5 a.m. Sunday through Thursday and 11 not reach this issue because we grant the State's
p.m. to 5 a.m. Friday and Saturday. BMC motion to dismiss, we agree with the State that
10.62.030(A). [FNl] The ordinance exempts running from an officer has the same potential for
minors in the company of a guardian, on an danger as a direct act of resistance. Therefore,
emergency errand, working, in a vehicle engaged in irrespective of the constitutionality of the state
interstate travel, within one block of legal residence, action, a suspect may not flee from an officer who is
traveling from an "activity," or authorized by acting in good faith.
special permit. BMC 10.62.030(C). As first DISCUSSION
enacted, the ordinance contained a "stop and
identify" clause which allowed officers to stop any A. Moomess
person who they believed to be in violation of the ,After the notice of appeal was filed, the State
curfew and ask for identification. This section has
since been repealed. See BMC 10.62. (FN2] moved in this court to enter a trial court decision
dismissing the charges under RAP 7.2(e). It argued
that the appeal would require a great deal of time
Council
are aware that the Bellingham City that
money and would not be worth the resources
Ccill has
as amended BMC 10.62 since this case
arose. However, the amendments did not eliminate because this was a relatively minor case. We grant
the constitutional problems with its core provisions. the State's motion. While the dismissal makes the
The full text of BMC 10.62.030 is reprinted in case technically moot, review is still appropriate
Appendix A. under the moomess doctrine.
FN2. J.D. argued in his brief that this stop and [1][21 We will ordinarily not review a moot case
identify provision was also invalid. We need not unless it presents issues of continuing public interest
Copr. 0 West 1997 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
937 P.2d 630 Page 4
(Cite as: 937 P.2d 630, *633)
or we determine that a decision on the merits is expression and in the fundamental liberties of the
appropriate, considering "(1) the public or private Fifth Amendment. Waters v. Barry, 711 F.Supp.
nature of the question presented; (2) the desirability 1125, 1134 (D.D.C.1989). Fundamental though it
of an authoritative determination which will provide may be for adults, states may sometimes curtail
future guidance to public officers; and (3) the minors' freedoms to provide them additional
likelihood that the question will recur.* In re protection, even at the expense of their full
Swanson, 115 Wash.2d 21, 24, 793 P.2d 962, 804 constitutional rights. When a state has a strong
P.2d 1 (1990) (quoting Dunner v. McLaughlin, 100 interest in protecting minors, it may restrict their
Wash.2d 832, 838, 676 P.2d 444 (1984)). This case rights in *634 ways in which they could not restrict
meets both tests. Many Washington communities adults'. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 64
are confronted with increasing juvenile crime and S.Ct. 438, 88 L.Ed. 645 (1944). But a state's right
have considered or enacted curfew ordinances as to restrict minors' fundamental rights is not
preventative measures. In 1973, the Supreme Court unlimited. Courts consider: (1) the particular
held that a municipality may enact a narrowly vulnerability of children; (2) their inability to make
tailored curfew ordinance, but no court has crucial decisions; and (3) the importance of the
discussed how a curfew could meet this parental role in child rearing to determine whether
requirement. City of Seattle v. Pullman, 82 the State has a significant enough interest in
Wash.2d 794, 514 P.2d 1059 (1973). Given the protecting minors that it may restrict these rights.
number of extant curfew ordinances, the pervasive Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622, 634, 99 S.Ct. 3035,
nature of the problem they seek to confront, and the 3043, 61 L.Ed.2d 797 (1979). In the context of
lack of any guidance on how a municipality can curfew ordinances, courts have disagreed about
enact a constitutionally-valid curfew ordinance, we whether minors have the same right to freedom of
conclude that the public interest mandates an opinion movement as adults. Compare Johnson v. City of
in this case. We are also encouraged to review the Opelousas, 658 F.2d 1065 (5th Cir.1981), with
curfew ordinance even though this case is moot Waters, 711 F.Supp. at 1136-37. Our analysis of
because Bellingham and Whatcom County officers the Bellotti factors convinces us that they do.
stop minors under the curfew, but neither
jurisdiction prosecutes infractions where the minor First, minors under 15 years old are not peculiarly
challenges the constitutionality of the ordinance. vulnerable to crime. Crime touches all of society
Under these unique circumstances where two and there is no evidence that minors under 15 years
jurisdictions use the ordinance to stop minors but old are more likely to be affected by it than any
avoid review of its constitutionality by dismissing other group. See, e.g., Hutchins v. District of
their cases, review is particularly appropriate. Columbia, 942 F.Supp. 665, 673 (D.D.C.1996);
Waters, 711 F.Supp. at 1137. Nor does the curfew
B. Freedom of Movement aid minors in making essential decisions. The
Bellotti court recognized that the state may have an
[3][4] We first consider whether the curfew interest in limiting minors' right to snake
unreasonably interferes with minors' right to "important, affirmative choices with potentially
freedom of movement. Adults' right to freely move serious consequences." Bellotti, 443 U.S. at 635,
about and stand still has been recognized as 99 S.Ct. at 3044. But as one court considering a
fundamental to a free society. Papachristou v. City curfew said, "the decision to either stay inside or
of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 92 S.Ct. 839, 31 roam at night simply does not present the type of
L.Ed.2d 110 (1972). "[Freeedom of movement is profound decision which Bellord would leave to the
the very essence of our free society, setting us apart. state." Waters, 711 F.Supp. at 1137. We agree
Like the right of assembly and the right of with the Waters court that a minor's choice to stay
association, it often makes all other rights out past 10 p.m. on a weekday, for whatever
meaningful—knowing, studying, arguing, exploring, reason. is not the kind of important life decision that
conversing, observing and even thinking." Aptheker the state has an interest in making for the minor.
