HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 10/19/1999 s v
City of Kent
cit Counc81 Meeting
v
Agenda
CITY OF ��
d�Wo
Mayor Jim White
Counci/members
Leona Orr, President
Sandy Amodt Connie Epperly
Tom Brotherton Judy Woods
Tim Clark Rico Yingling
October 19, 1999
Off[" of the City cleric
CITY of M�` !�S' SUMMARY AGENDA
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
October 19, 1999
rYICr Council Chambers
Mayor Jim White 7 : 0 0 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. Proclamation - Make A Difference Day
B. Proclm do YWCA Week Without Violence
eI y�K a(`111to, use
5 . PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Year 2000 Operating and Capital Budget
B. Republication of Codified Kent City Code - Ordinance y
47`
6 . CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Minutes - Approve
B. Bills - Approve �ry
C . Burdic Feed Rezone Ordinance - Adopt bb
D. 1999 Budget Adjustment and Code Amendment Ordinances -
Adopt
E. Mack Park Bill of Sale - Accept
F. Commute Trip Reduction Act Interlocal Agreement -
Authorize
�G. Vactor Solids Facility - Accept as Complete
--CH n., 277th Street Sewer Interceptor, Phase One - Accept as
Complete
7 . OTHER BUSINESS
A. School District Facilities Plan, Comprehensive Plan
Amendment CPA-99-2 - Approve
B. Tonelli Rezone - Ordinance v
C. Corrections Architectural Conti act - Authorize
D. 6 t(d,P /} P�)w��) r w ? d C3� Q ��RX �2_cLeJ
8 . BIDS
None
9 . REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF
10 . REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES
11 . CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
12 EXECUTIVE SESSION
None
13 . ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: A copy of the full agenda packet is available for perusal in the City Clerk's Office and the Kent Library.
An explanation of the agenda format is given on the back of this page.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office in advance at(253)856-5725. For
TDD relay service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388.
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
WELCOME:
The Kent City Council meets on the first and third Tuesday of each month except December at 7:00 p.m. In
December, the Kent City Council meets on the second Tuesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. The public is
welcome and encouraged to participate in the meeting. Meetings are televised on local cable television either
live or tape delayed. The following is a guide to insure that your participation is effective and timely.
1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL
3. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA: When the Mayor asks for changes to the agenda from the public, please
give your name and address and the subject of your concern. The Mayor,with the consent of the Council,
will then determine whether or not this should be added to the agenda and whether it should be added as
an Other Business item (#7) or a Continued Communications item (#11), and will call upon you at the
proper time.
4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS: Presentations, proclamations, introductions, etc.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: When the Mayor asks for public comment, you should rise or raise your hand.
Upon being recognized, step to the lectern, give your name and address, and state the nature of your
interest or concern. Please speak into the microphone on the lectern.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: The Consent Calendar is designed to expedite the business of the City Council.
These items have been previously discussed by the City Council and are considered so routine that
passage is likely. All items listed are passed in a single motion. If you wish to discuss an item on the
Consent Calendar, ask to have that item removed when the Mayor announces the Consent Calendar.
7. OTHER BUSINESS: Other Business items may require discussion by the City Council prior to reaching a
decision. You will be given the opportunity to address the City Council on any item listed by following the
same procedure as in Public Hearings. If there is a great deal of public input on any item, the City Council
may elect to set a public hearing for a future date.
8. BIDS: This part of the agenda is for the approval and award of contracts for the purchase of equipment or
construction projects.
9. REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF: This section is for reports from the Council
President, Chair of the City Council Committees or City staff.
10. REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES: This section is for reports from special committees.
11. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS: Items added to the agenda will be introduced at this time. In order to
better serve the public, please limit your comments to three minutes.
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: When necessary, the Council may recess to an Executive Session. These are
closed sessions during which only certain subjects may be discussed, such as personnel matters,
litigation concerns, and the sale or acquisition of property.
13. ADJOURNMENT
COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Council Committees are composed of three Councilmembers. The Committees meet regularly, and the Council
is best able to address the concerns of constituents during these meetings. Recommendations are then taken
to the full Council, and action is taken at a City Council meeting.
The four Council Committees are Operations, Parks, Public Safety and Public Works/Planning. The Council
also holds a workshop prior to each Council meeting.
If you would like a schedule of Council Committee meetings, please call the Council Secretary at
(253) 856-5712, the City Clerk's Office at(253) 856-5725, or Administration at (253)856-5721.
4/99
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) Proclamation - Make A Difference Day
B) Proclamation - YWCA Week Without Violence
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Public Hearings
1 . SUBJECT: YEAR 2000 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This is the second public hearing on the
Year 2000 Budget . This is the proposed annual budget for both
operating and capital . Public input is desired and welcome . A
copy of the Preliminary Budget will be available at the
November 2nd Council Workshop. The final public hearing will
be held on November 16 , 1999, with the anticipated budget
adoption planned for the December 14 , 1999, Council meeting.
3 . EXHIBITS: None
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:k A. Councilmember w moves, Councilmember seconds
to close the public hearing. m 0
B. Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 5A
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Public Hearings
1 . SUBJECT: REPUBLICATION OF CODIFIED KENT CITY CODE -
ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The first reading of the proposed
ordinance adopting the Kent City Code as compiled, edited and
republished by Code Publishing Company of Seattle, Washington,
as the official code of the City of Kent, was conducted on
October 5, 1999 . During the first reading, Council set this
date as the date for a public hearing and Council action on the
proposed ordinance .
