The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 03/02/1999 cmty of Kent �a City Council Meet ing Agenda . ......... CITY OF r r' Mayor Jim White Counci/members Leona Orr, President Sandy Amodt Connie Epperly Tom Brotherton Judy Woods Tim Clark Rico Yingling March 2, 1999 { ' office or the city cierk CITY OF MT.? SUMMARY AGENDA KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING 9VivrX March 2 , 1999 Mayor Jim White Council Chambers 7 : 00 p .m. MAYOR: Jim White COUNCILMEMBERS : Leona Orr, President Sandy Amodt Tom Brotherton Tim Clark Connie Epperly Judy Woods Rico Yingling ******************************************************************* 1 . CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 2 . ROLL CALL 3 . CHANGES TO AGENDA A. FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF B. FROM THE PUBLIC \� 4 . PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS � A. Kent Arts Commission 1999 Grant Recipients B. Employee of the Month Lei c i S( "�t �1 t,I t.'' 5 . PUBLIC HEARI GS A. LID 349, S .E. 223rd Sanitary Sewers, Final Assessment Roll B. Card Room Moratorium - Resolution 6 . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Minutes B. Approval of Bills C. King County Water District No . 111 Franchise Agreement Ordinance - Introduction D. Kent Public Development Authority Debt Security - Resolution ' E. Emerald Ridge II Final Plat - Set Meeting Date F. Kentview MPUD Amendment to Water Service Area - Authorization G. Canterbury Greens - Bill of Sale H. Julie ' s Addition - Bill of Sale 7 . OTHER BUSINESS A. South Ridge Preliminary Plat B. Meridian Ridge Preliminary Plat C. Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code Amendments, Proposal L 8 . BIDS A. HP Netservers Purchase Agreement (continued next page) SUMMARY AGENDA CONTINUED 9 . REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF 10 . REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES 11 . CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS 12 EXECUTIVE SESSION - Property Acquisition 13 . ADJOURNMENT po TU f/1 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 (253) 854-6587 . CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time, make known the subject of interest , so all may be properly heard. A) FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF B) FROM THE PUBLIC PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A) Kent Arts Commission 1999 Grant Recipients B) Employee of the Month Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Public Hearings 1 . SUBJECT: LID 349, S.E. 223RD SANITARY SEWERS, FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for the Public Hearing on the confirmation of the Final Assessment Roll for LID 349, S .E . 223rd Street Sanitary Sewer. The Public Works Director will give a brief description of the project and manner of assessment . 3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Director memorandum 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Council 2/2/99 (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 UAA moves, Councilmember seconds to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance for the Final Assessment Roll for LID 349 - SE 223rd Street Sanitary Sewer. DISCUSSION: ACTION: _7yl C- Council Agenda Item No. 5A PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM January 13, 1999 TO: Mayor and Citv Council FROM: Don Wicks irector of Public Works RE: LID 349—SE 223`d Street Sanitary Sewer (1131h Ave SE to 114" PI SE) March 2, 1999 has been scheduled for the confirmation hearing on the final assessment roll for the above referenced LID project. BACKGROUND The City received a petition for the installation of sanitary sewers on SE 223rd Street northeast of the curves on Benson Highway (SR 516) as shown on the attached map. Subsequently, all property owners within the project were contacted and there was adequate support to proceed with the formation of the LID. Initially, properties in addition to the area covered by the petition were contacted and asked to complete a questionnaire expressing interest or disinterest in the project. The LID boundary was based on the responses with properties on 1141h and 115th Place SE being deleted due to lack of support. The Resolution of Intent No. 1501 was approved by City Council on November 9, 1997 which set the hearing date for January 6, 1998. Zero protests were received, therefore City Council passed Ordinance No. 3388 on January 20, 1998 forming the LID and ordering the construction of the sewer system. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS The project constructed an 8" sanitary sewer system with one 6" side sewer stub to the right- of-way line for each of the 22 properties included in the LID boundary and 2 properties outside of the LID boundary. Tmv98274 Page 1 of 3 Project Number: 98-3003 The Construction included 8" sewer at the following location: (see attached map) ON FROM TO SE 223rd Street Approx 200 feet west 114" PI SE Of 113" Ave SE 114th Ave SE SE 223rd St 223rd PI SE 223rd PI SE 1131h Ave SE West to end 113rd PI SE SE 223rd St South to end Also included was street and general restoration. PROJECT FUNDING Original Final LID $186,972.28 $222,838.00 Soos Creek Water & Sewer: -0 - $15,725.04 City (Future Charge in Lieu of Assessment 554,491.18 $70,903.00 City (Sewer Division) -0- $43,086.19 TOTAL $246,463.46 $352,552.23 The LID share is composed of 22 assessments of$10,129.00 each. This is an LID project, however, City funding is being proposed for several reasons. There are two properties on the north side of SE 223rd Street as shown on the map that are not included in the LID. These properties are currently in Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, therefore we can't include them in the LID. However, due to the circumstances, they should be serviced by Kent since a Kent sewer is already available on SE 223rd Street. The City proposes to fund the cost attributable to these parcels and establish a Charge in Lieu of Assessment. Should these properties hook up in the future, they will pay a charge equal to the per house LID assessment to reimburse the City. In any event, the LID assessments are reduced as there are two additional properties to share in the cost. Each property currently has one existing house. The goal of the project was to provide a sewer connection for each house to address the failing septic system issue rather than to promote development. However, five of the properties currently with one house are of sufficient size to possibly allow further development. For assessment calculations, these properties were considered as two connections since it appears that at least one additional home could be constructed and connected to the sewer on South 223rd Street. The City proposes to fund the cost of the second connection and establish a Charge in Lieu of Assessment which will be paid should an additional connection be made in the future. This procedure minimizes the initial assessment for these larger properties which made it more feasible for the property owner to support the LID and pay the assessment, especially if they Tmv98274 Page 2 of 3 Project Number: 98-3003 did not have development plans. However, should they have the need for additional connection, they will be required to pay an appropriate share. - Soos Creek Water and Sewer District replaced their water mains while the roadway was torn up for the sewer construction. Therefore, they paid half of the asphalt overlay costs for restoring the roadway. The final project costs exceed the original estimate. The assessment to the properties has increased from $8,498.74 to $10,129 which covers only a portion of the increase. Due to the extent of the increase it is recommended that sewer division funds pay the additional cost above the revised assessment amount. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT Each property within the LID boundary receives an equal share of the LID total based on one residential side sewer connection per parcel. PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT Upon Council passing the Ordinance confirming the Final Assessment Roll, there is a 30-day 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 one- tenth of the principal plus interest on the unpaid balance. The interest will be what the market dictates. m- ANNEXATION TO CITY The LID is located outside of the Kent City limits but within our sewer franchise boundary. These properties were not required to annex to the City prior to the LID formation. However, each person applying for a sewer permit will be required to execute an Annexation No Protest Covenant. This means that in the case of an annexation attempt, they will be counted as a "yes" vote and once enough covenants have been signed, an annexation could proceed. MANDATORY SEWER CONNECTION The City Code states that all residences whether within or outside the City limits, located within 200 feet of a City of Kent sanitary sewer shall be required to connect to the sewer and shall be billed for the service. The Code provides that compliance with this provision be within 90 days after the date of official notice to do so. In the case of a public health or safety hazard, compliance shall be within 20 days of official notification. Following construction of the project, the City sends each property owner an official notice that the sanitary sewer service is available to the parcel and is within 200 feet of the house. Following the compliance period, all properties which have not yet applied for a side sewer permit will automatically be added to the sewer billing list. Tmv98274 Page 3 of 3 Project Number: 98-3003 '3'S 3/1b 911 f � � IX W Y.U. o _ - Ell j >.w z Z 3'S 'ld 911 ) �, 3:5 L CJ N m rn _ 7. ►rnuurnnn 3 W 'ld I ;� Q m �. W ii e , ►- - Z m (� F— Y I ( ,' uu.� z Q '^ LLIW v/ f NI O E z O Q N • ,. �_ MIN cr f wI H C str--• f g o N W � I _ C � w � i _ m I . . O (0 o 0 cr a I I — I �: • .•- i m z N z z W I I C' H r7 N W � I ♦ df I W W � n.�u ... ommmmmm W Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Public Hearings 1 . SUBJECT: CARD ROOM MORATORIUM - RESOLUTION 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On February 2 , 1999, the City Council passed Resolution No. 1525 imposing a moratorium on the acceptance of applications for the issuance of any business license or any building, land use, or development permit or approval for food or drink establishments conducting commer- cial, stimulant card games . State law authorizes cities to adopt moratoriums, provided a public hearing is held within sixty (60) days of adoption. This date has been set as the date for a public hearing on this matter. The council may either continue the moratorium for the full, six-month term or terminate the moratorium. 3 . EXHIBITS: Resolution 4 . RECOMMENDED BY• (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 pass Resolution No. - adopting findings and continuing the moratorium established in Resolution No. 1525 passed on February 2 , 1999, relating to food or drink establishments conducting commercial stimulant card games . DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 5B RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, adopting findings of fact and continuing a moratorium on the acceptance of applications for and the issuance of any business license or any building, land use, or development permit or approval for food or drink establishments conducting commercial stimulant card games. WHEREAS, RCW 34A.63.220 authorizes cities to adopt moratoriums provided a public hearing is held within sixty (60) days of adoption; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 1999, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1525 imposing a moratorium barring the acceptance of all applications for the issuance of any business license, or building, land use, or development permit or approval under the Kent City Code for food or drink establishments conducting commercial stimulant card games as defined in Chapter 9.46 RCW until additional review has been completed and any necessary code revisions have been adopted by the Kent City Council; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 provides that a city adopting a moratorium shall adopt findings of fact immediately after the public hearing held within sixty (60) days of adoption of the moratorium; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on Tuesday, March 2, 1999 before the Kent City Council; and 1 Moratorium Continuation WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is in the best interest of the City to continue the moratorium for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare of the community; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Recitals and Findings of Fact Incorporated. The recitals set forth in this resolution are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2. Findings of Fact. The Kent City Council hereby adopts the following Findings of Fact: 1. A number of food or drink establishments conducting commercial stimulant card games have opened recently in the King County area including the City of Kent; and 2. The City Council is concerned about the potential negative secondary affects that such establishments may create that would be detrimental to public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent; and 3. RCW 9.46.295 authorizes cities such as the City of Kent to prohibit any or all the gambling activities authorized under Chapter 9.46 RCW; and 4. There is a possibility that the City could, in the near future, receive more applications for such establishments that would significantly increase the number of such uses located within the City; and 5. The Kent City Code relating to food and drink establishments conducting commercial stimulant card games may not adequately address the various impacts that these uses present and the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare would be jeopardized by the establishment of such establishments prior to a review of the matter and possible adoption of new regulations by the City Council; and 6. Other cities in the surrounding Seattle-Tacoma Metropolitan region and elsewhere in the state have adopted ordinances relating to food or drink establishments conducting commercial stimulant card games based upon the impacts of such uses; and 2 Moratorium Continuation 7. The State legislature is currently considering bills relating to concerns over the rampant growth of these types of establishments throughout the State; and 8. The citizens of Kent would be well served if the City more fully addressed and understood the potential affects in the form of health, safety, economic and aesthetic impacts these uses impose upon neighboring properties in the community as a whole; and 9. The City needs time to review existing information on the affects of these uses and to evaluate whether to permit these gambling activities in the future and if so, review the Kent City Code in a comprehensive fashion to determine whether it sufficiently addresses the impacts of such uses. SECTION 3. Continuation of Moratorium. Based on the Findings of Fact adopted in Section 2, the City Council hereby determines that it is necessary for the moratorium enacted in Resolution No. 1520 to remain in effect for the entire 180-day period set forth in Resolution No. 1520. Accordingly, the moratorium shall not expire until midnight on August 1, 1999, unless the moratorium is shortened or extended by action of the City Council or until the effective date of any ordinance establishing new regulations governing food or drink establishments conducting commercial stimulant card games as defined in Ch. 9.46 RCW, which ever is sooner, and during said moratorium, no business license and no building, land use, or development permit or approval shall be issued nor shall any such permit or license application be accepted for any such establishment. SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution is declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. SECTION S. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage. 3 Moratorium Continuation PASSED at a regular open public meeting by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington,this day of , 1999. CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the City of Kent this day of 1999. JIM WHITE,MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER,CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, the day of 1998. BRENDA JACOBER,CITY CLERK P:\CiviHRmiutionlanbl ishmmtt.doc 4 Moratorium Continuation CONSENT CALENDAR 6 . City Council Action: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through H be app oved. Discussion !� Action 6A. Approval of Minutes . Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of February 16, 1999 . 6B. _Approval of Bills . Approval of payment of the bills received through February 12 and paid on February 12 , 1999 after auditing by the Operations Committee on February 23 , 1999 . Approval of checks issued for vouchers : Date Check Numbers Amount 2/12/99 212588-212816 $ 740 , 985 . 44 2/12/99 212817-213195 2 , 520 , 039 . 49 $3 , 261, 024 . 93 Approval of checks issued for payroll for February 1 through February 15 and paid on February 19, 1999 : Date Check Numbers Amount 2/19/99 Checks 233678-234004 $ 256, 694 . 57 2/19/99 Advices 76380-76947 803 , 193 . 16 $1 , 059, 887 . 73 Council Agenda Item No. 6 A-B Kent, Washington February 16, 1999 Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7 : 00 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Orr. Present : Councilmembers Amodt, Brotherton, Epperly and Yingling. Operations Director/Chief of Staff McFall, City Attorney Lubovich, Planning Director Harris, and Finance Director Miller. Approximately 15 people were in attendance at the meeting. CONSENT EPPERLY MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A CALENDAR through K be approved. Yingling seconded and the motion carried. MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6A) Approval of Minutes . APPROVAL of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of February 2 , 1999 . HEALTH & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6I) SANITATION Washington Avenue Self Storage. ACCEPTANCE of the Bill of Sale for Washington Avenue Self Storage submitted by Plemmons Hutchens LLC for continuous operation and maintenance of 372 feet of watermain improvements and release of bonds after expiration period, as recommended by the Public Works Director. The project is located at 415 Washington Avenue North. PLATS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6J) South Ridge Preliminary Plat SU-98-4 . SET March 2 , 1999, as the date for a public meeting to consider the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions of the South Ridge Preliminary Plat application. (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6K) Meridian Ridge Preliminary Plat SU-98-8 . SET March 2 , 1999, as the date for a public meeting to consider the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions of the Meridian Ridge Preliminary Plat application. (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7A) Emerald Ridge Preliminary Plat SU-98-16 . This date has been set to consider the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions dated January 6, 1999, for the Emerald Ridge Preliminary Plat . 1 Kent City Council Minutes February 16, 1999 PLATS Planning Manager Satterstrom explained for Councilmember Amodt that it is completely up to the developer as to when individuals can begin purchasing homes because it depends on how long it takes to make the improvements required. He noted that when Council approves the preliminary plat the developer is free to make application for the final plat . He noted that if the developer were to bond everything, not build but just post a bond for the plat, it would make the process very quick and lots could be sold accord- ingly. He noted that the developer for this plat has not indicated which way he intends to go, but if he chooses the bond it could probably be coming for final approval sometime this summer. Satterstrom explained that it generally takes a year to complete the lots, get the final plat approved, and then sell the lots . Councilmember Brotherton expressed concern re- garding the cul-de-sac that is planned for this development . Upon Brotherton' s question, Satterstrom noted that there is private property beyond the cul-de-sac which has already been platted and that it would be impossible to extend a road beyond the plat . Planning Director Harris noted for Amodt that the development is included in the 277th Street Corridor Project . Satterstrom explained that the plat is subject to environmental mitigation because there is not currently any cut-off date for inclusion or exclusion from the 277th Corridor Project for developments in general . Amodt noted that a new Task Force has been created to deal with mitigation issues so that future buyers are aware of and understand their responsibilities concerning these agreements that they may be required to sign. Orr noted that by the time the homes in this development are under construction there may be new rules regarding title searches so it may be more clear in the future than it has been in the past . 2 Kent City Council Minutes February 16, 1999 PLATS YINGLING MOVED to approve the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions of the Emerald Ridge Preliminary Plat application. Brotherton seconded and the motion carried. COMP PLAN & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6G) ZONING Mixed Use Development. ADOPTION of Ordinance AMENDMENTS No. 3440 relating to Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code Amendments for mixed use development requiring residential development in the mixed use overlay in the general commercial (GC) zone to be combined with commercial development, and further revising some development standards in the mixed use overlay in the general commercial (GC) zone to be consistent with development standards in the mixed use overlay in the com- munity commercial (CC) and office (0) zoning districts . (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6H) Comprehensive Plan And Zoning Amendments. ADOPTION of Ordinance No. 3441 relating to 1998 Comprehensive Plan Amendments CPA-98-2 (D) , CPA- 98-2 (E) , CPA-98-2 (G) ; and ADOPTION of Ordinance No. 3442 relating to Zoning Map changes CPZ-98-4 , CPZ-98-5, and CPZ-98-7 . These ordinances would amend the Comprehensive Plan' s Land Use Map designations and Zoning Map Designations of parcels of property more specifically identified in the ordinances, as well as amend the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan CPA-98-2 (K) . Items CPA-98-2 (B) , CPA-98-2 (I) , CPA-98-2 (J) and CPA-98-2 (L) were tabled at the Council meeting of February 2 , 1999 . SUBDIVISION (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7B) CODE AMENDMENT Subdivision Code Text Amendment SCA-99-1. The Land Use and Planning Board held a public hearing on January 26, 1999, to consider an amendment to the Kent Subdivision Code to increase the time period allowed to finalize and record a short plat . The Board recommends adoption of the proposed ordinance revising Section 12 . 04 .280 of the Kent Subdivision Code increasing this time period. 3 Kent City Council Minutes February 16, 1999 SUBDIVISION Planning Manager Satterstrom explained that the CODE AMENDMENT existing time period for approval of a short plat is 6 months and that the applicant can request a 6 month extension just by submitting a letter to the Planning Department . He noted that a great percentage of the short plats go the full year by requesting the extension but that several of the short plats have been running up against the 1-year time line . He further noted that staff supports extending the time period to allow additional time for finalizing the improvements, dedications, and getting the paperwork completed. He explained that the proposed amendment would give a 1-year time period with a request for a 1-year extension. He noted that all of the short plats would be easily completed within two years but that the 1-year time frame is a little tight . BROTHERTON MOVED to adopt Ordinance No. 3443 amending Section 12 . 04 . 280 of the Kent Subdivision Code, as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Board. Amodt seconded and the motion carried. WETLAND (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6C) ENHANCEMENT Wetland Enhancement Conceptual Plan At CONCEPTUAL Springbrook Greenbelt. ACCEPTANCE of the Wetland PLAN Enhancement Conceptual Plan at Springbrook Greenbelt, subject to approval of permitting agencies, and authorization to enter into an agreement with Matlack, Inc . SEWERS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6D) Sewer Comp Plan. ADOPTION of the Sewer Comp Plan subject to the issuance of a DNS or MDNS where the conditions are of an inconsequential nature as to the content of the Plan, as determined by the Public Works Director, and as recommended by the Public Works/Planning Committee . STREET LICENSE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6E) Worldcom/MFS Street License. APPROVAL of and AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign the limited street license between the City of Kent and Metropolitan Fiber Systems of Seattle, Inc . 4 Kent City Council Minutes February 16, 1999 TECHNOLOGY (BIDS - ITEM 8A) PLAN Centennial Infrastructure Wiring. As part of the 1998-2000 Tech Plan, the Centennial Center building was identified for rewiring to meet category 5 wiring specifications . The new wiring infra-structure will have a direct impact on productivity and allow computer equipment to communicate with other networked resources at optimal speed and performance . Our consultant, Northwest Information Services (NIS) , developed and published the request for proposal specs . The City received 6 responses . After careful review, NIS recommends an award to the lowest bidder, BTS Communications . The BTS response is in the amount of $91, 130 , which is $12 , 870 below our engineering estimate . EPPERLY MOVED to authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract with BTS Communications for the Centennial Center Infrastructure wiring, subject to City Attorney approval , in the amount of $91, 130 . 77 . FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6B) Approval of Bills . APPROVAL of payment of the bills received through January 29, 1999, and paid on January 28 & 29, 1999, after approval on February 2 , 1999 . Approval of checks issued for vouchers : Date Check Numbers Amount 1/28/99 211862-212068 $ 414, 405 . 63 1/28/99 212069-212325 1, 535, 175 . 16 1/28/99 212326-212587 1, 282 , 987 . 44 $3 , 232 , 568 . 23 Approval of checks issued for payroll for January 1 through January 15 and paid on February 5 , 1999 : Date Check Numbers Amount 2/5/99 Checks 233343-233677 $ 788 , 670 . 39 2/5/99 Advices 75767-76379 245 , 378 . 50 $1, 034 , 048 . 89 5 Kent City Council Minutes February 16, 1999 COUNCIL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6F) Council Absences. APPROVAL of an excused absence from the February 16, 1999, City Council meeting for Councilmembers Woods and Clark. They will be unable to attend. REPORTS Council President. Orr noted that the Operations Committee has been re-scheduled for February 23 , 1999 at 3 : 30 p .m. Public Safety Committee. Epperly noted that the next meeting will be held on February 23 , 1999 at 5 : 00 p.m. Public Works/Planning Committee. Epperly noted that the next meeting is scheduled for tomorrow (February 17, 1999) at 3 : 30 p.m. Parks Committee. Epperly noted that today' s meeting was cancelled and that the next meeting will be the third Tuesday in March (March 16, 1999) at 4 : 00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7 : 17 p.m. kon,� lk� Donna Swaw Deputy City Clerk 6 Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 111 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ORDINANCE - INTRODUCTION 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Introduction of King County Water District 4111 Ordinance/Franchise Agreement which grants Water District #111 authority to operate and maintain a domestic water supply system for Water District #111' s customers residing within the City limits of Kent . Pursuant to RCW 35A.47 . 040, franchises cannot be adopted on the day of its introduction, therefore, this franchise will be submitted for adoption at a later date . 3 . EXHIBITS: Water District #111 ordinance/franchise agreement 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works/Planning Department (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. 6C ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Dent, Washington, granting unto King County Water District No. 111, its successors and assigns, the right, privilege, authority and franchise for twenty-five years, to lay, construct, extend, repair, renew and replace water pipes, mains and facilities under, along, and/or across certain designated streets, avenues, roads, alleys, rights-of-way and other public places of the City, all in order to operate a domestic water supply system for the purpose of public sale and distribution of water to customers within the City. WHEREAS, both the City and the District are public agencies authorized by law to engage in furnishing domestic water service, and to that end, the City may, through the City Council, grant franchises with respect to the rights, powers, duties and obligations of the parties regarding the use of public rights-of-way and other public property, the provision of services, the maintenance and operation of facilities, the right to promulgate rules and regulations, to levy and collect special assessments, rates, charges, service charges and connection fees, the performance of contractual obligations and any other matters arising out of the provision of District service to areas within the City, all pursuant to and in accordance with RCW Sections 39.34.080, 35.92.010, 35A.47.040 and 57.08.045; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that the District can more economically provide water service to that certain area of its corporate limits as described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the District has the ability and desire to provide water service to this area; NOW, THEREFORE: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FRANCHISE GRANTED. The City of Kent, Washington (the "City " herein) hereby grants to King County Water District #111 (the "District" herein), a water district formed under Chapter 57.08 RCW, its successors and assigns, subject to the terms and conditions set forth hereinafter, a franchise for a period of twenty-five 1 (25) years, commencing on the effective date of this ordinance. This franchise shall grant to the District the right and privilege to lay down, construct, relay, connect, replace and/or maintain such and so many pipes, conduits and mains, and all other appurtenances, appendages and facilities thereto, in, along, through and under the avenues, streets, lanes, alleys, highways and other public places and ways in that portion of the Kent City limits as specifically described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein, as may be necessary, convenient and/or proper in order to provide water service to the public, and for that purpose to make any and all connections which may be necessary, convenient and/or proper. Section 2. AUTHORITY TO MANAGE, REGULATE AND CONTROL WATER SYSTEM. After the construction of the water facilities as contemplated under this franchise, the District shall have the sole responsibility to maintain, manage, conduct and operate its water system as installed within the area described in Exhibit A, together with any additions, extensions and betterments thereto. Section 3. AUTHORITY TO FIX SERVICE RATES. The rates charged to the water service customers within the area described in Exhibit A shall be fixed, altered, regulated and controlled solely by the District, pursuant to the limitations on such authority as set forth in RCW Chapter 57.08, or any applicable regulations promulgated thereafter by the state on the subject of rates and charges for water service. Section 4. NON-EXCLUSIVE GRANT. This grant or privilege shall not be deemed or held to be exclusive. It shall in no manner prohibit the City from entering into other agreements or franchises of a like nature or franchises for other public or private utilities, in, over, along, across, under and upon any of the streets, avenues, highways, alleys or public places, or ways as herein described, and shall in no way prevent or prohibit the City from using any of said streets, avenues, etc., or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of them with full power to make all necessary changes, relocations, repairs, or maintenance of same as it deems fit. Section 5. APPROVAL OF PLANS. Prior to construction of any of the pipes, conduits, mains, facilities and appurtenances in the area described in Section 1 herein, the District shall submit, to the Director of Public Works (hereinafter the "Director"), in triplicate, plans drawn to an accurate scale, showing the exact location, character, position, dimension, depth and height of the work to be done. The plans shall accurately depict the relative position and location of all pipes, conduits, mains, manholes, facilities and appurtenances to be constructed, laid, relaid, installed, replaced, repaired, connected or disconnected, and the existing street, avenue, alley, highway, right-of-way or property lines. All streets, avenues, highways, alleys, lanes or ways 2 denoted thereon shall be designated by their names and number and the local improvements therein such as roadway pavement, shoulders, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, ditches, driveways, parking strips, telephone or electric distribution poles, conduits, storm, gas or water pipe lines as may exist on the ground or area sought to be occupied shall be outlined. In the construction proposed by the District, all materials and equipment shall be as specified in the District's general conditions and standards and as approved by the City. The exact class and type to be used shall be shown on the plans, as will the equipment to be used and the mode of safeguarding and facilitating the public traffic during construction. The manner of excavation, construction installation, backfill, and temporary structures (such as traffic turnouts, road obstructions, etc.) shall meet with the approval of, pass all requirements of, and be constructed under the supervision of the Director. Prior to approval of any work under this franchise, the Director may require such modifications or changes as he deems necessary to properly protect the public in the use of the public places, and may fix the time or times within and during which such work shall be done. The District shall pay to the City such amounts as, in the judgment of the Director, are reasonably necessary to investigate and process any plans for construction work, to inspect such work, to secure proper field notes for location, to plat such locations on the permanent records of the City Public Works Department, to supervise such work, or to inspect or reinspect as to maintenance, during the progress of or after the repair of, any of the initial construction authorized by this franchise. The City shall make its best efforts to complete all inspections in a timely manner. Section 6. PROTECTION OF PUBLIC. Whenever an accident, faulty operation or excavation or fill associated with the construction, installation, maintenance or repair of the facilities authorized under this franchise has caused or contributed to a condition that appears to substantially impair the lateral support of the adjoining street or public place, or endangers the public, and adjoining public place, street utilities or City property, the Director may direct the District, at its own expense, to take actions to protect the public, adjacent public places, City property and street utilities, and may require compliance within a prescribed time. In the event that the District fails or refuses to take the actions directed promptly, or fails to fully comply with such directions given by the Director, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action, the City may enter upon the property and take such actions as are necessary to protect the public, the adjacent streets, or street utilities, or to maintain the lateral support thereof, including placing of temporary 3 shoring, backfilling, alteration of drainage patterns and any other actions reasonably necessary to decrease the possibility of earth movement, or actions regarded as necessary safety precautions; and the District shall be liable to the City for the costs thereof. Section 7. REPAIR OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND PUBLIC PLACES. After construction, maintenance or repair of the facilities authorized by this Agreement, the District shall repair and restore any damaged or injured streets, avenues, highways or public places, or affected portions of same, to their original condition. The Director shall have final approval of the condition of such streets and public places after completion of construction. Section 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The District hereby releases, covenants not to bring suit and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold 'harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and representatives from any and all claims, costs, judgements, awards or liability to any person, including claims by the District's own employees to which the District might otherwise be immune under Title 51 RCW, arising from injury or death of any person or damage to property of which the negligent acts or omissions of the District, its agents, servants, officers or employees in performing this franchise agreement are the proximate cause. The District further releases, covenants not to bring suit and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and representatives from any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards or liability to any person including claims by the District's own employees, to which the District might otherwise be immune under Title 51 RCW, arising against the City solely by virtue of the City's ownership or control of the rights- of-way or other public properties, by virtue of the District's exercise of the rights granted herein, or by virtue of the City's permitting the District's use of the City's rights-of-way or other public property, based upon the inspection or lack of inspection of work performed by the District, its agents and servants, officers or employees in connection with work authorized on the City's property or property over which the City has control, pursuant to this franchise agreement or pursuant to any other permit or approval issued in connection hereto. This covenant of indemnification shall include, but not be limited by this reference to, claims against the City arising as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of the District, its agents, servants, officers or employees in barricading or providing other warnings of any excavation, construction, or work in any public right-or-way or other public place in performance of work or services permitted under this franchise agreement. Inspection or acceptance by the City of any work performed by the District at the time of completion shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these covenants of indemnification. Said Indemnification obligations shall extend to claims which are 4 not reduced to a suit and any claims which may be compromised prior to the culmination of any litigation or the institution of any litigation, provided that the District shall not be liable to indemnify the City for any settlement of any action or claim effective without the consent of the District, but if settled with the consent of the District, the District shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from and against loss or liability by reason of such settlement. The District shall be obligated to indemnify the City regardless of whether the settlement of the action on the claim is made with the consent of the District if the District has refused to defend the City. In the event that the District refuses the tender of defense in any suit or claim, said tender having been made pursuant to the indemnification clauses contained herein, and said refusal is subsequently determined by a court having jurisdiction (or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree to decide the matter) to have been a wrongful refusal on the part of the District, then the District shall pay all of the City's costs for defense of the action, including all reasonable expert witness fees and reasonable attorneys' fees and the reasonable costs of the City, including reasonable attorneys' fees for recovery under this indemnification clause. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this franchise is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damage to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the District and the City, its officers, officials, employees or agents, the District's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the District's negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein constitutes the District's waiver of immunity under Title 51 RCW, solely for the purposes of this indemnification. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. Section 9. INSURANCE. The District shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the exercise of the rights, privileges and authority granted hereunder to the District, its officers, officials, agents, employees. The District shall provide a copy of such insurance policy to the City for its inspection prior to the adoption of this agreement, and such insurance shall evidence: A. Automobile Liability Insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000.00 Combined Single Limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and B. Commercial General Liability Insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000.00 Combined Single Limit per occurrence and 5 $1,000,000.00 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. Payment of deductible or self-insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the District. The insurance obtained by the District shall name the City, its officers, officials, employees and agents as insureds with regard to activities performed by or on behalf of the District. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or agents. In addition, the insurance policy shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. The District's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance maintained by the City, its officials, officers, employees or agents shall be in excess of the District's insurance and shall not contribute with it. The insurance policy or policies required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. Section 10. RELOCATION OF LINES AND FACILITIES. The District agrees and covenants at its sole cost and expense, to protect, support, temporarily disconnect, relocate or remove from any street or public place, any of its installations when so required by the City by reason of traffic conditions or public safety, dedications or new rights-of-way and the establishment and improvement thereof, freeway construction, change or establishment of street grade, or the construction of any public improvement or structure by any governmental agency acting in a governmental capacity, provided that the District shall in all such cases have the privilege to temporarily bypass, in the authorized portion of the same street upon approval by the City, any water line or portion thereof required to be temporarily disconnected or removed. The City shall consult all as-built maps and plans filed by the District pursuant to this franchise or any permits authorized under this franchise, in order to determine whether the District has placed pipe or facilities in any area affected by a proposed City project. The City will make its best effort and attempt to design or redesign streets, avenues, alleys or public places or ways, and other City utilities to minimize the impact 6 thereof on the District's existing water systems, including the need to require the District's facilities to be relocated. PROVIDED HOWEVER, that the City shall make the final determination on the need for relocation of the District's facilities. Whenever the City determines that any of the above circumstances necessitate the relocation of the District's then existing facilities, the City shall notify the District in writing, and provide the District with copies of pertinent portions of the plans and specifications for such project so that District is able to relocate its facilities to accommodate the City's project at least ten (10) days prior to the project's commencement. The City shall provide notice to the District and require relocation of the facilities in a period of time that is reasonable given the circumstances surrounding the project. The City understands that pursuant to RCW 57.08.050, the District is required to comply with certain notice and bid procedures prior to commencement of any construction project. Whenever practical, given the circumstances surrounding the City's project, the City shall provide the District with sufficient notice to enable the District to comply fully with RCW 57.08.050 without resorting to emergency powers granted therein. upon the District's failure to complete relocation of its installations and facilities as directed by the City, the City may remove same at the District's expense. If, after reviewing the as-built maps and plans submitted by the District, the City determines that the District's pipe or facilities will not be affected by a proposed City project, no notice shall be given to the District. The City may then commence construction and if the City finds that the District's as-built maps and plans are inaccurate through the actual discovery of pipe and facilities in the construction area, the City shall notify the District and allow the District twenty-four (24) hours to remove and/or relocate its pipe and facilities. However, should the District be unable to remove and/or relocate its pipe and facilities within this twenty-four (24) hour period after notification, the City may remove and dispose of same at the District's cost. Section 11. ABANDONMENT OF WATER PIPE AND SYSTEM FACILITIES. No pipe, conduit, main, appurtenances, appendages or water system facilities may be abandoned by the District without the express written consent of the City. Abandonment procedures may be initiated by application of the District to the City, which application shall detail, to the City's satisfaction, the location of all pipe or facilities to be abandoned, and the procedures the District plans to implement in order to comply with all local, state and federal regulations pertaining to abandonment of water pipe and facilities constructed of asbestos cement or other material containing asbestos. The District shall, at its own cost, remove and properly dispose of all abandoned pipes and water facilities when so directed by the City for the reasons and conditions set forth in paragraph one, Section 10, Relocation of Lines and Facilities, 7 and for street vacations. In the case of street vacations, the City shall retain and grant an easement to the District for any pipe and facilities then in use by the District. The City shall give notice to the District of any proposed project or street vacation requiring removal of abandoned pipe and facilities as set forth in Section 10. If the District does not comply within the time period set by the City, the City may arrange for the removal and proper disposal of all such pipes and facilities at the District's cost. Section 12. EXCAVATION. During any period of installation, relocation, maintenance or repair of the District's facilities and installations, all surface structures, if any, shall be erected and used in such places and positions within said public rights-of- way and other public properties so as to interfere as little as possible with the free passage of traffic and the free use of adjoining property, and the District shall at all times post and maintain proper barricades during such period of construction as required by state law or City ordinance. Whenever the District shall excavate in any public right-of-way or other public property for the purpose of installation, repair, maintenance or relocation of its facilities, it shall apply to he City for a permit to do so and except in the case of an emergency, shall give the City at least three (3) working days notice thereof. In the event that emergency work is required, the District may, without prior written notice to the City, request permits by telephone. The Director shall grant or deny such permits by telephone, but the District shall follow-up all phone emergency permit requests with a written application within three (3) working days of the telephone notification to the Director. In all other cases, the City shall approve the District's applications for permits as soon as reasonably possible. During the progress of the work, the District shall not unnecessarily obstruct the passage or proper use of the right-of-way, and shall file maps or plans with the City (as described in Section 3 herein) showing the proposed and final location of the sewer facilities. If either the City or the District shall at any time plan to make excavations in any area covered by this Agreement and as described in this Section, the party planning such excavation shall afford the other, upon receipt of a written request to do so, an opportunity to share such excavation, PROVIDED THAT: (1) such joint use shall not unreasonably delay the work of the party causing the excavation to be made; (2) such joint use shall be arranged and accomplished on terms and conditions satisfactory to both parties; and (3) either party may deny such request for safety reasons. Prior to commencement of any constriction authorized by this franchise agreement, the Director shall reference all monuments and markers of every nature relating to subdivision plats, highways and all other surveys. The reference points shall 8 be so located that they will not be disturbed during the District's operations under this franchise. The method of referencing these monuments or other points to be referenced shall be approved by the Director before placement. The replacement of all such monuments or markers disturbed during construction shall be made as expeditiously as conditions permit and as directed by the Director. The costs of monuments or other markers lost, destroyed, or disturbed and the expense of replacement by approved monuments shall be borne by the District. Section 13. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. The District, its subcontractors, employees or any person acting on behalf of the District shall keep him/herself fully informed of all federal and state laws, and all municipal ordinances and regulations which in any manner affect the work or performance of the work authorized under this franchise agreement, and shall at all times observe and comply with such laws, ordinances and regulations, whether or not such laws, ordinances or regulations are mentioned herein, and shall indemnify the City, its officers, officials, agents, employees or representatives against any claim or liability arising from or based upon the violation of any such laws, ordinances or regulations. Section 14. DISCRIMINATION. The District agrees that it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant on the grounds of race, creed, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap, provided that the prohibition against discrimination in - employment because of handicap shall not apply if the particular disability prevents the proper performance of the particular worker involved. The District shall ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without discrimination because of their race, color, religion , sex, national origin, creed, marital status, age or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap. The District shall take such action with respect to this franchise as may be required to ensure full compliance with Chapter 49.60 RCW. Section 15. CITY CONSTRUCTION ADJACENT TO DISTRICT INSTALLATION. The laying, construction, maintenance and operation of the said District's system of water lines, pipes, conduits, mains, etc., authorized under this franchise agreement shall not preclude the City or its accredited agents and contractors from blasting, grading or doing other necessary road work contiguous to the said District's pipe lines, provided that the District shall have forty-eight (48) hours notice of said blasting or excavation in order that the District may protect its line of pipe and property- 9 Section 16. MODIFICATION. The City and District hereby reserve the right to alter, amend or modify the terms and conditions of this franchise agreement upon written agreement of both parties to such alteration, amendment or modification. Section 17. BOND. Before undertaking any of the work, improvements, repair, relocation or maintenance authorized by this franchise, the District shall, upon the request of the City furnish a bond executed by the District and a corporate surety authorized to do surety business in the State of Washington, in a sum to be set and approved by the Director of Public Works as sufficient to ensure performance of the District's obligations under this franchise. The bond shall be conditioned so that the District shall observe all the covenants, terms and conditions and faithfully perform all of the obligations of this franchise, and to erect or replace any defective work or materials discovered in the replacement of the City's streets or property within a period of two years from the date of replacement and acceptance of such repaired streets by the City. Section 18. FORFEITURE AND REVOCATION. If the District wilfully violates or fails to comply with any of the provisions of this franchise, or through wilful or unreasonable negligence fails to heed or comply with any notice given the District under the provisions of this franchise, then the District shall, at the election of the Kent City Council, forfeit all rights conferred hereunder and this franchise may be revoked or annulled by the Council after a hearing held upon reasonable notice to the District. The City may elect, in lieu of the above and without any prejudice to any of its other legal rights and remedies, to obtain an order from the superior court having jurisdiction compelling the District to comply with the provisions of this franchise and to recover damages and costs incurred by the City by reason of the District's failure to comply. Section 19. REMEDIES TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE. In addition to any other remedy provided herein, the City reserves the right to pursue any remedy to compel or force the District and/or its successors and assigns to comply with the terms hereof, and the pursuit of any right or remedy by the City shall not prevent the City from thereafter declaring a forfeiture or revocation for breach of the conditions herein. Section 20. CITY ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS. Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct the City's ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and appropriate ordinances regulating the performance of the conditions of this franchise, including any reasonable ordinance made in the exercise of its police powers in the interest of the public safety and for the welfare of the public. The City shall have the authority at all times to control by appropriate regulations the location, elevation and manner of construction and maintenance of any water facilities by the District, and the 10 District shall promptly conform with all such regulations, unless compliance would cause the District to violate other requirements of law. Section 21. COST OF PUBLICATION. The cost of publication of this franchise ordinance shall be borne by the District. Section 22. ASSIGNMENT. The District may not assign the rights, duties and obligations under this Agreement without the prior, written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. If such consent is given for assignment, acceptance of the assignment shall be filed by the District's successor with the City. Section 23. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. All the provisions, conditions, regulations and requirements contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the District, and all privileges of the District shall inure to its successors and assigns equally as if they were specifically mentioned herein. Section 24. NOTICE. Anv notice or information required or permitted to be given to the parties under this Agreement may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise specified: THE CITY OF KENT KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT #I I I Director of Public Works Larry Bradburv, General Manager Don Wickstrom 27224 144`h Ave. SE 220 4th Avenue South Kent, Washington 98042-9058 Kent, Washington 98032 Section 25. ACCEPTANCE. After the passage and approval of this ordinance and within sixty days after such approval, this franchise shall be accepted by the District by its filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance thereof. Failure of the Grantee to so accept this franchise within said period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof by the District, and the rights and privileges herein granted shall, after the expiration of the sixty day period, absolutely cease and determine, unless the time period is extended by ordinance duly passed for that purpose. Section 26. SURVIVAL. All of the provisions, conditions and requirements of Sections 6, Protection of Public; 8, Indemnification; 10, Relocation of Lines and Facilities; and 11, Abandonment of Lines and Facilities, of this franchise shall be in addition to any and all other obligations and liabilities the District may have to the City at common law, by statute, or by contract, and shall survive the City's franchise to the District for the use of the areas mentioned in Section 1 herein, and any renewals or 11 extensions thereof. All of the provisions, conditions, regulations and requirements contained in this franchise ordinance shall further be binding upon the successors and assigns of the District, and all privileges, as well as all obligations and liabilities of the District shall inure to its successors and assigns equally as if they were specifically mentioned wherever the District is named herein. Section 27. SEVERABILITY. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this franchise ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this franchise. In the event that any of the provisions of this franchise are held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City reserves the right to reconsider the grant of this franchise and may amend, repeal, add, replacc or modify any other provision, or may terminate this franchise. Section 28. EFFECTIVE DATE. This franchise ordinance shall be: (1) submitted to the Kent City Attorney; (2) introduced at least once at a regular meeting of the Dent City Council; (3) published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Kent; and if granted by the approving vote of at least a majority of the City Council, shall be effective in thirty (30) days after execution. JIM WHITE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY 12 PASSED the day of 1998. APPROVED the day of , 1998. PUBLISHED the day of , 1998. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. , passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK 13 EXHIBIT "A" WATER DISTRICT #111 OF KING COUNTY CITY OF KENT FRANCHISE LEGAL DESCRIPTION November 18, 1998 BEGINNING at the intersection of a line lying 495 feet West of the East line of the Northwest quarter of Section 21, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W,M. in King County, Washington with the South margin of SE 240th Street; Thence Easterly along said South margin to the West line of the East half of the Northeast quarter of said Section 21; Thence Northerly perpendicular to said South margin to the centerline of SE 240' Street; Thence Easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the Northerly margin of said SE 240' Street in the Northeast quarter of Section 22, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; Thence Southeasterly, Southerly, Southwesterly and Southerly along said Northerly margin of SE 240' Street, the Easterly margin of 148' Place SE and the East margin of 148' Avenue SE to the East margin of Soos Creek Drive SE in the Northwest quarter of Section 26, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; Thence continuing Southerly and Southeasterly along said East margin to the North line of Lot 3 of King County Short Plat No. 880080, recorded under Recording No. 8110140550, records of King County, Washington; Thence Easterly along said North line to the East line of said Lot 3; Thence Southerly along said East line to the North margin of SE 264th Street; Thence Easterly along said North margin to the West line of the East half of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 26, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; Thence Southerly along said West line and the West line of the East half of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of said Section 26 to the South line of said Northeast quarter; Thence Easterly along said South line to the East line of said Southwest quarter of Section 26; Thence Southerly along said East line to its intersection with the centerline of the Bonneville Transmission Line Easement (Covington - Renton 1); Page 1 of 3 (XUW6%dk=*rli &d"Nwvnir It.IM EXHIBIT "A", continued Thence Southeasterly along said centerline to the North margin of SE 272nd Street; Thence Easterly along said North margin to the centerline of Soos Creek; Thence Southerly along said centerline to the South line of the North half of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 35, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; Thence Westerly along said South line to the East line of Lot 1 of King County Short Plat No. 883126, recorded under Recording No. 8405231102, records of King County, Washington; Thence Southerly along said East line to the North line of the South half of the South half of said Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter; Thence Easterly along said North line to the centerline of Soos Creek; Thence Southerly along said centerline to the Northwest margin of Primary State Highway No. 2 (S.R. 18); Thence Southwesterly along said Northwest margin to the North margin of SE 288th Street in the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 34, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; Thence Westerly along said North margin to the West margin of 132nd Avenue SE; Thence Northerly along said West margin to the South line of the North half of the North half of the Southeast quarter of Section 33, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M; Thence Westerly along said South line to the Southeasterly margin of SE 282nd Way; Thence Southwesterly and Westerly along said Southeasterly margin and the South margin of SE 282nd Street to the West margin of 124th Avenue SE; Thence Northerly along said West margin to the South line of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 33, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; Thence Easterly along said South line and the South line of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 33 to a point 440 feet West of the Southeast corner thereof, Thence Northerly and parallel with the East line of said Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter to the South line of the North half of the North half of said Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter; _. Page 2 of 3 (.%.0 T6Noo\bodmLd a Nowmbw 13.IM EXHIBIT "A", continued Thence Easterly along said South line of the North half of the North half of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter to the Southeast corner thereof; Thence Northerly along the East line of said Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter to the Northeast corner thereof, Thence Westerly along the North line of said Section 33 to the East line of the Big "K" Addition No. 2, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 78 of Plats, Page 16, records of King County, Washington; Thence Northerly along said East line to the Northeasterly line thereof; Thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line to the Northeast comer of the Big "K" Addition, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 67 of Plats, Page 66, records of King County, Washington; Thence continuing Northwesterly along the Northeasterly line of said Big "K" Addition and its Northwesterly extension to its intersection with the West margin of 124th Avenue Southeast; Thence Northerly along said West margin to its intersection with the South line of the North 507 feet of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 28, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; Thence Westerly along said South line to the West line of the East 149.8 feet of said Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter; Thence Northerly along said West line to the North line of said Southwest quarter of Section 28; Thence Westerly along said North line to its intersection with a line that is 495 feet West of and parallel with the East line of the Northwest quarter of said Section 28; Thence Northerly along said line that is 495 feet West of and parallel with said East line of the Northwest quarter and the Southwest and Northwest quarters of Section 21, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M. to its intersection with the South margin of Southeast 240th Street and the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description. Page 3 of 3 0_U%0761"=gMMda dM Newdobw IS.19" ■ ZZ RIP ��:Id ■prv� ii1GY/lid► --- -. • � uu■��•ii•'1I�'�!•�'-min .-i��.V/NOl. �.�[.••a� I �- I •�}III :11©! f.. �-sc wl_L. .e• ''J�� t:, ►'�• II .w --Ii� 'i town. �-■.+v�.1wa=:Y IrE ., ♦ Eiji�0 �, •: w.� A. 'Adel Ill nD� ,� � fr 7\ i 1 I�I �u.�IIU' �.-.'nu IN■ � � .urn' Ism.::�'_ •■■■.9�►�'--• li �� 1♦ ;Dill rg�C Itttd �11/.. �;,\•-•�_a��1�_ uu.n� a. ` ■::a..�:�i i�A��' i� ■ .- ♦ rq p-c�r ,.+- y�s�yu�- _ tea,a.o■ ■ lu ■,!•qJ � 1:• i\o:P� `� ■i wi♦.i � III�i��-.f N /ry ._r fib♦ ! � ■=wa...F all 11■i. E_ Jlht�j _��= ■71w _� 1�11liP��l.�.Ta• �� Et OF ME 7ir9C logo Z nm■ m . '_' �•�q��_ ��_'�� CI^.Mj1�, ••nul � s�ii��q•.. � �i 1�� 1 ~ uxxxa■mO■x ■ : . _ •..•_.. .�It.I.C.L.:,,•�� li7 \ '■■ram �..- w6. .7.+.'r..vq --•-�i•. '�-�.;♦°,.�:';1�:;::: ��; �f♦��.. �:Tif'C•�J'f1.��7a]i'111�If�'i�� ha►►{ p ��'+1p� 1 -.! • - lie...: �x B•alm7 new.■� .xua��-9♦i'1!��n� ■ 11.■�-W. 'C i._1_l �' -�'=w•- .:t"_.. .... ■■ �.■■■ �_�� er��illy �� _„1 � Is: ��7%a .■��i� �-�. J �..■i� t��r r q? �•�. ;" sm lax.lollON Em r � , 1- 0 Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: KENT PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DEBT SECURITY - RESOLUTION 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of Resolution No. which confirms the City' s previous commitment to guaranty the loan to be obtained by the Public Development Authority in order to redevelop the Landmark Lumberman' s Barn as the permanent site for the Kent Downtown Market . This guarantee obligation is conditioned on the City' s prior approval of the loan' s terms and conditions . 3 . EXHIBITS: Resolution 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. 6D RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, reaffirming the City's promise to guarantee the Kent Public Development Authority loan to be obtained by that authority for the purpose of developing the Landmark Lumberman Barn site as the permanent location of the Kent Downtown Market. WHEREAS, the Kent City Council created the Kent Downtown Public Market Development Authority ("PDA") by its ordinance No. 3396 ; and WHEREAS, the City of Kent created the PDA as the new home for the Kent Downtown Market; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the creation of the PDA, the City entered into a development and use agreement with the PDA which established rights and obligations between the City and the PDA for the transfer of the Lumberman Barn property and for the renovation, development, and subsequent leasing of that site; and WHEREAS, under Article II of that agreement, the PDA agreed to negotiate with a lender to obtain a tax exempt loan on terms acceptable to the City to fund the renovation and development of the Barn and Market; and 1 WHEREAS, under that same agreement, the City also guaranteed the loan between the lender and the PDA in the event of a default by the PDA; and WHEREAS,the PDA has developed the necessary plans and specifications and concurrent budget proposal to redevelop the Lumberman Barn site; and WHEREAS, with the assistance of the Kent Downtown Partnership, it is now appropriate for the PDA to seek a tax exempt loan for its redevelopment of the Barn site; and WHEREAS, the PDA has requested that the City of Kent reconfirm its obligation in the Development and Use Agreement to reaffirm its guarantee the loan obtained between the lender and the PDA on the condition the loan is acceptable to the City in the event of default by the PDA; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Pursuant to its motions, ordinance, and agreement to establish and develop the Kent Public Development Authority for the purpose of developing a new site for the Kent Downtown Market, the City of Kent hereby confirms that the City will apply its full faith and credit to guarantee the PDA's loan for the redevelopment of the Barn and site in the event of a default by the PDA on its loan repayment schedule, and on the prior condition that the PDA negotiates the loan with a lender under terms acceptable to the City. Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington this day of , 1999. 2 Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this day of 1999. JIM WHITE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. , passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, the day of 1999. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK P:\C ivi1\Renoluuon\PDA1oan.doe 3 � Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: EMERALD RIDGE II FINAL PLAT FSU-98-10 (AKA KAY) - SET MEETING DATE 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Set March Z' 1999, as the date for a public meeting to consider a final plat application by Tom O' Connor for the Emerald Ridge II final plat . The subdivision is 3 . 35 acres in size and is located at 102nd Place SE and SE 244th Street . The City Council approved the Emerald Ridge II (aka Kay) preliminary plat on January 19, 1999 . 3 . EXHIBITS • None 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 DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6E Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: KENTVIEW MPUD AMENDMENT TO WATER SERVICE AREA - AUTHORIZATION 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works/ Planning Committee, and upon the City Attorney concurring with the language therein, authorization for the Public Works Director to sign the Kentview MPUD Amendment to Water Service Area which authorizes Highline Water District to accept the Kentview and adjacent miscellaneous properties into their service area. 3 . EXHIBITS: Amendment to Water Service Area 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works/Planning Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) S . 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. 6F AGREEMENT FOR AMENDMENT TO SERVICE AREA THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation located in King County, Washington, hereinafter referred to as City of Kent", and Highline Water District, a Washington municipal corporation located in King County, Washington. herein after referred to as "Highline". Whereas Highline and City of Kent are municipal corporations, with adjoining corporate and service areas, authorized to provide public water service pursuant to RCW 57; and Whereas the parties believe that certain property located within the service area of City of Kent can be better served by Highline; and Whereas in order to efficiently provide for service to the property by Highline, the parties desire that it be included within the service area of Highline, and Whereas pursuant to the statutory authority to transfer the same under the Public Water System Coordination Act of 1977; NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows: The property described as: Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein, is hereby removed from the water service area of City of Kent and shall hereinafter be included within the water service are of Highline. The parties acknowledge that City of Kent and Highline are "purveyors" and that it is the express purpose of this Agreement to provide for the maximum efficient use of existing and future facilities; maximum public water system coordination; and orderly and efficient public water system planning. WITNESS our hands and seals. City of Kent HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT General Manager Peggy S. Bosley, General Manager Date: Date: 96098Agreement.doc, 12/3/98,page 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument, on oath and stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the General Manager of City of Kent, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the use and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Signature of Notary Print or stamp name of Notary Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing at My appointment expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Peggy S. Bosley signed this instrument, on oath and stated that he/she was authorized to. execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the General Manager of Highline Water District, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the use and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Signature of Notary Print or stamp name of Notary Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing at My appointment expires: 96098Agreememdoc, 12/3/98,page 2 DODDS ENGINEERS, INC. BELLEVUE WA 98007 DEl Project No: 96098 12/14/98 Exhibit "A" Amended Water Service Area Legal Description That portion of the southeast quarter of Section 10, Township 22 North, Range 4 East, W.M. and the northeast quarter of Section 15, Township 22 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County Washington described as follows: COMMENCING at the northwest corner of the southeast quarter of said Section 10; thence S00047'39"W along the west line of said southeast quarter, 30.00 feet to the south right-of-way margin for South 216`" Street and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described parcel; thence continuing S00047'39"W along said west line 2,597.28 feet to the quarter comer common to said Sections 10 and 15; thence S00045'33"W along the west line of the northeast quarter of said Section 15, a distance of 1,866.78 feet to the southwest comer of Parcel 1 of City of Kent Lot Line Adjustment (LL-93-4) under King County Recording No. 9304051734; thence easterly and southeasterly along the south line of said LL-934 the following courses and distances; thence S89050'52"E 882.08 feet; thence S55"45'51"E 257.43 feet; thence S35003'11"E 365.00 feet; thence N84°32'29"E 356.94 feet to the westerly bank of the Green River; thence northerly along the westerly bank of said Green River the following courses and distances; thence N31°27'39"E 260.44 feet thence N16027'13"E 266.73 feet; thence N24051'21"W 162.41 feet; thence N58°01'44"W 444.96 feet; thence N35°28'41"W 262.34 feet; thence N08020'53"E 409.39 feet; thence N20004'14"E 1,178.33 feet; thence N16050'00"E 167.35 feet; thence N02036'37"E 163.11 feet; thence NO3°21'12"W 474.72 feet; thence N03051'55"W 221.00 feet; thence N06040'43"W 163.00 feet; thence N19040'29"E 240.11 feet; thence N26052'43E 212.31 feet; thence N48°12'44"E 230.71 feet to the east line of Tax Lot No.'s 102204-9100-08 and 102204-9062-04; thence N02043'34"E along the east line of said Tax Lots and leaving the west bank of said Green River, 331.77 feet to the northeast corner of said Tax Lot No. 102204-9062-04; thence S89058'34"W along the north line of said Tax Lot No. 102204-9062-04, a distance of 499.77 feet to the southeast corner of Tax Lot No. 102204-9070-04; thence N02043'34"E along the east line of said Tax Lot No. 102204-9070-04, a distance of 210.35 feet to the south right-of-way margin for South 216'" Street, thence S89`58'34"W along said margin, 1,545.57 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. c a� vANDZ ;�O I .O wG LA�9 IRES 10/26/Co 96098L 13 .doc, 12114/98, page 1 i I I S. �-%l rim Jr•J- /eZZ64_9070-01 T.C. -04 I I O �89°.SD;fl�✓ ��8 d, /J N V 2� ,� Q5 if/9/'2739�E ZGO.4q 73 r5 ® 409 39 // /1/ZO°4A%4 f %/7e.j3 I r3 Q N/G'�GYJ E /67.35 /z nNDP° 4 /f/0,3°Z/ ` © iY03"s/3�""lip 22/.do /6 07 L8' JA n 1 �8°/z�"� z--V.7/ n NO2°.6jYZ- 33/. 77 Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: CANTERBURY GREENS - BILL OF SALE 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works Director, accept the Bill of Sale for Canterbury Greens submitted by Southey & Associates for continuous operation and maintenance of 1, 168 feet of sanitary sewers, 780 feet of street improvements and 1, 335 feet of storm sewers and, release of bonds after expiration period. The project is located at 125th Avenue S .E. & S .E. 264th Street . 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. 6G � ............. _ Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: JULIE ' S ADDITION - BILL OF SALE 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works Director, accept the Bill of Sale for Julie ' s Addition submitted by William E. Ruth for continuous operation and maintenance of 184 feet of watermain, 335 feet of sanitary sewers, 365 feet of street improvements and 336 feet of storm sewers and, release of bonds after expiration period. The project is located at S . E . 264th Pl . and 114th Ave . S .E. 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. 6H 246 PL x i ' I 5E Y Tt SE 248TH STcc N rN. N 2 �N y PL r W a T H +� A. = E 250 SE 251ST ST ,m Nc( 25 a 251ST PL N W .y °7 2S2ND PL E- 252NO PL SE 252NO ST uj 259 PL c cc T CV W x La ST 5 •~ Nam, 253 CT ¢ jm o w N N m 254TM ST o �y s co > i 254TH PL ! gt = I� 9 9� coo A r ¢� ¢ W tN r" P i nR ar N SE 256TH ST = = _ 2 PL PL m PL \ J � u ` m1 3E 256TN 3T w SE 256TH � - � Q N � ST cc., SE 260TH ST 259TH ¢ T \ SE 259TM w I cc PL 26 SE'�260TH PL i ;2 i i -i \ I� H _ _ am 211 ST cl PROJECT LOCATION y 2s�c rn 2!#�'pL 5t `,--``___Z, ,N 9r9 '3 SE 284TH ST ax i = j�- w T `0 263 PI w 264TH PL1• _ 1264TM ST \ �N SE 264TH S7 y Y l x cc 265 w SE 26 TH ST 266 -' '5 T w ST SE 26 SE 268 SE 266TH ST \ 2s \ a E _ ST O 269 ST PONDS \ l ST A� SE 270TH ST SE 271 ST ^1� C uwi _ ¢ �2 �� arr O W \ SE 272ND &T ,` o.� ¢ ST y 12172ND�__ O? = 6♦r .; �o ` s _ SE ST In ♦� Pi SE 272ND PL W 272 D ST Q uj 274 ST c ? J 273RD PL P4q' SE 27M7M ST x m 27S ST 'SE w 274TH ST = 4 sr i q 74 T ry SE-1 276TH ST E 275 P SE 2 W 1\\ m 276TH a H = 276TH PL ♦r OI \ N y 1~.i Q `l R ` 277TM PL o l • 277 PL 216� N 2 H ��e N.. ' N CT ��\277TH PL J c SE 279TH ` J 9i`+ CT ~ N 27 0 ^' N CT .N.. J ��9 f SE 260TM ST �280lvl Ott T a CT 2 W � SE 281ST ST uj N , W `•^ W z. W� a w cri SE 262ND JULIE'S ADDITION Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Other Business 1 . SUBJECT: SOUTH RIDGE PRELIMINARY PLAT SU-98-4 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set to consider the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions of the South Ridge Preliminary Plat application. 3 . EXHIBITS: Hearing Examiner Recommendation with map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Hearing Examiner (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) S . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to '�/modify/de4t the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions for the application of South Ridge Preliminary Plat DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 7A CITY OF _ Jim `Vhite, Mayor �� ann ng epartment (253)859-3390/FAX(2S3)850-7544 James P. Harris, Planning Director OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER (253) 859-3390 Theodore P.Hunter Hearing Examiner FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION FILE NO: SOUTH RIDGE #SU-98-4 APPLICANT: Baseline Engineering REQUEST A request to subdivide approximately 38.61 acres into 150 single- family residential lots. LOCATION: The property is located at SE 282°d Street (extended), between 140`" and 144'Avenues SE. APPLICATION FILED: October 2, 1998 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE ISSUED: March 2, 1998 Revised: October 1, 1998 MEETING DATE: January 6, 1998 RECOMMENDATION ISSUED: January 20, 1998 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL with conditions STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Fred N. Satterstrom, Planning Department Matthews Jackson, Planning Department Gary Gill, Public Works Department PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Teary Ferguson, representing Baseline Other James Jackson Gary Bates Sheryl Eisenbarth George Beckenridge Kouser Ahmad A. Marie Parshall Rhonda Ward ^U-lih VAF.V('FSO ( TH KGAT.W,%SHINGrOV TFI.FPHONF Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 Bill Dinsdale John Brown EXHIBITS: 1. Hearing Examiner file containing application, staff report,Determination ofNonsignificance and public notice. 2. Revised site plan dated January 6, 1999. 3. Letter from George Beckenridge 4. Letter from Zaheer&Kouser Ahmad 5. Letter from Rhonda Ward 6. Letter submitted by June Mehl INTRODUCTION After due consideration of all the evidence presented at public hearing on the date indicated above, and following an unaccompanied personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding area by the Hearing Examiner at a time prior to the public hearing, the following findings, conclusions and recommendation are entered by the Hearing Examiner on this application. SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS Terry Ferguson(Applicant) applied for a Preliminary Plat to subdivide 38.61 acres of land into 151 single family residential lots on October 2, 1998. The proposal had previously been reviewed under two separate preliminary plat applications,#TSU-96-30, and#TSU-984. The City of Kent issued a revised Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance(MDNS)on October 1, 1998, which reflected the current application. The MDNS became final on October 16, 1998. On October 26, 1998, the Applicant appealed two conditions of the MDNS. An open record public hearing was conducted at the City of Kent Council Chambers on January 6, 1998 to review the Preliminary Plat request and the SEPA appeal. At the hearing, the Applicant withdrew his SEPA appeal, and submitted a revised site plan that reduced the number of lots to 150. FINDINGS 1. The Applicant requested approval of a Preliminary Plat to subdivide 38.61 acres of land into 150 single-family residential lots. The property is located at SE 282nd Street extended between 140' and 144`h Avenues SE, Kent, Washington. Exhibit 1, Application; Exhibit 2, Revised Site Plan. 2. The subject property is zoned Single Family Residential, maximum density 6.05 units per acre(SR-6), which is consistent with the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan designation for the site. The minimum lot size in the SR-6 zone is 5,700 square feet, and the minimum lot 2 Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 width is 50 feet. K.C.C. 15.04.020; Exhibit 1, Staff Report. The density of the proposed development would be 3.9 dwelling units per acre. Testimony of Mr. Jackson. The smallest lot in the subdivision would be 5,705 square feet, and the average lot size would be 6,021 square feet. All of the lots would be at least 50 feet wide.Exhibit 1, Staff Report;Exhibit 2, Revised Site Plan. The subject property is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses are single family residential, with lot sizes ranging from 5,000 to 9,600 square feet. Exhibit 1, Staff Report. 3. Several City of Kent Comprehensive Plan goals and policies in the land use, housing, transportation,and economic development elements apply to the proposed development. For example,City goals include accommodating anticipated household growth by providing new dwelling units within the city limits,K.C.P. Goals LU-1 & LU-8; K.C.P. Policies LU-1.1 and LU-8.1, controlling environmental impacts of residential development,K.C.P. Goal H-1 and Policies H-1.2 and H-1.7, funding the development of roads through fair share payments by new residential developments, K.C.P. Policies TR-1.2 and 1.3, and encouraging home ownership,Policies ED-2.1 and ED-2.3. Exhibit 1, Staff Report. 4. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City of Kent was designated lead agency for environmental review. It issued a Revised Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance(MDNS)subject to 21 conditions on October 1, 1998, which became final on October 16, 1998.Exhibit 1, MDNS. The Applicant appealed the MDNS on October 26, 1998. Specifically, he appealed condition 10, which required road and shoulder improvements on 1441h Avenue SE, because he was financially responsible for other improvements on 144th pursuant to SEPA conditions, and because the street had already been developed in conjunction with another subdivision. The Kent Public Works Department reviewed the roadway conditions, and concluded that the existing improvements were adequate to satisfy condition 10. The Applicant also appealed condition 15, because there appeared to be a conflict between subparagraphs (a) and (e). The City clarified the conflicting language. The Applicant withdrew his appeal based on the City's assurance that he would not be responsible for additional road improvements pursuant to condition 10, and on the City's interpretation of condition 15. Staff Report, AP-98-6; Exhibit 1, Staff Report and MDNS; Testimony of Mr. Ferguson. 5. The proposed development would have access to public utilities. Water would be provided by Water District#111, and sanitary sewer service would be provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. Exhibit 1, Staff Report. 