v. Secretary of State, 378 U.S. 500, 520, 84 S.Ct. Finally, the curfew does not foster the parent-child
1659, 1671, 12 L.Ed.2d 992 (1964) (Douglas, J., relationship as the Beilord court portrayed it.
concurring). This freedom is rooted both in the Rather, the curfew interferes with parental control
First Amendment's protection of association and because it prohibits parents from allowing their
Copr. C West 1997 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
937 P.2d 630 Page 5
(Cite as: 937 P.2d 630, *634)
children to participate in beneficial programs or ordinances because their reach was too broad.
groups which may keep them out after curfew Noting that the number of juveniles engaged in safe
hours. The Bellom factors do not support a and innocent activity almost certainly outnumbers
conclusion that the State may abridge minors' those engaged in criminal activity, the courts have
freedom of movement where it could not so limit held that confining all of them to their homes or a
adults few designated activities without evidence that such
Draconian restrictions were necessary to address
[5][6] Because it impacts a fundamental right, we juvenile crime is not a narrowly tailored response to
consider the curfew's constitutionality under the the problem. . See Hutchins, 942 F.Supp. at 676;
strict scrutiny test. In Seattle v. Pullman: the court Waters, 711 F.Supp. at 1136. The record in this
agreed that minor curfews are subject to strict case also fails to provide evidence of a sufficient
scrutiny: "Similarly, minor curfew ordinances may nexus between the curfew and juvenile victimization
be permissible where they are specific in their or crime rates to withstand strict scrutiny. [FN4] In
prohibition and necessary in curing a demonstrable fact, the only evidence before us shows that,
social evil." Pullman, 82 Wash.2d at 803, 514 P.2d according to Bellingham's own officials, the curfew
1059. The question then becomes whether the has had no impact at all on juvenile crime. Peggy
ordinance is narrowly tailored to promote a Slavick, Juvenile Curfew and Parental
compelling state interest. Shapiro v. Thompson, Responsibility Ordinances in Washington State,
394 U.S. 618, 634, 89 S.Ct. 1322, 1331, 22 Washington State Institute for Public Policy, March
L.Ed.2d 600 (1969). 1996, Appendix A. Like the curfew the Supreme
Court invalidated in Seattle v. Pullman, this one also
[7] Before a municipality can enact valid legislation lacks "the requisite connection to the ordinance's
which infringes on a fundamental right like freedom alleged purpose of protecting minors." 82 Wash.2d
of movement, the Government must prove a at 801, 514 P.2d 1059. Because the law is not
compelling need. Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. narrowly tailored to prevent juvenile crime or
Pena, — U.S. —, — - —, 115 S.Ct. 2097, protect minors from becoming victims, we hold that
it is an unconstitutional infringement on minors'-
. 2117-18, 132 L.Ed.2d 158 (1995). It need not have freedom of movement.
scientific or exact proof of the need for legislation.
Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629, 642, 88 FN4. We recognize that the City of Bellingham did
S.Ct. 1274, 1282, 20 L.Ed.2d 195 (1968). not have the opportunity to create a record in
Bellingham enacted its curfew in response to rising support of the curfew because it chose not to defend
crime rates in the CBD. It hoped to reduce juvenile the curfew's constitutionality and to dismiss J.D.'s
crime and protect young people from becoming conviction. Constitutional issues are normally raised
victims of crime. In the hearings on the ordinance, in an action for a declaratory judgment in which the
the Council heard testimony about crime in the CBD Government has an opportunity to complete the
record. However, the City never argued that it
and considered the curfew as 'a possible solution.While no statistics about crime in the CBD were would have added anything to the record before us,
or that it had any additional evidence to support the
before the Council at the time it voted on the curfew. It is therefore appropriate to rely on the
ordinance and it relied solely on anecdotal evidence record before the Council as presented by the parties
from the police chief, there was sufficient testimony in this case.
to support the Council's fording that a crime
problem exists in the CBD. We also agree with the C. Freedom of Expression
Council that crime prevention and protecting minors
from becoming victims are sufficiently compelling [10] The curfew's broad reach also impermissibly
interests to survive strict scrutiny. The curfew infringes on minors' right of free expression. The
ordinance thus meets the first prong of the test. United States Supreme Court has long recognized
that minors have the same fundamental right of
[8][9] But it must also be narrowly tailored to meet expression as adults. Tinker v. Des Moines Indep.
the governmemal purpose. To be narrowly tailored, Community Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 511, 89 S.Ct.
there must be an evidentiary nexus between a law's 733, 739, 21 L.Ed.2d 731 (1969). Therefore, the
purpose and effect. Hutchins, 942 F.Supp. at 675. State may limit this freedom only if its action is
Other *635 courts have struck down similar curfew narrowly tailored to serve a compelling purpose.
Copr. C West 1997 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
937 P.2d 630 Page 6
(Cite as: 937 P.2d 630, *635)
Waters, 711 F.Supp. at 1135. _ Some curfews have
been upheld because they have a broad exception for We declare BMC 10.62 unconstitutional and grant
First Amendment activities. See Qutb v. Strauss, 11 the State's motion to dismiss.
F.3d 488 (5th Cir.1993) (upholding the Dallas,
Texas ordinance), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1127, 114 APPENDIX A
S.Ct. 2134, 128 L.Ed.2d 864 (1994). But the BMC 10.62.030—Curfew For Minors.