3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee and City Council
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
S . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
A. Councilmember kf V moves, Councilmember jt') seconds
to close the public hearing.
IB . Councilmember VII� moves, Councilmember L1q) seconds
adoption of Ordinance No . 3 adopting the Kent City Code as
compiled, edited and republished by Code Publishing Company of
Seattle, Washington, as the official code of the City of Kent .
DISCUSSION:
ACTION: F Y1
Council Agenda
Item No . 59
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, adopting the Kent City Code as compiled,
edited and republished by Code Publishing Company of
Seattle, Washington as the official code of the City of Kent.
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2695 constituted a codification of the
ordinances of the City of Kent, Washington, and publication thereof in a volume entitled
"Kent City Code"; and
WHEREAS, The Kent City Code was republished by Municipal Code
Corporation and adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 3080; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Kent to continue with the present
codification of the City's ordinances and to change the publication company from
Municipal Code Corporation to Code Publishing Company, without effecting any
significant change other than in the format and availability of the Kent City Code, which
will be in a written published format as well as in an electronic format available on
computer diskette; NOW THEREFORE,
1 Adoption of Code
(published Sept., 1999, by Code PublishingCompany)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 3080 is hereby repealed in its entirety.
SECTION 2. — Code Adopted. The "Kent City Code," also referred to
herein as "Code," as compiled, edited and republished by Code Publishing Company of
Seattle, Washington, is hereby adopted as the official code of the City of Kent,
Washington. In the event of any conflict or inconsistent language between this Code and
any ordinance in effect prior to the effective date of this Code as adopted herein, the
language of this Code shall prevail and the language of the prior enacted ordinance shall
be deemed amended or repealed to the extent of such inconsistency or conflict.
SECTION 3. Section 1.01.020 of the Kent City Code shall be, and is
i
hereby, amended to read as follows:
See. 1.01.020 Adoption of code. The eedi fieatien of the o""nanees of the ` it
I
ef—i�Pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.21.500 through 35.21.570, there is
adopted the "Kent City Code." the official codification of all general, public and of
permanent ordinances of the City of Kent, Washington, as compiled, edited and published
by Code Publishing Company, Seattle, Washington. natuFe as ,..tamed and set bilh in
i
A eepy h o f n file in the e ffiee o f the eity elefk entitled "Kent City Code,"
b
and the safne is hereby adopted as the effleial Gede ef the Gil�x ef Kent, as provided by
j nGw 35 21 500 35.21.570.
I
SECTION 4. — Title-Citation-Reference. This Code shall be known as the
i
"Kent City Code" and it shall be sufficient to refer to said Code as the "Kent City Code"
in any prosecution for the violation of any provision thereof or in any proceeding at law
or equity. It shall also be sufficient to designate any ordinance adding to, amending,
2 Adoption of Code
(published Sept., 1999,by Code PublishingCompany)
correcting or repealing all or any part or portion thereof as an addition to, amendment to,
correction of, or repeal of the"Kent City Code." Further reference maybe had to the titles,
chapters, sections and subsections of the "Kent City Code" and such reference shall apply
to that numbered title, chapter, section or subsection as it appears in that Code. The
references and editor's notes appearing throughout the Code are not intended to have any
legal effect, but are merely intended to assist the user of the Code. The history notes
appearing in parentheses after sections of this Code are not intended to have any legal
effect but are merely intended to indicate the source of matter contained in the section.
SECTION 5. —Reference Applies to Amendments. Whenever a reference
is made to the "Kent City Code" or any portion thereof, that reference shall apply to all
amendments, corrections and additions heretofore, now, or hereafter made.
SECTION 6. — Codification Authority. This Code consists of all of the
regulatory and penal ordinances and certain of the administrative ordinances codified
pursuant to RCW 35.21.500 through RCW 35.21.570, inclusive.
SECTION 7. — Reservation of Prosecutions. The adoption of this Code
shall not affect any prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were
committed prior to the effective date of the adoption of the Code, nor shall the adoption
of the Code be construed as a waiver of any license, fee, or penalty due and owing at the
effective date of the Code adoption, nor shall adoption affect the validity of any bond or
cash deposited with the City pursuant to the terms of any prior enacted ordinance; but
rather, all rights and obligations pertaining under ordinances in effect prior to republication
of the code shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 8. —Severabilitv. If any section, subsection, clause or phrase o
this Code is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Code. The City declares that it would
3 Adoption of Code
(published Sept., 1999, by Code PublishingCompany)
have enacted this Code, and each section, subsections, sentence, clause and phrase thereof
irrespective of the fact that one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases
had been declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 9. This ordinance shall become effective thirty(30) days after
its final passage as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of , 1999.
APPROVED: day of , 1999.
PUBLISHED: day of , 1999.
±� I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed
I
I
by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Kent as hereon indicated.
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P�Ci.il\OrmnanccUdopCwe-1999 doc
I
l
4 Adoption of Code _
(published Sept., 1999, by Code PublishingCompany)
CONSENT CALENDAR
6 . City Council Action:
Councilmember C A/Ll/ moves, Councilmember I1,l
seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through H be approved.
Discussion ty
Action MC'-
6A. Approval of Minutes .
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
October 5, 1999 .
6B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through September 30 ,
and paid on September 30 , after auditing by the Operations
Committee on October 5 , 1999 .