6. It is anticipated that the proposed development would add approximately 320 students to the local school system. Testimony of Mr. Brown. One area property owner expressed concern about school overcrowding due to the enrollment of new students.Exhibit 5, Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Ward. 3 Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 7. One area landowner commented on the absence of plans for a playground or exercise area for residents of the proposed development. Exhibit 3, Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Breckenridge. City of Kent Ordinance 2975 requires developers to dedicate 5% of the total plat area as parks or open space, or pay a fee in lieu of dedication, which would fund the development and maintenance of local parks. Exhibit 1, Staff Report. 8. The subject property is accessed from 144th Avenue SE to the east of the site. Exhibit 2, Revised Site Plan. 144th Avenue SE is classified as a Residential Collector Arterial upon the City's Master Plan of Roadways. The current average daily traffic (ADT)along 144`' SE is 3,000 vehicles. The proposed development would add approximately 1,442 daily and 150 p.m. peak hour trips to the area. Exhibit 1, Staff Report; Testimony of Mr. Jackson. To mitigate the increase in traffic on 144th Avenue SE, the Applicant would extend SE 282nd Street west to 132nd Avenue SE. Testimony of Mr. Brown. 9. Several area property owners were concerned about access to the proposed development off of 144th Avenue SE. The entrance to the development would be located below the crest of a steep hill. The concern was that motorists coming over the top of the hill would not be able slow in time for pedestrians,particularly children, and for vehicles turning onto 144th from the development. Exhibit 6, Letter from Ms. Mehl; Exhibit S, Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Ward. In response to an inquiry about the addition of a left turn lane into the proposed development, Mr. Brown testified that a separate left turn lane would not be justified by design standards. Exhibit 6, Letter from Ms. Mehl; Testimony of Mr. Brown. 10. Public testimony was received concerning pedestrian access to and from the development. In particular, several area property owners were concerned that increased traffic on 144'h Avenue SE would create unsafe conditions for pedestrians,bicyclists,and in particular, children traveling to and from school. Testimony of Mr. Ward; Testimony of Ms. Ahmad; Testimony of Ms. Eisenbarth; Exhibit 3, Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Breckenridge;Exhibit 4, Letter from Mr. and Mrs.Ahmad. MDNS condition no. 4 requires the Applicant to construct a 6.5 foot wide concrete sidewalk along the west side of 144t'Avenue SE and a six foot wide asphalt walkway from the end of the sidewalk to the south property line of Horizon Elementary School. Condition 4 also contains subconditions related to pedestrian safety, including a requirement that that a barrier be constructed between the asphalt walkway and the southbound lanes of 144 h Avenue SE. The Applicant's plan would have to be approved by City Public Works Department. Testimony of Mr. Ferguson; Exhibit 1, MDNS and Staff Report. 11. The western part of the subject property is characterized by steep slopes and Category II wetlands,and would not be developed. The area is vegetated by red alder, western red cedar, cottonwood, salmonberry, red twig dogwood, and pacific willow. The wetland is within the 4 Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge - #SU-98-4 Soos Creek watershed basin and provides flood storage for Soos Creek. City of Kent regulations require a 50-foot buffer for category H wetlands.Exhibit 1, Wetland Delineation Report. A 100 foot buffer (Tract B on the revised site plan, Exhibit 2) would protect the wetland. Testimony of Mr. Jackson. 12. Several area residents were concerned about surface water runoff from the construction of impervious surfaces on site. In particular, the residents were concerned that the construction would exacerbate existing flooding conditions on 144th Avenue SE and SE 288th. Testimony of Mr. Jackson; Testimony of Mr. Bates; Testimony of Ms. Eisenbarth; Testimony of Mr. Breckenridge; Testimony of Ms.Ahmad; Exhibit 3, Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Breckenridge; Letter from Ms. Mehl. Baseline Engineering (Baseline) prepared a Preliminary Storm Drainage Report for South Ridge on October 2, 1998. Baseline found two drainage basins on site; one draining toward the west, and one draining towards the east. Both basins drain towards streams that commingle in the wetland on site. Exhibit 1, Preliminary Storm Drainage Report. Terry Ferguson of Baseline testified that most of the surface water runoff from the development would flow towards the wetland in the western portion of the property. Testimony of Testimony of Mr. Ferguson. From the wetland, water flows south under South 282nd Place and drains onto SE 288th Street. Exhibit 1, Wetland Delineation Report and Preliminary Storm Drainage Report. Currently, there is a flooding problem on SE 288th street. Testimony of Mr. Jackson. Baseline concluded that according to applicable City of Kent regulations, the Applicant would be-required to restrict flows from a 100-year storm to 70 percent of the pre-developed two-year flow, so that release rates would be lower than present maximums, easing the flooding problem. Exhibit 1, Preliminary Storm Drainage Report; Testimony of Mr. Gill. 13. One area landowner commented on possible financial impacts the development would have on the City and local taxpayers because of increased public utilities and road repair.Exhibit 5, Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Ward. 14. Notice of the open record public hearing was posted, published, and mailed in accordance with applicable City of Kent regulations. Exhibit 1, Public Notice. CONCLUSIONS Jurisdiction The Hearings Examiner has jurisdiction to hold a public hearing on this application; to consider all evidence presented at the public hearing; and, based on that evidence, to approve, disapprove or approve with conditions the preliminary plat application. Chapter 58.17 RCW,• KCC 12.04.360; KCC 2.32.090. 5 Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 Criteria for Review The recommendation of the Hearings Examiner must be supported by the evidence presented, as stated in the Findings of Fact of this recommendation,and must be consistent with the standards and criteria for review specified in state statutes and city ordinances. The standards and criteria for review of preliminary plat applications are found in Chapter 12.04 of the Kent City Code(KCC)and Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington(RCW). These review criteria include: (a) KCC 12.04.020 which provides that the purpose of the city's subdivision regulations is to: Provide rules,regulations,requirements, and standards for subdividing land in the City of Kent, ensuring that the highest feasible quality in subdivision will be attained; that the public health, safety, general welfare, and aesthetics of the City of Kent shall be promoted and protected, that orderly growth, development, and the conservation, protection and proper use of land shall be ensured; that proper provisions for all public facilities (including circulation,utilities, and services) shall be made; that maximum advantage of site characteristics shall be taken into consideration; and that conformance with provisions set forth in the City of Kent Zoning Code and Kent Comprehensive Plans shall be ensured. (b) KCC 12.04.330 which specifies eight requirements that must be shown on the preliminary plat map including appropriate name and dates, proposed platted property lines,contours and elevations,proposed public service areas, square footage calculations for developed and open space, dimensions of each lot, statements of soil type and drainage conditions, a description of existing land cover, and a description of wildlife present. (c) KCC 12.04.370 which requires a written statement from the Seattle-King County Health Department as to the general adequacy of the proposed means of sewage disposal and water supply. (d) KCC 12.04.430 which provides for the protection of valuable, irreplaceable environmental amenities so that urban development may be as compatible as possible with the ecological balance of the area including preservation of drainage patterns,protection of ground water supply, prevention of erosion and preservation of trees and natural vegetation;. (e) KCC 12.04.440 which specifies requirements for utilities including sanitary sewers, a proper drainage plan and a proper water distribution system. 6 Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 (f) KCC 12.04.450 which requires due consideration to the allocation of public service usage areas and due regard for all natural features including large trees, water courses, historical spots and other community assets that would add attractiveness and value to the property. (g) KCC 12.04.490 which provides for mitigation of any adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreational facilities in the City of Kent. (h) RCW 58.17.110 which requires an inquiry into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the subdivision and a determination "that appropriate provisions are made for public health, safety and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, or other public ways, transit stops,potable water supplies, sanitary wastes,parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school. Conclusions Based on Findings With conditions designed to address specific impacts on the community, the proposed development will satisfy the criteria for approval of a preliminary plat as established by the City Council of Kent as more specifically set forth below: 1. Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan: The proposal would satisfy the requirements of the SR-6 zone and would be consistent with the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. Finding of Fact Nos. 2 & 3. 2. Pedestrian/Child Safety: With conditions of approval, there will be improvements to facilitate safe passage for children walking to and from school. Condition 4 of the MDNS provides for safe walking conditions for students walking to and from school. Finding of Fact No. 10. 3. Community Impact: The City of Kent has declared that one of its goals is to increase the amount and kinds of housing available in the City to accommodate expected growth in the region. The Hearing Examiner must consider that goal when reviewing preliminary plat applications. This proposal is consistent with goals of the comprehensive plan. Kent Comprehensive Plan Goal LU-8. Concerns about the financial impact the development might have on local taxpayers are beyond the Hearing Examiner's scope of review. Those are political questions that are best addressed by the City Council. Moreover, City of Kent Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 land use regulations are designed to ensure that developers pay their fair share of the cost of improvements to the infrastructure necessary to accommodate growth in the city. With conditions of approval, the Applicant would be required to construct sanitary sewer, water, and drainage systems to serve the development. The Applicant would be required to participate financially in the City's South 272nd/South 277th Street Corridor Project, improve 144th Avenue SE with a sidewalk and asphalt walkway, and contribute towards open spaces or the maintenance of local parks. The required improvements would benefit the community as a whole. 4. Utilities: The development would have adequate water and sanitary sewer service.Finding of Fact No. 5. Public testimony established that flooding of adjacent properties due to surface water runoff is a serious problem in the neighborhoods surrounding the proposed development. With conditions of approval, including those listed in the MDNS, the Applicant would be required to submit detailed drainage plans that conform to City of Kent regulations, Chapter 7.07 Kent City Code. The City has determined that with conditions of approval, impacts to the neighborhood would be adequately mitigated by the preliminary drainage plan already submitted by the Applicant. At this preliminary stage, however, the City can only determine that the plans are sufficient-- it can not guarantee that the finished drainage system will function properly. Those issues would need to be resolved prior to approval of a final plat and prior to construction of any houses. See, Phillips v. King County, 968 P.2d 871 (Wash. 1998). The City has agreed to work with owners of surrounding properties to address specific concerns regarding septic and surface water flows. Testimony of Gary Gill. 5. Environment: The wetlands on Tract A of the subject property would be left undisturbed, and would be separated from the development by a 100-foot buffer. Conditions of approval are needed to require that the Applicant submit a Detailed Tree Plan indicating how significant trees will be retained. Finding of Fact No. 11. 6. Traffic: Increased traffic is a serious concern in this area of Kent as well as all across the valley. Conditions of approval are necessary to help ensure that the increased traffic will not unduly burden the street system in the area. With conditions of approval, the increase in traffic due to the proposed development would be adequately mitigated. In particular, the extension of SE 282nd Street would help alleviate the traffic problems on 144th Avenue SE. Finding of Fact No. 8. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the Hearings Examiner APPROVES the application, subject to the following conditions: 8 Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 A. PRIOR TO RECORDING THE SOUTH RIDGE SUBDIVISION• 1. The Owner/ Subdivider shall receive approval for engineering drawings from the Department of Public Works, and either construct or bond for the following: a. A gravity sanitary sewer system to serve all lots. Sanitary sewer service will be provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. The septic system serving the existing home(s) within the proposed short plat, if any, shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health Department Regulations. b. A water system meeting domestic and fire flow requirements for all lots. Water service will be provided by Water District#111. Existing wells — if any - shall be abandoned in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Ecology. C. Detailed Drainage Plans which show how the 100-year post-developed stormwater runoff from this development will be collected,conveyed, stored, treated and released to the City stormwater drainage system in compliance to the City of Kent Construction Standards and the conditions contained within the Revised DNS for#ENV 98-04. An open-to-the-air stormwater treatment system in accordance with the requirements of the Kent Construction Standards and the conditions contained within the revised DNS for#ENV 98-04. d. A Detailed Grading Plan for the entire subdivision which includes provisions for utilities, roadways, retention/detention ponds, stormwater treatment facilities, and a building footpad for each lot. These plans shall be designed to eliminate the need for processing several individual Grading Permits upon application for Building Permits: phasing of grading on a lot-by-lot basis will not be considered. e. A Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan for the entire subdivision which reflects the Detailed Grading Plan discussed above, and the Planning Department approved Tree Plan. Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 f. A Wetland Mitigation Plan that addresses avoiding or minimizing impacts to wetlands by analyzing alternatives that would avoid the impact, as stated in Kent City Code,Section 11.05.120.Avoiding wetland impacts shall be pursued to the maximum extent possible. g. Street Improvement Plans for 144'Avenue South, designed in conformance with the requirements for a Residential Collector Street as described in the City of Kent Construction Standards and the Revised DNS for#ENV 98-04. h. Pedestrian Walkway Improvement Plans as required by the conditions for the Revised DNS for#ENV 98-04. i. Street Improvement Plans for the subdivision streets meeting the requirements for Residential Collector Streets (for Southeast 282nd Street), and for Residential Streets (all other streets within the subdivision) as described by the City of Kent Construction Standards and the conditions of the Revised DNS for#ENV 98-04. j. Street Light Plans meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure for Street Lighting Requirements prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed by the State of Washington. This brochure is available from the Transportation Section of the Public Works Department. 2. The Applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Detailed Tree Plan from the Planning Department. All trees of six inch or greater caliper must be shown on this plan. Grading Plans cannot be approved by the Department of Public Works without an approved Detailed Tree Plan. 3. The Owner/ Subdivider shall dedicate, or deed, all necessary public rights-of-way for the required improvements and provide all public and private easements necessary for the construction, operation and maintenance of the required improvements. 4. The Owner/Subdivider shall permanently protect the approved and preserved, and/or enhanced, or created wetland(s) and it's buffer(s) by creating a separate Sensitive Area Tract and deeding the tract in fee simple to the City, OR by granting a Sensitive Area Easement to the City for the entire sensitive area as required by the conditions of Revised DNS for#ENV 98-04. 10 Hearings Examiner Findings and Recommendation South Ridge #SU-98-4 5. Prior to release of any construction bonds, the Department of Public Works must approve As-Built Street, As-Built Sanitary Sewer, As-Built Water, As-Built Street Lighting, and As-Built Drainage Plans for the entire site prepared by a professional land surveyor licensed by the State of Washington in conformance to the requirements of Appendix "E" of the City of Kent Construction Standards. 6. The owner/developer shall dedicate five percent of the total plat area as parks/open space, or pay a voluntary fee-in-lieu of per Ordinance #2975. B. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT ON ANY LOT IN THE SOUTH RIDGE SUBDIVISION (#SU 98-04). THE OWNER/ SUBDIVIDER SHALL: 1. Execute all EMAs required above and by the conditions of approval for the DNS issued for the SEPA Checklist for this project. 2. Record the Plat. 3. Construct all of the improvements required above. 4. Receive approval of the required As-built Drawings for Water, Sewer, Street, and Stormwater Facilities. 5. Should this subdivision not be within the LID formed to construct the specified corridor improvements, then the Owner of each lot shall pay their financial obligation for the street improvements along the South 272od Street /South 277" Street Corridor in full prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Dated this 20'day of January, 1999. THEODORE PAUL HUNTER Hearing Examiner "" 11 City of Kent - Planning Department i n 3D. ,m A 73. lY. gg MW.-A' A 14. A i�• " AR.i.2R l i4.i dl. 2. dR L?, � 4 W n =° Z AJ 39 i !; i"=°is .2 a.i1l.i!=.ir° - .. reQ � _'"—�---- ------- ---- --tee— ------ - ---- ----r-- m �cr sa y 14',�'MI sa .to!JAI Jr. M W. @!.lAT.314 3T4!2t. APPLICATION NAME: South Ridge NUMBER: #SU-98-4 DATE: January 6, 1999 REQUEST: Preliminary Plat A N Application boundary Site Plan Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Other Business 1 . SUBJECT: MERIDIAN RIDGE PRELIMINARY PLAT SU-98-8 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set to consider the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions of the Meridian Ridge Preliminary Plat application. 3 . EXHIBITS : Hearing Examiner Recommendation with map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Hearing Examiner (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: II ((�� Councilmember O"_moves, Councilmember 1 O40 seconds to approve/ the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of approval with conditions for the application of Meridian Ridge Preliminary Plat . DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 7B CITY OF Jim White. Mayor " Pt - - James P. Harris, Planning Director OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER (253) 859-3390 Theodore P.Hunter Hearing Examiner FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FILE NO: MERIDIAN RIDGE #AP-98-5 AND #AP-98-8 MERIDIAN RIDGE #SU-98-8 APPLICANT: #AP-98-5 Withdrawn on December 16. 1998 by applicant Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard #1 Tukwila, WA 98188 #AP-98-8 David and Martha Osborn 14919 SE 2815` Street Kent, WA 98042 w #SU-98-8 Schneider Homes, Inc. REQUEST: For AP-98-5: The appellant is appealing conditions 4, lines 9 through 17, 4 a, 5, and 15 For AP-98-8 The appellants are appealing the adequacy of the information contained in the environmental checklist which was prepared by the applicant's and which was relied on by the Responsible Official to arrive at a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for the proposed Preliminary Meridian Ridge Subdivision. Specifically, the appellants are asking for a reconsideration of the Determination of Nonsignificance based upon the adequacy of information contained in the following sections of the Checklist: A-7. Existing Conditions A-13 Environmental Information B-l.b What is the steepest slope on the site? B-LdAre there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity B-3.a Water—surface _'0aih AVENt'E SOUTH UNT. %kASHINGTOV QS03' ; FELEPHONE ,2;3i�5V-3300 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 B-3.a.5 Does the proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. B-3.c. Water Runoff(including storm water): 1)Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. B-5.a Animals #SU-98-8 A request to subdivide approximately 19.33 acres into 93 single- family residential lots. LOCATION: The proposed Meridian Ridge Preliminary subdivision is located on the west side of 152nd Avenue SE opposite SE 280' Street. APPLICATION FILED: #AP-98-5 October 19, 1998 #AP-98-8 October 29, 1998 #SU-98-8 August 20, 1998 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE ISSUED: October 5, 1998 MEETING DATE: December 16, 1998 and continued to January 6, 1999 DECISION ISSUED: January 20, 1999 DECISION: #AP-98-8 DENIED #SU-98-8 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: James P. Harris, Planning Director Richard Chase, Public Works Department PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Martha Osborn, applicant David Osborn, applicant Kenneth Peckham, representing Schneider Homes Mel Daley, Schneider Homes Other Doug Cain Gail Goeman Terri Muller 2 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 EXHIBITS: 1. Hearing Examiner file containing a copy of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificancce, notice of public hearing, maps and staff report. 2. Revised Map of subdivision 2a. Letter dated January 25, 1993 to Larry Reichert (#SU-98-8) 3. Letter from J. Jones dated May 6, 1998. (AP-98-8) 3. Letter to Larry Reichert dated June 10, 1991 (#SU-98-8) 4. Letter to Richard Chase from J. Jones dated December 11, 1998. (AP-98-8) INTRODUCTION After due consideration of all the evidence presented at public hearing on the date indicated above, and following an unaccompanied personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding area by the Hearing Examiner at a time prior to the public hearing, the following findings, conclusions and decision are entered by the Hearing Examiner on this application. SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS The applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide approximately 19.33 acres into 93 single-family residential lots on property located west of 152"d Avenue SE and south of SE 2VI Street. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance(MDNS) was issued for the proposed project. Two appeals of this MDNS have been filed; one by the applicant (AP-98-5) and the other by David and Martha Osborn and Doug and Sharon Cain (AP-98-8). A consolidated open record hearing was held on Wednesday, December 16, 1998 to allow all interested persons an opportunity to respond to the preliminary plat application and recommendation of approval, and to hear testimony on the SEPA appeals. The Kent Planning Department reviewed the preliminary plat application and recommended approval with conditions in a written report presented at the hearing. The City of Kent,the applicant,the appellants, and other interested parties appeared at the hearing. The applicant withdrew its appeal(AP-98-5) at the hearing. The Hearings Examiner continued the hearing until January 6, 1999 to allow for additional evaluation of the site to ensure that all onsite jurisdictional wetlands were delineated. 3 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 CRITERIA FOR DECISIONS Criteria for Review of MDNS Appeal The legislature and the courts have established guidelines for the Hearing Examiner review of an appeal of a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued under the State Environmental Policy Act. In an appeal of a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance under SEPA, the Hearings Examiner must review the mitigation conditions imposed by the City to determine if all significant adverse environmental impacts will be mitigated. The focus of this review is dictated by State law. The following statements of law are relevant to this review of the SEPA MDNS appeal: 1. An agency may issue an MDNS if it determines, after considering mitigation measures proposed by the applicant and/or the agency, that the proposal as mitigated will not have a significant adverse environmental impact. Indian Trail Property Association v. Spokane, 76 Wash.App. 430 (1994). The Hearings Examiner must accord substantial weight to the agency's determination that an environmental impact statement is unnecessary because adverse impacts can be mitigated in an MDNS. RCW 43.21 C.090; WAC 197-I1-680(3)(vi); Swift v. Island County, 87 Wn.2d. 348 (1976). 2. Mitigation measures imposed by an agency must be stated in writing, and must be reasonable and capable of being accomplished. WAC 197-11-660. Mitigation measures must be related to an identified adverse impact of the proposal, and must be based on policies identified by the agency and incorporated into regulations,plans, or codes which are formally designated by the agency. RCW 43.21 C.060; WAC 197-I1-660;Levine v.Jefferson County, 116 Wn.2d 575 (1991). 3. The Appellant has the burden of proof to show that the agency made a mistake when it issued the MDNS. Leavitt v. Jefferson County, 74 Wn.App. 668 (1994). The issue on appeal is whether there are significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the proposal that cannot be mitigated. 4. The agency's substantive SEPA decision is reviewed under the"clearly erroneous"standard, which allows the reviewing body to reverse the agency action only"if left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Polygon Corp. v. City of Seattle, 90 Wn.2d 59 (1978). Criteria for Review of Plat Application The decision of the Hearings Examiner on a land use application must be supported by the evidence presented, as stated in the Findings of Fact, and must be consistent with the standards and criteria for review specified in state statutes and city ordinances. The standards and criteria for review of preliminary plat applications are found in Chapter 12.04 of the Kent City Code (KCC) and Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). These review criteria include: 4 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 (a) KCC 12.04.020 which provides that the purpose of the city's subdivision regulations is to: Provide rules, regulations, requirements, and standards for subdividing land in the City of Kent,ensuring that the highest feasible quality in subdivision will be attained;that the public health, safety, general welfare, and aesthetics of the City of Kent shall be promoted and protected,that orderly growth,development,and the conservation,protection and proper use of land shall be ensured; that proper provisions for all public facilities(including circulation, utilities, and services) shall be made; that maximum advantage of site characteristics shall be taken into consideration; and that conformance with provisions set forth in the City of Kent Zoning Code and Kent Comprehensive Plans shall be ensured. (b) KCC 12.04.330 which specifies eight requirements that must be shown on the preliminary plat map including appropriate name and dates, proposed platted property lines,contours and elevations,proposed public service areas, square footage calculations for developed and open space, dimensions of each lot, statements of soil type and drainage conditions, a description of existing land cover, and a description of wildlife present. (c) KCC 12.04.370 which requires a written statement from the Seattle-King County Health Department as to the general adequacy of the proposed means of sewage disposal and water supply. (d) KCC 12.04.430 which provides for the protection of valuable, irreplaceable environmental amenities so that urban development may be as compatible as possible with the ecological balance of the area including preservation of drainage patterns, protection of ground water supply, prevention of erosion and preservation of trees and natural vegetation. (e) KCC 12.04.440 which specifies requirements for utilities including sanitary sewers, a proper drainage plan and a proper water distribution system. (f) KCC 12.04.450 which requires due consideration to the allocation of public service usage areas and due regard for all natural features including large trees, water courses, historical spots and other community assets that would add attractiveness and value to the property. (g) KCC 12.04.490 which provides for mitigation of any adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreational facilities in the City of Kent. RCW 58.17.110 which requires an inquiry into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the subdivision and a determination"that appropriate provisions are made for public health, safety and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, or other public 5 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school. After considering all the evidence presented at the public hearing on the date specified above, the following Findings, Conclusions and Decisions are entered by the Examiner on this appeal and underlying application. FINDINGS 1. The applicant requests a preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels totaling approximately 19.33 acres into 93 single-family residential lots. The proposed plat would create 89 new building lots. The subject property is west of 152°d Avenue SE at approximately SE 280`h Street. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8), page 1; Testimony of Mr. Jackson. 2. The subject property is zoned SR-6, Single Family Residential. The maximum permitted density is 6.05 units per acre. The minimum lot size in the 5,700 square feet. The predominant land use in the vicinity is single family detached residential development. A grocery store, Shady Park Grocery, is located across from the northeast corner of the subject property. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8),page 2. 3. The City Comprehensive Land Use Map designates the subject property and surrounding area as Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre (SF-6). The property to the northeast of the subject property, where Shady Park Grocery is located, is designated Commercial. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8),page 2. 4. The City adopted a 20 year housing target of 7,500 new dwelling units. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8),page S. The Comprehensive Plan supports infill of vacant or undeveloped lots and development near existing urban services and infrastructure. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8),page 6. The City considers a minimum density of four units per acre sufficient to support urban services. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8),page 6. The vicinity in which the subject property is located has seen a large amount of infill development. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8),page 8. 5. The city representative submitted that the proposed location is well served by existing human services and facilities. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8),page 6. The gross density of the proposed plat would be approximately 4.81 units per acre. The smallest lot proposed would be 5,700 square feet with an average lot size of approximately 6,000 square feet. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8),page 2; Testimony of Mr. Jackson. 6. Sewer and water facilities exist to serve the site. The proposed plat would receive sewer service from the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District and water service from Water District #111. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8), page 8; Testimony of Mr. Jackson. Onsite stormwater would be collected, conveyed, stored, and treated onsite and released to the city stormwater drainage system. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8),page 10. 6 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 7. The applicant would construct the internal road network to serve the site. The internal roadway would be dedicated to the City and integrated into the existing city road network. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8),page 7. The applicant would also construct a pedestrian walkway on the west side of 152"d Avenue Southeast, starting on the north end of the sidewalk to be constructed along 152' Avenue SW, and continuing northerly to the intersection with Kent-Kangley Road. Exhibit 1, MDNS,page 3. 8. The Public Works Department estimates that the proposed development would contribute an additional 93 peak hour vehicular trips. During the environmental review,adverse traffic impacts from proposed development were identified and measures to mitigate these adverse impacts were included as conditions of the MDNS. Exhibit 1, MDNS. The applicant's representative requested that the applicant be able to realign 152d Avenue SE to reduce the potential of adverse impacts to the Class Two stream located to the east of the 152' Street right-of-way. Testimony of Mr. Daly. The applicant must accommodate the recommendations of King County Department of Metropolitan Service related to the provisions for mass transit. Exhibit 1, MDNS,page 2. 9. There are mature trees located on the property. The applicant would be required to submit a detailed tree plan, subject to Planning Department,prior to development on any lot or the issuance of a grade and fill permit. The tree plan must identify those significant trees that will be protected. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8), page 3; Testimony of Mr. Jackson. 10. Pursuant to KCC 12.04.490, the applicant must mitigate any adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreational facilities in the City of Kent. In order to be consistent with KCC 12.04.490, the City recommended that, as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to dedicate five percent of the total property as open space or pay a voluntary fee-in-lieu of dedication as set forth in Ordinance No. 2975.Exhibit 1, Staff Report (SU-98-8),page 13. 11. A final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on October 5, 1998 (#ENV- 98-59) subject to 22 conditions. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8),page 3. Two appeals of the MDNS were filed. One appeal (AP-98-5) was withdrawn at the December 16, 1998 session of the hearing. 12. The Appellants in the second appeal (AP-98-8) contend that the checklist is inadequate and request a reconsideration of the Determination of Nonsignificance. The Appellants specifically contend that the information about vegetation types, onsite wetlands, unstable slopes and steep slopes, impact to water flow and impacts to animals appears to be inadequate. Exhibit 1, Staff Report (AP-98-8),page 1; Exhibit 2 (AP-98-8); Testimony of Ms. Osborn; Testimony of Mr. Osborn; Testimony of Mr. Cain. The city representative submitted that City reviewed the environmental checklist and, with that information in addition to its own information and analysis, applied conditions that would adequately mitigate the potential adverse impacts that were identified. Exhibit 1, Staff Report(AP-98- 8),page 9; Testimony of Mr. Harris. 7 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 13. The city maps, previous evaluation of the subject property, and testimony from residents in the vicinity indicate that wetlands exist on the subject property. Testimony of Mr. Jackson; Testimony of Ms. Goeman;Exhibit 3 (SU-98-8); Testimony of Ms. Muller; Testimony of Ms. Osborn; Testimony of Mr. Cain. As a condition of the MDNS,the applicant was required to submit a wetland delineation and mitigation plan. Exhibit 1 (SU-98-8), MDNS Because the issue of the wetland delineation was raised as part of the MDNS appeal, the Hearing Examiner held the record open for information regarding the existence of onsite wetlands. 14. A letter dated December 11, 1998 from Jeffrey S. Jones, Certified Professional Wetland Scientist, states that an emergent wetland exists in the southwest corner of the subject property. Exhibit 4 (AP-98-8). A December 30, 1998 letter from Kim Harper, Senior Wetland Ecologist, confirms Mr. Jones's delineation, and states that the lots on which the wetland falls are of such size to allow single family development without encroaching upon the wetland or wetland buffer. Sheldon & Associates December 30, 1998 letter. At the January 6, 1999 session of the hearing, Kim Harper testified that although the southwest corner has wetland characteristics,the area is a"borderline non-wetland"and does not fully meet the wetland criteria.Exhibit 1, Staff Report(SU-98-8),page 3; Testimony of Ms. Kim. No other information on the delineation of wetlands or the character of the property was provided at the continued hearing. 15. Notice was given in accordance to applicable regulations. Exhibit 1, Affidavit of Notice; Testimony of Mr. Jackson. CONCLUSIONS Jurisdiction The Hearings Examiner has jurisdiction to hold a hearing on this appeal and to issue a decision to grant or deny the appeal. If the appeal is granted, the Examiner will not issue a decision on the underlying application until such time as there is compliance with the requirements of SEPA. If the appeal is denied, the Examiner may approve, disapprove or approve with conditions the preliminary plat application. KCC 12.04,360; KCC 2.32.090. Conclusions Based on Findings 1. The appeal of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance should be denied. The issues raised by the Appellants are relevant to the subject property. However, potential adverse impacts to surrounding properties and potential adverse impacts to wildlife and critical areas on the subject property were considered during the environmental review. Although some of the information provided by the applicant may not have been entirely complete, the City had sufficient information from the checklist and its own sources to adequately review the project. The Hearings Examiner must accord substantial weight to the agency's determination that an environmental impact statement is unnecessary because adverse impacts can be mitigated in an MDNS. The Appellant has not met the burden of proof to show that the city made a mistake when it issued the MDNS. Findings of Fact Nos. 8 REVISED Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Correction to Page 9 Only Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and #SU-98-8 11-12. The Appellants expressed concern about adverse impacts the development will have on the vicinity and the wildlife habitat on the subject property. The Growth Management Act requires that cities plan for growth, including areas where increased density can be accommodated. The 1995 Kent Comprehensive Plan,prepared under the Washington State Growth Management Act, designates the area in which the subject property is located as suitable for residential development at a density of six units per acre. The zoning code designates the subject property as SR-6, Single Family Residential, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation. While the Appellants correctly identify adverse impacts associated with the proposed development (such as decrease in wildlife habitat, a potential for increased surface water runoff and removal of significant trees), these impacts are what is to be expected with development of the subject property as envisioned by the City Council when adopting the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations. The Hearing Examiner has no jurisdiction to require a less dense development if the proposed plat is in compliance with the provisions of the Kent City Code governing review of preliminary plat applications. Protection of land valuable as wildlife habitat must either be identified in the Comprehensive Plan or protected by private agreement. The subject property under review has been identified as land suitable for single family housing. Findings of Fact Nos. 2, 3, 4, 12. 2. With conditions, the preliminary plat application meets the criteria for approval as established by the Revised Code of Washington and the City Council of Kent and should be approved. With conditions, the application will be consistent with the Kent Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan; will provide adequate water and sewer service to proposed residential lots; will have considered natural features of the site in the proposed lot layout; and will provide mitigation of adverse impacts to the surrounding area including those to park and recreation facilities. Findings of Facts Nos. 1-1 S. Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure that adequate provisions will be made for public health and safety, open spaces, drainage ways, streets, mass transit, water and sanitary sewer, and parks and recreation. The application should be approved subject to conditions to require stormwater drainage improvements to address increased water flow from impervious surfaces; street improvements to address increased traffic on surrounding streets; sanitary sewer and water system improvements to ensure that future residents will have adequate utility services; and protection of existing trees to assist in stormwater control and visual aesthetics. Findings of Fact Nos. 1- 1 S. DECISION The appeal of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance made by the Planning Director pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act is DENIED. The application for Preliminary Plat to subdivide 9.15 me 94sing-le family i ti l ' 19.33 acres into 93 sinizle-familv residential units is APPROVED subject to the following conditions: 9 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and #SU-98-8 A. PRIOR TO RECO IN r THE MERIDIAN RMQF SUBDIVISTOrr• 1. The Owner/Subdivider shall receive approval for engineering drawings from the Department of Public Works, and either construct or bond for the following: a. A gravity sanitary sewer system to serve all lots. The septic system serving the existing home(s) within the proposed subdivision shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health Department Regulations. b. A water system meeting domestic and fire flow requirements for all lots. Existing wells, if any, shall be abandoned in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Ecology. C. Detailed Drainage Plans which show how the 100-year post-developed stormwater runoff from this development will be collected, conveyed, stored, treated and released to the City stormwater drainage system in compliance to the City of Kent Construction Standards, and as specified in the DNS for this development. d. Landscape Plans for the retention/detention pond facility, as referenced in Kent's Development Assistance brochure for same. e. Stormwater Treatment Plans for an open-to-the-air stormwater treatment system in accordance with the requirements of the Kent Construction Standards to mitigate for potential impacts to stormwater runoff quality. (1) The stormwater treatment system shall be within the approved public retention/detention facility tract. (2) Easements for biofiltration swales across private lots will not be acceptable to meet this requirement. f. A Detailed Grading Plan for the entire subdivision. g. A Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan for the entire subdivision which reflects the Detailed Grading Plan, and the Planning Department approved Tree Plan. h. Street Improvement Plans for 152°d Avenue Southeast, designed in conformance with the requirements for a Minor Arterial Street as described in the City of Kent Construction Standards. Street Improvement Plans for the 10 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 subdivision street terminating with a cul-de-sac at its west terminus. The Street Improvement Plans for this subdivision street shall be designed in conformance with the requirements for a Residential Street as described in the City of Kent Construction Standards, including but not limited to: combined cement concrete curbs&gutters and 5-foot wide cement concrete sidewalks on both sides of the street; at least 32-feet of asphalt pavement; a maximum grade of 15 percent; minimum horizontal radii of 100-feet; a City- approved street lighting system; public stormwater drainage, detention, and treatment facilities; internal street system curb return radii of 25-feet minimum; curb return radii of 50-feet at the intersection of the subdivision street system with 152"d Avenue Southeast; and a 45-foot radius to the face of curb all cul-de-sacs. Shifting of the right of way to the west to accommodate the stream shall be allowed. i. To provide adequate safe stopping distance within this subdivision, the Applicant/Owner/ Subdivider shall either redesign the internal road system using minimum horizontal curve radii of 100-feet, OR the Applicant/ Owner/Subdivider shall provide approved sight distance easements based upon a 25 MPH design speed across the lots located inside the loop street at the northwest, northeast, and southeast curves in the "loop" portion of the internal street system. j. All corner lots shall be designed to provide at least 50-feet of driveway separation distance from the adjacent street corner as required by the City of Kent Construction Standards. The following Restriction shall appear on the face of the recorded plat: Where one frontage side of a corner lot provides the required driveway separation distance and the other frontage side does not, the driveway location for that corner lot shall not be permitted on the shorter lot side. k. Street Light Plans meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure for Street Lighting Requirements. This plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed by the State of Washington. This brochure is available from the Transportation Section of the Public Works Department. 2. The Owner/Subdivider shall waive all abutter's direct vehicular access rights to 152' Avenue Southeast, and the face of the recorded plat shall contain this Restriction. A similar restriction shall be put upon lots 1 and 69 to prevent access onto Southeast 280`h Street (extended). 3. The Applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Detailed Tree Plan which shows the location of all trees of six inch or greater caliper. Detailed Grading Plans 11 Hearings Examiner Findings and Decision Meridian Ridge #AP-98-5, #AP-98-8 and#SU-98-8 cannot be approved without a Planning Department and Department of Public Works approved Detailed Tree Plan. 4. The Owner/Subdivider shall dedicate or deed all necessary public rights-of-way for all of the required improvements listed, and shall provide all public and private easements necessary for the construction, operation and maintenance of the required improvements listed. Further the Owner/Subdivider shall reserve easements for any and all purposes as may be required by the Director of Public works. 5. Prior to release of any construction bonds, the Department of Public Works must approve As-Built Drainage Plans for the entire site prepared by a professional land surveyor licensed by the State of Washington in conformance to the requirements of Appendix "E" of the City of Kent Construction Standards. 6. The Owner/Subdivider shall comply with all of the conditions issued with the DNS for#ENV-98-59. 7. The developer or applicant shall dedicate five (5)percent of the total property being developed as open space or pay a voluntary fee-in-lieu of dedication as set forth in Ordinance No. 2975. B. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUELDING PERMIT ON ANY LOT IN THE MEIRED AN RIDGE SUBDIVISION ( S# U 98-8) THE OWNER/SUBDIVIDER 1. Execute all EMAs required above and by the conditions of approval for the DNS issued for the SEPA Checklist for this project. 2. Construct all of the improvements required above and record the plat. Dated this 20'day of January, 1999. 007Z.A. THEODORE PAUL HUNTER Hearing Examiner ch:su988fin.doc 12 City of Kent - Planning Department PRELIMINARY PLAT OF �K_ ��, 9 MERIDIAN RIDGE PORTIONS OF S.W.V4,N.W.I/4•SECTION 35•TWP.22 N.ROE 5 E.WJA. AND N.WJ14,S.W.114,SECTION 35,TWP.22 N.ROE 5 E,WM V' _ SE 278TH ,. 11 � ! it I ,' �%t 4I1r •... % .. . ®. e tot rs i.. ks� 111e j ro+ sl f <11 9z4 131 3; � •1, ,Zc. L1 H'.,.�• Q� 1' �' � 3 UJI LU o � r ( _ _� l°" s1 _ �s `• - 3t• !�.1c. 1� 1 �� I ►11 ?r _I ZUJI .14 � � ti, d• 4 ,V1.Ipi�`WUllr-N"aliiu� i Q ' je- dt_! 1 APPLICATION NAME: Meridian Ridge NUMBER: #SU-98-8 DATE: December 16, 1998 REQUEST: Preliminary Plat A N Application boundary Site Plan Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Other Business 1 . SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS CPA-98-2 , PROPOSAL L 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This item was continued at the City Council meeting of February 16, 1999 . It was stated by staff that the Land Use and Planning Board minutes of November 30, 1998 were incorrect . After reviewing the video tape, it has been determined that the minutes of the November 30, 1998 Land Use and Planning Board meeting are correct . This item is a request to amend the land use map designation from (SF-8) Single Family Residential, 8 dwelling units per acre to Mixed use. The property is approximately 5 . 93 acres and is located north of James Street, between Fourth and Fifth Avenue S . The Land Use and Planning Board recommends denial of this request . 3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo, staff report to Land Use & Planning Board (11/23/98) , minutes of LUPB meeting of 11/30/98 and minutes of City Council meeting of 2/16/99 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Land Use & Planning Board (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember l moves, Councilmember w eL seconds to approve/medi-fy1deny the Land Use & Planning Board' s recom- mendation of denial of #CPA-98-2 (L) on the proposed 1998 comprehensive plan amendment.-�a - € �r r,-,,•„Ar r n 71YPT�e3Y'P the �L�.ssa�}�__e-�-��snartc-e-3 DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 7C CITY OF Jim White, Mayor - fKVICTA Planning Department (253)859-3390/FAX(253)850-2544 James P.Harris,Planning Director CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (253) 859-3390 MEMORANDUM March 2, 1999 TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE, AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: MATTHEWS JACKSON, PLANNER/GIS COORDINATOR SUBJECT: 1998 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS - Item #CPA-98-2 (L) At the City Council meeting of February 2, 1999, the council considered the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendations on 1998 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The memo prepared by the Planning Department for the City Council on February 2, 1999, noted that the Planning Board was moving item #CPA-98-2 (L) forward without a recommendation. This item was considered by the Land Use and Planning Board at their November 30, 1998 public hearing. However, Council Member Orr noted that the minutes of November 30, 1998 indicated that the Land Use and Planning Board were forwarding a recommendation of Denial on this item. Staff was directed to clarify this matter prior to City Council action. Staff reviewed the videotape of the November 30, 1998 public hearing. Staff found the Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing minutes were correct. Staff forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Planning Board in the staff report dated November 23, 1998. After deliberations, the Land Use and Planning Board voted to forward a recommendation of Denial of #CPA-98-2 (L) to the City Council. Therefore, the Minutes of the November 30, 1998 meeting are accurate, and the staff memo to the City Council dated February 16, 1999, was in error. The correct Land Use and Planning Board recommendation on item #CPA-98-2 (L) is Denial. Staff will be available at the March 2, 1999, City Council meeting to discuss the Planning Boards' recommendation on item #CPA-98-2 (L). For a complete description of#CPA-98-2, please refer to the Planning Department staff report to the Land Use and Planning Board attached dated November 23, 1998. MJ/s/public/planning/cpa982cc.mem2 Attachments cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager "U Dili.XA F-N[ I S(ri_TII I KEVF.A\ %SHINGTOA YSII 3_'-5195 CITY OF Jim White, Mayor Planning Department (253) 859-3390/FAX(253) 850-2544 James P.Harris,Planning Director CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (253) 859-3390 MEMORANDUM NOVEMBER 23, 1998 MEMO TO: BRAD BELL, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: MATTHEWS JACKSON, PLANNER/GIS COORDINATOR SUBJECT: #CPA-98-2 (A-L)/#CPZ-98- (1-9) - 1998 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENTS INTRODUCTION In April, 1995, the Kent City Council adopted the Kent Comprehensive Plan, which was prepared and adopted under the provisions of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA requires that comprehensive plans combine land use, transportation, capital facilities, and other elements in a way, which is both internally consistent and ............ consistent with plans from other jurisdictions in the region. The GMA also requires that a city's development regulations implement and be consistent with the plan. The GMA establishes procedures for the amendment of plans, and stipulates that plans can only be amended once a year unless an emergency is declared which requires immediate action. Pursuant to the provisions in the GMA, the City Council adopted an ordinance (Ordinance #3237) outlining procedures for the amendment of the City's plan. These procedures are now outlined in Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code. The City's procedures ordinance established September 1 of each calendar year as the deadline for applications to be submitted to the Planning Department for proposed amendments to the plan. 1998 AMENDMENTS As of September 1, 1998,the Planning Department received twelve applications for amendments to the comprehensive plan. Ten of these applications were initiated by private property owners, and two applications were initiated by the City of Kent. The proposed amendments are summarized below: 1. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 6 units per acre to Commercial for the property located at the southwest corner of SE 256te Street and 132°d Avenue SE. (Brutsche) 2. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Commercial to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located on the south side of Kent-Des Moines Road, approximately 700 feet west of Pacific Highway South. (Shulman) 3. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for the property located at 13602 SE 282"d Street. (Burridge). 4. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 6 units per acre to Commercial for the property located at 11715 and 11733 Kent-Kangiey Road. (Costanzo) 5. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Industria; to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at 88" Avenue South and South 218`h Street. (Mower/Tonelli) ' 0 401 AVENUE SOUTH / KENT.WASHINGTON 98031-5895 1 TELLPHONE (25 3 1 859-3301) Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 2 6. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Low Density Multifamily Residential to Commercial for the property located at 12809 Kent-Kangley Road. (Mower/Nguyen) 7. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Mobile Home Park to Commercial for the property located at 15386 SE 272°d Street. (Gusa) 8. A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 6 units per acre to Single Family Residential 8 units per acre for the property located at 25840 135d'Lane SE. (Houle) 9. A change to the Land Use Map from Restricted Mixed Use to Medium Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at 108"Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road. (Mower/Hebert) 10. Amendment to Goals LU-9 and LU-10 of the Land Use Element. (Ruth) 11. Amendments to the Capital Facilities Element. (Kent Finance Department) 12. Implementation of a portion of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. (City of Kent) It should be noted that any proposed changes to the Land Use Plan Map will be reviewed concurrently with correspondir amendments to the zoning map. This memorandum will present information about each proposed amendment. Maps have been prepared, and are attached, for each area, which will be affected by the proposed changes to the Land Use Plan Map and zoning map (Attachment A). Each proposed amendment will be analyzed and staff s recommendation will be noted. STANDARDS OF REVIEW Section 12.02.050 of the Kent City Code outlines the standards of review, which must be used by staff and the City Council in analyzing any proposed comprehensive plan amendments. Proposed amendments are to be examined based on the following criteria: 1. The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare; 2. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the plan that warrant an amendment to the plan; and 3. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the comprehensive plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities elements of the plan. The proposed plan amendments have been analyzed based on these criteria. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 3 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Proposal A- Change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning for property located at southwest corner of SE 256te Street and 132'Avenue SE Applicant: Leo C. and Norma J. Brutsche (Brutsche) Existing Plan Designation: Single Family Residential Proposed Plan Designation: 6 units per acre Commercial Existing Zoning: SR-6, Single Family Residential Proposed Zoning: 6.05 units per acre GC, General Commercial Background The subject property consists of one tax lot, which is approximately 41,861 square feet. The property is located at the southwest corner of SE 256"Street and 132d Avenue SE and currently has a land use designation of SF-6, Single Family Residential and a zoning designation of SR-6, Single Family Residential. The property is currently vacant. The site is generally flat and appears to contain no wetlands. Properties to north, south, east and west are single family residential. Analysis The applicant states that this proposal would promote the public health,safety and general welfare by providing a"corner store"site for neighborhood oriented shops. While the Kent Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-13.5 discusses analyzing the potential for development of"corner store", small scale,neighborhood-oriented shops adjacent to selected rights-of- way in higher density neighborhoods, staff has not been directed to take up this issue at this time. Since the site is surrounded by single family homes, this property would not be considered to be within a high density neighborhood. A commercial use at this intersection would conflict with additional goals and policies of the Kent Comprehensive Plan. These include the following: Goal LU-12—Promote orderly and efficient commercial growth within the existing commercial districts in order to maintain and strengthen existing commercial districts, to minimize costs associated with extension of facilities, and to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another. Policy LU-12.3—Develop regulatory incentives to encourage infill development in existing commercial areas. Regulatory incentives may include urban, mixed use zoning and higher-density zones, planned unit developments, transfer of density credits, and streamlined permit processes. The land use goals and policies make reference to encouraging commercial infill development in existing commercial areas. The parcel in question is not in a commercial area; the nearest commercial districts are at SE 240'Street and 132nd Avenue SE and SE 272°d Street and 132°d Avenue SE. Furthermore, the Public Works Department finds that a commercial use at this location would have a significant impact on neighboring properties in the amount of increased peak hour trips. It should be noted that GC zoning allows uses, which typically generate a great deal of traffic, such as food stores and gasoline service stations. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 4 Recommendation The uses surrounding the proposed amendment are residential and any type of commercial use would be out of character. In addition, the Public Works Department expressed concern with the amount of additional traffic that might be generated by a potential use and the negative impact on neighboring properties. The Comprehensive Plan encourages infill development in existing commercial areas; consequently, staff recommends denial of the applicant's request for a land use designation of Commercial and GC zoning. Proposal B- A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the properties located 700 feet west of Pacific Highway South,on the south side of Kent-Des Moines Road Applicant: Jack Lynch(Shulman) Existing Plan Designation: Commercial Proposed Plan Designation: Low Density Multifamily Existing Zoning: GC, General Commercial Proposed Zoning: MRG, Garden Density Multifamily 16/units per acre Background The subject site consists of five tax parcels and covers an area of approximately 7.5 acres. The site is currently zoned General Commercial and the land use designation is Commercial. The City of Des Moines abuts the site on the north, west, and south. The area east of the subject property is zoned General Commercial, and is developed with the Midway Crossing shopping center. A residential subdivision is located to the south and southwest of the site, and approximately five single family dwellings face the subject property. An apartment complex lies to the west of the site,and three single family dwellings, a mobile home park and commercial uses lie to the north across Kent-Des Moines Road. The site has had a previous environmental review for a possible commercial development, but the applicant states the site is inappropriate for commercial activity. This site was one of the proposed 1997 comprehensive plan amendments. Last year the applicant made a request for a land use designation of Medium Density Multifamily Residential, and a zoning of MRM in order to develop the site with apartments. This request was denied by the City Council. Analysis Significant slopes,an inventoried wetland, and the headwaters of Massey Creek are present on this site. The elevation along Kent-Des Moines road, at the northwest corner of the property, is 335 feet. This elevation dips downward to an elevation of 285 feet at the westerly boundary of the property. Slopes of ten percent are found on the eastern edge of the property. The site is currently vacant, and the applicant states that the developable portion of the site is located in the north/northeast part of the property. The northern portion of the site fronts on Kent-Des Moines Road. Due to the location of sensitive areas on this lot, all development is likely to occur along the frontage of Kent-Des Moines Road. Although this area has less slope than other non-wetland portions of the site, it is likely that substantial grade and fill will be required to accommodate new development. The Public Works Department has commented that development of this site with multifamily residences would likely create less traffic than if it were developed with a commercial development,as allowed under existing zoning standards. The amount of traffic generated by an apartment development would depend on the total number and type of units constructed. The applicant has stated that they are considering some 70 to 80 two story condominium units. This is Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 - Page 5 substantially less than the 132 units considered under their previous application. The City of Des Moines includes this site in its comprehensive plan,and they give the area a 10— 12 unit townhouse designation. Recommendation One of the criteria by which each proposed comprehensive plan amendment must be evaluated is new information,which was not available at the time of development of the comprehensive plan. This site was evaluated for multifamily development one year ago during the comprehensive plan amendment process.The applicant made a request for a land use designation of Medium Density Multifamily Residential, and a zoning of MRM,Medium Density Multifamily, 23 units acre density. Staff recommended a land use designation of Low Density Multifamily Residential and a zoning of MRG,Garden Density Multifamily Residential, 16 units per acre density. Staff s recommendation was based on a more realistic expectation of density on the subject property. The Land Use and Planning Board and City Council still voted to allow no new multifamily on the site.The new information provided by the applicant includes a tentative site plan and a new topographic survey.During the adoption of the comprehensive plan, the city council,through its land use decisions, voted to eliminate the potential for new multifamily areas on west hill. Although the impacts of commercial development may be as great or greater on the environment than those of the proposed multifamily project, the city council made it clear last year that they were not ready for new multifamily zoning on west hill. Therefore, staff is recommending denial of this proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Proposal C- Change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for property located at 13602 SE 282°d Street Applicant: Charles Burridge(Burridge) Existing Plan Designation: Single Family Residential Proposed Plan Designation: 3 units per acre Single Family Residential 6 units per acre Existing Zoning: Single Family Residential Proposed Zoning: 3.71 units per acre Single Family Residential 6.05 units per acre Background The subject site consists of 2 tax parcels and covers an area of approximately 11.21 acres. The site has a land use designation of SF-3, Single Family Residential, 3 units per acre maximum density, and is zoned SR-3, Single Family Residential, 3.71 units per acre. The site is located in the Meridian annexation area,which became a part of the city on January 1, 1996. The initial zoning placed on the property at that time was largely a reflection of existing King County zoning. The applicant is requesting a change to a land use designation of SF-6, Single Family Residential,6 units per acre, and a zoning of SR-6, Single Family Residential, 6.05 units per acre in order to subdivide and construct single family detached residences. The site is currently occupied by a single family residence and accessory buildings. The site contains areas,which have been identified as wetlands in the City's wetland inventory. Properties to the north and east are zoned SR-6 and have a land use designation of SF-6. Properties to the west are zoned SR-3 and have a land use designation of SF-3. Properties to the south are zoned SR-1 and have a land use designation of SF-1. Analvsis This site is adjacent to an area,which was part of the 1997 comprehensive plan amendment process.The Clasen/Dinsdale Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 6 amendment made the same request as the current applicants, and their proposal was approved by the city council. That site was significantly encumbered with wetlands. The subject property also contains inventoried wetland areas, which will limit the developable area of the property. The site is located in an area which is quickly transitioning from large lot homesteads exceeding one acre to typical suburban residential development on lots of 5,000 to 8,000 square feet. There are several plats, which have recently been approved in the immediate area and others which are still in the approval process. Most of the plat activity has occurred in the area designated SF-6 on the land use map and with a zoning of SR-6. Recommendation The applicant and other developers in the area have stated that in order for residential projects to be feasible, a certain minimum yield of lots is necessary based on the cost of the property and the cost of providing the urban infrastructure and services required by the city's construction standards. SR-3 zoning allows a density of 3.71 units per acre and a minimum lots size of 12,000 square feet. Properties with few environmental constraints and of uniform size can usually achieve the maximum density of 3.71 units per acre. However, those properties with irregular shape, landlocked locations,or enviroiunental constraints will be very difficult to develop at a similar density. The adopted King County planning policies established four units per acre as a minimum,which is efficient to provide urban services. Therefore, even under ideal circumstances, and a maximum density of 3.71 units per acre, the SR-3 zone probably provides a minimum acceptable yield of lots for typical suburban residential development. The wetlands located on the subject property will limit the amount of developable area. The fact that these environmentally constrained areas appear to be located in the middle of the subject property will also impact the ty and shape of development possible on the site. The wetlands and a typical buffer of 50 feet is likely to be protected av a permanent sensitive areas tract on the property. In order to yield an acceptable number of lots on this property staff feels that a zoning of SR-6 is more appropriate for this property. This is consistent with the action taken on the adjacent property during the 1997 comprehensive plan amendments. Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request for a land use designation of SF-6 and a zoning of SR-6. Proposal D - Change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for property located at the southeast corner of 116th Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road Applicant: Richard Costanzo (Costanzo) Existing Plan Designation: Single Family 6 Proposed Plan Designation: 6 units per acre Commercial Existing Zoning: SR-6, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 6.05 units per acre NCC, Neighborhood Convenience Commercial Background The subject property consists of two parcels located at 11715 and 11733 Kent Kangley Road, respectively. The two parcels combined are 2.62 acres. The parcels were brought into the City as part of the Ramstead/East Hill annexation area in 1994. In January, 1995, the City Council designated the property as R1-7.2 (now SR-6) on the zoning map, as.part of the Ramstead/East Hill annexation area initial zoning. In April of 1995, when the City Council adopted the Kent Comprehensive Plan, the property was designated as SF-6, single family residential. Both parcels currently contain a single-family residence. The parcel to the west is developed with a small convenience store which was zoned NCC (Neighborhood Convenience Commercial) by the City Council as part of the Ramstead/East Hill initial annexation zoning. The parcel immediately to the west of this parcel, which is located at Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 7 the southeast comer of 116t' Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road, was approved for a plan and zoning change from single-family residential.to neighborhood commercial in early 1998 as part of the 1997 comprehensive plan amendment cycle. However, the approval was conditioned on a requirement to dedicate property for the improvement of the intersection of 116' and Kent Kangley as part of the 277' Corridor project. To date, this condition has not been met, and therefore no ordinance has been adopted approving the amendment, meaning that the parcel is still designated on the plan and zoning maps as single-family residential. Property to the west on the west side of 116th Avenue South is zoned MRG (Multi-family residential, 16 units per acre) and is developed with an apartment project and three single-family residences. Property to the south, east and north of the subject property is designated SF-6 in the comprehensive plan and zoned SR-6. The property to the south is the Lindental subdivision, which was recorded in 1991 and where homes are currently being constructed. The property to the north is developed with low density single-family residential uses, as well as a City of Kent well site and a storm detention area for the Seven Oaks subdivision located to the northwest. The intersection of 116th Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road is the northern terminus of the City's planned route for the 272nd/277th corridor, which then will proceed south along 116th Avenue SE. The corridor project will likely result in expanded traffic volumes at the intersection of 116' and Kent Kangley. The applicant states that the property proposed for amendment is not suited for residential development due to high traffic volume associated at the intersection of 116th Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road. The applicant argues that the proposed amendment is appropriate due to the fact that the two contiguous properties are zoned commercial, and states that if the proposed plan and zoning amendments were approved that all four parcels could be joined together to provide for an integrated development. It should be noted however, that at this writing the plan and zoning amendments for the parcel on the southeast corner of 116'b and Kent Kangley have not been adopted by ordinance. The applicants argues that the proposal meets the criteria for comprehensive plan amendments, and cites plan policies LU-12.3, LU-13.5, LU-13.6, ED-3.1, TR-1.1, and TR-1.5. These policies relate to providing infill opportunities for commercial development and providing consistency between land use and transportation plans. The City's 272nd/277th corridor project is intended to provide convenient access from East Hill to the major north- south routes (Interstate 5 and State Route 167) which are located to the west. The Public Works Department has expressed strong concerns about locating commercial land uses anywhere along this corridor, since commercial land uses generate significantly higher traffic volumes than the existing single-family designation would. When the corridor project was in the planning phase, the City negotiated a road establishment agreement with King County that stated, among other things, that the construction of the corridor would not be used as a justification for redesignation of any abutting/adjoining property to a commercial use. In December, 1993, the City Council passed Resolution No. 1379 (attached) stating that the Council anticipates that it would designate lands adjacent to the corridor as single-family zoning, in accordance with previous City and King County plans. The intersection of 116th Avenue SE and Kent Kangley will be a key intersection on the corridor; the intersection is scheduled to have two left-turn lanes proceeding southbound from Kent Kangley Road to 116th Avenue, and two right-turn lanes proceeding eastbound from 116th Avenue SE to Kent Kangley Road. The net effect will be that access to the site will be extremely limited, and it is anticipated that no left turns would be permitted into the site from either street. From a land use perspective, it is apparent why the applicant seeks a change to the existing designations. The subject parcels are adjacent to a commercial site, and the parcel to the west of the existing commercial site may also become commercial in the near future should the owner of that parcel come to an agreement with the City for dedication of right-of-way. If the subject parcels were redesignated to commercial, it might provide the opportunity for all four parcels to be redeveloped in a manner that would be more integrated. This is particularly important given that the properties adjoin residential uses to the east and the south; any subsequent commercial development would have to be Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 - Page 8 designed in a way to protect and buffer the impacts of the development from adjacent residential uses. Any opportunities to redevelop the subject parcels with the other parcels to the west are partially contingent on the status of the parcel at the southeast comer of 116'Avenue SE and Kent Kangley Road. If the rezone of this parcel is not executed, than this parcel would retrain designated as single-family residential. This would provide less of an opportunity to provide for an integrated commercial development at this location. Also, the uncertain status of the parcel at the intersection makes it difficult for the applicants at this point to propose any way to develop the site in a way which could demonstrate how the property could be developed in a way in which transportation ingress and egress could be managed in a safe way, or also buffer the site from adjacent residential uses. Recommendation As noted, one of the standards of review for reviewing changes to the plan is that a proposed amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities elements of the plan. The Public Works Department has raised concerns as to whether the proposed amendment could maintain concurrency between the land use and transportation element, and has also expressed concern about the impacts on the intersection resulting from a potential use which would generate a high volume of trips in and out of the site. In addition, the criteria for review also state that any amendment not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare. As mentioned, the lack of resolution regarding the status of the parcel at the intersection of 116' and Ke�` Kangley Road makes any discussion of integrating development at the site and designing a project to protect adjoin single-family uses speculative at best. Therefore, at this time staff recommends denial of the applicant's request for a designation of commercial and NCC zoning. Proposal E- A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located at 88t°Avenue South and South 218te Street South Applicant: Dana Mower—DBM Consulting(Mower/Tonelli) Existing Plan Designation: Industrial Proposed Plan Designation: LDMF, Low Density Multifamily Existing Zoning: CM-1 Proposed Zoning: Commercial Manufacturing MRG, Garden Density Multifamily 16 units per acre Background The subject property consists of two tax parcels and is approximately 6.9 acres in area. The site is currently zoned CM-1, Commercial Manufacturing, and has a land use designation of Industrial. The applicant is requesting a land use designation of Low Density Multifamily and a zoning of MRG in order to aggregate a total of 20 acres to develop an apartment complex. The property is currently occupied by a single family residence. Properties to the north,west, and south are zoned CM- and have a land use designation of Industrial. The property to the east is zoned MRG and has a land use designation Low Density Multifamily Residential. Several large scale multifamily projects are located in the vicinity of this proposal to the south. Light industrial and commercial land uses are located to the west of the subject property. The City of Kent Wetland Inventory indicates the possible presence of wetlands and/or a stream on the property. The applicant states that property has been for sale for three years and has not sold due to its size and location. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 - Page 9 Analysis As part of the Growth Management Act, counties and cities are required to monitor the amount of land available for further development. This potential capacity is measured against projected growth in order to establish appropriate growth targets and boundaries. The City of Kent is a key player when it comes to future development in the region. The Kent Valley is a focal point for industrial uses because of its proximity to the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma, the airport, and transportation facilities. In recent years, the amount of available vacant industrial land has diminished. Since it is unlikely that much, if any new industrial land will be created, it is important to protect what is still available. The subject property is located directly across from the Valley Freeway. There is no sound buffer in this area, and noise impacts on residential development are obvious. Primary access to the site is provided by an underimproved right of way. This narrow and winding road is not built to current City of Kent Construction Standards. Although it can be argued that the uses allowed on this site under the existing CM-1 zoning would generate as much traffic as multifamily, the flow and direction are likely different. Recommendation Staff feels that it is of regional interest to preserve available vacant industrial land for industrial uses. The CM-1 zone allows for the type of light manufacturing jobs that the area is losing. The subject property is located adjacent to property with existing MRG,which will have to be properly buffered when the two lots are developed. Noise impacts also limit the use of the subject property for residential use. Staff recommends denial of the applicant's request for Low Density Multifamily Residential and MRG zoning. Proposal F— Change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning for property located at 12809 Kent-Kangley Road Applicant: Dana Mower(Mower/Nguyen) Existing Plan Designation: Low Density Multifamily Proposed Plan Designation: Commercial Existing Zoning: MRG Proposed Zoning: Garden Density Multifamily CC, Community Commercial Background The subject property consists of one tax lot,which is approximately 15,246 square feet. The property is located at 12809 Kent-Kangley Road on the south side of Kent-Kangley and currently has a land use designation of Low Density Multifamily Residential and a zoning designation of MRG, Garden Density Multifamily. The property currently contains a single-family residence. The vacant property to the west is zoned Professional Office and SR-6, and is encumbered by a wetland. The wetland is of unknown size and is classified as a Category 1,requiring a 100-foot buffer. The boundary of the wetland has not been determined at this time; consequently,the applicant of this amendment may be required to complete a wetland analysis. The property to the east is zoned Community Commercial and contains a single family residence. The houses to the east of this residence are mostly office uses such as a chiropractic and realty office. / Analysis Kent-Kangley Road between 128`h Avenue SE and 132"d Avenue SE is under study presently by the Washington State Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 10 Department of Transportation due to the large number of vehicular accidents. Also known as state Highway 516,Kent- Kangley Road had over 100 accidents in this stretch between 1994 and 1996. There were 14 accidents at the intersection of 128`h Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road. Most of the accidents involved turning vehicles. The Public Works Department has expressed strong concerns about locating a commercial use at this comer. Due to the unusual configuration of the site,there would be no other alternative but to enter onto Kent-Kangley Road,which is not a viable option due to it being a high accident location. With regard to the City's comprehensive plan, the plan has several goals and policies with regard to commercial land uses. These include the following: Goal LU-12—Promote orderly and efficient commercial growth within the existing commercial districts in order to maintain and strengthen existing commercial districts, to minimize costs associated with extension offacilities, and to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another. Policy LU-12.3—Develop regulatory incentives to encourage infill development in existing commercial areas. Regulatory incentives may include urban, mixed use zoning and higher-density zones, planned unit developments, transfer of density credits, and streamlined permit processes. The plan also contains goals and policies with regard to the coordination of land use and transportation, including: Goal TR-1—Coordinate land use and transportation planning to meet the needs of the City and the requirements of the Growth Management Act. Alternative flexible and creative transportation options that minimize the, requirements should also be allowed in the planning process. Policy TR-1.5 -Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible. Goal TR4 — Eliminate disruptions which reduce the safety and reasonable functioning of the local transportation system. The land use goals and policies make reference to encouraging commercial infill development in existing commercial areas. This parcel in question is adjacent to a commercial area on the east,but subsequent development of commercial land uses may result in an increase in access issues to Kent-Kangley Road that could not be mitigated. A commercial use will significantly increase traffic, especially if the use is a convenience store/gasoline station,which is a specially permitted use in a CC zoning district. More traffic has the potential for an increased number of accidents in this already dangerous portion of state Highway 516. Recommendation As noted, one of the standards of review for reviewing changes to the plan is that a proposed amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use and transportation elements. The Public Works Department has raised serious concerns as to whether the proposed amendment could maintain concurrency between the land use and transportation element,and has expressed concern about the impacts the additional traffic will have on an already dangerous stretch of state Highway 516. Although the site is adjacent to CC zoning to the east and Office zoning to the west, any subsequent development on the parcel will have access to the site that is severely restricted. Therefore,staff recommends denial of the applicant's request for a designation of commercial and CC zoning Proposal G- A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located at 15386 South 272 Street Applicant: Byron Gusa (Gusa) Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 " Page 11 Existing Plan Designation: MHP, Mobile Home Park Proposed Plan Designation: Commercial Existing Zoning: MHP, Mobile Home Park Proposed Zoning: GC, General Commercial Background The subject property consists of one tax parcel and is approximately 3.82 acres in size. The site is occupied by several buildings and has a land use designation and zoning of MHP,Mobile Home Park. The property to the west is developed with a mobile home park and has a land use designation and zoning of MHP. The property to the east is developed with a mobile home park and has a land use designation and zoning of MHP. The property to the south is zoned Community Commercial and has a land use designation of Commercial. Property to the north is part of the Soos Creek Trail Park. The subject property is located between two existing mobile home parks. This area was annexed to the City of Kent on January 1, 1996 as part of the Meridian Annexation Area. At that time the property was given its initial land use designation and zoning of MHP. During the initial public hearing process,no public testimony was taken regarding this property. Analysis When this area was annexed to the City of Kent it was the intent of staff to only designate those properties with existing mobile home park uses as Mobile Home Park. The proximity of the subject parcel to both existing mobile home parks led to its inclusion with the neighboring properties. The Mobile Home Park zone is a special zone, which can only be created out of existing multifamily zoned land. It has not been the policy of the staff to designate areas of the city as possible sites for future mobile home parks. Since mobile homes make up such a small portion of the total housing stock of the City of Kent,to require such as the only principally permitted use on vacant properties would be very restrictive to property owners. No new mobile home parks have been established in the city in many years and the only new Mobile Home Park land use and zoning designations have been placed on parks, which have,been annexed into the city. The applicant states that the market for new mobile home parks is nonexistent at this time. Recommendation Potential uses for the subject property are limited. The fact that the site does not have a frontage on Kent-Kangley Road (SE 272od Street) limits its potential commercial uses. Its narrow shape and location between two existing mobile home parks further restricts the potential uses of the property. The applicant states that he wants to develop the site with a mini storage facility. These uses do not require a lot of commercial signage or street frontage to be successful. A mini storage facility in this location between two existing mobile home parks would provide a much needed service to many of the existing mobile home tenants. The applicant states in his application that the commercial properties abutting the site are zoned GC, General Commercial. The applicant's request for General Commercial zoning was made in order to"maintain compatibility with surrounding land uses..."However,abutting commercial uses are zoned CC,Community Commercial. There is currently no General Commercial zoning located on the East Hill. Recommending General Commercial use on East Hill would be a new policy direction. Staff feels a more suitable zoning for this property would be CC, Community Commercial. This is consistent with existing zoning and existing policy. Mini storage facilities are a conditional use in the Community Commercial zone. These are uses, which are permitted but may have unique impacts, which may need unique conditioning. Conditional uses are approved through a public hearing process. Staff recommends that the land use designation of the subject property be changed to Commercial and the zoning changed to CC, Community Commercial. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 12 Proposal H- A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located at 25840 135`h Lane SE. Applicant: Les Houle-Kensington Development(Houle) Existing Plan Designation: SF-6, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 6 units per acre SF-8, Single Family 8 units per acre Existing Zoning: SR-4.5, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 4.51 units per acre SR-8, Single Family 8.71 units per acre Background The subject property consists of one tax parcel and is approximately 6.32 acres in size. The property became a part of the city on January 1, 1996 as part of the Meridian annexation area. When the property was annexed to the city, the property owners were unsuccessful in getting a multifamily zoning designation for their property. The site has a land use designation of SF-8 and is zoned SR-4.5.Property to the west has a land use and zoning designation of Mobile Home Park. The properties to the north and east are zoned SR-4.5 and have a land use designation of SF-6. Lake Meridian abuts the property on the south. The site is currently developed with a single family residence and 18 small detache' rental suites. The applicant is proposing a change in land use designation to SF-8 and a change in zoning to SR-8 in or&,— to subdivide and construct a single family detached development. Neighboring land uses to the north and east are predominantly single family residential. There are some duplexes and triplexes in the vicinity. The property to the west is the Pink Thunderbird Mobile Home Park. Analysis This property is owned by George Lewis and was denied for a Low Density Multifamily Residential land use designation and MRD,Duplex Multifamily Residential zoning under a previous comprehensive plan amendment. Staff has reviewed this site for a tentative plat under existing zoning. The applicants were going to be required to do substantial offsite improvements to 135`�Avenue SE from SE 256'tr Street in order to develop their property.This and other improvements come at a cost,which the owners felt were unfeasible under existing zoning limitations. This is a unique property, which has frontage on Lake Meridian. Its previous use as a summer vacation property dates back many years. The existing rental suites provide a unique living opportunity for residents. To the west of the site is an existing mobile home park. To the north of the subject property are two attached unit projects, which were developed with duplexes and triplexes. Springwood Townhomes and Lake Meridian Village total some 104 units. The remaining uses are detached single family residential. All these different residential land uses were developed under previous King County zoning regulations for the R4 and RS9600 zones. Croce this property was annexed into the City of Kent, some of development flexibility,which was available under King County regulations, went away. Recommendation Allowing smaller lot sizes and up to 8.71 units per acre would provide some 40 to 50 new homeowner opportunities on or near Lake Meridian. Most of the lakefront property is already developed and very few new opportunities fo* preliminary plats exist. When the owners of this property petitioned the City Council for multifamily and duplex zonin6., their requests were denied largely because of the council's current policy to not convert existing single family areas to multifamily. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 13 As stated by the applicants in their application, developing the site under current zoning regulations would result in large lots with very expensive homes. The construction costs and costs to provide infrastructure would be spread out to only a few lots. This adds cost to the homes when sold. Allowing a smaller lot development would provide more homeownership opportunities while protecting single family neighborhoods and providing access to recreation areas(the lakeshore), Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request for a land use designation of SF-8 and a zoning of SR- 8. Proposal I- A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located at 108`h Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road. Applicant: Dana Mower—DBM Consulting Engineers Existing Plan Designation: MU-R, Mixed Use Proposed Plan Designation: Limited Multifamily Medium Density Multifamily Existing Zoning: O-MU Proposed Zoning: Professional and Office MRM, Medium Density Multifamily and Mixed Use 23 units per acre Background The subject property consists of three tax parcels, which are approximately 4.8 acres in area. The site is an L-shaped piece of property, with a long, narrow parcel, which stretches from Kent-Kangley Road to SE 264 Street, and two smaller parcels located at the northwest corner of SE 264`t' Street and 108`h Avenue SE. The property is currently developed with two single-family residential dwellings. The property is surrounded by a variety of plan and zoning designations and types of development. The parcel to the east and north of the subject property, located at the southwest corner of 108`h Avenue SE and Kent Kangley Road, is zoned Office and is the site of a bank. The parcels located to the east and southeast of the subject property are zoned Office-Mixed Use, and are currently developed as single-family residential uses. The properties to the west of the subject property are zoned MRM and are developed with multi-family residential uses and a vacant parcel. The parcels to the south are zoned SR-8 and MRG, and are developed with a single-family residential use and a multifamily residential use, respectively. The properties to the north on the north side of Kent Kangley Road are developed as commercial. The comprehensive plan designates the parcels to the north and east as Mixed Use—Limited Multi- Family, the parcels to the west as Medium Density Multifamily, and the parcels to the south as SF-8 and Low Density Multifamily. Analysis As mentioned, the area adjacent to the subject property is surrounded by both commercial and residential uses. The applicant states that the property is not appropriate for commercial development, given its unusual configuration and its relatively small amount of frontage along Kent Kangley Road (approximately 200 feet). The applicant also maintains that the general area in question already contains an effective mix of commercial and residential uses, and - that therefore it is not necessary to require a mixture of uses on the site itself. The applicant argues that the site is too small to contain an effective mix of commercial and residential uses, and that the type of development, which the City requires, is residential. The applicant cites several goals and policies in the comprehensive plan to support the Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 14 proposed amendment, including LU-8.3, CD-1.1, H-1.1, and Goal H-2. These goals and policies all speak to supporting the location of housing in areas with adequate urban infrastructure and services, placing housing in close proximity to other uses, and the provision of adequate and diverse housing opportunities for Kent citizens. When the comprehensive plan was adopted in 1995, the plan contained goals and policies supporting mixed use development, and also designated areas both on the valley floor and east hill for mixed use development to occur.The plan states that in the mixed use areas in the valley, stand-alone multifamily residential uses be permitted,while on East Hill,residential uses be allowed only in conjunction with a mixed use development. Zoning amendments adopted by the City Council in 1997 therefore distinguished between the mixed use areas in the valley, which are zoned predominantly GC, with the mixed use areas on east hill, which are predominantly zoned CC or O. In the GC zone, multi-family residential uses are allowed as a principally permitted use in the mixed use overlay; in the CC and O zones, multi-family residential is only allowed in conjunction with a mixed use development. The adopted code amendments specified that in the CC and O zones that at least 25 percent of the gross floor area of a mixed use development with residential uses must be commercial. The applicants are claiming that the subject property is not appropriate for mixed use/commercial development, and would be more appropriately used as residential only. However, as earlier discussed, there is already a mixture of commercial and residential uses in proximity of the site. The site does have frontage along Kent Kangley road, and there are commercial uses adjacent to the site to the north and east. Therefore, it appears that the site would be a good candidate for mixed use development, which is why it was included in the mixed use overlay. Furthermore, tt comprehensive plan and zoning code are very clear about residential development in the mixed use areas on east hitr being combined with commercial uses. To change the site to stand-alone multifamily zoning would appear to be inconsistent with the intent of the City Council. Staff agrees with the applicant that this site is an appropriate place for residential development, but it should be noted that under the current comprehensive plan and zoning designation 75 percent of the gross floor area of any development could be used for housing. Therefore,under the current designation, the site meets the criteria for providing opportunities for housing in close proximity to other services, as provided for in the policies in the comprehensive plan. Recommendation This proposed amendment does not appear to be consistent with the existing policy decisions made by the City Council with regard to the mixed-use overlay on East Hill. The 1995 comprehensive plan indicated that new residential development in commercial areas should be combined with commercial development, and this was confirmed by the Council in adopting the mixed use overlay zoning amendments in 1997. Therefore, staff recommends that the proposed amendment be denied. Proposal J— A request to add the following policy in one of the Comprehensive Plan sections headed by Goal LU-9 and Goal LU-10 of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: Allow and encourage single family townhouse-style attached condominiums in the single family residential zones that permit residential densities of six units per acre or higher. Applicant: William E. Ruth(Ruth) Existing Plan Designation: Request policy to be added to Goal LU-9 and/or Goal LU-10 sections of the Comprehensive Plan. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 15 Existing Zoning: The policy is proposed to address single family zones, specifically the Existing SR-6 and SR-8 Single Family Residential zoning districts. Background The applicant states that many proposed detached single family plats are unable to obtain an economic density because of the inherent restrictions of the zone. More efficient use of residential land would result in a more affordable and desirable consumer product. He believes that the ability to attach single family condominiums also supports an affordable housing element in the Kent area—an element that is now quickly disappearing with the rapidly escalating pricing of single family attached lots. The purpose of this request,as stated by the applicant, is to provide unique and innovative land use and housing designs to more properly use a variety of lots. The applicant states that attachment will provide many opportunities to cluster units in order to take advantage of topographic features, views, and provide a more economical use of each site. The request is for attachment of as many as five units in each condominium townhouse structure. This pattern would occur in combination with traditional individually-sited homes. An additional goal of this proposed policy change, according to the applicant,is to create considerably more open space within a proposed subdivision than would be found in the traditional detached configuration. In addition, smaller properties that have been bypassed because of size, shape and topographical restrictions could be used as desirable in-fill development. Analysis The major issue in review of this application is the ability to address the individual property owner/developer concerns about developing difficult properties, and also assure the City and the single family community-at-large that the result of permitting diverse housing types in single family zones will not disrupt the single-family character of the neighborhoods. Existing Land Use and Housing Element goals and policies clearly support diverse housing types, options, innovation, and flexibility, but the City also seeks to protect neighborhood character. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element contains the following goals referenced in this application: Goal LU-9 - Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types, options, and densities throughout the City and the Potential Annexation Area Goal LU-10—Revise development regulations to encourage more single-family development and more flexibility and innovation in terms of building and site design. In the last five years, the City has received numerous requests for flexibility of housing type in single family residential projects. In most cases, the sites in question contained environmental constraints or greenbelts. Properties that contain slopes, wetlands, or creek setback areas often cannot be developed economically, and it is true that often the site is degraded by traditional lot and street patterns. The Policies that follow the above Comprehensive Plan goals address various ways to create diverse housing opportunities, in several different zones in the City, One policy, LU-10.2 addresses the intent of this application in single -.- family zones by recommending clustering of housing units in subdivisions to maximize potential build-out of single- family homes and preserve open space and environmentally sensitive areas. It appears that the existing goals and policies are broad enough to not exclude attaching of units if the City decides to approve a process to do so. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 16 In addition to appropriate policy and regulations, successful combining of housing types depends on good design. There are many good examples of the proposed housing type in this area, but there are also poorly designed examples. Although the Comprehensive Plan recommends good design in all housing(Goal CD-16—Encourage creativity and high quality in the design of residential buildings.),neither the Comprehensive Plan nor the zoning code contain provisions for design review in single family zones. This issue is related to the larger issue of diverse site plans and housing types in single family zones. There may be appropriate applications for attaching part of the units in single family developments in Kent under certain criteria and conditions, but considerable study and research is needed to identify the appropriate types of attached housing and determine what the criteria and conditions should be. Recommendation Staff recommends that a work program be set up for 1999 to study the proposal to allow attached units in single family zones.The result of the study should be a recommendation to include or not include attached units as part of the implementation measures for Comprehensive Plan Goals LU-9 and LU-10. If the recommendation is to include attached units, it should include recommended processes, criteria and conditions. Proposal K- Update of Capital Facilities Element Applicant: City of Kent Finance Department The Capital Facilities Element in the comprehensive plan which was adopted in 1995 contains a great deal of information relating to inventories of existing capital facilities,estimated costs of anticipated future facilities,and projected revenues to fund these facilities. These components of the Capital Facilities Element are all required under the Growth Management Act (GMA). Due to the fact that the City Council has approved a large-scale revision to the Capital Facilities Element in 1999, at this time there are only tables 8.1 and 8.2 will require an update. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Land Use Board recommend approval to the City Council of the updates to the Capital Facilities Element as prepared by the Finance Department, and as shown in Attachment B. Proposal— The request is to modify the Land Use map,figure 4.7 in the Kent Comprehensive Plan to revise the land use designation of the subject property to Mixed Use. The purpose of the proposal is to implement an action contained in the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan(DSAP) Applicant: City of Kent Planning Department Existing Plan Designation: SF-8, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 8 units per acre Mixed Use Existing Zoning: SR-8, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 8.71 units per acre Future Zoning Amendment Background: This Comprehensive Plan amendment request addresses the following action in the DSAP: "Revise the Comprehensive Plan Map and adopt a new zoning designation for the area between Fourth and Fiffl Avenues North,north of James Street. Revise the existing Comprehensive Map designation,SF8(single Family-- Residential, 8 dwelling units maximum per acre)to commercial. The zoning code designation shall allow limited office development, and include residential development combined with office development as a conditional use.,, Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 17 The action above specifies a Commercial designation, followed by approval of limited Office zoning with a conditional use permit to allow housing. After the DSAP was drafted, the Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan Map designation was approved. Staff recommends that the designation be changed to Mixed Use and followed by limited Office zoning with a Mixed Use overlay,which would provide development standards and guidelines for mixing office and residential uses that are not provided by the Commercial designation. A conditional-use permit would not be required for housing development proposals that meet the development standards of the Mixed Use overlay. Analysis This proposed Comprehensive Plan map revision is a Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan implementation action. The purpose of the action is to create a zone that is more compatible with the Commons Park, located directly west of the subject property, and to provide opportunities to develop housing close to work and recreation. Residents of the single family neighborhood north of James Street between 4`h and 5`" Avenues testified at public meetings and hearings that visitors to the Park in the evenings and weekends park on neighborhood streets and produce traffic levels that are not compatible with a single family neighborhood. By allowing mixed-use development that would include office and urban-style housing such as town houses, condominiums, and housing over office uses, a larger number of office workers and residents will have pedestrian access to the park. Parking facilities in the area could be increased through joint parking agreements for housing and office uses. The proposed revision is also consistent with Comprehensive goals and policies that direct housing and employment Growth into the downtown area, designated a regional Urban Center. The revision would allow more housing to be developed close to jobs, recreation, public transportation, and government and medical services than is possible with the present designation. If the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map revision is approved, a new zoning district will be proposed, subject to Land Use and Planning Board recommendation and City Council approval, to permit limited office zone uses together with a mixed use overlay to permit housing to develop in a compatible land use pattern with new offices. The proposal is generally consistent with the criteria used to evaluate any proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan . It will not result in development that will adversely effect the Public Health, safety, and general welfare. The amendment proposal is based new information generated by the DSAP process and not available at the time that the Comprehensive Plan was adopted.The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and Capital Facilities elements of the Plan. The proposal is supported by the following Comprehensive Plan goals and Policies: Goal LU-3—Designate the downtown Planning area as a City Center Focus both the City and regional household and employment growth on the downtown area. Policy LU-3.3—Encourage medium and high density residential development in the downtown area....... Goal H-2—Provide sufficient, diverse, and affordable housing for the existing and projected population of Kent. RECONEVIENDATION Staff recommends approval of the above proposal to modify the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to revise the land use designation of the subject property from SF 8 to Mixed Use. In addition,the staff is directed to develop a new zoning district in order to implement the Mixed Use land use plan designation. Subject: #CPA-98-2 (A-L) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 23, 1998 Page 18 CONCLUSION In summary,the staff recommendations for the twelve proposed plan amendments are as follows: Proposal A- Recommend that applicant's request for Commercial and General Commercial zoning be denied. Proposal B - Recommend that the applicant's request for Low Density Multifamily Residential and MRG zoning be denied. Proposal C - Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Single Family Residential 6 in the comprehensive plan and SR-6 on the zoning map Proposal D- Recommend that the applicant's request for Commercial and NCC zoning be denied. Proposal E- Recommend that the applicant's request for Low Density Multifamily and MRG zoning be denied. Proposal F- Recommend that the applicant's request for Commercial and CC zoning be denied. Proposal G- Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Commercial in the comprehensive plan and CC, Community Commercial on the zoning map. Proposal H- Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Single Family 8 in the comprehensive plan and SR-8 on the zoning map. Proposal I- Recommend that the applicants' request for Medium Density Multifamily Residential and MRM zoning be denied. Proposal J- Recommend that a work program be set up for 1999 to study the proposal to allow attached units in single family zones under certain conditions. Proposal K- Recommend the update of the Capital Facilities Element per the suggestions of the City of Kent Finance Department is approved. Proposal L - Recommend that the properties be redesignated Mixed Use in the comprehensive plan and direct staff to develop a new zoning district to implement this amendment. If you have any questions prior to the November 23rd public hearing,please contact me at(253) 859-4152. mj/p/public/cpa98-2.mm3 Attachments cc: James P.Harris,Planning Director Fred Satterstrom,Planning Manager Kevin ONeill,Senior Planner Sarah Bradley,Planner Linda Phillips,Planner Mayene Miller,Finance Director Barbara Engstrom,CFP Analyst CITY OF �� Jim White, Mayor Planning Department (253)859-3390/FAX(253)850-2544 James P.Harris,Planning Director LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Public Hearing November 23, 1998 The meeting of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order by Chair Brad Bell at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 23, 1998 in Council Chambers of Kent City Hall. LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Brad Bell, Chair Sharon Woodford, Vice Chair Steve Dowell Ron Harmon Jon Johnson David Malik Terry Zimmerman PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James P. Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Kevin O'Neill, Senior Planner Matthews Jackson, Planner/GIS Coordinator Linda Phillips, Planner Pamela Mottram, Administrative Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board member Steve Dowell MOVED and Ron Harmon SECONDED a motion to approve the October 26, 1998 minutes. MOTION carried. ADDED ITEMS TO THE AGENDA None COMMUNICATIONS None NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS None #ZCA-984 RETAIL USE IN(DC) DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Planner Linda Phillips submitted a letter for the record received from Alice Nelson on November 19 as Exhibit #1. Ms. Phillips submitted a letter for the record from Linda Johnson Executive Director of the Kent Downtown Partnership as Exhibit#2, requesting withdrawal of the regulatory review ZCA-98-4, submitted September 4, 1998. The KDP made an additional request to resubmit - this proposal at a future date. "0 4th AVENUE SOUTH / KENT.WASHINGTON 98032..5895/TELEPHONE 1253)859-33(N) Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 2 #ZCA-98-6 DART SUPPLY AND RECREATION CENTER IN M-2 ZONING DISTRICT Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom explained that Mike Ketola, an owner of a proposed dart supply and recreation center, filed this code amendment request on November 1. This request stemmed from an appeal filed in September 1998 by Mr. Ketola. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the appeal pertained to a zoning interpretation in the M-2 zoning district regarding a proposed dart throwing facility. Mr. Satterstrom said that the Planning Department provided a zoning interpretation explaining that this type of facility was not a permitted use in the M-2 zone. Mr. Ketola appealed the zoning determination. Mr. Satterstrom said that staff stated that although this use is not permitted at present in the M-2 zoning district characteristics of the proposed use could justify a code amendment. Mr. Satterstrom stated that after staffs discussion with Mr. Ketola the appeal was dropped. Mr. Ketola then filed an application for a code amendment. Mr. Satterstrom explained the purpose of the M-2 zoning district is to provide a suitable area for a broad range of industrial and warehouse type uses. These uses are governed through a controlled environment in terms of retail and other service uses. Three recreational uses are enumerated in this type of zoning district as acceptable; gymnastic schools, health and fitness clubs, and indoor paintball. Mr. Satterstrom stated that these uses require high ceilings, which are common in industrial buildings. Mr. Satterstrom said that the proposed dart supply center abuts a commercial area although the proposed amendment would affect all M-2 zoning. Mr. Satterstrom stated that parking requirements are higher for recreational uses than those for typical warehouse and industrial uses. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the proposed site for this facility has adequate parking. Staff recommends approval of the code amendment to allow dart-playing facilities as a principally permitted use in the M-2 zoning district. Board member Ron Harmon MOVED and Board member Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to open the Public Hearing. Motion carried. John Ketola, 25219 74`b Avenue South, Kent, WA stated that as the applicant for this proposal, his intent is to provide a safe dart playing facility for youth and families. He stated that he owns a manufacturing plant next door with a warehouse and retail outlet for their manufactured darts. Mr. Ketola explained that he was unaware that a dart playing facility would not be allowed in the M-2 zoning district. Mr. Ketola responded to Mr. Harmon's question on hours of operation by saying that he would close his facility at 9:00 p.m. on weekdays if curfew is set for 10:00 p.m. and if the weekend curfew is set at 12:00 a.m.,he would close his facility at 11:00 p.m. Sharon Woodford questioned what type of darts was used with the dartboards. Mr.Ketola stated that the dartboards were the upright electronic soft tip dartboards. Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Ron Harmon SECONDED a motion to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 3 Steve Dowell MOVED and Ron Harmon SECONDED a motion to endorse the proposed regulatory review request and recommend to the City Council that the M-2 zoning district be amended to allow dart playing as a principally permitted use. Motion carried. 1998 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS Planner Matthews Jackson explained the process used in the evaluation and recommendation of comprehensive plan amendments. He outlined the specific criteria staff is required to follow in reviewing and analyzing each proposed amendment. Two of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments are proposed text changes only to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Jackson explained that amendments are not allowed to result in development that would adversely effect public health, safety and general welfare. The amendments are considered based on consistency with goals and policies of the comprehensive plan and concurrency between the land use, transportation and capital facilities elements. CPA-98-2(C)/CPZ-98-3 BURRIDGE AMENDMENT Mr. Jackson said this proposal is submitted by Charles Burridge to request a change in the land use designation from SF-3 Single Family/3 units per acre to SF-6 Single Family/6 units per acre and an amendment to the zoning from SR-3/3.71 units per acre to SR-6/6.05 units per acre single family residential. The property is located at 13602 Southeast 282nd Street and is approximately 11.21 acres in size. Mr. Jackson said this site is located adjacent to last years Clasen/Dinsdale amendment site proposal, which included the same change requests as, is being requested on the Burridge amendment. Mr. Jackson stated that the Board and Council approved the Clasen/Dinsdale amendment, allowing for a precedence of this request. Mr. Jackson said the property is encumbered slightly by wetlands that will limit development through the central portion of the site. He indicated that a 50-foot buffer is typically required surrounding wetlands as a protection from development. Mr. Jackson explained that staff has considered that the City of Kent is within the urban growth area in considering this recommendation. He stated that City Council supports single family development and that development is executed with cost effectiveness in providing urban services. Staff feels this recommendation is consistent with action taken last year and that that this amendment would provide for more single family ownership opportunities. Staff recommends approval of this application. Ron Harmon MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED a motion to open the public hearing. Motion carried. Mr. Curt Newell, 28110 134th Place SE, Kent, WA said that he lives on a low portion of land adjacent to the proposed property. He expressed concern over the drainage problems within this area. Mr. Newell explained that a drainage ditch running through the proposed property has been - cleared out and reinforced with rocks and drainage pipes. Mr. Newell said that a water retention pond (approximately 40x40 feet and four feet deep) at the back of his property continually exceeds its banks with water backing up within 100 feet of his Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 4 home. He reiterated concern that if drainage is not adequate, water will back up further on his property. Mr. Newell said that he believes a SF-6 designation to be excessive for the area under consideration. He said that the land is extremely soggy. He expressed concern that development could effect the water quality of the community well located on one of the adjacent properties. Mr. Newell expressed concern over increased traffic generation in the area in addition to his concerns over the use of appropriate buffering from the corridor. Mr. Newell said that he desires to have the property remain as currently zoned. Jon A. Gentry, 28148 134th Place Southeast, Kent, WA said that his 1.5-acre property borders 282nd and 134th Place. He said his home was one of the original houses built in the tract 20 years ago. Mr. Gentry said the decision to build his home was based on the quietness of locating on a dead end road with no traffic as well as being located close to Kent and Auburn. Mr. Gentry expressed concern that more than 3 homes per acre would generate additional traffic on the road as well as effect the quality of life and disturb the water quality of the community well which he helps to maintain. Alan Stuckey, 13456 SE 282nd Street, Kent, WA said that his property lies to the southwest side of the proposed property. He stated that his primary concern with the rezoning of this property is the issue of ground water drainage from adjacent and other nearby properties. Mr. Stuckey submitted a letter for the record as Exhibit#3. Mr. Stuckey spoke at length on the need for appropriate drainage systems to handle both rainwater runoff as well as water from underground streams located in the area. He stated that his property has a manmade pond that captures drainage from the pasture area as well as water runoff from the uphill properties immediately to the west. Mr. Stuckey explained that the water is than funneled to the edge of the property proposed for rezoning where it works its way along southeast 282nd to the wetlands directly east of the application boundary site. Mr. Stuckey stated that the proposed Burridge amendment property is chiefly located on the downhill area of the entire water drainage system. He expressed concern that development of this property could jeopardize the quality of the clean drinking water provided by the well system that has been in service for 20 years. Mr. Stuckey stated that placing a large development in this area would be inconsistent with the character and use of adjacent and nearby properties. Charles Burridge, 27001 114th Avenue SE, Kent, WA addressed citizen concerns about the quality of the well water being compromised. Mr. Burridge stated that to maintain water quality in the area, a 12-inch line was being placed from 132nd Street to 144th Street as part of the Southridge project for which he is the developer. He said that water runoff from the property was being maintained with retention ponds as well as improving 132nd Street to the large wetland areas. Mr. Burridge said water runoff for the new development would run along 282nd to the wetland water retention area. Communication ensued between Mr. Dowell and Mr. Burridge regarding similar developments located close to the proposed development site. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 5 Ms. Zimmerman questioned Mr. Burridge on how many homes could realistically be built on the proposed site. Mr. Burridge estimated 40 to 45 homes could be built on the site with consideration taken for the required 100 foot buffering requirements for the wetland areas. Chair Bell asked Mr. Burridge if he believed the drainage for his neighbors would improve as a result of the retention ponds. Mr. Burridge responded affirmatively. Ron Harmon asked Matt Jackson where public water was located in proximity to the subject property. Mr. Jackson deferred to City Engineer, Gary Gill who stated that Water District 101 serves the area. City Engineer, Gary Gill stated that the proposed area is part of a very sensitive and highly regarded wetland system that is a salmon-bearing tributary to Soos Creek. The setbacks required from the parameters of the wetland system and the stream are 100 feet. Mr. Gill spoke at length in regards to how development density relates to trip generation on the arterial roadway system. He stated that based on the development constraints on this site,the impact to the road system will not be increased substantially. Mr. Gill assuaged Mr. Dowell's concerns in regards to the density of development that could be developed on this site. Mr. Gill stated that the wetland areas on this site would severely restrict development of six units per acre and that the underlying County's original zoning allows for 3.71 units per acre. #CPA-98-2(D)/#CPZ-984 COSTANZO AMENDMENT Senior Planner Kevin O'Neill stated that this is a proposal to change the comprehensive plan and the zoning map designation for two properties from Single Family/6 units per acre to Neighborhood Commercial. The property is located east of the intersection of 116`h Avenue Southeast and Kent Kangley Road at 11715 and 11733 Kent Kangley Road. Mr. O'Neill said that last year a similar request was considered for the lot located at the southeast comer of 116th Avenue Southeast and Kent Kangley Road He stated that the lot immediately to the west of these two lots is designated commercial and the lot on the southeast corner of Kent Kangley was approved for commercial with a condition that right-of-way be dedicated at the intersection of 116th and Kent Kangley. Mr. O'Neill explained that that intersection is the northern terminus of the 277th Corridor, which will become a major intersection with extensive improvements associated with it. Mr. O'Neill said that two issues were considered in analyzing this proposal: potential impacts to the transportation system, specifically at the intersection of Kent Kangley and 110h, and impacts to adjoining single family residences. Mr. O'Neill defined the property designations of the properties surrounding the subject property. Mr. O'Neill said that this proposed rezone would move existing commercial zoning two parcels further east, bringing it closer to existing single family residences. Mr. O'Neill stated that since the properties are fairly large a method could be potentially developed to buffer potential commercial development from the residential properties. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 6 Mr. O'Neill stated that the applicant discussed potentially consolidating all four properties to allow for one consolidated development, assuming that the property on the corner is effectuated as a commercial parcel. Mr. O'Neill said that property consolidation could minimize impacts to the property as it would allow for better ingress and egress to the site and allow for better buffering as there would be more flexibility in siting the development on the site so as not to impact property owners. Mr. O'Neill said the possibility exists that the property could be developed as four distinctive stand alone commercial developments. Mr. O'Neill stated that the status of the corner parcel is uncertain and by moving the commercial area further east,this could pose a negative impact on the adjoining single family residents. Mr. O'Neill stated that the inability to determine how the ingress and egress from the property would be accomplished could impact the intersection. Staff-recommends denial of this proposal. Mr. Gill referred to the ITE (Institute for Traffic Engineers)Trip Generation Manual while speaking at length on potential peak hour trips that could develop as a result of development of the site. Mr. Gill stated that Public Works objective in building the 277' and 196d' corridors is to move commuters through the city and into the outlying areas in a safe and efficient manner. Mr. Gill stated that when you introduce commercial sites at major intersections, trips in and out of those sites increase substantially creating the serious potential for vehicular accidents and creating gridlock at those intersections, reducing the level of service that those arterials can provide. Chair Bell said that if the market demands commercial development, than that type of development should take place. Karen Rehkop, 24633 156"Avenue Southeast,Kent,WA stated that she is the owner of the two middle properties situated in the center of the four properties under proposal. She stated that the conditions for the comer property have been resolved and that the convenience store on that property had been rezoned to neighborhood commercial four years ago. Ms. Rehkop stated that her property located at 11715 Kent Kangley Road is under consideration as part of this proposal. Ms. Rehkop said that she has owned this property for 20 years and purchased the adjoining property with anticipation of growth in that direction. She stated that she anticipates this property could accommodate a development that would care for the needs of the surrounding property owners as well as compliment the community with an aesthetically pleasing landscape plan. Ms. Rehkop stated that at the present time,the four properties can be entered at road grade level. She stated that the residential development abutting up to the proposed property sets below the level of the properties and is separated from the properties by a high fence. Ms. Rehkop said that a plan is in place for the four properties to share ingress and egress to the properties, lessening the impact on Kent Kangley Road. Mr. Harmon noted that the south end of the property is below street grade facing the single-family residences. He asked Ms. Rehkop if she planned to cut and fill that area. Ms. Rehkop stated that she felt it would be necessary to cut and fill that area to create a uniform look. In response to Mr. Malik's question,Ms. Rehkop said that four driveways entered onto Kent Kangley from her property with a two-way left turn lane provided on Kent Kangley. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 7 Donna Returner, 11733 Southeast Kent Kangley, Kent, WA said her family owns the property located next to Karen Rehkop's and she would like to see the property converted to commercial as it does not lend itself to single family development. She stated that traffic from the road generates a high volume of noise. Ms. Remmer said that Kent Kangley Road is dark and it would be beneficial to have more lighting installed. Martin Durkan,Jr.,330 Southwest 43' Street,Renton,WA stated that he represented property owner Mr. John Titus last year when he was granted a conditional rezone on his comer property. The conditional rezone was based on Mr. Titus dedicating a portion of property for a street right-of-way for the new corridor running along the property. Mr. Durkan stated that after negotiations were completed with the city regarding right-of-way easements, it was determined that a larger portion of property would have to be dedicated than originally anticipated decreasing the size of the developable property. Mr. Durkan stated that he consulted with the adjoining property owners to formulate a site plan that would benefit all property owners by integrating development of the separate properties. This would create property that would be more suitable for development. Mr. Durkan said that he has executed an agreement with the adjoining property owners to consolidate usage of the current driveways, decreasing the number of access points from 6 or 7 down to 2 driveways. This should have a positive impact on the transportation infrastructure that currently exists. Terry Zimmerman asked Mr. Durkin how the residential properties would be buffered from the development. Mr. Durkin explained that the buildings are designed with tiles which absorb sound, acting as acoustical buffers from the noise. He said that sidewalks, landscaping, as well as the building design would act as a visual screen buffer. Mr. Richard Constanzo, 24310 Crystal Lake Place, Woodinville, WA said that he was the applicant for this project. He stated that the properties should be looked at as an island of commercial property versus a fragmented development. He spoke at length about proposed methodology to divert traffic as well as deal with traffic generation as a result of new development. Mr. Constanzo stated that there is a cross access and parking agreement with the contiguous corner property owners. He concurred that buffering is of paramount importance with 30,000 cars traveling on Kent Kangley Road daily. Mr. Constanzo stated that any commercial buildings erected would mitigate noise for the properties located to the south. Mr. Constanzo stated that development of the property would take place on the 2.62-acre parcel fronting Kent Kangley Road as well as at the intersection of 116th. He stated that development might be considered close to 264th. CPA-98-2(H)/CPZ-98-8 HOULE AMENDMENT Planner Matt Jackson explained that this application is submitted by Mr. Les Houle. He stated that the parcel of land consists of 6.32 acres. The property is located at 25840 135 Lane Southeast at the head of Lake Meridian next to the Pink Thunderbird Mobile Home Park. Mr. Jackson stated that a prior proposal request was submitted for the Lewis property to change the land use designation from multifamily to a duplex designation. He said that the current request is Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 8 for a land use designation change from SF-6 single family/6 units per acre to SF-8 single family/8 units per acre and a change in zoning from SR-4.5 to SR-8. Mr. Jackson stated that this change would increase the single-family residential density. Mr. Jackson stated that two houses as well as 16-18 rental suites are on this property with public access to a community beach. He stated that under the current zoning of SR 4.5, a tentative plat meeting was held with the applicant as a means to determine how the property could be developed as well as look at the expense involved in developing the property. Mr. Jackson stated that as a result of the meeting, the applicant was required to improve 135' Avenue South, from 256'to their property. Mr. Jackson stated that the cost of development would be unfeasible considering the property density. He said the applicant is requesting higher density to offset the cost of development. Mr. Jackson stated that staff reviewed the property and determined that improvements were necessary for the street system as well as on site retention for water drainage. Mr. Jackson said that Lake Meridian is a shoreline of statewide significance and a permit is required for development ,xithin 200 feet of the shoreline. He said that the site offers unique opportunities for additional home ownership near the lake. Mr. Jackson said that Kent's Comprehensive Plan has several goals and policies supporting the establishment of new single family residential neighborhoods and public access to amenities such as the lake. Mr. Jackson stated that within a SR-8 zoning designation; the land can be developed with lot sizes of 7600 square feet or 4.5 units per acre as well as developed with lot sizes of 4000 square feet or 8 units per acre. Mr. Jackson stated that staff believes that it is in the best interest of the city to allow for smaller lot development to encourage the affordability of home ownership near the lake. Mr. Jackson stated that it is likely that the developer would provide for community beach access. Staff recommends approval of this application. Chair Bell submitted a letter from Mr. Dick Lamb for the record as Exhibit#4, voicing opposition of development to the property at 25840 135`"Lane SE. In response to Sharon Woodford, Mr. Jackson stated that the only access road to the property and neighboring properties is 135th Lane SE with no plans in place for an additional roadway.. Mr. Jackson stated that prior to the Meridian annexation, this property was under the jurisdiction of the county. Under county regulations,Planned Unit Developments(PUD's)were allowed with attached or clustered housing while maintaining open areas within the underlying density. Mr. Jackson said that this area is not developed exclusively for single family detached housing, as there are attached duplexes and triplexes located near this project In response to Mr.Dowell,Mr. Jackson stated that no building codes were enforced regarding single family attached units other than a planned unit development must be developed as condominiums on a minimum of 100 acres. Mr. Malik voiced his. concern that roadway improvements should be completed prior to any development of property. Mr. Jackson stated that developers are required to put up a bond exceeding Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 9 the proposed cost for necessary improvements such as roadways and complete construction prior to any building permits being issued. Mr.Jon Nelson,320 2"d Avenue South, Kirkland,WA stated that he is employed with Peterson Consulting and along with Cam West represents Les Houle. He stated that a new residential development with a single-family density of 8 units per acre would provide a density transition between the mobile home park on the west and the larger lot residential neighborhoods to the east. Mr.Nelson stated that this development would provide affordable single family housing and provide a visual buffer for the adjoining properties. Mr. Charlie Denny, 25702 135' Place Southeast, Kent,WA said that he has resided in the Lake Meridian area for 26 years. Mr. Denny voiced his opposition to a residential development that would increase the housing density by 40 or 50 additional homes. He stated that 135th Place is the only street to and from the proposed site. The additional homes would impact a street that already accommodates 100 trailers, 21 homes and 18 cabins. Mr. Eric Clarke, 924 Bellevue Way NE, Suite 101, Bellevue, WA is employed with Cam West Development. Mr. Clarke submitted a packet of aerial photographs illustrating the two successful in-fill communities of Lakeview Park in Kirkland and Kelsey Creek in Bellevue. These photographs were submitted for the record as Exhibit #5. Mr. Clarke stated that his company is working in conjunction with Mr. Les Houle and Mr. Jon Nelson of Peterson Consulting in designing a traditional neighborhood for the Lewis property. Mr. Clark stated that developing detached homes at 8 units per acre(approximately 40-45 units)will provide a superior in-fill community, quality and affordability as well as a neighborhood with a sense of community. Mr. Clarke stated that he would be glad to coordinate a tour of the Kelsey Creek and Lakeview Park projects if planning staff and the Board was interested. City Engineer Gary Gill spoke at length about density impacts to the area. Mr. Gill stated that he felt a 36-foot wide neighborhood collector street would be adequate. He said that the city would require the developer to complete off site improvements to 256`' Street. Mr. Gill said that the developer would have to provide a minimum 24 foot wide, two-lane roadway with widened and paved shoulders, and full curb gutters. Mr. Harmon asked Mr. Gill if egress and ingress for the existing neighbors would improve as a result of the new development. Mr. Gill responded in the negative as trip generation would increase. He explained that safety within the area would improve as a result of widening the lanes and providing adequate shoulders with walkways. Mr. Harmon asked Mr. Gill if the Fire Department has been involved with this proposal. Mr. Gill stated that staff works closely with the Fire Department in establishing minimum lane widths of 28 feet on local access streets allowing room for an emergency vehicle to navigate. Conversation ensued between Mr. Harmon and Mr. Jackson regarding allowable density for the proposed development. Mr. Jackson stated that the developers would have to provide for a right-of- way as it is currently nonexistent. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 10 Mr. Malik asked Mr. Jackson how much of the property would be set aside for beachfront usage. Mr. Jackson stated that the City has provisions in place for plats of 5 lots or more where the developer would dedicate either 5%of the total plat area or pays a fee to provide parks in the area. CPA-98-2(A)/CPZ-98-1 BRUTSCHE AMENDMENT Mr. Jackson stated that this application is submitted by Leo and Norma Brutsche. Mr. Jackson said the property is located at the southwest corner of 132d Avenue Southeast and Southeast 256 h Street and is approximately .98 acres in size. Mr. Jackson stated that the applicant is requesting a change to the land use designation from SF-6/Single Family 6 units per acre to Commercial and the zoning designation from SR-6/Single Family Residential/ 6 units per acre to General Commercial. The applicant would like to provide a corner grocery store. Mr. Jackson stated that the neighboring land use designations are residential and this development would create a new commercial node on 132nd and 256'. Mr. Jackson stated that the main issue is if merit exists in creating a commercial development at this site. He stated that existing commercial nodes at 240' and 132"d are developed with offices and an QFC shopping center. Mr. Jackson stated that the Lake Meridian Plaza is located south of the proposed site at Kent Kangley and 132nd with a Fred Meyers and several restaurants. Both shopping centers are located less than one mile from the proposed site and still have room for expansion. Mr. Jackson stated that the Public Works department is concerned with the high volume of traffic in the area of 256th and that this area is slated for improvement within the next two years under the single family residential zoning currently in effect. Mr. Jackson stated that staff recommends denial of this request. Beverly Riedler, 13110 SE 258' Street,Kent,WA stated that she resides adjacent to the proposed property and supports staff s recommendation for denial. Ms. Riedler submitted a letter for the record as Exhibit#6. She voiced her concern over the impact that this development would generate in terms of increased noise volume as well as flooding the residential area with light. Ms. Riedler stated a commercial development in this area would generate the potential for pedestrian as well as vehicular accidents as both arterials are heavily traveled. Ms. Riedler stated that in 1997, 21,400 cars traveled through the intersection at 132nd and 12,000 cars traveled through 256th. Mr. Jackson submitted letters from Paula Egbert for the record as Exhibit #7, from Mr. and Mrs. Roland Darling as Exhibit #8, and from Mr. Bill Eastman as Exhibit #9 voicing concern over development of this project. Mr. Dave DeHart, 13121 Southeast 258'Street, Kent,WA stated that he resides in an adjoining neighborhood with the youngest children. Mr. DeHart said that he supports staffs recommendation for denial. He stated that this proposed development would increase traffic density,creating a safety risk to the children in the neighborhood. He stated that he does not wish to view a commercial business from his residence. Mr. Lee Robertson, 13104 SE 258t°Street, Kent, WA stated that his property is adjacent to Mr. Brutsche's property and he supports staff s recommendation for denial. He voiced concerned about the increased traffic generation as a result of this development. Mr. Robertson stated that Ms. Claudia Odie, Head of the Kent School District's Transportation Department, will not allow a bus stop at the end of their street due to the high volume of traffic already occurring. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 11 Ms. Pam Robertson, 13104 SE 258"Street, Kent,WA stated that she concurs with her neighbors in supporting denial of this proposal. She stated that she is opposed to increasing the volume of traffic and noise levels. Ms. Robertson stated that existing commercial is adequate. She said that this proposed section of land is a small section of Mr. Brutsche's property. Ms. Robertson said if this property is zoned commercial,the remainder of his property could potentially become zoned as commercial, creating a highly congested intersection. Mr.Jerald Cline, 823 Joshua Green Building, Seattle, WA represents Mr. Brutsche. Mr. Cline submitted material in support of a Soos Creek County convenience store for the record as Exhibit #10. Mr. Cline explained that convenience stores are typically located in residential areas. Mr. Cline stated that a convenience store is a mixed-use enterprise. He said that it meets the land use goals of the comprehensive plan to encourage corner stores and establish a quality of life that encourages pedestrian access for commercial establishments or retail use. Mr. Cline stated that the proposed area currently does not offer adequate retail areas. He stated that people are driving from Soos Creek and the Meridian Lake area to the East Hill commercial area, increasing traffic density. The market suggests locating small convenience stores within residential areas to serve the community. Mr. Cline explained that since the adoption of Kent's Comprehensive Plan in April 1995, several changes have occurred in Kent. He stated that the most important change was the annexation of the Meridian area formerly under the county's zoning regulations. Mr. Cline stated that this is the first review request for this area under the City of Kent's regulations. Mr. Cline addressed the concerns of the neighbors. He explained that there is a natural buffer on the property the Brutsches will use to develop their convenience store. The buffer will screen Brutsche's property from the Robertson's subdivision and from the property of the other folks. W. Cline stated that Mr. Brutsche owns the property to the west of the proposed site. He said that Mr. Brutsche would dedicate a right-hand turning lane that so that vehicular traffic traveling east on 256th will be able to enter and leave the proposed store's property safely. Mr. John Casey, 12719 Southeast 254' Place, Kent, WA stated that he opposes rezoning this property and is recommending that this proposal be denied. Mr. Casey said that numerous convenience stores, grocery establishments and gas stations are located within one mile of Mr. Brutsche's property. He stated that a general commercial designation would be a drastic change from the current single family designation. #CPA-98-2(B)/CPZ-98-2 SHULMAN AMENDMENT Mr. Jackson stated that this proposal submitted by Jack Lynch requests a land use change from Commercial to Low Density Multifamily and the zoning from General Commercial to MR-G Garden Density Multifamily/16 units per acre. The property is 7.5 acres in size and is located 700 feet west of Pacific Highway South on the south side of Kent-Des Moines Road. Mr. Jackson stated that W. Lynch submitted a similar proposal last year for a medium density multifamily designation with a zoning of MRM/23 units per acre. Mr. Jackson stated that staff revised that request and recommended approval at 16 units per acre under MRG zoning. Mr. Jackson said that both the Board and Council denied the proposal. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 12 Mr. Jackson stated that the City of Des-Moines surrounds the property on three sides. There are significant environmental constraints connected with any development on this property. The headwaters of Massey Creek are located on this property. Mr. Jackson stated that the City of Des-Moines has incorporated this area in their comprehensive plan with a townhouse designation of 10-12 units per acre. Mr. Jackson stated that staff believes that the information received this year was not significantly different from last year's request. Mr. Jackson stated that staff recommends denial of this request. Mr. Robert Ruth, 805 South 219" Street, Des Moines,WA is a Senior Planner with the City of Des Moines. He states that the City of Des Moines bound the proposed property on three sides. Mr. Ruth stated that he concurs with the City of Kent Planning staff that this proposal be denied and that the MR-G density designation would overwhelm the site's carrying capacity. Mr. Ruth stated that City of Des Moines staff believes that 50%of the site consists of sensitive areas comprised of steep slopes, wetlands, streams and the headwaters of Massey Creek(a critical drainage basin which experiences frequent flooding). Mr. Ruth said that density should not be increased in an area that is enamoured by sensitive areas. He stated that although an effort has been made to protect the wetlands and buffers, slopes would be recontoured, cut and filled. Mr. Ruth said that if development occurs the disturbance to the land would affect drainage patterns throughout the site and down through the basin. Mr. Ruth spoke at length about the increase in traffic generation that would occur. He stated that the Des-Moines intersection of Pacific Highway South and the Kent Des Moines Road is a failing intersection located just a few hundred feet from the site. Mr. Ruth stated that no improvements have been made to the frontage road adjacent to the proposed site to accommodate this type of development. Mr. Ruth stated that the Kent Des-Moines Road arcs so that site distance to and from the site is impaired. Mr.Jack Lynch, 1001 Northeast Boat Street,Seattle,WA stated that he represents the applicant. He stated that the site is west of Pacific Highway south and consists of 8.5 acres. Mr. Lynch said that one acre located west of the proposed site is zoned commercial and is located within the City of Des-Moines. He stated that a deed restriction would be placed on that parcel of land to inhibit development. Mr. Lynch stated that site conditions dictate what type of development will take place. He stated that a wetlands and topographic study has been completed as well as a traffic analysis. Mr. Lynch said that the site is heavily wooded. Development would be concentrated on 35 to 40 percent of the site located on the north side of the property. Mr. Lynch stated that the proposed development would allow for a maximum of 78 two-story high townhouse units, consisting of nine two stories buildings. Mr. Lynch said that the building density would equate to 10.5 units per acre. He stated that sixty percent of the site would be retained in its natural state with approximately 3.5 acres of developable land. Mr. Lynch stated that a townhouse concept would be a good transition in this area. Mr. Lynch said there is commercial development to the east and north with existing multifamily and single family Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 13 housing to the southwest. Mr. Lynch stated that clustered development is conducive to this site with the environmental constraints associated with this land. Martin Durkin, Jr.,330 Southwest 43rd Street, Renton, WA stated that he worked with Mr. Shulman on last year's project. He said that the City of Kent recommended approval of a 140 unit multifamily project last year. Mr. Durkin stated that the outcome from the Council's deliberations indicated that they did not want further multifamily development in Kent. Mr. Durkin stated that he worked with City Attorney, Mr. Lubovich to prepare a townhouse ordinance. He stated that the ordinance was not completed and the only ordinance currently in effect allows for 110 unit Planned Unit Development. Mr. Durkin disagreed with the City of Des-Moines assumptions that the steep slopes will be cut down and wetlands disturbed. He stated that the City of Des-Moines has submitted a proposal to widen Des-Moines Way. Mr. Durkin stated that the City of Des Moines would be cutting down the slopes and that the city has plans to turn the wetlands into a regional detention area that would create a tremendous disturbance within this sensitive area. Mr. Durkin said that the representative with the City of Des-Moines failed to explain that this property is under possibility of future condemnation. Mr. Durkin stated that he asked Mr. Shulman to submit a substantially different request this year committing to development of townhouse condominiums and reducing the number of units from 140 to 70, substantially less than the property can carry. Mr. Durkin said that the market dictates a need for affordable townhouse condominiums and that this development would act as a buffer from the commercial development and multifamily housing. He would appreciate the City's support in favor of this proposal. Chair Bell announced that the Board should consider the Mower/Tonelli Amendment then close the public hearing, continue with deliberations and voting and hold a continuance of the public hearing on Monday, November 30 at 7:00 p.m. to hear the remainder of the code amendments. Mr. Dowell was in favor of continuing the hearing until all the amendments had been heard. Mr. Dowell moved to continue the hearing process until completion. Motion died for lack of a second. Chair Bell apologized to the public for having to set through the hearing on amendments that did not pertain to them and for their patience in having to return on November 30. #CPA-98-2(E)/#CPZ-98-5 MOWER/TONELLI AMENDMENT Matt Jackson submitted a letter from the City of Des-Moines for the record as Exhibit #11. Mr. Jackson stated that Mr. Dana Mower on behalf of Mr. Tonelli submits this proposal. The property is located on 88" Avenue South and South 218'h Street and is 6.9 acres in size. The applicant is requesting a change in land use from Industrial to Low Density Multifamily and a change in the zoning from Commercial Manufacturing 1 to (MRG) Garden Density Multifamily. Mr. Jackson stated that Mr. Tonelli owns an adjacent piece of property zoned MR-G and is requesting that the two properties be joined together to build a multifamily project. Mr. Jackson stated that the neighboring land use is (CM) Commercial Manufacturing which allows for a wide range of light manufacturing and heavy commercial uses. Mr. Jackson said that there is a range of industrial uses of similar nature in the vicinity as well as large-scale multifamily projects located south of this proposed site. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 14 Mr. Jackson stated that the site is located on a substandard road fronted by SR-167 and encounters high noise levels. He said that the applicant has not been able to market the proposal for commercial manufacturing because of its size and because it is located next to multifamily zoning. Mr. Jackson said that there would be difficulty in developing this site for multifamily residential use as the site is located up slope from the freeway and experiences high noise impacts. He stated that staff would need to consider converting existing industrial land to residential. Mr. Jackson stated that the City of Kent serves as a focal point for regional and industrial land and serves as the core for warehouse distribution and industrial uses in the region. Mr. Jackson said that each year the Growth Management Act requires Kent to complete a capacity analysis on residential carrying capacity and the city's potential for industrial growth. Mr. Jackson stated that there is a lack of available commercial manufacturing land in Kent and the region. Mr. Jackson said that it is in the best interests of the city to protect available commercial property. Mr. Jackson stated that staff recommends denial of this proposal. Mr. Rich Tonelli, 22440 88"'Avenue South, Kent,WA stated that he is the applicant and resides on the last 20 acres of the farm of which 6.9 acres is part of the proposed rezone area. He said that his family has been a part of the Kent Valley since 1910 and his property was originally part of a working farm until the 1960's when SR-167 divided the property into three parcels. Mr. Tonelli stated that development of the property should be in the best interests of the city as well as suit their own interests. He stated that a multifamily (PUD) Planned Unit Development was approved in the 1980's and expired as no one was interested in buying the property. Mr. Tonelli stated that split zoning on the 20-acre parcel has made it difficult to develop the land and stated that two offers have been received for the 20 acres to develop multifamily housing. Mr. Tonelli said that if multifamily housing were developed under the current zoning, residents would have to travel through existing industrial property to enter the residential development. Mr. Tonelli stated that the portion of the property zoned for multifamily development is located at the back portion of the 20 acres with a steep slope and is difficult to develop. He voiced his believe that if the entire 20 acres were developed as multifamily, this would be advantageous in that 5 to 7 acres of the slope can be left as undeveloped land. Roberta Marta,502 16`h Street Northeast,Suite 312,Auburn,WA represents Dana Mower and DBM Consulting Engineers. She stated that their client, Rich Tonelli has been a long time member of the community and would like this project to be in the best interest of the community. Ms. Marta explained that DBM Consulting respects staffs decision to recommend denial. She stated that the proposal is requesting rezoning Lot 1 and Lot 2 to MR-G Garden Density Multifamily Residential District from Commercial in order to maintain consistent zoning throughout the property and eliminate safety issues associated with leaving the property to the west commercial. Ms. Marta submitted preliminary site plans for the record as Exhibit#12. Ms. Marta referred to the site plans in speaking at length on what they were proposing for the area. Ms. Marta said that a traffic analysis was completed comparing commercial and residential traffic impacts to the area. Ms. Marta stated that the report indicated that a residential development would alleviate traffic locally and regionally. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 15 Ms. Marta submitted an article from the South County Journal as Exhibit# which addressed the demand for multifamily housing in the community. Ms. Marta said that this project would provide affordable housing, with easy access located immediately adjacent to employment centers in the valley. Gary Volchok, 1420 5'Avenue,Suite 1700,Seattle,WA stated that he has served the Kent Valley as a real estate agent with CB Commercial for 30 years. Mr. Volchok stated that he has worked with Mr. Tonelli over the years to sell his property. Mr. Volchok said that selling this property has proved difficult due to the split zoning and the way in which the property would need to be developed with the CM-1 zoning located at the bottom portion and residential development at the top of the property. Mr. Volchok stated that portions of the top 8 acres of the property are can not be developed due to sensitive areas. He stated that approximately 12 acres are developable due to financial constraints. Mr. Volchok spoke on the access and safety issues that would be encountered by the need to enter the multifamily development through the Commercial Manufacturing zoned property. Mr. Volchok stated that he has inventoried the industrial properties in Kent and Auburn and concurs with staff that industrial zoning is at a critical mass within the Kent Valley. He spoke at length on defining commercial zoning and stated that he felt that this property should not be used for commercial development. Mr. Volchok stated that he has checked with other multifamily realtors in the valley and has been informed that there is a shortage of available MR-G land in the Kent Valley for building affordable multifamily housing. Mr. Volchok stated that he favors multifamily development for this property. He stated that this property is located in close proximity to the freeway interchange as well as being close to employment centers decreasing commute time. Communication ensued between the Board and Mr. Volchok for clarification on where ingress and egress is located for the multifamily project abutting up to the proposed property as well as where access would be for the proposed property. Mr. Malik asked Mr. Volchok how new development would affect the intersection at 228 h and north Central. Mr. Volchok stated that more vehicular traffic would be generated no matter how the property is developed. He stated that a tentative traffic analysis of the area indicated if the property was developed with multifamily, there would be less trips generated then if the property was developed with a combination of industrial and multifamily. Terry Zimmerman MOVED and David Malik SECONDED a motion to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Brad Bell voiced his intent to allow the Board to deliberate and vote on the six individual code amendments with continuance of the public hearing to November 30 to hear the remainder of the amendments. Mr. Bell asked Assistant City Attorney Laurie Evezich if this would be acceptable. Ms. Evezich concurred. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 16 CPA-98-2(Q/CPZ-98-2 BURRIDGE AMENDMENT Chair Bell said this is a request to change the land use map designation from SF-3 Single Family Residential/3 units per acre to SF-6 Single Family Residential/6 units per acre and the zoning map designation from SR-3 Single Family Residential/3 units per acre to SR-6 Single Family Residential/6 units per acre. The property is located east of 135`h Avenue Southeast and north of 282nd Staff recommends approval of this amendment. Ron Harmon expressed his desire for the property to remain zoned as SF-3. The Board members with the exception of Mr. Dowell concurred. Steve Dowell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to recommend denial of this amendment. Motion carried. CPA-98-2(D)/CPZ-98-4 COSTANZO AMENDMENT Chair Bell said that this is a request to change the land use map designation from SF-6 Single Family Residential/6 units per acre to Commercial and the zoning map designation from SR-6 Single Family Residential/6 units per acre to NCC Neighborhood Convenience Commercial District. The property is located along 116' and Kent Kangley Highway. Staff recommends denial of this amendment. Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom announced that regrettably an erroneous public notification may have occurred and that the surrounding property owners within a 300-foot radius had not been properly notified as required by law. Mr. Satterstrom extended apologies to the Board,the applicant as well as all others in attendance concerning this amendment. He stated that although the site was properly posted, surrounding property owners will need to be renoticed and the amendment reheard by the Board. Mr. Satterstrom respectfully requested that this amendment not be acted upon until staff has ascertained the exact facts. Laurie Evezich recommended that proper notification should be given if it was not initiated correctly. She stated proper notification involves questions of fundamental fairness under the Due Process Clause of both constitutions. Ms. Evezich recommended that the Board should move to remove this item from the six amendments to be deliberated upon this evening. Mr. Satterstrom explained that a 10-day notification period is necessary prior to a hearing. He said when this hearing reconvenes on November 30, the Board will be informed at that time if this item will be rescheduled for the public hearing scheduled on December 14. 2(M/#CPZ-98-8 HOULE AMENDMENT Chair Bell said that this is a request to change the land use map designation from SF-6 Single Family Residential/6 units per acre to SF-8 Single Family Residential/8 units per acre and the zoning map designation from SR-5 Single Family Residential/5 units per acre to SR-8 Single Family Residential/8 units per acre. The property is located at 25840 135`h Lane Southeast by Lake Meridian. Staff recommends approval. Chair Bell stated that he concurs with staffs recommendation and believes that the developer has proposed a unique development. Chair Bell said that he believes the developer will comply with the requirements for sidewalks and address safety concerns as well as provides additional housing in the community. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 - Page 17 Mr. Harmon voiced his concern in reference to safety issues and traffic generation due to accessibility being limited to one way in and out of the property. Mr. Harmon stated that he would like to see the city and developer find a way to develop more than one ingress and egress location or widen the street to allow room for emergency vehicles. City Engineer, Gary Gill stated that the main concern with this development last year was that a minimum of 24 feet of street width was required from 256th Street to the entrance of the site with a minimum of 6 foot paved shoulders or a walkway located on one side of the roadway. Mr. Gill said that this development must construct curb gutters and sidewalks along their sites with the same guidelines stipulated for last year. Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Ron Harmon SECONDED a motion to recommend approval of #CPA-98-2(H)/CPZ-98-8 Houle Amendment. Motion carried. #CPA-98-2(A)/#CPZ-98-1 BRUTSCHE AMENDMENT Chair Bell said this is a request to change the land use map designation from SF-6 Single Family Residential/6 units per acre to Commercial District and the zoning map designation from SR-6 Single Family Residential/6 units per acre to GC General Commercial District. The property is located at the southwest corner of southeast 256`' and 132°d Avenue South. Steve Dowell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to recommend denial of ECPA-98-2(A)/#CPZ-98-1 Brutsche Amendment. Motion carried unanimously. #CPA-98-2(B)/#CPZ-98-2 SHULMAN AMENDMENT Chair Bell said this is a request to change the land use map designation from Commercial to Low Density Multifamily Residential and the zoning map designation from GC General Commercial to MR-G Garden Density Multifamily. The property is located 700 feet west of Pacific Highway South on the south side of Kent Des-Moines Road. Staff recommends denial . Ms. Zimmerman stated that she approves of this amendment contingent on the property being developed for home ownership. Chair Bell and Sharon Woodford concurred with Ms. Zimmerman. Ms. Evezich stated that the Board does not have authority to amend the zoning code through this forum. Ron Harmon MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED a motion to recommend denial of this application. Motion carried unanimously. #CPA-98-2(E)/#CPZ-98-5 MOWER/TONELLI AMENDMENT Chair Bell said this is a request to change the land use map designation from Industrial to Low Density Multifamily Residential and the zoning map designation from CM-1 Commercial Manufacturing to MR-G Garden Density Multifamily Residential/16 units per acre. The property is located east of SR-167 at 88th Avenue South and South 288' Street. Chair Bell stated that he recommends approving the Tonelli Amendment. He stated that Kent has encouraged development of multifamily housing in the valley for many years and that the location is conducive to this type of development. Steve Dowell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED a motion to recommend approval of the Mower/Tonelli Amendment. Motion carried unanimously. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 23, 1998 Page 18 Steve Dowell MOVED and Ron Harmon SECONDED a motion for continuance of the public hearing on Monday, November 30 to hear the remaining code amendments and to remove the Costanzo Amendment from deliberations. Motion carried. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chair Bell opened the meeting for nominations. Steve Dowell NOMINATED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED a motion to appoint Ron Hannon to the position of Chairman. Ron Harmon accepted. Sharon Woodford NOMINATED and Jon Johnson SECONDED a motion to appoint Terry Zimmerman to the position of Vice Chair. Terry Zimmerman accepted. Steve Dowell MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED a motion for a unanimous ballot for the positions of Chair and Vice Chair. Motion Carried. ADJOURNMENT Ron Harmon MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED a motion to adjourn. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respect 1 Submitte Jam s P arris Secretary Kent City Council Minutes February 2, 1999 COMPREHENSIVE currently constructing apartments in this zone PLAN has complied with all rules and a change at this time would be a burden for him. He said he would like to amend the motion to leave the current zoning in that one piece of property to protect the rights of that individual and to ensure that the apartments which are going to be built there will be properly maintained •in the future. - Lubovich explained that a non-conforming use can be maintained but not expanded, and that a different designation would have to be created in order to expand the development . Orr said that changing the zone at this time would not jeopardize the current project . Woods said she appreciates the work of the Land Use and Planning Board, and noted that low-income senior housing has been built recently in the downtown area. Yingling emphasized that the current builder has followed every rule and that he should be allowed to finish his project with the same rules . Brotherton suggested asking the Planning Department to prepare a Comprehensive Plan change to take through the hearing process to handle this situation. Satterstrom clarified that if a non-conforming use burns to the ground, it can re-establish itself by applying for a building permit within one year, that expansion of a non-conforming use would require applying for a conditional use permit, and that financing is a concern. The motion then carried with Amodt, Brotherton and Yingling opposed. (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7C) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments CPA-98-2 (A-L) /CPA-98- (1-9) . According to City of Kent procedures, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are processed collectively once every year. Applications for 12 plan amendments were received by September 1 , 1998 . Ten of these applications were plan map amendments with rezone requests, one application was for a policy amendment, and 8 Kent City Council Minutes February 2, 1999 COMPREHENSIVE one request was an amendment of the City' s PLAN Capital Facilities Element . The Land Use and Planning Board held public hearings and made recommendations on these proposals on November 23, November 30, and December 14, 1998 . Matt Jackson of the Planning Department reviewed each of the twelve items, pointed out the loca- tions on a map, and noted the recommendations as follows : A - Brutsche - denial of request B - Shulman - denial of request C - Burridge - denial of request D - Costanzo - approval of application E - Mower/Tonelli - approval of application F - Mower/Nguyen - denial of application G - Gusa - approval of request H - Houle - approval of application I - Mower/Hebert - denial of application J - Ruth - Add request to work program for 1999 for study as to whether the proposal has merit K - Capital Facilities Element - approval as recommended by the Finance Department L - Planning Department - no recommendation Regarding the Costanzo application, Jackson noted that there is a natural slope and existing family zoning on the east side; regarding the Houle application, he said there had been no discussion on the water level of the lake or boat usage; regarding the Ruth application, he read the request as follows : A request to add the follow- ing policy in one of the Comprehensive Plan sections headed by Goal LU-9 and Goal LU-10 of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element : Allow and encourage single family townhouse style attached condominiums in the single family residential zones that permit residential densities of six units per acre or higher. Upon Orr' s question, Jackson agreed to determine whether the minutes of the Land Use and Planning Board' s meeting of November 30, 1998 , regarding 9 Kent City Council Minutes February 2, 1999 COMPREHENSIVE Item L are correct . Harris recommended that no PLAN action be taken on Item L at this time. Clark agreed. The City Attorney pointed out that the Land Use and Planning Board held hearings on these matters, and that although public input can be given at tonight ' s meeting, - another hearing would be required if there is new information outside the record which causes a substantive change to the recommendations.. Proposal A CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board and deny the Brutsche request . Woods seconded. Jerry Cline, 823 Joshua Green Building, Seattle, representing Mr. Brutsche, said the amendment would allow for a neighborhood convenience store on the corner, would reduce traffic on Kent-Kangley Road and on 256th Street , and is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policy 13 . 