Bellingham curfew only permits minors engaged in
"activities" to be in public areas of the CBD and A. No minor 15 years or younger shall be in or
contains no specific exception for expressive remain in any public place in the CBD between the
activities. As another coon considering a similar hours of 10:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m., Sunday through
curfew noted, protected expressive conduct like Thursday, and between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and
participation in study groups or youth vigils and 5:00 a.m., Friday through Saturday.
protests which does not fall within the ordinance's
narrow exclusions will disappear. Waters, 711 During school vacations and holidays, and on
i
F.Supp. at 1135. This is too great an impact on nights preceding school vacations and holidays,
Friday and Saturday curfew hours shall be in effect.
legitimate protected expression. Because
Bellingham's ordinance infringes on minors' right to C. The provisions of paragraphs A, B and C shall
free expression and is not narrowly tailored to serve not apply to the following circumstances:
the City's purpose, it is an invalid restraint on (1) When the minor is accompanied by a parent,
expression. guardian, custodian or other adult person having
custody or control of such minor.
D. Vagueness (2) When the minor is on an emergency errand or
specific business or activity directed or permitted
[11][12] J.D. finally contends that the Bellingham by his parent, guardian or other adult person
curfew is unconstitutionally vague. Every ordinance having the care and custody of the minor.
must be sufficiently clear to give a person of (3) When the presence of the minor is connected
ordinary intelligence fair notice of what conduct is with or required by some legitimate employment,
prohibited and provide explicit standards for officers trade, profession or occupation and the minor is
enforcing the law. Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. traveling by direct route to or from such place of
352, 357, 103 S.Ct. 1855, 1858, 75 L.Ed.2d 903 employment, trade, profession, or occupation.
(1983). BMC 10.62 excepts minors en route to or (4) When the minor is in a motor vehicle and
from "an activity including, but not limited to, engaged in interstate travel with the consent of a
dance, theater presentations, and sporting events." parent, guardian or other adult person having
BMC 10.62.030(C)(6). The ordinance does not custody or control of such minor.
indicate whether an exempt "activity" would include (5) When the minor is within one block of his/her
a social gathering, a book club, a science group, or legal residence.
other group event not organized by some overseeing (6) When the minor is traveling by direct route to
body. In fact, the listed examples of "activities" or from an activity including, but not limited to, a
give the impression that such meetings are not dance, theater presentation, and sporting events.
"activities" as defined in the statute and only Minors who attend such activities shall return to
organized or formal events are exempted. Because their homes or usual places of abode within one-
the ordinance is unclear about what is and is not an half hour after the activity has ended.
exempted activity, it fails to provide explicit (7) When the minor, or a group of minors, has
standards for enforcement. Police officers do not been authorized by special permit obtained from
have *636 sufficient guidance to determine whether the Chief of Police to be in the CBD during curfew
a minor traveling from an event other than those hours for circumstances not provided for by the
specifically listed may or may not be cited under the other exceptions set forth in this ordinance.
ordinance. Therefore, we hold that BMC 10.62 is
also unconstitutionally vague_ END OF DOCUMENT
Colin (0 West 1997 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
COMPARISON OF CURFEW ORDINANCES
Initiative Petition Ordinance Ordinance Considered by Council
✓ Curfew and parental responsibility ✓ Same
✓ Juveniles under eighteen (18) years of age ✓ Same
✓ Curfew hours: ✓ Curfew hours:
Sun. - Tours. 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Daily 12:01 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Sat. - Sun. 12:01 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Exemptions Exemptions
✓ Juvenile is accompanied by a parent or ✓ Same
guardian
✓ Juvenile is traveling to or from an official ✓ Same
school, political, religious or recreational
activity
✓ Juvenile is involved in emergency ✓ Same
✓ Juvenile is in a motor vehicle engaged in ✓ Juvenile is in a motor vehicle involved in
interstate travel with consent interstate travel.
✓ Juvenile is on the sidewalk of home or ✓ Same
neighbor
✓ Juvenile is on an errand pursuant to written ✓Juvenile is on an errand at the direction of the
instructions of a parent or guardian juvenile's parent or guardian
✓Juvenile is engaged in lawful employment or ✓ Same
traveling to or from such place of employment
✓ Juvenile is exercising First Amendment
rights
✓ Juvenile is lawfully conducting business or
engaging in entertainment or amusement in an
establishment with the owner or operator's
consent.
✓ Juvenile is going to or from a residence of
another.
✓ Juvenile is legally emancipated.
Enforcement Enforcement
✓ Officer may stop and question juvenile. If ./ Officer may stop and question juvenile and
juvenile fails to cooperate or provide direct juvenile to his or her home.
information, may be taken into custody.
Officer delivers juvenile home, PD, or DSHS.
✓ If juvenile is in danger, pursuant to RCW ✓ Same
13.32A, may take juvenile into custody and
deliver or arrange to deliver juvenile to home or
other location.
✓ Violations are civil nof criminal ✓ Same
✓ 1st Violation: not to exceed $50 ✓ 1st Violation: warning
2nd Violation: not to exceed $150 2nd Violation: $100
3rd Violation: not to exceed S500 Rd/Subsequent
or community service through Parks Violation: $250
Department @ one hour per five dollar ($5)
penalty performed by juvenile, parent, or
guardian
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15. 1997
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: JUVENILE CURFEW AND PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
ORDINANCES - COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Participation in the King County Voter
Pamphlet for the City's proposed new Curfew Ordinance requires
Council appointment of two committees of up to three members
each, to prepare ballot statements containing arguments "for"
and "against" the Curfew Ordinance for the pamphlet.