Aporoval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
9/30/99 223664-224020 $2 , 485, 765 .45
9/30/99 224021-224507 2 , 403 , 477 .40
$4 , 889, 242 . 85
Approval of checks issued for payroll for September 16 through
September 30 and paid on October 5, 1999 :
Date Check Numbers Amount
10/5/99 Checks 238937-239275 $ 279, 087 . 00
10/5/99 Advices 85311-85949 864 , 558 . 08
$1, 143 , 645 . 08
Council Agenda
Item No. 6 A-B
Kent, Washington
October 5 , 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 ,
Brother, Epperly, Woods and Yingling, Operations Director/Chief of
Staff McFall , City Attorney Lubovich, Police Chief Crawford, Fire
Chief Angelo, Public Works Director Wickstrom and Parks Director
Hodgson. Approximately 50 people were at the meeting.
CHANGES TO The City Attorney noted that the closing of S .
THE AGENDA 256th Street at 29th was discussed yesterday by
the Public Works and Planning Committee, and the
issue was added to the agenda as Other Business
Item 7D.
The City Attorney noted a typographical error in
Consent Calendar Item 6C regarding the date of the
public hearing on the budget and said the correct
date is October 19, 1999 .
PUBLIC Youth Service Club Ball Fields Presentation.
COMMUNICATIONS Parks Director Hodgson noted that the Parks
Department has been working .with all the service
clubs in Kent on a facility with ball fields for
youth. He showed a video which explained the pro-
ject and noted that each service club for each
field will provide either $35 , 000 in cash or in
goods and services toward the development of that
park. Baseballs signed by their members were
presented to Mayor Pro Tem Orr by a representative
of each club. Hodgson noted the dedication is
planned for April 2 , 2003 . Bags of peanuts were
distributed by Rick the Peanut Man, and Mayor Pro
Tem Orr expressed thanks to all .
Employee of the Month. Mayor Pro Tem Orr
announced that Barbara Hill , Project Coordinator
in Public Works Engineering Construction, has been
selected as October Employee of the Month. She
noted that Ms . Hill was instrumental in implement-
ing the new permitting system and is an excellent
customer service representative for the City.
1
i
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
PUBLIC Fire Prevention Week. Mayor Pro Tem Orr read a
COMMUNICATIONS proclamation noting that the Kent/District 37 Fire
Department is dedicated to the preservation of
life and property from the devastating effects of
fire, and emphasizing the extreme importance of
not only having a home escape plan but physically
practicing it regularly. She proclaimed .he week
of October 3 -9 , 1999 as Fire Prevention Week in
the City of Kent and encouraged residents to
participate in fire prevention activities at home,
work and school . Fire Chief Angelo accepted the
proclamation and said fire prevention does not
cost , it pays .
National Mammography Day. The Mayor Pro Tem noted
that this year more than 180 , 000 women in the
United States will learn that they have breast
cancer, that more than 400 , 000 women will lose
their lives, and that mammography is recognized as
the most effective method of detecting breast
changes that may be cancer. She proclaimed
October 15, 1999 , as National Mammography Day in
the City of Kent and encouraged all women to get
the facts about mammography. The proclamation was
presented to breast cancer survivor Margaret
Porter, who noted that it has been a year since
her stem cell transplant . She encouraged women to
do breast self exams , and said that breast cancer
is not a death sentence .
A Day in Memory and Honor of Domestic Violence
Victims . Mayor Pro Tem Orr noted that the
Domestic Abuse Women' s Network is organizing the
2nd Annual South Cour. y Domestic Violence Rally in
honor of those killed by domestic violence, those
who are currently in a domestic violence situa-
tion, and those who have survived this abuse in
communities throughout the South County region
during the last year. She proclaimed October 13 ,
1999, as A Day in Memory and Honor of Domestic
Violence Victims, and encouraged all citizens to
take an active role in supporting all victims so
they can lead healthy lives safe from violent and,
abusive behavior .
2
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
CONSENT WOODS MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through
CALENDAR I , including an amendment to Item C correcting the
hearing date, be approved. Epperly seconded and
the motion carried.
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM GA)
Approval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of
the regular Council meeting of September 21, 1999 .
STREETS (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7D)
(ADDED ITEM)
Closure of S. 256th Street and 29th Avenue South.
Mayor Pro Tem Orr explained that this issue was
discussed by the Public Works and Planning
Committee on October 4th, and that the committee
unanimously agreed to close the road temporarily
while traffic studies are done .
BROTHERTON MOVED to temporarily close 256th Street
at 29th for a period not to exceed six months and
to request Administration to conduct appropriate
traffic studies during this time and report to the
Council with its findings and recommendations .
Yingling seconded. Amodt commended Epperly for
her work on this issue . Juanita Bosshart, 25327
29th Avenue South, also thanked Epperly and the
entire Council . Orr explained that there are
notification requirements, but that the notifica-
tion and the closure will take place as soon as
possible . Epperly pointed out that when the
apartments were built , part of the mitigation with
the neighborhood was that the road would be closed
and there would be no access onto the street .
Brotherton' s motion then carried.
STREET (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6H)
VACATION 40th Street South Street Vacation. ADOPTION of
Ordinance No . 3476 vacating a portion of 40th
Avenue South.
The City received a street vacation petition
- signed by various owners of property abutting the
applicable portion of 40th Avenue south, an
existing public street, lying generally at the
3
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
STREET intersection of 37th Place South and 40th Place
VACATION South in Kent . After a public hearing on July 6 ,
1999 , the City Council approved the vacation so
long as the petitioner first fulfilled all the
conditions recommended by staff and approved by
Council . The petitioner has fulfilled all of the
conditions imposed.