5 . Beverly Reidler, 13110 S .E. 258th Street, disagreed with Cline and said a M convenience store would not benefit their neighborhood. She said there are stores within a mile each way, and while it may reduce traffic on Kent-Kangley, it would increase traffic on 256th and would present safety issues . The motion to deny the request then carried. Proposal B CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board and deny the Shulman request . Woods seconded. Jack Lynch, 1001 NE Boat Street, Seattle, representing the owner, noted that this request was made last year and at that time staff recommended a land use and zoning change but the Planning Board was split and Council said this type of request would be addressed through a condominium ordinance . He said this year they proposed townhouse condominium units only, reduced the number of units, and proposed that that development be clustered on the north side of the property. He said it appeared at the time 10 Kent City Council Minutes February 2 , 1999 COMPREHENSIVE that the Board was supportive of the concept but PLAN were concerned how to ensure that townhouse condominium units would actually be built. He explained that an agreement restricting the property to townhouse condominiums only was sub- mitted in January. He noted that there were other restrictions in the agreement as well, and urged the Council to approve the -request, subject to the covenant . Martin Durkan, Jr. , 330 SW 43rd, Renton, noted that paperwork for a site- specific covenant rezone has been submitted and asked that if action on that cannot be taken at this time that the Council consider a townhouse ordinance . Orr spoke in favor of creating a condominium zone in the near future . She offered to schedule a special workshop on the issue, after which staff can follow up. Upon Epperly' s questions about those who are currently interested in building condominiums, Lubovich said an analysis is appropriate, that staff would like to have some input from Council , and that action could be taken on a contract rezone proposal tonight . He explained for Yingling that there is an under- lying desire not to have more apartments in the area and that there are currently no regulations dealing with condominiums other than through a negotiated contract rezone . Harris voiced opposition to contract zones and recommended not using them. Upon Orr ' s question, Lubovich explained that once a condominium ordinance is in place, applicants would go through the annual process . CLARK WITHDREW his motion and Woods withdrew her second. CLARK THEN MOVED that this proposal be tabled until there has been a chance to process it in an appropriate fashion as de- scribed by this discussion. Woods seconded and the motion carried. Proposal C CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board and deny the Burridge request . Woods seconded. Rick Moose, 21325 204th Avenue SE, 11 Kent City Council Minutes February 2, 1999 COMPREHENSIVE Maple Valley, speaking on behalf of the appli- PLAN cant, said the report issued by the Planning staff recommended approval, noting that it is an ideal fit for increased densities. The motion then carried. Proposal D CLARK MOVED to deny the Costanzo proposal as opposed to the Land Use and Planning Board which recommended approval . The motion died for lack of a second. . CLARK .THEN MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board and approve the Costanzo proposal . Woods seconded. Clark explained that Kent-Kangley has commercial development along it and this creates problems . The motion then carried with Clark opposed. Proposal E CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board and accept the Mower/Tonelli application. Woods seconded. Dana Mower, DBM Consulting Engineers, said this is an ideal property to make this zoning change on, as the existing zoning on the property negatively impacts the existing zoning to the east . Rich Tonelli , 22440 88th Avenue S . , said they have been unable to develop the property due to the large investment require- ments and development risks . He said that multi- family zoning makes sense, and would reduce traffic on East Hill . Gary Volchok, 16400 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, pointed out that the access into the industrial zoning property is the same road as the residential portion in the back, resulting in trucks and families both using the same road. He added that the size of the CM zoning is difficult to develop. Orr noted that staff did not recommend this change and that there are good reasons for that . She said industrial land is becoming more and more scarce and this is not a good place for multi-family housing. The motion then carried with Orr and Yingling opposed. 12 Kent City Council Minutes February 2 , 1999 COMPREHENSIVE Proposal F PLAN CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board and deny the Mower/Nguyen request . Woods seconded. Dana Mower, DBM Consulting Engineers, pointed out that the site is divided with a split zone, and that there are 3-5 accidents per year at the intersection. He asked that the property be converted from a single-family residential use to a business, noting that it is only half an acre in size and there is no other practical use. The motion then carried with Amodt, Epperly and Yingling opposed. Proposal G CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board on the Gusa request . Woods seconded and the motion carried. Proposal H CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board on the Houle application. Woods seconded. T. J. Tuntland, 25725 135th Place SE, noted that last year this was presented for SRG and was denied, and said it should not be changed to SR8 . He voiced concern about public safety access, the safety of the lake, and environmental impacts . Dick Lamb, 25708 135th Place SE, said there is only one access and that more homes would create problems with traffic and with access to the lake . James Tuntland, 25725 135th Place SE, said he would like to know why the Land Use and Planning Board is recommending SR8 now after backing the residents on SR4 . 5 for years . Tim Mullenberg, 25715 135th Place SE, said this is too much housing for the area and there are many concerns, as previously mentioned. Orr spoke in opposition to the proposed density and voiced concern about having only one entrance. Brotherton also spoke against the motion, citing congestion in the area, traffic, and the water level in the lake . Upon Woods ' question, Jackson explained that in previous years the request had been for multi-family zoning, and that adding the density was a way to off-set the cost of 13 f Kent City Council Minutes February 2, 1999 COMPREHENSIVE improvements. He noted for Orr that all the PLAN property zoned SR4 . 5 has a land use designation as SF6. The motion then failed with no one in favor. Proposal I CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board and deny the Mower/Hebert request. Woods seconded. Dana Mower, DBM Consulting Engineers, pointed out that this was a split vote at the Land Use and .Planning Board and presented two alternatives : 1) use of an overlay which states that two-story for-sale condominium townhouses are the only thing allowed in the zone, and 2) to down zone the property to MRG zoning from 23 units to 16 units . Roger Newall, 1102 19th Avenue E, Seattle, architect for Roger Hebert, stated that the condominium townhouse would be substantially less in density and height and would have less lot coverage than what is currently zoned. Hugh Leiper said mixed zoning will work only in certain areas, and that this site is very small . CLARK WITHDREW his motion and MOVED to table . Woods seconded and the motion carried. Proposal J Orr noted that a decision has been made to work on condominium zoning and that by adopting a condominium zone, the Ruth request is a non- issue . She said she cannot support spending staff time to work on a program that would allow multi-family style development in single-family zones, but that some of the issues can be resolved if a condominium zone is established. CLARK MOVED to table this issue indefinitely. Woods seconded and the motion carried. Proposal K CLARK MOVED to uphold the Land Use and Planning Board in amending the Capital Facilities Element as outlined by the Finance Department . Woods seconded and the motion carried. 14 Kent City Council Minutes February 2 , 1999 COMPREHENSIVE Proposal L PLAN Clark suggested dropping the request to change the Land Use Map in order to implement an action contained in the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, as it does not need to be dealt with. Orr pointed out that the issue will be dealt with a some point, but that clarification is needed at this point . CLARK MOVED to table this issue until the March meeting. Woods seconded and the motion carried. CLARK MOVED to direct the City Attorney to pre- pare the necessary ordinances to uphold these decisions . Woods seconded and the motion carried. WOODS MOVED to make the letters received a part of the public record. Orr seconded and the motion carried. (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7D) Shoreline Master Program CPA-98-4/SMP-989-1. The Land Use and Planning Board held a public hearing on December 14 , 1998 , to consider amend- ments to the Kent Shoreline Master Program and Comprehensive Plan goals and policies relating to shoreline management . The Board recommends adoption of the revised Kent Shoreline Master Program, dated December 14 , 1998, with amend- ments . This item was referred to the Public Works/Planning Committee, who considered it on February 1 , 1999 . Kevin O 'Neill of the Planning Department explained that the Public Works and Planning Committee recommends adoption of the draft Shoreline Master Program dated December 14, 1998 , as amended by the Land Use and Planning Board on December 14 , 1998, with revisions and additional amendments recommended by the Committee on February 1, 1999 . He outlined the recommendation of the Public Works and Planning Committee as shown in his memo of February 2 , 1999 . 15 Kent City Council Meeting Date March 2 , 1999 Category Bids 1 . SUBJECT: HP NETSERVERS PURCHASE AGREEMENT 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On January 5, 1999, Council authorized a contract with Sarcom/NovaQuest to assist the City with the design and implementation of Microsoft Exchange. This item is part two of the project, the related server hardware bid award. A request for quote for HP Netservers and related warranties was published and six vendors responded. Unisoft was the lowest bidder with a total bid price of $93 , 192 . 72 . The City kas decided not to purchase the ATL DLT tape drive identified on the quote, making the total award to Unisoft $83 , 150 .48 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from Joe Lorenz and Call for Quotes/Unisoft ' s Quote 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee on 2/23/99 (unanimous) (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $83 , 150 . 48 SOURCE OF FUNDS : Technology Plan 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember W &D moves, Councilmember seconds to authorize the Mayor to sign a purchase agreement with Unisoft for the purchase of HP Netservers and related warranties in the amount of $83 , 150 .48 , subject to City Attorney approval . DISCUSSION: ACTION: `r w Council Agenda Item No. 8A Date: February 16, 1999 To: Council Operations Committee From: Joseph Lorenz, Network Manage 44Y' 4 CC: Marty Mulholland; Director of Information Services Brent McFall, Director of Operations Re: Request for Quote Award: HP Netservers Background: On January 5, 1999, we appeared before you with an award recommendation for professional services to Sarcom/NovaQuest to assist the City with the design and implementation of Microsoft Exchange. Today, we come before you with part two of this project, related server hardware bid award. Since Council approval, we have been working with our consultants from Sarcom/NovaQuest to identify the City's requirements. These requirements included items like; the number of e-mail accounts today, future growth needs of the City, scalability to meet future needs, fault tolerance, and maximum allowable downtime for backups. With the information gathered during the design phase, our consultants applied past experience and Microsoft's design criteria to help develop a hardware recommendation. Through our joint collaboration, it was decided that a total of 6 servers were necessary to support the Microsoft Exchange Messaging implementation and future business systems. The City developed and published the Request for Quote for HP Netservers and Related Product Warranties based on this effort. Process: The City received 6 responses form the following vendors: CompUSA, DPE, RDI, Sarcom/NovaQuest, Technology Express, and UNISOFT. UNISOFT was the lowest bidder due to mathematical errors. We have discussed this with them and UNISOFT has decided to honor the total bid price despite the identified arithmetic irregularities. UNISOFTs total bid price was for$93,192.72. The City has elected not to purchase the ATL DLT tape drive identified on the quote. The total purchase price reflects the deletion of this product and its associated accessories. Recommended Action: Award the Request for Quote for HP Netservers and related product warranties to UNISOFT in the amount $83,150.48, subject to City Attorney approval and Mayor's signature. Motion: Authorize the Mayor to sign a purchase agreement with UNISOFT for the purchase of HP Netservers and related warranties in the amount of$83,150.48, subject to City Attorney approval. Thank you. Enclosures: UNISOFTs response to the City's Call for Quotes HP NetServer and Related Product Warranties. UNISOFT's Price Guarantee letter. i I City of Kent Call for Quotes For Five (5) HP Netservers, and Related Product Warranties. i i Issued: Tuesday February 2, 1999 Date Due: Friday February 12, 1999 Time Due: 12:00 noon, Pacific Time (as shown by the clerk's clock) Address Responses to: City Clerk am Quote for HP Netserver 220 4`" Avenue South Kent,WA 98032 iW CALL FOR QUOTES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Kent,Washington, will receive sealed quotes at the Office of the City Clerk through February 12, 1999 to 12:00 noon, as shown on the clock adjacent to the City Clerk's Office on the 2n0 floor of City Hall. Quotes will be clearly marked"QUOTE FOR HP NETSERVER- on the outside of the envelope, addressed to the City Clerk, 220 0 Avenue S., Kent,WA 98032. No facsimiles will be considered. The City is seeking quotes for five(5) Hewlett-Packard Pentium II Netservers from authorized HP resellers. Supplier must have authorized HP warranty service center in the greater Seattle-Tacoma area. Acceptable models are listed in the specification. Specifications can be obtained by contacting the City of Kent Information Services Department at 253- 520-4266. Quotes must be submitted in the format of the Specifications Document No plea of mistake in the quote shall be available to the supplier as a defense to any action based upon the neglect or refusal to execute a contract. No supplier may withdraw his/her quote for a period of 30 days after the date the quote is due. The City of Kent reserves the right to reject any and all quotes,or waive any informalities in the process. The City of Kent will award this contract to the lowest and best responsible supplier, based on that supplier's quote, and shall be the sole judge thereof. Dated this 28th day of January, 1999 Feb-04-99 01 : 13P Information Services 206 859-4018 P-04 QUOTE SPECIFICATIONS QUOTE FOR HP NETSERVERS The City intends to purchase five HP Pentium 11 Netservem from an authorized Hewlett-Packard reseller. Supplier must have authorized HP warranty repair facility In the greater Seattle- Tacoma area. The City will purchase fire(5)HP Netservers, per the Required Configuration listed below. Multiple quotes will be accepted from suppliers. No substitution of equipment will be tolerated. The City will receive the machines in one shipment, dates to be provided by the City. The City will take delivery of the machines by April, 1999. Schedule of Events: Request for Quotes Issued: January 28, 1999 Request for Quotes Due: February 12, 1999 Notification to Apparently Successful Supplier. February 15 1999 Approval by Kent City Council: February 16, 1989 Formal Acceptance of Quote: February 19, 1999 Delivery of 5 HP Netserver's March 8, 1999 Please provide quote for the following: Five(5)Hewlett-Packard Pentium 11 Netserver Computers with hardware that conform,at a minimum,to the following specifications: All components must be original equipment manufacturer or HP OEM components unless otherwise noted, or specified. Required Configuration: Onty I Manufacturer Part Number Description 2 1 D5004A#A6D NETSERVER LH3R P2/400 4 D6099A 256MB 100MHZ ECC SDRAM DIMM D5013A N 5 ETSERVER 10/100 PCI LAN 26 D6107A ID 9.1G SCSI ULTRA WE HOT SWAP 2 05955A NETRAID 3-Sl SCSI DSK ARRAY 2 D4282B HP NETSERVER LH3/LX PROCBLA 4 4806077A INTERNEAL DRIVE CAPACITY UPGRADE 2 D6092A PROCESSOR UP -400 100MHZ 2 D6093A HP NETSERVERH3 FAN TRAY PWR SUP 2 D6095A LH3 Power Supply 2 H5513A SUPPORTPACK 7X24 F/NETSERVER C5141F DL TAPE IV CAR 1 PC 3 D6130A HP NETSERVER LPR P2/400MODEL 3 D6097A 64MB 10OMHZ ECC SDRAM DIMM 3 D6098A 128MB 100MHZ ECC SDRAM DIMM 3 H5518A SUPPORTPACK SAME DAY P/NETSERVER 3 D4992AV NETRAID,—1 CHANNEL DISK 3 D6092A PROCESSOR UPGRADE P2-400 10OMHZ 1 TH6YF-YF A L-L200 DLT7000 1 TSXGM-01 ATL AUTOLOADER MAGAZINE 1 SBE-NTME-0000 -SF-AGATE BACKUP EXEC for NT 7.2 1 SBE-NTLM-0001 SEAGA E BACKUP EXEC AUTOLOADER OPTION 1 SBE-NTEX-0001 SEAGATE BACKUP EXEC MICRO50FT EXCHANGE AGENT _.... -u-r- .�.... ..�. _ �-rr �... .... ...0 ... . .� . ....c. . •...cam �..� ..�_..0 tv i� r _ u� QUOTE FOR HP NETSERVERS, page 2 The City reserves the absolute right to accept or reject any equivalent product offered for any reason, with or without cause, by a supplier. Quotas for each product shall include delivery to the City. Suppliers shall be responsible for all goods until delivered to and accepted by the City. Please submit quotes In the following format. Additional materials may be attached. Company Name: Company Address: i cJ a Contact Name and Phone Number: Location of HP Warranty Repair Facility: Do you have an goo number for product or support questions?: THERE ARE FIVE REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit 1. Product Worksheet filled in completely. G' 2. Please attach a price guarantee guaranteeing the above price through August 29, 1999. 3. Please attach a letter verifying status as an authorized HP reseller. 4. Please attach a letter verifying status as an authorized HP warranty service center. 5. Please attach a letter describing the procedure that the City would take a) in the event of a hardware problem in the first year of ownership, and b)in the event of a hardware problem in the 2"°and P years of ownership. _ Please attach any additional information with regard to the product or delivery of the product here: r'V l t_: :'-S v 0.�7- ►v 1 6 r ..iJ t� a CL 0 v 0 �- c `o 4 V cm �sOx ~3A Nc W N C -a NCC W > W oV 02W G W t -4d � W ` Ow CD � $ C Oa a: 1 0 V} mC O W 2U = O c zmzO se a < 2 CL < gQRLC z Y. xm wow w� ww a. wwwa,C gom % g " ` mwwZ .� O� _ Y Id� Wx� M VwP-4 U WQNwC om a = � > OL o > nHW W C yWpG OIL I <CL ` LOCO WQWzUru 000- n ; wNW = a9oz cn m Zc. a < < a a waW = a » - =Uv TM Mt ►- = wj � a~. u03v 0zc14zoizx ? aJco - nza � acnn0Of $ w? LLI _. o `mo 4 $ O � w y < > rot w aaaamaaa < < w < aaa < a � C cnr— toNI� NMiAM V- Ot� aDW W � zz z Oq- O_ 1A47CIAf— 01 Cf r -' M T- Of QI } �C ivc� 88CD in cn in n co QN � �t'fNNN � NNNNQMMMMMM ADDENDUM QUOTE SPECIFICATIONS QUOTE FOR HP NETSERVERS The City intends to purchase five HP Pentium 11 Netservers from an authorized Hewlett-Packard resellen Supplier must have authorized HP warranty repair facility in the greater Seattle- Tacoma area. The City will purchase five(5) HP Netservers, per the Required Configuration listed below. Multiple quotes will be accepted from suppliers. No substitution of equipment will be tolerated. The City will receive the machines in one shipment, dates to be provided by the City. The City will take delivery of the machines by April, 1999. Schedule of Events: Request for Quotes Issued: January 28, 1999 Request for Quotes Due: February 12, 1999 Notification to Apparently Successful Supplier. February 15 1999 Approval by Kent City Council: February 16, 1989 Formal Acceptance of Quote: February 19, 1999 Delivery of 5 HP Netserver's March 8, 1999 Please provide quote for the following: Five(5)Hewlett-Packard Pentium II Netserver Computers with hardware that conform,at a minimum,to the following specifications: All components must be original equipment manufacturer or HP OEM components unless otherwise noted,or specified. Required Configuration- Gnty Manufacturer Part Number Des cri n 2 D5004A#A60 NETSERVER LH3R 122/400 4 D6099A 256MB 10OMHZ ECC SDRAM DIMM 5 D5013A NETSERVER 10/100 PCI LAN W28 D610 A 9.1 GB SCSI ULTRA WIDE HOT SWAP 2 D5955A NETRAID 3SI SCSI DSK ARRAY 2 D4282B HP NETSERVER LH3/LX PROCBLA 4 D6077A INTERNEAL DRIVE CAPACITY UPGRADE 2 D6092A PROCESSOR UP RARE 2-400 10OMHZ 2 D6093A HP NETSERVER H3 FAN TRAY PWR SUP 2 06095A LH3 Power Supply 2 H5513A I SUPPORTPACK 7X24 /NETSERVER 48 C5141 F OL APE IV CART 1 PC 34 D6130A HP NETS RV R LPR P2/400MODEL 3 4 D6097A 64MB 100MHZ EC S RAM DIMM 3 D6098A 128MB 100MHZ ECC SORAMDIMM 396648A 4 H5514A SUPPORTPA K SAME DAY P/NETSERVER 34 04992AV NETRAID-1 U—HAN-N-ff DISK 3 06092A PROCESSOR UPGRADE P2-400 100MHZ 1 TH6YF-YF ATL-L200 1007000 1 TSXBM-01 ATL AUTOLOADER MAGAZINE 1 SBE-NTME-0000 SEAGATE BACKUP EXEC for NT 7.2 1 SBE-NTLM-0001 SEAGATE BACKUP EXEC AUTOLOADER OP71ON 1 SBE-NTEX-0001 SEAGATE BACKUP EXEC MICROSOFT EXCHANGE AGENT Feb-04-99 O1 : 15P Information Services ZOti 853-4018 P- 08 a C Ts Q� ~ c O m L v � a ~ � w = N w> = p « ZU AMRa Qo j � c NQ O cN c LU aj = Q: wYpacno cU 3 cU) >- go g2 w 0 :) CD � _ wz O d ? ZZOWW N � 2QOo ? OOa WW w z N W W W O (n J p Q UOW aWWa WQvma $ Oc, Qw a � WZ W a. ma 0 � Zg -10U w < 0 $ w » mw= w NYetMw Cl_y CR7 •� Gw W c; WpyW � a > W2 1a- w pOwW WU UOcn � mm wmw c�ui CD O a � gm � zwpz � a � z a O � � O ¢P:- L)i czNzmzi ? ai � upic = � � w 17m. aa `�`cnuwCLwi� 'u5 W E L m 2 AL � � g �? o 0 « Qam « QQ < tiQQ � QaQ U zz z = v0mr� tL� 2r_ " wcv) V.. � aNivNi rm Q w •- o4� mr. wcao� •- Q pp�� _ 0OfN 00V) rr0 K! QlO t0x CO ww W � 03cco � � S8 = v8i� inS � � cn n n co C N cc 0N mrW) C4NePNNN tvCVc) cV a 40) C� co ri J NJ o ? (h cn 17 - � O T ti- a ' to _ OOP, — J c� .. o -� cl Lr n CN �w N a w N ~ = o YI W = 'm _ i WWco U- F... .CC. t � LU � 0 t H r 0 c y } 0mg } W o2 � $ W W z ° � g o �ao � wN q� Boa CL z M � � 3 etnUp ]CX ,( W � � () Oa. n � JW o m ww w COW ' � U aa W a »ca9Qc9� amc7zE OFw � W YY QwW N � aWic W2 � OI--- mmOvwpww ' u � 0" 1LW O WW W WO a WMLU ` " W DLU m gnWQZaZ 8 CL mga � N mgua �Q � tn z ' zm �w � wm awwd9XCN 2 "F.0Z = _ G = = - 4z mza as = acncnOcoW � = m X W cca 9 o 0 0 0 w Q wc daaaamaa a � aaa �W X > WLU zz lzwQMInN S. CD � OILODf� M^C C QM� W� 8 0 onfncoc cc w w mm m n0ananno = cnna = an 0 co co m 11 m C N N O et et Q NlwLOaNN � NNNN � MlbMPO � MM �- February 12, 1999 City of Kent Information Services Dept Attu: City Clerk 220 0 Avenue South Kent,WA 98032 Re: QUOTE FOR HP NET SERVERS Attachment#1: This serves as formal written notice that the prices contained for the attached bid are guaranteed through August 29, 1999. t ly,Wright Director of Operations UNISOFT, INC. 14690 NE 95th Street, Suite 101 •Redmond,WA 98052-2544•Tel:(425)861-5750•Fax: (425)861-9068 February 12, 1999 City of Kent Information Services Dept. Attu: City Clerk 220 0 Avenue South Kent,WA 98032 Re: QUOTE FOR HP NET SERVERS Attachment#2 & 3: Attached is our HP authorization for sales and warranty service. Sincerely, - Wright Director of Operations UNISOFT, INC. 14690 NE 95th Street,Suite 101 •Redmond,WA 98052-2544•Tel:(425)861-5750•Fax:(425)861-9068 HEWLETT !l CL4 if•Ll-Packard('ofnp::n� PACKARD . :;I11 �(rfrm('rri•I, Ituulr•.:u'il ;:f ::,c•t:u:.(•:duma:,!,:u:,�.`ns,�' July 1, 1997 Authorization #0127880001 Peyman Khodabakhsh Unisoft Inc 2021 130th Avenue Northeast Suite B Bellevue WA 98005 Dear Peyman Khodabakhsh: We at Hewlett-Packard are very happy that you have chosen to renew your HP U.S.VAR Authorization for another year. The information you provided in the 1997 Reseller Profile will help us to better serve your needs. The"Instant Reference Guide" included in this package is one of the many tools that you will find useful in specifying HP products as a part of your solution. This guide provides detailed information on a broad range of HP product, including our full line of server and networking products. Inside you'll find key selling points, competitive comparisons and configuration tables. In the"HP Key Resources"section, you will find telephone numbers you can call for additional information. Also enclosed for additional information on HP Products and Services, please see "HP Supported Programs Available to You." The HP Reseller Web Site is designed to provide you and your organization with direct access to a variety of information on HP Products and Services. Please review the enclosed"HP Reseller Web Site Product Brief' for a comprehensive description of this electronic information service. Hewlett-Packard is pleased to be your vendor of choice and we appreciate your business. Thanks again for your continued support. For further comments or questions, please call 1-888-447-7373. Sincerely, HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY Susan Weatherman Reseller Contracts &Negotiation Manager Enclosures: Instant Reference Guide HP Supported Programs Available to You HP Reseller Web Site Product Brief Reseller Certificate SB2499. Robert Raimo 325 HPLaserJET 4/4M/4+/4M+/5/5M/& 5N 970429 SB2499. Robert Raimo 346 HPLASERJET 4000 SERIES 980129 SB2499. Robert Raimo 355 LaserJet4500 N/DN 981103 SB2499. Robert Raimo 604 HPOmniBook 4000/5000 & 6000 Series 970804 ,.,B2499. Robert Raimo 605 HPOmniBook 600 & 800 Series 970804 SB2499. Robert Raimo 901 HPLaserJet Basic Hardware Training 970429 Total Service Technicians: 4 Authorized Technician Count (By Exam #) Exam ___Exam __Exam _ _Exam _ Exam # Count # Count- # Count - # Count --# -- Count 040---2 -- 049---2 -- 324---1 -- 329---1 -- 346---1 044---1 -- 050--- 1 -- 325 ---3 -- 330---1 -- 355---1 045 ---1 -- 051 ---1 -- 326---2 -- 336---1 -- 604---1 046---2 -- 054--- 1 -- 327---1 -- 339 ---1 -- 605 ---1 047---2 -- 322---1 -- 328 ---1 -- 341 ---1 -- 901 ---3 Total Exam Authorizations: 25 http://partner.americas.hp.com/rrc/docs.cgilbsds/list techs.cgi?level=outlet 2/12/99 Technician Report for Outlet 0127880001 Authorized Technician List (by Technician ID) TECH ID "TECHMCIAN "'EXAM N""EXAM DESCRIPTION "DATE SA0143. Larry Mcdermott 040 HPNETSERVER LH/2/PRO/PLUS & LD 950628 SA0143. Larry Mcdermott 046 HPVL2/2E,VL2 5/60,M2,N2,XM2,XP,XU 950628 SA0143. Larry Mcdermott 047 HPNetServer LS/LS2 950628 SA0143. Larry Mcdermott 049 HPVectra'95 Models 950628 SA0143. Larry Mcdermott 322 HPDeskJet 500C,520,550C,560C Diagnostic 940613 SA0143. Larry Mcdermott 324 HPC2614A DESKJET PORTABLE 940613 SAO143. Larry Mcdermott 326 HPLaserJet IUSi, 4Si and 4SiMX 950919 SA0143 . Larry Mcdermott 328 HPDESKJET 1200C/1600C/PS 940613 SA0143. Larry Mcdermott 329 HPDESKJET 310 PRINTER C2621A 940613 SA0143 . Larry Mcdermott 330 HPDESKWRITER 310 PRINTER, C2617A/23A 940613 SA0389 Paul 040 HPNETSERVER LH/2/PRO/PLUS & LD 950801 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 044 HewlettPackard NetServer LF 970226 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 045 HPNetServer LC 970226 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 046 HPVL2/2E,VL2 5/60,M2,N2,XM2,XP,XU 950801 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 047 HPNetServer LS/LS2 950801 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 049 HPVectra'95 Models 950801 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 050 HPVectra'96 Models 961108 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 051 HPVectra Models 50015101515 961108 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 054 HPVECTRA 97/500/VE3/VL5 Series 980827 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 325 HPLaserJET 4/4M/4+/4M+/5/5M/ & 5N 961004 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 326 HPLaserJet IIISi, 4Si and 4SiMX 961004 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 327 HPLASERJET 4L/4P/4ML/4MP/5P/5MP/6P/6MP 961004 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 336 HPLaserJet 4V/4MV 961111 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 339 LASERJET5L AND 6L SERIES 961004 Khodabakhsh SA0389 Paul 341 HPLASERJET 5SI/5SIl1X MOPIER/8000 961004 Khodabakhsh SERIES SA0389 Paul 901 HPLaserJet Basic Hardware Training 961004 Khodabakhsh SA4923. Steve Mason 325 HPLaserJET 4/4M/4+/4M+/5/5M/& 5N 960522 SA4923. Steve Mason 901 HPLaserJet Basic Hardware Training 960522 http://partner.americas.hp.com/rrc/docs.cgi/bsds/list techs.cgi?level=outlet 2/12/99 February 12, 1999 City of Kent Information Services Dept. Att a. City Clerk 220 4"Avenue South Kent,WA 98032 Re: QUOTE FOR HP NET SERVERS Attachment#4: HP warranty information: Since we are an HP authorized service center we offer the City of Kent two options as pertaining to warranty service. Option 1: The standard HP warranty services is 3 years on site.You may call HP direct for service related issues. Option 2: All service related issues can be directed to Unison,Inc.,we have a toll free support line, 1-800- UNISOFT(1-800-864-7638)available 8-5 Monday through Friday. lincer "Y, Randy Wright Director of Operations UNisoFT, INC. 14690 NE 95th Street,Suite 101 •Redmond,WA 98052-2544•Tel:(425) 861-5750-Fax:(425)861-9068 MCWLETT" Llr PACKARD dm rr Hewlett- Comp , tia94086 Naciff T Park I200 SerSUMwVa Unisofi Inc 14690�E 95s`Stroet, Suite 101 Redmond,WA 99052-2544 For tholattention of Paul Khodabakhsh 16ei February 1999 Outlet Identification: 0127880001 Dear , This later is to confirm that you are an Authorized Hewlett Packard Premier Support Provider. You are authorized to perform service repairs only an products that you are authorized to sell under your Hewlett-Packard U.S.Value-Added Reseller agreement,and wheat an HP certified technician employed by Umsoft performs those services. Upon request,HP can supply the certificate numbers and products that you c ua dy have technicians trained on. Yours sincerely, Adele alshe. Channel Support Program Manager. fI TOTAL P.02 February 12, 1999 City of Kent •`Information Scrvieci Dept. Attn: City Clerk 220 4'"Avenue South Kent,WA 98032 Attu: Joe Lorenz Re: QUOTE FOR HFNET SERVERS Addendum to Bid Attachment 42 is hereby replaced by the attached Certificate of Authorization. Attachment#3 will be replaced no later than 2/16/1999 by a letter verifying status as an H1' warranty service center., Unison is pleased to confirm the total price as bid,irreslxx:tive of witbmcdc irregularities. • cercly, . . Randy Wright Dhvcwr of Operations UNISOFT. INC. 14890 NE 95th Strut,Suite 101 Redmond,WA 98052-2544-Tel:(425)esi-5750-Fox-(425)881-90ti8 Z O � ' N G r it de at 16 C O c W 4 �s a N W � � 42 REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE C. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE D. PUBLIC WORKS/PLANNING COMMITTEE E. PARKS COMMITTEE F. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES January 19, 1999 w COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Judy Woods, Sandy Amodt, Tim Clark STAFF PRESENT: May Miller, Brent McFall, John Hodgson, Jed Aldridge, Chris Hills, Sue Viseth, Joe Lorenz, Barbara Lopez, Charlie Lindsey, Dena Laurent, Kathleen Senecaut, Linda Phillips, Mayor White, Tom Brubaker, Jackie Bicknell Agenda changes: The vouchers needing approval are dated January 14, 1999 as well as January 15, 1999. Item three was deleted because it is incorporated in Item six. Approval of Minutes of January 5, 1999 Committee Member Tim Clark made the motion to approve the minutes of January 5, 1999. The motion was seconded and carried 3-0. Approval of Combined Check-Detail Vouchers May Miller, Director of Finance, presented the check-detail vouchers for approval. Tim Clark made the motion to approve the vouchers dated January 14, 1999 and January 15, 1999. The motion was seconded and carried 3-0. Diversity Training Consultant Contract Chris Hills, Risk Manager, recapped the decision of bringing in a consultant to provide diversity training services by forming a committee comprised of employees from each City department as well as two members from the Mayor's Diversity Task Force. Through the Request for Proposals process, Executive Diversity Services was selected. During 1999, all line staff in the City will receive one day's training and supervisors and managers will receive two days training. Tim Clark asked Brent McFall, Director of Operations, if there would be additional costs for employee substitutes or replacements during training. Mr. McFall said there would not be any additional out-of-pocket expense,but there would be the lost opportunity cost of having employees in a day of training versus at their normal work site. Committee Member Sandy Amodt asked what measurement tool would determine the success of the workshops. Chris Hills responded that designs have been made to get feedback, with Executive Services attaining the information. The training committee will be evaluating the feedback and then will do follow-up measurement after the training to see what the impact of the training had been. Ms. Amodt asked what was the"hope" outcome for the training. Mr. Hills said it was for employees, and citizens who interact with employees, to feel more a part of the larger community of Kent and to be able to relate to one another more easily. Ms. Amodt asked what percentage of citizens or customers that come to City Hall were of ethnic groups, and what percentage of employees were minority. Mr. McFall said there were no records or tracking of ethnicity or cultural background of customers with whom the City interacts. There is dated information from the 1990 census as to the ethnicity and demographics of the population as a whole in Kent, and also up-to-date school information that may not be a totally accurate reflection of the demographics. Information is not available that says whether the City is contacted by its citizens in the same ratio as the demographics in the community as a whole. Chair Judy Woods made the assumption that numbers should be available in terms of employee diversity. Sue Viseth, Employee Services Director, said that the employee population make-up is 8.6% minority. That is an increase over the past year when the City was at 7.3%. The 1990 census survey data showed the Kent community at 13.6% minority makeup. Those numbers have been explored with the Mayor's Multi-cultural Task Force and the new Diversity Advisory Board who will be providing feedback and assisting the City in gathering information for training. Ms. Amodt asked how many bilingual employees were working for the City. Mr. Hills said one of the things that would probably be a recommendation as a result of the diversity training was to create and make available a data base resource list of people who could speak certain languages. That subject was brought up during the focus group sessions provided by Executive Services in their training designs based on the specific needs of the City of Kent. Sandy Amodt moved that the Operations Committee recommend to the Council to authorize the Mayor to sign a contract, already approved by the City Attorney, with Executive Diversity Services, Inc., to provide inclusion and diversity training to all City employees. The motion was seconded and carried 3-0. Purchase of Fiber Optic Cable from TCI Joe Lorenz, Network Manager, said that through the meetings with TCI on the fulfillment of their franchise agreement to provide fiber optics to City facilities, it was decided that now would be the opportunity to include additional facilities while TCI was building up their infrastructure in the City of Kent. The proposal is to extend fiber optics to the portions of the Kent and Federal Way School Districts that are within the Kent City limits. Also to Parks Kent Commons, the Parks Senior Center, Parks Resource Center, Fire Stations 71, 72, 75, and 76, a possible new maintenance facility,Valley Com, and the Golf Course facility. Tim Clark commented that the City library is scheduled for fiber optic linkage, but asked about the possibility of exploring with the City of Covington the linking of the new regional library at the edge of Covington at Highway 18. Mr. Lorenz replied that the City of Covington would have that opportunity, and noted that King County had made provisions to connect up all county library facilities in their agreement with TCI. Mr. Clark asked for clarification on the increased potential that the enlarged network gives to the City in terms of access to the technology of training, communications, and emergency backups. Mr. Lorenz indicated the added sites on the colored map. Sites in green are ones in the original franchise agreement. Sites in red are the proposed additional sites. Redundancy is built in to help incorporate unforeseen events. Touching on the training aspect, Mr. Lorenz said that Fire stations could have two-video training so firemen could be in their station, have training, and still be close to where a call might come through. The ability to share voice and data across fiber optics is at significantly higher speeds. The life span of the network is approximately 20 years. Mr. Clark commented that with fiber optics, the ability of instantaneous picture and audio would be created, and asked if, on a fire call, on-the-scene observation could literally flash live pictures to headquarters for further direction or backup equipment. Joe Lorenz said the technology would have to be on location but wouldn't necessarily take advantage of the fiber optic network described in the diagram. However, that capability is possible as seen with the nightly TV news. Mr. Clark presumed that emergency valuations would be greatly enhanced through the increased technology, and Mr. Lorenz agreed and said the performance of daily responsibilities would not have to wait on a slow link and there would be the ability to extend voice without paying for a dedicated point-to-point circuit through a third party provider. Tim Clark asked if he was correct in assuming that employees could be sent out from their current work site to other locales and it would not change their ability to communicate with their fellow employees, and also would have the ability to assess problems more accurately. Joe Lorenz said the local area network would be expanded out with the ability to provide services and do troubleshooting over that network as with the campus network. Sandy Amodt asked why the City was looking at connecting the golf course when it wasn't certain what action would be taken with the golf course. Joe Lorenz replied that the golf course is a City facility and needs services provided as long as the City is using it and fiber optics at that location would be beneficial. Ms. Amodt asked what the time frame was for putting in the fiber optics in comparison to the time frame on the decision for the golf course. Brent McFall answered that if a decision was made by the City Council in a timeframe that allowed the City to withdraw the golf course from the network, it would do so. But as the golf course is a municipal facility, the fiber optic network is in very close proximity to the City shops, the opportunity to take advantage of a very good price is available, and TCI is putting in their lines anyway, it makes prudent sense to include the golf course in that installation. If the City sold the golf course, it would not be throwing away money as the fiber optic capability would enhance the golf course to a potential buyer, and might enhance the value as well. Tim Clark asked if installation of the fiber optic lines would also reduce some of the costs of the current phone lines. Brent McFall replied that there would be significant savings. Mr. Clark asked what a TCI line costs now. Joe Lorenz replied that it was around$310 per line per month. Sandy Amodt asked how much would be left in the contingency budget after these funds were used. Mr. McFall responded that this project would take less than half of the contingency budget. Tim Clark moved that the Operations Committee recommend to the Council that the Mayor be authorized to apply funds; estimated at$155,213 from the Technology Plan contingency budget to extend the City's I-NET backbone, as provided under the City's franchise agreement with TCI, subject to City Attorney approval. The motion was seconded and carried 3-0. Councilmanic Bonds May Miller said there is reason to go forward with Councilmanic Bonds as several projects are now ready to use the money. Bonds were never issued last year, even though budgeted, as the bond projects were never at a certainty to proceed. Also, interest rates are the lowest they have been in 20 years. Dick King, Lehman Brothers, recommended looking at all future projects to see if they would be ready to include now to take advantage of the lower interest rate, and this would save duplication of the bond issuance costs. Every item was looked at for 1998 and 1999 to see if they were ready, and this bond of$20,858,000 includes both years of projects with the exception of the parking garage and land acquisition for the Performing Arts Center. The exact amounts for those two are not known or exactly when they will happen. All other issues were combined together. On March 16, 1999 final adjustments will be made in the dollar amount and