3. EXHIBITS: NONE
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: N/A
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember Ak moves, Councilmember 0,", seconds
for the appointment of to the Voter
Pamphlet Committee in fav of the proposed Curfew Ordinance
and the appointment o to the Voter
Pamphlet against a proposed Curfew Ordinance.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4E
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15 1997
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: RIVERBEND GOLF COMPLEX MANAGEMENT SERVICES
EVALUATION COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENTS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Mayor would like to submit for
Council confirmation the names of six (6) individuals who have
been contacted and indicated their willingness to serve as
members of the Riverbend Golf Complex Management Services
Evaluation Committee. He has also appointed three (3) Ex-
Officio (non-voting) members. The purpose of the committee is
to evaluate the proposers for the management of the Riverbend
Golf Complex.
The City Council voted on March 4 , 1997 , to create a committee
to evaluate the proposers for the management and operation of
the Riverbend Golf Complex and that committee would then make a
recommendation to City Council.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from Mayor White
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor White
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
�t1140 Councilmember� _moves, Councilmember seconds
to confirm the Mayor' s appointments to the Riverbend Golf
Complex Evaluation Committee.
,QI. Y' �iY726�6rtJ
)DISCUSSION:
N'' ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4F
MEMORANDUM
TO: CHRISTI HOUSER, CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: JIM WHITE, MAYO4�.)
DATE: JULY 101 1997
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS TO RIVERBEND GOLF COMPLEX MANAGEMENT
SERVICES EVALUATION COMMITTEE
After much consideration, I would like to offer the following appointments for Council
confirmation. These individuals have been contacted and have indicated their willingness to serve
as members of the Riverbend Golf Complex Management Services Evaluation Committee. The
purpose of the committee is to evaluate the proposers for the management of the Riverbend Golf
Complex.
The Kent City Council voted on March 4, 1997 to create a committee to evaluate the proposers for
the management and operation of the Riverbend Golf Complex and that committee would then make
a recommendation to City Council.
I would like to offer for your confirmation:
Jon Johnson(Committee Chairman) Kent City Council
Ben Dillard Kent School District
Chris King U.S. Bank
Harold Peranti Riverbend Golf Advisory Board
Dick Lackey Shannon and Associates
Jim Bennett Kent City Council
Cathy Madeson Best Western Choice Lodge
Ex-Officio members (non-voting) John Hodgson Director of Parks and Recreation
Brent McFall Director of Operations
Pete Peterson Superintendent of Golf
These appointees would bring interest, experience and enthusiasm to the Riverbend Golf Complex
Evaluation Committee.
The evaluation date is set for Thursday, July 31, 1997.
..........
Kent City Council Meeting
Date July 15 . 1997
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: BOWEN SCARFF/MILL CREEK BYPASS CULVERTS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The bid opening for this project was
held on July 9th with seven bids received. The low bid was
submitted by R. L. Alia Company in the amount of $415, 264 . 68.
The Engineer's estimate was $488 , 184. 15. The project consists
of building a large diameter storm drain bypass in the vicinity
of the Bowen Scarff Ford dealership to alleviate a bottleneck
in the Mill Creek system which has caused flooding in the past
in this vicinity.
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that upon
the Public Works Department' s receipt of all required permits,
the Mill Creek Storm Drainage Improvements at Bowen Scarff
contract be awarded to R. L. Alia Company for the bid amount of
$415, 264 . 68 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Director memorandum
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $415, 264 . 68
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Mill Creek Proiect Fund M18)
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: /
Councilmember moves, Councilmemberl /L-seconds
that upon the Public Works Department' s receipt of all required
permits, the Mill Creek Storm Drainage Improvements at Bowen
Scarff contract be awarded to R. L. Alia Company for the bid
amount of $415, 264 . 68.
DISCUSSION• ^1^ Q
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 5A
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
July 10, 1997
TO: Mayor &z City Council
FROM: Don Wicicstrom �
RE: Mill Creek Drainage Improvements @ Bowen Scarff
Bid opening for this project was held on July 9th with 1 bids received. The low bid
was submitted by R. L. Alia Company in the amount of $415,264.68. The Engineer's
estimate was 5488,184.15.
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that upon the Public Works
Dept's receipt of all required permits, the Mill Creek Drainage Improvements @
Bowen Scarff contract be awarded to R. L. Alia Companv for the bid amount of
5415,264.68.
BID SUMMARY
R. L. Alia Company 415,264.68
D.D.J. Construction 466,094.91
Ceccanti, Inc. 496,356.30
Engberg Construction 523,102.31
Tri-State Construction, Inc. 596,055.99
Pivetta Bros. Construction 617,574.53
Glacier Construction 629,391 .30
Engineer's Estimate 488,194.15
MOTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds that upon the
Public Works Dept's receipt of all required permits, the ,Mill Creek Drainage
Improvements @ Bowen Scarff contract be awarded to R. L. Alia Company for the
bid amount of 5415,264.68.
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
.....y....... ..........