BILLBOARDS (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 5B)
Billboard Moratorium Renewal . On April 20 , 1999 ,
the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1536
imposing a moratorium barring acceptance of all
applications for the issuance of any building,
land use, or development permit or approval for
billboards . The moratorium expires at midnight,
October 17 , 1999 . The purpose of the proposed
resolution is to renew the moratorium for an
additional six months to allow Council sufficient
time to thoroughly analyze all the information
gathered and to consider proposed code amendments
relating to billboards . The City Attorney ex-
plained that the moratorium would expire prior to
completion of this matter if not renewed.
Mayor Pro Tem Orr declared the public hearing
open. There were no comments from the public and
WOODS MOVED to close the public hearing. Epperly
seconded and the motion carried.
BROTHERTON MOVED to adopt the findings in the
proposed resolution and to pass Resolution
No . 1556 renewing the moratorium relating to
billboards . Woods seconded and the motion
carried.
ADULT RETAIL (PUBLIC HEARINGS - 5A)
Adult Retail Moratorium Renewal. On November 17 ,
1998 , the City Council adopted Resolution No . 1520
imposing a moratorium barring acceptance of all
applications for the issuance of any building,
land use, or development permit or approval for
adult retail establishments . On April 20 , 1999,
a
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
ADULT RETAIL City Council adopted Resolution No . 1534 renew-
ing the moratorium which expires at midnight,
October 29 , 1999 . The purpose of the proposed
resolution is to renew the moratorium for an
additional six months pending consideration by the
City Council of a proposed ordinance relating to
adult retail establishments . Council will con-
sider the proposed ordinance during tonight ' s
meeting under Other Business .
The City Attorney said the concern is with the
sufficiency of the definition of adult retail
establishments and the purpose of the regulations
is to site those facilities within 1 , 000 ' of
churches, schools, parks, libraries and residen-
tial zones . He added that the purpose of the
moratorium was to study the regulations, and that
those studies have been completed. He explained
that if the Council adopts the proposed regula-
tions tonight, the ordinance will not be in effect
prior to the expiration of the moratorium on
October 29 . He clarified that the moratorium
would expire on the effective date of the regula-
tions .
The Mayor Pro Tem opened the public hearing.
There were no comments from the audience and WOODS
MOVED to close the public hearing. Epperly
seconded and the motion carried.
BROTHERTON MOVED to adopt the findings in the
proposed resolution and to pass Resolution
No. 1555 renewing the moratorium relating to adult
retail establishments . Woods seconded and the
motion carried.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 72)
Adult Retail Establishments . On September 27,
1999 , the Land Use and Planning Board held a
hearing and thereafter recommended approval of the
proposed ordinance relating to adult retail
establishments . The ordinance amends both the
business license code (Chapter 5 . 10) and the
zoning code to establish a new definition of adult
5
Kent City Council Minutes October S„ 1999
ADULT RETAIL retail businesses which includes adult bookstores ,
video stores, and novelty stores . Those esta-
blishments meeting the definition of an adult
retail establishment must be properly licensed and
zoned as such.
City Attorney Lubovich explained that the main
purpose of the regulations is to make sure that
these facilities which have a significant impact
on the community are located in the proper sites .
He noted that the business license code defines a
retail establishment as 20% stock in trade, and
that there is a slight inconsistency in the zoning
code which needs to be corrected. He said the
proposed ordinance shows that this kind of facili-
ty does have impacts and defines adult retail
establishments in such a manner trat it would
survive court scrutiny. He recommended using 30%
as a guideline . He noted t::at new definitions are _
found on pages 7 , 8 , 9, 10 and 15-19 of the
proposed ordinance .
Lubovich noted that if the ordinance is adopted
tonight, it would go into effect in thirty days
and the newly extended moratorium would expire; if
the ordinance is not passed tonight, the mora-
torium would continue until it expires or until
further action is taken on the matter .
BROTHERTON MOVED for the adoption of the findings
set forth in the proposed ordinance including
those relating to the referenced studies and
further for the adoption of the ordinance as
Ordinance No . 3475 relating to adult retail
establishments . Woods seconded. Brotherton
commended the City Attorney for working with local
businesses to define a standard they can live
with. His motion then carried.
REZONE (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7A)
Burdic Feed Rezone RZ-99-2 . (KIVA 9900515) . The
Hearing Examiner has recommended approval of an
application to rezone two parcels of property from
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
REZONE DCE, Downtown Commercial Enterprise, to GC,
General Commercial . The property is located in
the northeast corner of Willis and Railroad Avenue
and the other parcel is located in the northwest
corner. Planning Manager Satterstrom explained
that this would accommodate the relocation of
Burdic Feed, which is being displaced by the RTA
station.
BROTHERTON MOVED to accept the Findings of the
Hearing Examiner and to adopt the Hearing
Examiner' s recommendation of approval of the
Burdic Feed Rezone and to direct the City Attorney
to prepare the necessary ordinance . Epperly
seconded and the motion carried.
CITY CODE (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7C)
City Code. This is the first reading of the
proposed ordinance adopting the Kent City Code
as compiled, edited and republished by Code
Publishing Company of Seattle as the official
code of the City of Kent .
The City Attorney explained that the intent of
republishing the code is to enhance delivery of
the Code and updates to both City staff and the
public, and to take advantage of upgraded tech-
nology. He noted that the Code will be accessible
on the internal computer system and to the public
through the Municipal Research Service Center
website . He added that hardbound copies are
available through Code Publishing .