the final interest rate established. The money won't be received until the end of March. Ms. Miller said a trip was planned to San Francisco to meet with Moody's and Standard& Poor's. A credit check has been done and an official statement put out to go forward to the credit agency. w Seattle and Bellevue both recently got their ratings upgraded and Dick King feels that Kent really has a strong position because of the strong fund balance, smooth annexations, and revenue coming in as r was budgeted. If the City's credit rating is upgraded, it will keep the interest at the lowest rate. It also sets a rate for utilities for later revenue bonds as they can't have a higher rating than the general Government. Bond issue projects have been grouped into land and buildings. The East Hill land acquisition has been budgeted, as has the final payment on Fire Station 75, which was the station acquired in the annexation. The final payment is due in December, but by paying it off April I", the City will save about $100,000 in interest costs. Included is the Phase II of the Space Plan, and the proposed acquisition in the next two years of land for the Police Headquarters. Long-term, minor and temporary remodels, and renovations are planned. Corrections needs major life-cycle renovations, and there are other tenant improvements and temporary changes to accommodate space until there is more room. Security improvements are included plus an employee or workplace task force, the technology-automation plan that is already approved, and Police and Fire MVP replacements which would give those departments lap tops. Back-up generators have been purchased, to be ready for the year 2000 in case of disaster, for City Hall, the Centennial Center, the Shops, Kent Commons, and all major City facilities. The City's portion of the 2561h Corridor and the Downtown Gateways Project are included. The life of each asset is determined, as they will be funded for the period of their life cycle. Some of the mainframe computer hardware has a seven-year life, some systems such as the business system is on a 10 year life, while some land and buildings have a 20 year life cycle. The seven-year issue will be complete in seven years, the ten in ten years, and then the final issue in 20 years. Dick King put together all the debt schedule based on life cycles. About $76,000 will be received from accrued interest which will pay part of the expenses. Bond insurance premium was paid which upgrades the rating to the very highest grade and keeps the interest rate at the lowest level. The principle payment is always made in December, so the first major principle payment for this bond will be December, 1999. There will be a higher debt service payment for the first seven years because that includes all the automation pieces and others that have a seven-year life, then for the next 3 years the rest of the 10 year life cycle items will be covered. The debt service payment has already been budgeted and set aside. In order to put it in the Capital Budget, it has to be established how the City can afford to pay for the debts. This year about $611,000 will be saved because of timing and when the issuance is done. There are Several projects ready to begin right away, such as the East Hill Maintenance Facility land, the Phase II Study, and some of the Tenant Improvements. If the City declares its intent to bond, that means some of the cash reserves can be used until the bond cash is received on April 1'`, then the City can pay back to the cash reserves. John Hodgson, Parks Director, gave a general idea of where the City is right now on the Space Study. In 10 years, the City anticipates a population of at least 130,000. As a result, the Space Study will look at space requirements the City will need in order to provide service to that size community. The initial study was a bubble concept where all departments determined their current and future levels of service. They came up with how many staff and how much equipment will be needed to provide City services. It was identified that all of the Centennial Center will probably be needed plus more maintenance facilities for Parks and Public Works and a larger Police station. The next Phase of the Space Study is the programming and pre-design. Programming includes the evaluation of all work functions, space needed, and what the average office should look like 10 years from now. Pre- design is the stage that goes into actual construction drawings which is where everyone will sit, how big the workstations are, how many square feet of file space or electronic file space will be needed to service offices in the future. Engineering- and Architecture is from 8-12% of the $300,000 cost, including construction drawings. Tim Clark asked about the Information Systems training Center. Brent McFall said it would be a room in the Centennial Center to do in-house training of 12-15 employees at a time on technology and software applications. Mr. Clark had a question about improvements to Fire Station 74. Mr. McFall said there are some needed minor modifications having to do with structural issues, the internal drainage system, dry-rot, and repairs. Tim Clark asked for a scale that breaks out the bonding over the years. May Miller said she could provide that, and added that this would not require any new taxes. Right now Sales Tax, and Real Estate Excise Tax are used with $2 million funded from the Gas Tax. From December 1998 to January 1999, $800,000 were added because of the Del Mar, Meridian Valley, and Meridian annexations. Right now there is $88 million and the City owes $43 million, so it's at about 50% of capacity. This bond would put the City at 58% capacity the day it's issued. By the end of the year it drops back down because more value is added and a payment has been made. Brent McFall added that the City is well within the limits of its debt capacity. Tim Clark commented that the City had expressed a desire to build the garage for the train station in partnership with Metro and King County and had given a commitment for a certain amount of financing. He asked what the status was on the parking garage. Mr. McFall said the City is continuing to work with Sound Transit on negotiation of an interlocal agreement which would set out the City of Kent's cost for its portion share of that structure. The project is still in early design stage and it's not known yet what the ultimate cost of the structure will be or exactly how many parking stalls there will be. The formula that has been conceptually agreed upon factors in the difference of the cost of a surface parking stall and the cost of a structured parking stall. That amount will then be multiplied by the number of stalls in the garage to find Kent's proportionate share. Mr. Clark submitted that the proposal the City sent made a commitment of$4 million. Mr. McFall said he had every confidence that the cost would be at or below that number. Sandy Amodt asked what the contingency plan was for repaying the bond debt in the event of a disaster. Mr. McFall replied that there were three ways the City could accommodate a financial disaster. First, the City has maintained a contingency fund in its Capital Improvement Program. Council's policy has been to have a 10% reserve in the General Fund which has been extended, with Council concurrence, to the Capital Improvement Fund, so there is a 10%reserve in that fund as well. Cash is available in the event of a short-term downturn where that cash might be needed. Second, there are a number of projects that are cash-funded. If the City got into a situation where the revenue into the Capital Improvement Fund was not producing at the rate that was projected, some or all of those projects proposed to be funded with cash would be deferred to make the debt service payments. Third, Kent has been a very good steward over the years in funding of depreciated capital assets, equipment, self-funded health insurance plans, and the self-funded workers compensation program. As an absolute last resort, the City has funds set aside for these specific purposes which could be utilized to make debt obligations. The City shows the bond rating agencies, Moody's and Standard& Poor's, the amount of money that is truly available to meet obligations in the event of an absolute disaster, and the policies in respect to reserves in the Capital Improvement Fund and the General Fund. The rating agencies have looked upon that very favorably and have recognized that Kent has an excellent ability to pay even in the event of a disastrous financial circumstance. Debt service obligations could be carried for a couple of years if the need was there. Sandy Amodt asked if the City anticipates using the whole Centennial Building facility. John Hodgson replied that there is the possibility that some of the 41h floor could continue to be leased which would generate some revenue. He said there is still the need for a larger Police station, and the potential of replacing the current Council chambers with a new Council chambers and using the current chambers as part of Information Services. Brent McFall said that construction of a new Police Headquarters would free up their current space, which should give the City enough office space. Ms. Amodt asked what the projection was on staff ratio to 130,000 population. Mr. Hodgson said the only direct staff ratio is Police officers per thousand, and the firefighters ratio is close to that. Other ratios have to do with the number of acres or miles of street maintained. Brent McFall added that right now the City has a staff ratio of about 10 staff per thousand population. Tim Clark moved that the Operations Committee recommend to the Council to proceed with the issuance of Councilmanic Bonds of$20,858,000 plus bond issuance costs; establish and/or amend the necessary budgets for the projects, debt issuance costs and debt service as outlined; proceed with several projects, including tenant improvements. Phase II of the Space Study and purchase of the land for the East Hill Maintenance Facility with the intent to reimburse these projects with the bond proceeds; and authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Merritt& Pardini for an amount not to exceed$300,000 for Phase II of the Space Study. The motion was seconded and carried 3-0. December Financial Report May Miller asked to postpone the December Financial Report to the next Operations Committee meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 4:38PM. PUBLIC WORKS/PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES January 20, 1999 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Tim Clark, Rico Yingling, Connie Epperly substituting for Tom Brotherton STAFF PRESENT: Sandy Amodt, Don Wickstrom, Roger Lubovich, Fred Satterstrom, Diana Nelson, Gary Gill, Dena Laurent, Kevin O'Neill, Robyn Bartelt, Kathleen Senecaut, Pat Fitzpatrick, Jackie Bicknell PUBLIC PRESENT: Steve Dejulio Chair Tim Clark dropped the Billboard Ordinance Status from the agenda. Anoroval of Minutes of December 7, 1998 Committee member Connie Epperly moved to approve the minutes of December 7, 1998. The motion was seconded and carried 3-0. Mixed Use Development Kevin O'Neill, Planning Department Senior Planner, informed the Committee of the proposed amendment recommendation of the Land Use and Planning Board on Mixed Use Development including both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code that was referred back to the Planning Committee by the full Council on Dec. 8, 1998. In 1995 when the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Plan, the plan map designated three areas for mixed use development: two areas on North Central and West Meeker directly adjacent to the Downtown, and a third area on the East Hill. The Comp Plan map and policies distinguish between the areas, however, in that the plan says multi-family residential areas would be allowed as a stand-alone use in the Valley. On the East Hill, it would only be allowed in a mixed use development that combined commercial uses with residential uses. When the board and the Council considered zoning amendments necessary to implement those plan policies in 1996 and 1997, a mixed use overlay was - designated in all three of those areas. The Plan was only to apply in specific overlay areas and designated parcels. Most of the area in the Valley is zoned general commercial. The areas on the East Hill that are designated for mixed use are zoned primarily community commercial or office. When the zoning codes were adopted, there were differences in general commercial versus community commercial and office zone. In the general commercial zone in these mixed use overlay areas, mostly unresidential uses were allowed as a stand-alone use. Last summer. the Mayor, with the Council's concurrence, asked staff and the Land Use Board to recommend amendments to the plan and zoning for the general commercial area to only allow residential development in a mixed use configuration in the Valley similar to how it's done on the East Hill. Staff recommended some amendments to both the Plan and zoning code, which would have implemented that request. The land use board in their public hearing on Oct. 26th voted to keep the plan and zoning as they now stand and to not amend either one but to continue to allow stand alone residential uses in the mixed use areas of the Valley. Chair Tim Clark asked what the impact would be on multi family dwelling structures within the area if the language adopted dropped the "on a stand alone basis in designated areas". Kevin O'Neill responded that if Mixed Use Development standards were standardized throughout the City to make those in the Valley similar to those on the East Hill, residential uses would still be allowed in those mixed use areas. However. a developer would have to, within the same building or on the same site, combine those residential uses with commercial uses so that at least 25% of the total area would be commercial. That is the existing standard on the East Hill at this time. The use would still be allowed but it wouldn't be allowed on a stand- alone basis. Committee Member Rico Yingling commented that the original concern was that there was a potential for a developer to bring in low standard apartment complexes but that didn't happen. Mr. O'Neill said part of the concern was about a development that was proposed and has now been permitted on North Central Avenue that was of a stand alone residential nature. Seeing that development come in raised some concerns of whether that was what the City wanted or if in a mixed use area should any single developmer.: be mixed use. The Board has wrestled with the issue of whether requiring a commercial component with a residential component would make residential development unfeasible. Tim Clark remarked that there are considerations and mentioned that the arrival of the commuter rail could indicate the need to create housing that accommodates access to a much better transportation system for people. The City Council has traditionally not taken a position of encouraging stand alone apartment complexes. The bulk of those that have been built were all permitted in the 1980s. Now there is definite rejection on the part of the citizens for stand alone apartment complexes, and it has been a struggle trying to establish a more diverse housing ratio but the recent annexations have brought the City back into better balance. A fairly prolonged examination of the mixed use plan on the East Hill was done with the purpose and intent to tie together the community, especially with the allotment of services and the dependency of the people that live there trying to development business within the community where they live. Kevin O'Neill said mixed use developments, specific zonings, or developments that combine residential and commercial uses have been done throughout the region. It is possible and feasible to do and the commercial component of a mixed use development can generate revenue overall throughout the development that may mitigate some of the concern. Rico Yingling said he agreed with the Land Use and Planning Board that no changes were necessary. Connie Epperly remarked that the Council heard very clearly from the public 15 years ago that there were too many apartments, which were at 70% density. Now it is down to 50% because of the annexations. Multi family units put a strain on public safety, and much of the Police and Fire activities are spent in mul family developments. Mr. Yingling made the comment that hearings were held with the public invited, and the Land Use and Planning Board after receiving information sustained the fact that no changes were necessary. Most of the downtown area is already a mixed use area. Connie Epperly said that when the mixed-use concept came up about 6-8 years ago, consultant Tony Nielsen was invited to do a community project that 250 citizens attended. He showed examples of mixed use development that other cities were doing that was very popular that consisted of retail on the ground floor and apartments above. Rico Yingling stated that, within walking distance of the particular development area in discussiorr, there are restaurants, an athletic club, a car dealership, gas stations, and different kinds of commercial development, making it already mixed use,just not a particular type of mixed use. Tim Clark asked how far the area would extend into the City's downtown strategic plan area. Fred Satterstrom, Senior Planner, said it would only go to about James Street. Most of the zoning is GC zone and is outside the downtown commercial zoning district with some areas just outside. There is already a mixed use environment in the downtown area where residential can be built on its own or in a mixed use configuration. The areas of discussion are outside of the actual city center. Mr. Clark asked how many city blocks outside of downtown. Mr. Satterstrom said it was probably all within half a mile. Mr. Clark summarized that it would basically be a vision for the greater downtown area and would not prevent multi family housing from being built in the City of Kent, but would restrict the areas and types in particular zones. Rico Yingling suggested that development is market driven and it would depend on whether developers could afford to build mixed use development in the zoned areas. Mr. Satterstrom agreed and said that a primary factor working against the development of mixed use is the fact that a lot of the development community isn't used to the idea. The consultant that was hired to work with the Land Use and Planning Board said that developers must be comfortable doing mixed use. If apartment builders are trying to build commercial, that's strange to them and they're reluctant to try it. If commercial builders are used to building commercial and not residential, residential is foreign to them. Kevin O'Neill commented that the consultant said it typically takes a development community 5-7 years to adapt to changes, not only regulations, but also types of development and market conditions. Connie Epperly asked what the density was for multi family development. Mr. O'Neill said the overall building envelope of a building is based on floor area ratio. Floor area ratio is the ratio of the floor area of the building over the lot area and is a term that can be used for either commercial or residential development. The developer would have the option of building residential uses of up to a FAR of 1, which would mean on a 40,000 square foot lot, a 40,000 square foot building could be built. The number of units that would go into that building would be a function of how big the individual units were. Ms. Epperly asked about height restrictions. Mr. O'Neill said that in the overlay areas there is a height restriction of up to 40 feet on the East Hill and up to 50 feet in the valley areas. There are incentives to get residential development in the mixed-use ordinance. A developer could start out with a base height of 25 feet and then would be given bonuses. Adding residential uses to a building or development would give a bonus of an extra 5 feet. Putting a pitched roof, which is more of a residential look, gives another bonus of up to 5 feet. Trying to get some of the parking at grade or below grade gives another bonus. The way the ordinance is written it actually rewards residential development by giving developers bonuses. It does that on the East Hill and in the valley to try to get a better overall development and a better integrated development. Connie Epperly moved to accept the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation but deleting the sentence "Or on a stand-alone basis in designated areas" on Policy LU-6.2. The motion was seconded by Tim Clark. Kevin O'Neill clarified the recommendation of the Land Use and Planning Board to leave zoning alone and not change it. Page 5 of the staff report.dated Oct. 26`h outlined amendments that needed to be made to both the comp plan and zoning code to require residential development in the valley to be of a mixed use configuration. Tim Clark summarized the desired motion to adopt comprehensive plan amendments from the staff report of Oct. 261h, numbers 1, 2, and 3 from page 5 and on page 6 the zoning code amendments as listed numbers 1 and 2. Mr. Clark asked Ms. Epperly if that was her desired motion. She responded yes. The motion was seconded by Tim Clark and carried by a vote of 2-1. Rico Yingling voted no. King County Grant Agreement— 1999 City Optional Program Don Wickstrom, Director of Public Works, informed the Committee of a correction in the dollar amount for the budget. The Business Recycling Program equals $23,868 rather than $36,286, which makes a final total of$36,286 for the proposed budget. This grant is from King County to hold special events for recycling two times a year, and for a collection of specific material not in the current site pickup collections. Tim Clark asked if this would be hazardous material. Mr. Wickstrom responded that it was more for special recycling, and another grant would be for household hazardous waste materials. Four items have to be picked for recycling from a list that includes Non-ferrous Metals. Tires, Appliances. 43-7 Plastics, PET & HDPE Plastic Containers. Clean Wood (untreated), Bulky Wood Waste (less than 3 inches in diameter), Reusable Household Goods. Textiles. Ferrous Metals, and Polycoated Paperboard. The Business Recycling Program is to provide assistance to businesses within the Kent City limits to expand recycling, waste prevention, and bio-recycling programs, and to provide assistance to establish these programs and also to work towards a minimum service level, which means every business should be doing some recycling. Rico Yingling moved that the Public Works/Planning Committee recommend to the Council authorization for the Mayor to sign the Grant Agreement, direct staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for $36.286. The motion was seconded and passed 3-0. Seattle/King-County Health Department Grant Agreement—Hazardous Waste Collection Don Wickstrom said this is a grant in the amount of$21,727 from the Seattle/King County Health Department for a special household hazardous waste program that would include two events. Materials to be collected for recycling are lead, acid batteries, antifreeze, all petroleum-based products/oil filters, and automobile tires. Connie Epperly moved that the Public Works/Planning Committee recommend to the Council to authorize the Mayor to sign the Grant Agreement, and to direct staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for $21,727. The motion was seconded and passed 3-0. LID 349—SE 223rd St. Sanitary Sewer—Charge in Lieu of Assessment Don Wickstrom said this LID was initiated in 1997 and funded in January 1998. Because of septic tank problems in the cover area, the Council asked to have the construction done that year and it was. The asphalt happened to be a lot thicker than was anticipated and the County made the City restore it back to what it was and that took the project over budget. The total contract budget was for $246,000 and the actual costs came in at $352,000. Property owners were notified that there was going to be a problem and it was estimated that their assessment would jump from about $8,600 to $10,129. 50% of the property owners voted to proceed with the project. Mr. Wickstrom said there are some large, undeveloped parcels on the north of 223`d, which could potentially be subdivided. When the LID was set up it was anticipated putting some money into the fund project to pay for future subdivision of those lots so when they connected they would then reimburse the City. Those properties would pay $10,129 as they subdivide. A couple of properties that weren't included in the LID area because they were actually in the Soos Creek Sewer& Water franchise area but are logically connected to City lines, will be asked to reimburse that amount when and if they connect. Because the citizens were promised the amount would be $10,129, the Department doesn't feel it can go back and assess more because the project cost $43,000 more than estimated. The additional money will come from the Miscellaneous Capital Improvement Fund for sewers to keep the assessment at the original level as was last agreed. Rico Yingling clarified that one cost was indicated to homeowners, and it was discovered it would cost more. Over 50% of the property owners accepted that. Then it was found that the cost would be even more than that and so the Department is paying the difference. He asked if the potential new connections would receive the same charge as the original assessment. Mr. Wickstrom said it was anticipated that there would be a certain number of connections because the lots are potentially subdividable so that was originally included in the budget and the assessment would be the same. Rico Yingling moved that the Public Works/Planning Committee recommend to the council to authorize the Public Works Department to establish a charge in lieu of assessment for$10,129 per connection (per house) as described above, for the affected properties as shown on the attached map. The motion was seconded and passed 3-0. LID 349—Final Assessment Roll Don Wickstrom said the Final Assessment Roll needs to be confirmed in the amount of$10,129 recognizing that$43,000 will come from the City's Sewer Division and $70,903 should be collected bacl in future assessments. Connie Epperly moved that the Public Works/Planning Committee recommend to the Council authorization to establish March 2, 1999 as the Public Hearing date to adopt the Ordinance establishing the Final Assessment Roll for LID 349. The motion was seconded and passed 3-0. Report on TCI Negotiations with Seattle Tim Clark explained that he wanted to find out what was going on with Seattle in their negotiations with TCI. TCI is not meeting its build-out in terms of timeliness and contractual obligations. Conceivably some things have come to light in Seattle's exploration of the options of which Kent needs to be apprised. The intent of this motion would be to have a report back no later than 30 days preferably to this Committee. Rico Yingling moved that the Public Works/Planning Committee direct administration to contact the City of Seattle for information on current negotiations with TCI. The motion was seconded and passed 3-0. Zoning Code Ordinance Update Kevin O'Neill said the Zoning Code Ordinance Update relates to the Zoning Code Update that was adopted by Council in June 1998. It involved numerous changes to the zoning code many of which were substantive and many of which were related to reformatting the configuration of the code. Following the adoption of the ordinance and in actually applying the provisions of the ordinance, it was subsequently realized there had been inadvertent errors made in moving from the adopted amendments to the actual ordinance. One of the major changes that was adopted as part of the zoning code update was taking the uses allowed in each zoning district and the development standards that were very task intensive and moving those into a tabular matrix format. Mistakes were made by the consultants that staff failed to catch. Some of the reformatting done with conditions in the preexisting code weren't moved into the new table. Some of the things adopted by Council in June weren't moved into the actual ordinance, or when they were moved into the ordinance that was drafted by the City Attorney's office, they hadn't been done correctly. Both the Planning Department and the City Attorney's office bear some responsibility for these actions. Staff has been working internally to make sure all of those errors have been corrected. Laurie Evezich, Assistant City Attorney, has termed the errors to be scrivener's errors in that they were inadvertent. Staff has brought it back to this committee to disclose what has happened and are asking for the Committee's concurrence to make the corrections in the ordinance. Connie Epperly moved that the Public Works/Planning Committee recommend to the Council approval of corrections to Ordinance 3409 as outlined and updated and recommend sending the corrected ordinance to the full City Council for consideration. The motion was seconded and passed 3-0. Sewer Comp Plan—Introduction Don Wickstrom covered two issues, the update of the existing comp plan, and a sewer rate increase. Mr. Wickstrom said the comp plan had no new issues. Some emergency work and improvements have been done. The Comp Plan shows minor work to some pump stations, and the need was identified for a new East Hill trunk system, which has been budgeted in the 1999 budget. A new interceptor will be connected to the Valley/Auburn interceptor that goes to the Renton treatment plant which will end on the hill at 264`h and 1141". It will service the City's ultimate needs up to 40,000,000 gallons a day. The City's service area is still in the county and even though the lot on the East Hill has been annexed, the bulk of the system is from I5 easterly out to about 1241", eventually going to 272nd North and to 212'h on the East Hill. The area tapers over towards Benson Highway and Soos Creek. The franchises of 1980 are expiring this year. To get a new franchise to operate in King County the comp plan needs to be updated. Kent's servicing area includes the Polygon Kentview Complex on the West Hill, west of the river. Council has also approved service to SeaTac. The Coluccio development area at Orillia Road and 200"' was included at the same time as the Kentview proposal. The Island area on Military Road, south of 516 and the river, along 277'h that follows the corridor, will eventually be in Kent's service area and the City will need a franchise to service that area. King County Metro is putting a trunk in but that is Kent's potential service area including the area between the tracks. Rico Yingling asked who would be putting in the east- west trunk line in that area. Don Wickstrom replied that it was part of King County, but Kent would have control of the service area and would determine how it would be serviced. Tim Clark asked if the City would be responsible for a line feeding off the West Hill by the Kentview development, which would be in Sea Tac. Don Wickstrom said the City will service Sea Tac with a City system and will have the rights of control to say what the uses will be. The plan is that it will always be Kent's system even with extended use to Sea Tac. A franchise agreement will have to be worked out with Sea Tac. The only other area outside of the present franchise is in the vicinity of 132"d and along the border with Auburn. A tentative agreement has been reached about potentially servicing that area and is reflected in the comp plan. Mr. Wickstrom handed out a document prepared by the Finance Department showing sewer rates. The net available for Capital Projects and total available Capital are in negative amounts. Because Sewer and Storm are a combined utility, to continue to finance the Sewer utility, Storm Sewer revenue is being used. Mr. Wickstrom said the Storm Sewer should pay its own share and the Sewer should pay its own share. In order to get out of the hole, a rate increase of 41/z% is needed. which would be about$1.09 per month increase. Mr. Wickstrom said this subject would be back to the next Public Works/Planning Committee for additional discussion. Rico Yingling asked for clarification on the mixture of operating financial data and capital information. Mr. Wickstrom said capital is paid out of operating revenue and when revenue exceeds expenses money goes to pay for capital. Tim Clark asked if sewers were a City obligation by law. Mr. Wickstrom answered that the City has its own utility, which is self-sufficient. It is combined with the storm utility because when that utility was created, financial backing was needed in order to implement it. Right now the storm utility is in great shape generating enough money. Holiday Garbage Pickup Don Wickstrom told the Committee that during the last snowfall on Christmas Eve, December 241h, some customers didn't get their garbage picked up. A letter was sent to the contractor, to which he responded accepting responsibility for the lack of communication with the citizens and said in the future, appropriate advance notice would be given of when the trucks would be back. Mr. Wickstrom said the City will do notification on TV and radio news and in the paper to make sure citizens are aware of when they can expect pickup. If citizens don't know, they pull their garbage can back from the curb, and then when the truck comes for pickup, the garbage cans aren't out. Tim Clark remarked that the citizens were not getting clear answers. The company came back and made an extra run trying to cover for the error, but because there was no way to notify the citizens, some people got pickup because they left their garbage cans out. Others pulled theirs back in for safety and they got missed. The situation was also complicated by the interconnection of some of the companies that service this area. Mr. Wickstrom sent a fairly lengthy letter describing that the City was not happy with how customers were treated over the phone and in terms of service. The Mayor backed this with another letter of his own and the City is now getting better compliance. Status of LID 340 Steve Dejulio, of Foster, Pepper, & Shefelman, gave an update of LID 340. In the early fall of 1998, the City Council was presented with the issue of how the Local Improvement District Final Assessment Roll for LID 340 would be managed. LIDS are an assessment based financing in which properties that are especially benefited by improvements are assessed the cost of public improvement, whether the improvements are sewer systems, water systems, or roads. LID 340 is the cross-valley arterial for 196`h from Orillia Road and the Green River across the valley, crossing the railroad tracks with elevated crossings to the East Valley Highway. The total project cost is approximately $50,000,000. The Kent portion from the river to East Valley Highway is approximately $42,000,000. Of that amount, $21,000,000 is State and local funding and $21,000,000 was to be assessed against the properties within the valley. A number of community meetings were held to discuss the process leading to the LID, and in those meetings the Public Works Department reminded the community that this was a project on the City's books and in planning for over a decade. The LID was formed in the spring of 1998, the final assessment roll process developed, and brought forward for public hearing. The City Council delegated the process to the Public Works Committee. The Public Works Committee scheduled and conducted over 10 hours of hearing, with two taking place in November, 1998. There were over 460 parcels in the LID which were subject to assessment. Only 22 protests were filed covering 40 of the 460 parcels of property within the valley. The Public Works Committee considered each of the protests, received whatever evidence was to be presented, and working with independent council, prepared extensive findings and conclusions on each of the protests. In some cases, the assessments that were proposed by the staff were modified with respect to particular properties. Following the hearings in November and the entry of initial findings in December, the committee conducted a further hearing on January 4, 1999 to hear further protests and for those properties that may have not received adequate notice of the November hearings. At the January 4`h hearing, only one group of further protests was received. The Committee entered a supplemental set of findings and the matter was forwarded to the full Council. The full Council adopted the Committees recommendation at the Council meeting of January 19, 1999 and has confirmed the roll. Initial funding for the project has already been provided by the State, and King County is already constructing certain portions of the project, with the river crossing at 200`h already in the final stages of completion. When the LID financing is in place, the final construction project from the river all the way across the valley and across the railroad tracks will be completed. The most expensive portion of that project will be the extensive bridgework necessary to cross the railroad tracks, both the Union Pacific and the Burlington Northern lines. Don Wickstrom gave a rough estimate of the bridge cost at$16,000,000. Mr. Dejulio continued, saying that after the Local Improvement District Final Assessment Roll is confirmed, all the properties are notified of the opportunity to pay the assessment within a 30 day prepay period. Certain properties have already paid their assessment including The Boeing Company that has paid its extensive assessment for its prorated share of the cost of the project. At the conclusion of that 30 day prepay period, the City will know how much in bonds it will have to issue in order to finance the project. The City will pay those bonds back through the collection of assessments from the individual property owners over a 15-year assessment payout period. The annual assessment for the next 15 years will be a specific amount of approximately 1/151h of the principal and interest of the obligation over that period of time. It is anticipated that bonds will be authorized in March of 1999, the final design completed with bids received, and then construction will be authorized. Mr. Wickstrom said the bridge is proposed to be going out to bid within one to two months and will be a two-year construction process. The roadwork should be done next year. Hopefully, the bridge and roadwork will be completed at the same time. Right now from West Valley Highway to Orillia Road, all the projects are under contract and that area will hopefully be opened this fall, with access to I5. Tim Clark mentioned that the RTA should start work on the train station this spring and summer and the train is supposed to be running in December of 1999. In the meantime there will be slower train traffic across the valley floor, and continuing traffic congestion and build-up as freight trains become more numerous until the overpasses are finished. Rico Yingling asked if there were any off ramps between the two highways. Don Wickstrom said that Frager Road will be reconnected north, but traffic won't be able to go south on Frager to 2121h. All the present access along Russell Road, and 1961h from the Green River to the West Valley will continue. There will be a signal at 58"' next to the river by the Toys 'R Us warehouse factory with a road going north allowing Boeing access. From Russell Rd. to 212`h is a right turn only, but there is an onramp also at that point. Between West Valley and East Valley, 72"d will be tied to the north. Right now it comes to the south and deadends behind an existing warehouse the City owns. That will be demolished, and the road will go from 180`h to 196`'. Steve Dejulio said the project had additional issues associated with crossing next to the Western Processing Hazardous Waste site immediately adjacent to the west side of the railroad tracks. An extensive amount of engineering and design work was required in order to satisfy the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Ecology's environmental considerations. The City has substantially satisfied requirements in order to build the project. Tim Clark asked about the formal completion of the LID Process. Mr. Dejulio said the formal completion took place last night with the Council's confirmation of the Final Assessment Roll. However, there is the possibility for a parry that has protested an assessment to seek further review by the Superior Court, and a specific statutory procedure is outlined for people who may wish to protest their specific assessment. That appeal process is only available for those properties that participated and filed written protests with the Committee initially. Mr. Dejulio cautioned Committee members who actually participated in the hearings to not have active discussions with any of the protesting parties regarding any specifics of the hearing as there is a remote possibility that the matter may come back before the Committee on reconsideration. In that situation the Committee members would again be serving in a quasi-judicial or judge-like capacity and would be bound by a court to only consider those matters that are brought forward from the public hearing record. If a property owner who did not participate and did not protest the assessment had questions or wanted to discuss the situation with the Committee or Council member, they would be free to do so. Letter to Citizens Council Member Sandy Amodt presented a letter to apologize to residents for lack of clarification on the 2771h Street Corridor Environmental Mitigation Agreement Process and to assure citizens in business that the City is working on improving the current process for environmental mitigation agreements. At the January 19`h Council meeting, the Council voted to have a task force examine the current process and to recommend improvements. Ms. Amodt asked the Committee to send the letter to the Council on the consent calendar for approval by the full Council to be mailed to the residents. Connie Epperly said she could understand how some of the citizens could feel they weren't notified because of the way the assessment was written on their deeds and paperwork. She emphasized that the majority of the current Council had nothing to do with the way the LID was formed. Tim Clark agreed with the idea behind the letter and with the issues brought forward, but suggested creating a sounding board with the citizens by having the task force meet first to look at the process of finding alternative funding sources for creating a decent transportation system. Mr. Clark said he would like to see an educational effort be made to share with the public some of the things the City faced such as a change in state law which took away the street utility tax. After receiving citizen input about alternatives and then exploring ways to create community support for whatever final funding mechanism is brought forward, the letter could be sent incorporating those ideas. Sandy Amodt agreed with including additional items in the letter after the actual research was done. The meeting was adjourned at 5:15PM. REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS A. EXECUTIVE SESSION Property Acquisition