R E P O R T S
OCOUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE :V .r.J'.`
OJvr
CD� PLANNING COMMITTEE Z4- q-i'00 !21 m
E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
PARKS COMMITTEE
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS��9re"yo
BRENDA JACOBER
cirr of �.,� � (Please put in Council agenda
packet)
n r,
Jim White, 'Mayor
Planning Department (253)859-3390/FAX(253)850-2544
James P. Harris, Planning Director
REVISED
CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
May 20, 1997
Planning Committee Members Present: Citv Attomev's Office
Leona Orr. Chair Laurie Evezich
Tim Clark
Jon Johnson
Other
Plannin<z Staff Peggy Aulgur. Sounds on Wheels
James P. Harris, Planning Director Daniel Streiffert
Margaret Porter. Administrative Asst III Nancy Streiffert
Teresa Beener. Administrative Secretary Ted Sullivan. KC Program Mana(2er
SOUNDS ON WHEELS (L. Orr)
Chair Leona Orr explained that the Peggy Aulgur. owner of Sounds on Wheels. contacted her
regarding a problem she was having within the City. Chair Orr asked that Ms. Auigur explain her
situation to the Committee.
Peggy Aulgur, 111 Central Avenue. Ms. Aulgur stated that she and her husband own Sounds on
\k`heels. which is located in the Citv of Kent. She remarked that they have been doing business in
the Citv of Kent since late 1987 and purchased their Central Avenue property from Texaco in 1991.
Ms. Aulgur commented that she felt they had received a lot of opposition from the City from the
beginning. She explained that the main opposition they faced came from the existence of the open
driveways. She remarked that the property was originally a service station and had six entrances.
She stated that they negotiated with the City to leave four entrances open.
Ms. Aulgur stated that their building was partially destroyed from arson fire. She stated that during
reconstruction. concerns were once again expressed regarding the zoning and driveway issue. She
indicates that during their rebuilding process. there was someone from the Citv constantly observing
their progress. She commented that this was tremendously frustrating and remarked that the rules
of the game were constantly changing.
1
„i-in ,�P:. �n F_F\I
City Council Planning Committee Minutes - Revised
May 20. 1997
She stated that when they finally got the building back together they had only one driveway
remaining at the northwest side of the building. The Aulgur's put up barriers to close the remaining
entrances. She professed that the City was requiring them to put in a sidewalks, add curbing and
make the site wheel chair accessible. She stated that they received bids on the improvements and
they were extremely expensive.
In June of 1996,they applied for a sign permit. The sign company Ms. Aulgur hired went to the City
of Kent to apply for the sign permit. They returned and informed the Aulgur's that a sign permit
could not be issued for the property because of existing violations and issues with the City.
Ms. Aulgur stated that the reason the property was redlined was because the driveway on the
northwest side of the property. Since that time. the Aulgur*s have tried to speak with City officials
to no avail.
She stated that her attorney had written a letter in July of last year to the City which was forwarded
to the City Attorney. After the letter had been received, the City would not speak with Ms. Aulgur
because it was now a legal matter.
Ms. Aulgur expressed her frustration with the situation. She stated that there are other properties in
the area that have more severe issues such as excessive signage and numerous driveways left open.
She stated that she feels as though she has been singled out. She is asking to have the provision
removed from her property and the sign permit issued.
Committee member Tim Clark stated that he is unsure as to how your sign permit is different from
any other applicants. Ms. Aulgur stated that her sign has nothing to do with this issue. Mr. Clark
stated that sign is a wide open term and there are several types and restrictions that apply.
Ms. Aulgur stated that according to the information that the sign company received from the City
there are no problems with the sign that is being requested. She stated that her sign permit is being
held up due to the fact the northwest corner of her property does not meet the City's requirements.
although the City allowed her to occupy the business.
Assistant City Attorney Laurie Evezich explained that the history of this property dates back to
approximately 1992 when Sounds on Wheels requested permits from the City of Kent. The City
approved the initial site plan with conditions and issued their permits. She explained that some of
the conditions required certain construction standards and traffic patterns, rights-of-way, driveway
access, egress, ingress, etc. to be followed in accordance with common Public Works practices at
that time.
Ms. Evezich explained that subsequent to receiving their site plan approval, the business opened and
in 1996 the applicants approached the City of Kent with some additional permits unrelated to their
original permits. During the review of a change of use permit application (1996) a planner went out
and did a site inspection. Upon obtaining plans, it was discovered at that time that the project as
Citv Council Planning Committee Minutes - Revised
May 20. 1997
approved had not been carried forward. Hence, the plans that were approved with conditions had
not been fulfilled by the owners; therefore, no additional permits can be used until such time as they
comply with the original site plan approval.
Ms. Evezich stated that the letter she had received from Susan Sampson representing Sounds on
Wheels was written in September of 1996. Ms Evezich explained that she responded to the letter
on October 17, 1996, in which she responded to Ms. Sampson's questions and invited her to contact
her. She state that there was no further contact from the applicants or their attorney before today.
Ms. Evezich warned that this body is not necessarily the best avenue in which to discuss this matter.
Chair Orr explained that Ms Aulgur approached her. Ms Orr discussed the situation with the Citv
Attomev Romer Lubovich and the City Attorney determined that this item could be discussed at the
Planning Committee. Ms. Evezich offered to discuss this matter directly with iV1s. Aulgur and
provide her with a more direct remedy.
APPLICATION FOR OPEN SPACE TAXATION (PUBLIC HEARING) (J. Harris)
Planning Director James P. Harris explained that Daniel and Nancy Streiffert have applied for a
current use assessment for open space taxation of their property. which is located in the City_ of Kent.
Mr. Harris identified the property location on a map. The property is located at 10102 SE 270th
Place.
Mr. Harris explained that the total area under consideration for open space is approximatel" 91
acres. He explained that the property is adjacent to two parcels of City_ owned land. He stated that
the portion of their property in question has about 40% slopes.