WOODS MOVED to schedule a public hearing on re-
publication of the Kent City Code for October 19 ,
1999 . Amodt seconded and the motion carried. Orr
expressed support for this project .
COUNCIL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6D)
Excused Absence. APPROVAL of Councilmember Tim
Clark ' s request for an excused absence from the
October 5 , 1999, City Council meeting, as he will
be unable to attend.
7
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
FIRE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6I)
DEPARTMENT King County Interlocal Agreement, Miscellaneous
Structures Inspection. APPROVAL of and AUTHORIZA-
TION for the Mayor to sign the Inspection Agree-
ment with King County for 1999 . This agreement
covers the inspection of all occupancies in Fire
District #37 , with the exception of single family
residences and miscellaneous structures . It is in
a series of continuing agreements that have been
signed for the last several years . It provides a
tool used by the Fire Department to alleviate
serious fire hazards in the District ' s commercial
buildings and is for the first inspection and one
re-inspection only. Any follow up work after the
first re-inspection is the responsibility of the
King County Fire Marshal . The County will reim-
burse the City at the rate of $100 . 00 per hour for
travel , research time and inspections performed on
any permit application within the City' s
jurisdictional boundaries .
PARKS & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6E)
RECREATION H. D. Fowler Donation. ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE
$100 . 00 in irrigation materials for the Kent
Memorial Park Field 41 Improvements project
donated by H. D. Fowler, as recommended by the
Parks Committee .
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6F)
Revenue From Runsten House Purchase. ACCEPTANCE
of a check from Mr. & Mrs . Runsten for $1 , 300 . 00
for the purchase from the City of the City' s
surplus house and authorization to deposit the
funds in the East Hill Youth Sports Complex #1
budget , as recommended by the Parks Committee .
In 1996 , the City' s surplus house located at 14420
SE 288th Street in Kent was advertised to sell .
Mr. and Mrs . Runsten were awarded the contract for
their sole bid of $1 , 300 .
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
PARKS & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6G)
RECREATION Golf Fees Year 2000 . APPROVAL of the golf fees
increase in the Year 2000 , as recommended by the
Parks Committee .
Each year city staff, S . S .M.D . staff, and the Golf
Advisory Board meet to evaluate golf fees for the
upcoming year. The increases are based on
evaluation of other like-facilities in the area .
(BIDS - ITEM 8A)
East Hill Park Expansion. The bid opening for
this project was held on September 24th with
13 bids received. The low bidder was Fuji
Industries, Inc . in the amount of $743 , 600 . 00 ,
plus Washington State Sales Tax. The Engineer ' s
estimate was $850 , 000 . 00 .
The Parks Director recommends entering into an
agreement with Fuji Industries, Inc . in the amount
of $743 , 600 . 00 , plus WSST for the East Hill Park
Expansion Project base bid and alternate #1 .
WOODS MOVED that the East Hill Park Expansion
project be awarded to Fuji Industries , Inc . for
the bid amount of $743 , 600 . 00 , plus Washington
State Sales Tax. Epperly seconded and the motion
carried.
FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6B)
Approval of Bills . APPROVAL of payment of the
bills received through August 31 and paid on
August 31 , 1999; and payment of bills received
through September 15 and paid on September 15 ,
after auditing by the Operations Committee on
September 21 , 1999 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
8/31/99 222376-222654 $ 555 , 123 . 45
8/31/99 222655-223069 $3 , 053 , 855 . 87
$3 , 608 , 979 . 32
9
Kent City Council Minutes October 5 „ 1999
FINANCE 9/15/99 223070-223298 $ 797 , 105 . 80
9/15/99 223299-223663 $1 , 437 , 105 . 88
$2 , 234 , 211 . 68
APPROVAL of checks issued for pavroll of August 16
through August 31 and paid on September 3 , 1999 ,
and checks issued for payroll of September 1
through September 15 and paid on September 20 ,
1999 :
Date Check Numbers Amount
9/3/99 Checks 238246-238603 $ 285 , 508 . 69
9/3/99 Advices 84104-84726 $ 816 , 062 . 90
$1 , 101 , 571 . 59
9/20/99 Checks 238604-238936 $ 301, 916 . 69
9/20/99 Advices 84727-85310 $ 857 , 154 . 95
$1 , 159 , 071 . 64
BUDGET (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6C)
Year 2000 Operating Budget. SET October 19, 1999 ,
as the date for a public hearing on the Year 2000
Operating Budget .
REPORTS Council President. Orr reminded Councilmembers of
the Suburban Cities dinner in Enumclaw on
October 13th.
Operations Committee. Woods noted that the next
meeting will be at 3 : 30 p .m. on October 19 .
Public Safety Committee. Epperly noted that the
next meeting will be at 5 : 00 p .m. on October 12 .
Parks Committee. Woods noted that the next
meeting will be at 4 : 30 p .m. on October 19 .
EXECUTIVE At 8 : 00 p .m. , the meeting recessed to Executive
SESSION Session to discuss property acquisition for
approximately 15 minutes .
The meeting reconvened at 8 : 14 p .m.
, n
Kent City Council Minutes October 5„ 1999
Property ACQuisition. WOODS MOVED to authorize
the Mayor to finalize negotiations and close on
the purchase of property described as Lots 5 , 6
and a portion of Lots 4 , 7 and 8 of Block 2 ,
Ramsay' s Addition, known as the Reiman property,
for $598 , 000 , subject to removal of contingencies
relating to an environmental study and title
review to the satisfaction of Administration.
Epperly seconded and the motion carried.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8 : 15 p .m.