He explained that the approval body consists of three King County Council members and three Kent
City Council members, which may approve the application by separate public hearings. Mr. Harris
explained that the applicants were required to complete the King Countv Public Benefit Rating
System Form and they have identified several significant features on their property. The Rainier
Chapter of the National Audubon Society supports this proposal and Mr. Harris stated that the
Planning Department is recommending approval of this application.
Chair Leona Orr opened the public hearing.
Ted Sullivan,King County Program Manager of the Public Benefit Rating System,506 Second
Avenue, Suite 720, Seattle, WA 98104. Mr. Sullivan explained that he has reviewed this
application and discussed a few corrections. The applicants identified the area as having a surface
water quality buffer area. although they do not qualify for that category. Mr. Sullivan explained that
the Streiffert's property does qualify for the aquifer protection area and the public lands and ri«i1t of-
way buffer. He stated that the applicants qualify for an 80% tax reduction.
3
City Council Planning Committee Minutes - Revised
Mav 20. 1997
Planning Director Jim Harris questioned what the 80% tax reduction would be on. Mr. Sullivan
explained that the Streiffert's would receive the tax reduction on the portion of the land in the
program not the entire tax bill.
Mr. Sullivan explained that the next process would require the approving members to sign a
'Decision of Granting Authority' to approve the application. He stated that the County Council
members will be meeting on June 26, 1997 to decide this application.
Mr. Harris questioned when the Council members would have to sign the approval forth.
Mr. Sullivan explained that the Council members could sign any time after they have made their
decision. He stated that he could send Mr. Harris a form tomorrow. Mr. Sullivan commented that
the tax reduction will not take place until 1998 and it will not affect the current tax year.
Mr. Sullivan explained that the City has the option of shifting the loss of revenue from this tax
reduction to the rest of the property owners within the City of Kent or can simply absorb the loss of
revenue. He also explained that his recommendation will outline the conditions that will apply to
the property. Some of the conditions that will be placed on the property are as follows:
No development on the property that would disturb the resources.
No machinery.
No manicuring of trees.
Maintain an existing trail.
Mr. Harris explained that he is unsure how the City has dealt with the loss of revenue from previous
applications. Chair Orr asked Mr. Harris to research how the City has handled previous applications
before thev decide on how to handle this application.
Committee member Tim Clark MOVED and Johnson SECONDED a motion to close the public
hearing. The motion carried.
Committee member Johnson MOVED and Clark SECONDED a motion to approve the Application
4E96CT035K for Open Space Taxation. Motion carried.
Chair Leona Orr requested that Mr. Harris get the necessary paper work for the Council members
to sign and also asked him to research the history of how the City has handled the decrease in
revenue.
-4
City Council Planning Committee Minutes - Revised
- May 20. 1997
ADDED ITEMS
SPECIAL PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING (J. Harris)
Planning Director James P. Harris requested that the Committee schedule a special meeting on
September 2, 1997 to consider Block Grant funding., The Committee concurred to set aside this date
for a special meeting.
PARK ORCHARD FENCING ISSUE/108TH AVENUE SE (T. Clark)
Committee member Tim Clark commented that when this item was last discussed by the Planning
Committee, Assistant City Attorney Tom Brubaker agreed to speak with the Apartment Complex
in question. Mr. Clark asked the City Attorneys office for an update.
Assistant City Attorney Laurie Evezich stated that the City Attorney's office is trying to substantiate
whether the agreement made between the City and the Apartment was binding by mitigating
conditions of the development or if the agreement was merely a friendly verbal agreement.
Mr. Clark requested that this item be brought back to the Planning Committee at the next meeting
to consider limiting on-street parking if the City is unable to require the Apartment to replace the
fence.
Mr. Harris stated that this item will be placed on the next Planning Committee agenda (June 17th).
Ms. Evezich stated that she will report back to the Committee at the next meeting whether the fence
was required due to mitigating conditions which the City can hold the apartment accountable.
HOUSING TARGET GOALS (L. Orr)
Chair Leona Orr questioned whether staff was working to revise the housing target goals and make
adjustments for the areas annexed into the City.
Mr. Harris explained that this issue is currently being researched by staff. He stated explained there
is no quick formula to revise the target goals; however. both King County and Kent are working,
towards updating the target goals. Mr. Harris stated that staff will provide the Committee a report
on the housing target goals as the revision becomes available.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.
yW
1
CITY OF ,70 1
Jim White, Mayor
Planning Department (253)859-3390/FAX(253)850-2544
James P. Harris,Planning Director
CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
June 17, 1997
Planning Committee Members Present: City Attorney's Office
Leona Orr, Chair Laurie Evezich
Tim Clark Tom Brubaker
Jon Johnson
Planning St Other
James P. Harris, Planning Director David Wolbeck
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Teresa Beener, Administrative Secretary
PARK ORCHARD FENCING ISSUE/108TH AVENUE SE - (L. Evezich)
Assistant City Attorney Laurie Evezich explained that this issue was originated from a citizen
complaint regarding the removal of a previously existing fence at the Summit Apartments. The
group's main complaint is the pedestrian traffic that has increased because of the removal of the
fence.
Ms. Evezich explained that the City has no legal grounds to enforce the apartment complex to
reconstruct the fence. However, the property manager has informed the Assistant City Attorney that
they have budgeted and scheduled the construction of an iron gate perimeter fence for September
of this year. The fence is being constructed for security reasons and will be accessed by a card key.
Because the apartment's initiative to construct a fence, Ms. Evezich feels that this meets the concerns
the citizen group therefore there is no reason to pursue this issue farther.