Brenda Jacob r, CMC
City Clerk
I
1� Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: BURDIC FEED REZONE ORDINANCE - ADOPT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of Ordinance No. rezoning
of two parcels of property, approximately 0 . 451 acres, from the
current zoning of Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) to
General Commercial (GC) . The request was filed on May 20, 1999
(RZ-99-2 Burdic Feed Rezone) . Public hearings were held before
the Hearing Examiner on August 18, 1999, and September 1, 1999 .
The City Council approved the rezone as recommended by the
Hearing Examiner at its October 5, 1999 Council meeting.
3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance (Exhibit "A" shows the location of the
two parcels for rezone)
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Land Use and Planning Board
(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. 6C
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, relating to Land Use and Zoning,
rezoning two parcels of property comprising of 0.451 acres
and located, respectively, at the northeast and northwest
corners of Willis Street and Railroad Avenue, from
Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) to General
Commercial (GC). (Burdic Feed Rezone - RZ-99-2),
WHEREAS, an application to rezone approximately 0.451 acres from the
current zoning of Downtown Commercial Enterprise(DCE) to General Commercial (GC)
was filed on May 20, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the City's SEPA responsible official issued a Mitigated
i
Determination of Nonsignificance(MDNS) for the proposed rezone on July 13, 1999; and
�I
WHEREAS, two public hearings on the Burdic Feed Rezone were held
before the Hearing Examiner on August 18, 1999, and September 1, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the Hearing Examiner issued findings that the Burdic Feed
Rezone is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed rezone and
subsequent development activity would be compatible with the development in the vicinity,
1 Burdic Feed Rezone
that the proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity
of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated, that
circumstances have changed since the establishment of the current zoning district to
warrant the proposed rezone, and that the proposed rezone will not adversely affect the
health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent; and
WHEREAS, the findings are consistent with the standards for rezone set
forth in Sections 15.09.050(A)(3) and 15.09.050(C) of the Kent City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Kent Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the
Burdic Feed Rezone on September 3, 1999, as submitted by the applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council moved to accept the findings of the Hearing
Examiner and the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for approval of the Burdic Feed
Rezone from Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) to General Commercial ((-jC);
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The property located at the northeast and northwest corners
of Willis Street and Railroad Avenue, Kent, Washington consisting of approximately 0.451
acres depicted in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference is
rezoned as follows:
Parcel numbers 9179060-0085 (Parcel 1) and 917960-0005 (Parcel 2) located in
Kent, Washington, shall be rezoned from Downtown Commercial Enterprise(DCE)
to General Commercial (GC).
2 Burdic Feed Rezone
SECTION 2. Severability. If any one or more sections, sub-sections, or
sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain
in full force and effect.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED day of 1999.
APPROVED day of 1999.
PUBLISHED day of 1999.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passe
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
—' e r�nomm�cc.e�.amFaaa��cao<
3 Burdic Feed Rezone
U 1
Q N (D LL
i
cy) O
L L
N W °° 3
ry W U 0 ,
AVM OIN30S
O
N
4�
anvavoaiiVa s AM
u
L
m
IM
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: 1999 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT AND CODE AMENDMENT
ORDINANCES - ADOPT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Operations
Committee, adoption of Ordinance No. providing for a
gross budget adjustment of $49, 234 , 432 for budget adjustments
made from January 1 to August 31, 1999, and adoption of
Ordinance No. providing for code amendments relating to
budgets . The 1999 budget adjustments primarily involve
previously approved Council items for capital projects and to
establish budget for the 1999 Councilmanic Bond issue .
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from Finance Director Miller and ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES X
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No . 6D
Date: September 21, 1999
To: Operations Committee
From: Mayene Miller, Finance Division Director
Subject: Budget Adjustment and Code Change Ordinances
Authorization is requested to approve the gross budget adjustment ordinance totaling
$49,234,432 for budget adjustments made through August 31, 1999 and a code change
ordinance. The budget adjustment ordinance is primarily a housekeeping adjustment,
consolidating individual budget items into one adjusting ordinance, the other ordinance
makes a necessary code change.
Please note that in the first ordinance, $46,400,013 has been previously approved by
Council. Of this amount, $3,467,150 was approved in prior years or other funds and primarily
establishes carryover budgets for various capital projects and equipment. The remaining
$42,932,863 was approved by Council this year and is essentially for capital projects and to
budget the 1999 Councilmanic Bond Issue.
The balance consists of internal transfers of$618,323 and $2,216,096 which has not been
previously approved by Council, but needs to be approved to be in compliance with the State
Auditor's requirements. This amount includes:
• $2,904 in the General Fund to correct missed city contribution to the Firefighter's Fitness
Fund in 1999
• $32,000 for a Cargo Van in the Fleet Services fund, approved in 1999 budget to be
funded out of LID 347. This LID was closed and the balance transferred back to the Street
Fund. $32,000 is a transfer from the Street Fund to Fleet Services to fund the purchase.
• $10,000 for the "Goals to Recovery Program" in the Correction's Facility from Criminal
Justice fund balance.
$18,200 for a Latent Light Source for Police Investigations in the Criminal Justice Fund
overlooked in the 1999 budget process funded out of Criminal Justice fund balance.
• $150,000 additional revenue and payment to contractor for merchandise sales at
Riverbend Golf Course
• $400,000 Fire Equipment Fund one-time transfer to Insurance Fund, including $100,000
to Worker's Compensation, and $300,000 to Health Insurance.