Committee member Jon Johnson discussed his concern with on-street parking and suggested limiting
parking to one side. He discussed the issue of residents parking inoperable vehicles or working on
vehicles while they're parked on the street. Ms. Evezich explained that those would be code
violation issues and could be addressed in that manner.
Committee member Tim Clark asked for this item to be scheduled for the September meeting to
check the apartments progress. Mr. Satterstrom explained that a building permit is not necessarily
1
^n am w5 SO KENT. WASHINGTON 9N032-;8vi I TELEPHONE _06�%iO- 100/PAX
City Council Planning Committee Minutes
June 17, 1997
required if the fence is less than six feet tall. Ms. Evmzich offered to write the apartments a letter to
explain the City's appreciation of their efforts, inform them of the development requirements, and
ask for them to keep the City informed to their progress.
The Committee agreed to bring this item to their September meeting.
GREEN RIVER ANNEXATION PROCESS - (T. Brubaker)
Assistant City Attorney Tom Brubaker stated that there are several annexations in progress at this
time. He explained that Del Mar and Meridian Valley annexations will become part of the City on
July 1, 1997. Mr. Brubaker explained that the Green River Annexation is still pending. The 10%
petition and notice of intent was previously accepted by the City Council.
Mr. Brubaker explained that the petition method of annexation requires 60% or more of the assessed
valuation of landowners to agree to the annexation. King County owns more than 40% of the land
value and to this date refuses to agree to the annexation. The area consists of approximately 12
residents and the majority support the annexation. The annexation would benefit the 277th Corridor
project by unifying the permit and construction process and would eliminate the need to work in
more than one jurisdiction.
The other method of annexation is by ballot, and Mr. Brubaker explained that process. The process
would be commenced by a Resolution. A copy of the Resolution would be sent to the King County
Auditor and the Boundary Review Board. The Boundary Review Board would hold a public hearing
in the vicinity of the area proposed for annexation. The Boundary Review Board makes a
recommendation to either approve as proposed or modify the area.
Mr. Brubaker explained that if the Boundary Review Board does not approve the annexation, there
can be no action on the annexation for 12 months. If they approve the annexation, it will be
forwarded to the King County Auditor to be placed on the ballot. The ballot will include two
questions, one if the area should be annexed into the City of Kent, and two whether area should
assume the existing indebtedness of the City.
Clark questioned how much of the area was a part of the King County Agricultural lands. Planning
Manager, Fred Satterstrom, explained that about 2/3 of the area were agricultural lands. The area
consists of some King County parks and one property owner is not in the Purchase of Development
Rights program.
Johnson MOVED and Clark SECONDED a motion to approve the Green River Annexation Process
and send the Resolution to the Council for their approval. Motion carried.
».. City Council Planning Committee Minutes
June 17, 1997
ADDED ITEM:
CORRECTION TO THE MINUTES FROM MAY 20. 1997
Chair Leona Orr asked for changes to be made to the May 20, 1997 Planning Committee Minutes
to reflect the statement made by herself and Ms. Evezich regarding the appearance of fairness and
the reason Ms. Aulgur was at the Planning Committee. Chair Orr asked for the minutes to be
corrected and brought back to the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:38 p.m.
,w
3
MINUTES FROM PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
" JUNE 17, 1997
PRESENT: Jim Bennett, Chair Roger Lubovich
Tim Clark Ed Crawford
Leona Orr Norm Angelo
Meeting called to order by Chairman Bennett at 5:11 p.m.
SOUTH KING COUNTY NARCOTICS TASK FORCE GRANT ADMINISTRATION
Chief Ed Crawford explained that the South King County Narcotics Task Force has been in
operation for about seven to eight years. It is made up of employees from Kent, Auburn,
Renton and Tukwila. They work narcotics enforcement cases that go beyond the city and they
work closely with the State and the Federal Government on larger narcotics cases.. Renton has
been the lead agency since the inception of the Task Force. This past year, however,
command was turned over to the City of Kent. This means that the City of Kent is now
responsible for providing the lieutenant in charge of the Task Force. With this change, fiscal
responsibility also needs to be moved from Renton to Kent. Changing the fiscal responsibility
to the City of Kent will make it easier for the lieutenant to relate and work with the Finance
Division on fiscal matters. $6,000 has been allocated to the City of Kent for taking over the
fiscal responsibility functions.
Leona Orr moved to approve the request and place on the July 1, 1997, City Council Consent
Calendar. Tim Clark seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously (3-0).
BRIEFING ON EMS LEVY - RESOLUTION.
Chief Norm Angelo explained that every six years the County has the opportunity to renew the
Emergency Medical Services levy. This year, however, since we are a city of over 50,000
population, according to Legislation we must authorize the County to put the levy measure on
the ballot. This does not mean approval of the levy itself, it simply authorizes the County to put
the levy on the ballot. The impact for Kent is significant. South King County advanced life
support services/paramedics are funded basically through this levy. In addition, there are
certain basic life support funds that come to the fire departments. It does not pay for all basic
life support, but its incremental and enables Kent to mesh with the medics to provide the level
of service that this County has enjoyed for 20 years.
Angelo .advised that the proposed levy amount is at 29 cents, noting that the amount on the
enclosed resolution reads .29 which is an error and will be corrected. Clark asked if that was
29 cents per thousand dollars of assessed value. Angelo advised that it was and further
explained the process of how they come up with these figures.