• $1,200,000 Insurance Fund to book additional IBNR per accounting requirements based
on actuarial study, and to increase the expenditure budget to cover claims incurred but
not paid. An additional $100,000 is an increase to the Worker's Compensation Fund and
$300,000 to the Health Insurance Fund to cover increased 1999 claims, funded by the
one time transfer from the Fire Equipment Fund.
• Also included are some miscellaneous budget corrections of ($29,008).
The second ordinance amends the City Code to bring the Council salaries into compliance
with State minimum wage requirements.
The attached summaries show the budget adjustment ordinance changes by fund and the
code changes, the 1999 budget adopted by ordinance #3433, the adjustments being
requested and the total operating and capital budgets. The following pages show a detailed
listing of these adjustments by fund, including council authorization dates for the amounts
previously approved.
Council Action:
1. Approve the budget adjustment ordinance for adjustments made from January 1, 1999
through August 31, 1999 totaling $49,234,432.
2. Approve the code amendment necessary to bring Council salaries into compliance with
State minimum requirements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington,
affecting budgets, amending the 1999 Budget for adjustments
made through August 31, 1999.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The 1999 City budget is hereby amended to include budget
fund adjustments as follows:
FUND BUDGET
General Fund 504,442
Street Fund 32,000
Capital Improvement 140,475
Criminal Justice 92,004
Environmental Mitigation 133,852
Other Operating Projects 235,118
Councilmanic Debt Service 444
i
Street Capital Projects 12,482,629
Parks Capital Projects 310,347
Other Capital Projects 18,495,516
Water 128,417
Sewerage 1,697,728
Golf Complex 225,650
1 1999 -Budget Adjustment
Equipment Rental 51,198
Central Services 7,711,034
Fire Equipment Fund 578,455
Facilities Fund 4,815,123
Insurance 1,600,000
Total Gross Budget $49,234,432
SECTION 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
2 1999 -Budget Adjustmentl
PASSED: day of , 1999.
APPROVED: day of 1999.
PUBLISHED: day of , 1999.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. , passed
by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washin.aton, and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P'6 W,di..nc Ibud,c,99.oWl doc
l
'I
I
i
i 3 1999-Budget Adjustment
ORDINANCE NO.
i
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington,
amending Chapter 2.01 of the Kent City Code relating to
salaries.
. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 2.01.010(A) is hereby amended as follows:
— Sec. 2.01.010. Compensation of council members.
A. lit This subsection is subject to the provisions ofRCW 35A.12. 070. eEach city
council member shall be paid a salary of five hundred fifty dollars ($550.00) per month.
Effective January 1 2000 each city council member shall be paid a salary of eight hundred
i
fiftv dollars (S850 00) per month Effective January 1 2001 each city council member
shall be paid a salary of nine hundred dollars ($900 00) per month Effective January 1
2002 each city council member shall be paid a salary of nine hundred fifty dollars
(S950 00) per month Effective January 1 2003 each city council member shall be paid
a salary of one thousand dollars ($1000.00) per month. The duly elected president of the
I
city council shall be paid an additional salary of one hundred fifty dollars ($169-90
S150.00) per month in addition to the regular council member salary.
SECTION 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
1 Coanpensation of Council Member
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
ij
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
fI
I
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of , 1999.
APPROVED: day of 1999.
PUBLISHED: day of , 1999.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed
by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Kent as hereon indicated.
II
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
2 Compensation of Council Members
City of Kent
Budget Adjustment Ordinance
Adjustments through August 31, 1999
Additional Appropriations
Carryover Ordinance Adjustment Total
Fund Budget #3433 Ordinance Budget
001 General Fund 54,117,802 504,442 54,622,244
110 Street Fund 4,607,742 32,000 4,639,742
130 Lodging Tax Fund 135,000 135,000
140 Youth/Teen Programs 615,837 615,837
150 Capital Improvement 8,405,384 140,475 8,545,859
160 Criminal Justice 2,536,733 2,566,520 92,004 5,195,257
170 Environmental Mitigation 11,600 395,291 133,852 540,743
180 Housing & Community Development 1,305,050 659,356 1,964,406
190 Other Operating Projects 992,887 707,408 235,118 1,935,413
211 Voted Debt Service 1,832,413 1,832,413
212 Councilmanic Debt Service 5,463,587 444 5,464,031
250 Special Assessment 3,187,878 3,187,878
310 Street Capital Projects 70,488,107 9,962,186 12,482,629 92,932,922
320 Parks Capital Projects 14,548,972 2,158,433 310,347 17,017,752
330 Other Capital Projects 1,544,213 1,691,444 18,495,516 21,731,173
410 Water 17,979,287 12,456,341 128,417 30,564,045
440 Sewerage 24,302,886 29,153,907 1,697,728 55,154,521
480 Golf Complex 3,778,512 225.650 4,004,162
510 Equipment Rental 142,000 3,038,870 51,198 3,232,068
520 Central Services 2,488,218 5,137,880 7,711,034 15,337,132
530 Fire Equipment Fund 246,040 578,455 824,495
540 Facilities Fund (269,437) 8,455,113 4,815,123 13,000,799
560 Insurance 6,243,442 1,600,000 7,843,442
620 Firemen's Relief&Pension 209,647 209,647
680 Economic Development 10,944 10,944
Total Gross Budget 136,070,516 165,236,977 49,234,432 350,541,925
Less:
Internal Service Funds 14,759,705 290,534 15,050,239