Clark commented that usually when he thinks of emergency services his first inclination is to
think of the junior taxing districts, but obviously this is a county-wide levy and a county-wide
vote. Angelo confirmed that is correct and explained that each city and even the fire districts
could levy an EMS levy above and beyond their normal levies. This does preclude anybody in
Minutes from Public Safety Committee Meeting
June 17, 1997
Page 2 of 3
the county from levying against the amount that is being done here and makes it truly a
regional service. Clark further commented this has absolutely nothing to do with our
communications system that backs this whole system up. Angelo explained that it has nothing
to do with it directly. Its a separate levy. However, the 800 MHz county-wide levy did provide
funding for medics to have communications devices. But, that is a separate levy and is due to
sunset soon. These funds come from a different source of authorization. Clark asked if there
is anything else scheduled as a bond or levy coming on the November all-county elections.
Angelo advised that in doing the research, the County Office of Elections was able to give them
three: 1) East Bellevue Community Municipal Corporation - whether to continue its existence;
2) Sammamish Community Municipal Corporation - whether to continue its existence; and 3)
Water District No. 1 - a resolution to increase the number of commissioners from three to five.
Angelo further advised that the only other item they were aware of, which came from other
sources, is a possible initiative to go on the November ballot which would hold any tax
increases on property taxes down to the cost of living. Clark asked if that is a county issue or a
state-wide issue. Angelo commented that he believed it would be a state-wide issue. Angelo
advised that they were not able to uncover any further levy-type issues at this time, but people
have well into July to file.
Leona Orr moved to recommend that the proposed resolution to allow the county to place the
re-authorization of the EMS levy on the November ballot be placed on the Consent Calendar
for the July 1, 1997, City Council meeting. Tim Clark seconded the motion. Motion passed
unanimously (3-0).
Chairman Bennett commented that sometimes you really don't understand the value of having
every fire truck, police car and everything else imaginable to arrive at a scene. And, being of
the conservative nature, he thought this was kind of a waste of time and money. But he now
realizes that until they get there they don't know what they're up against. He unfortunately
witnessed the recent wreck on West Meeker and would have to say that he would pay to have
every policeman, fireman, you name it there because they worked their butts off to try and save
the guy. When he finally left there had been hope that they may have saved him, but
unfortunately that did not happen. Bennett advised that it was just amazing the teamwork and
the hard work that went on, stating it really makes you appreciate their efforts when you're
witnessing such an event and all you can do is just stand there and pray. Angelo commented
that unfortunately they do not have the opportunity to save them all, but the reality of it is,
between the paramedics and the firefighters and the support the police give, there is a system
out there that is so seamless, it is so non-jurisdictional that the only thing that does matter is
life. Angelo further commented that this community probably has not only the highest number
of alarms in general to respond to, but we also have the highest number of saves. And, if it
wasn't for the Council — the thinking about things regionally, about the paramedics and pulling
things together, this wouldn't be possible.
ADDED ITEMS: -
Leona Orr advised Chief Crawford that the average daily population number at the corrections
facility for the week ending June 8 appeared to be inadvertently left off the June 13 Mayors
Minutes from Public Safety Committee Meeting
June 17, 1997
Page 3 of 3
Report to Council. Orr further commented that she appreciated getting information about
what's happening on Lake Meridian, but indicated the information was not exactly what she was
looking for. The Mayors Report to Council on May 31 indicated that six citations were issued
as a result of contact with 35 violators at Lake Meridian. The report she received from Chief
Crawford says no citations were issued and went on to explain the difference between a citation
and a notice of infraction. Orr advised that by the end of summer she would like to know if the
notices of infraction, citations, warnings or whatever are being issued to jet ski operators, boat
operators, water skiers, swimmers, canoes, or whatever. There has been a very clear message
that there is concern about safety on the lake and Council needs to know where the problem/s
stem from. Crawford advised that maybe they could break it down into four or so classifications
such as 1) a boat towing a water skier, 2) a regular boat with a traditional motor or a runabout,
3) personal watercraft, 4) what they traditionally call a jet ski, etc. Crawford indicated that they
would try to come with something. Orr advised that the breakdown is needed because by the
end of summer they need to know who is causing the problems and what kind of problems they
are. Orr asked if there is a fine attached to a notice of infraction or is it simply some kind of
warning. Crawford explained that there is a fine just like a speeding ticket which is also a
notice of infraction.
Chairman Bennett advised that he has received a couple phone calls concerning visibility
W issues due to tall vegetation at different intersections: 1) when you pull out on Frager Road
taking a right on 212th - the individual said you just hop on the gas and hope nobody is coming;
2) on 132nd and 248th at the T in the road - if you're turning left off 248th you have to ease out
into the intersection in order to see the oncoming traffic. Bennett asked if this is a public works
issue or? Crawford indicated that he would make sure it was taken care of, the areas would be
checked for sight visibility and the appropriate people would be called if something needed to
be done. Tim Clark further advised that on 162nd, right where the stop sign is where you turn
to go in towards Lake Meridian and the boat launch, coming off 256th where you turn on 162nd,
going up the hill and you can't see the stop sign until you're on top of it. Clark explained that he
drove it recently and the guy has two cherry blossom-type trees there. One tree is just fine, but
the other has dropped down to a level where you can't see the stop sign until you're right on top
of it.
Tim Clark commented that he would like say thanks to the Police and Fire Departments for the
mock collision that was put on at Kentridge. It was a joint facility and training session, but it
was very educational both for the kids and the observers. Clark advised he thought it was
really a fine training program and a very dramatic overview of what emergency services can do.
Meeting adjourned at 5:34 p.m.
klr