Other Transfers 672,224 15,347,604 18,673,953 34,693,781
Internal Transfers 289,268 10,502,324 618,323 11,409,915
Total Net Budget 135,109,024 124,627,344 29,651,622 289,387,990
99ADJORWAs 9/21199
City of Kent, Washington
1999 Combined Operating Statement
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Inc(Dec) Beginning Ending
in Fund Fund Fund
Revenues Expenditures Balance Balance Balance
General Fund 50,906,574 54,117,802 (3,211,228) 8,565,640 5,354,412
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 9,750 95,382 (85,632) (85,632)
Approved by Council-Current Year 352,349 406,156 (63,807) (63,807)
Budget Correction 2,904 (2,904) (2,904)
111/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 185,319 185,319
51,268,673 54,622,244 (3,353,571) 8,750,959 5,397,388
Special Revenue Funds
Street 4,721,675 4,607,742 113,933 793,434 907,367
Budget Correction 32,000 (32,000) (32,000)
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 679,555 679,555
4,721,675 4,639,742 81,933 1,472,989 1,554,922
Lodging Tax Fund 175,250 135,000 40,250 40,250
Youth/Teen Programs 508,173 615,837 (107,664) 358,647 250,983
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 45,593 45,593
508,173 615,837 (107,664) 404,240 296,576
Capital Improvement 6,773,958 8,405,384 (1,631,426) 2,539,646 908,220
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 140,475 (140,475) (140,475)
-- 111/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 35,364 35,364
6,773,958 8,545,859 (1,771,901) 2,575,010 803,109
Criminal Justice 2,303,854 2,507,020 (203,166) 761,586 558,420
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 16,444 22,105 (5,661) (5,661)
Approved by Council-Current Year 36,061 48,384 (12,323) (12,323)
Budget Correction (808) 808 808
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 313,010 313,010
2,356,359 2,576,701 (220,342) 1,074,596 854,254
Environmental Mitigation 357,993 395,291 (37,298) 93,613 56,315
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 75,839 75,839
Approved by Council-Current Year 58,013 58,013
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 6,629 6,629
491,845 529,143 (37,298) 100,242 62,944
Community Block Grant 659,356 659,356
Other Operating Projects 581,988 707,408 (125,420) 125,420
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 144,475 235,118 (90,643) (90,643)
Budget Correction 45,904 45,904 45,904
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment (19,638) (19,638)
772,367 942,526 (170,159) 105,782 (64,377)
Debt Service Funds
Voted 1,832,413 1,832,413 55,462 55,462
111/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 22,415 22,415
1,832,413 1,832,413 77,877 77,877
Councilmanic 5,463,587 5,463,587
-- Approved by Council-Current Year 444 444
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 423 423
5,464,031 5,464,031 423 423
99ADJORDI xls 921M
City of Kent, Washington
1999 Combined Operating Statement
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Inc(Dec) Beginning Ending
in Fund Fund Fund
Revenues Expenditures Balance Balance Balance
Special Assessment 3,113,226 3,174,878 (61,652) 1,897,558 1,835,906
1/1199 Fund Balance Adjustment (167,848) (167,848)
3,113,226 3,174,878 (61,652) 1,729,710 1,668,058
Capital Projects Funds
Street Projects 9,562,186 9,562,186
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 975,553 1,021,355 (45,802) (45,802)
Approved by Council-Current Year 11,461,274 11,461,274
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 45,493 45,493
21,999,013 22,044,815 (45,802) 45,493 (309)
Parks Projects 2,243,129 2,158,433 84,696 84,696
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 60.347 (60,347) (60,347)
Approved by Council-Current Year 250,000 250,000
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 211,009 211,009
2,493,129 2,468,780 24,349 211,009 235,358
Other Projects 1,691,444 1,691,444
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund (26,211) (26,211)
Approved by Council-Current Year 17,925,727 17,925,727
19,590,960 19,590,960
Enterprise Funds
Water 7,143,029 8,929,788 (1,786,759) 2,978,000 1,191,241
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 18,708 117,997 (99,289) (99,289)
Approved by Council-Current Year 10,420 (10,420) (10,420)
1/1199 Fund Balance Adjustment 1,295,336 1,295,336
7,161,737 9,058,205 (1,896,468) 4,273,336 2,376,868
Sewerage 23,636,361 24,161,028 (524,667) 3,015,000 2,490,333
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 236,842 1,464,738 (1,227,896) (1,227.896)
Approved by Council-Current Year 222,838 232,990 (10,152) (10,152)
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 1,873,166 1,873,166
24,096,041 25,858,756 (1,762,715) 4,888.166 3,125,451
Golf Complex 3,421,300 3,161,262 260.038 260,038
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 75,650 (75,650) (75,650)
Budget Correction 150,000 150,000
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment (198,693) (198,693)
3,571,300 3,386,912 184,388 (198,693) (14,305)
Internal Service Funds
Fleet Services 2,733,247 3,038,870 (305,623) 2,960,923 2,655,300
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 32,000 12,571 19,429 19,429
Approved by Council-Current Year 6,627 (6,527) (6,627)
Budget Correction 32,000 (32,000) (32,000)
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment (186,797) (186,797)
2,765,247 3,090,068 (324,821) 2,774,126 2,449,305
Central Services 5,144,749 5,137,880 6.869 61,829 68,698
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 60,000 (60,000) (60,000)
Approved by Council-Current Year 7,651,034 7,651,034
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 24,556 24,556
12,795,783 12,848,914 (53,131) 86,385 33,254
99ADJORDI xls 921/99
City of Kent, Washington
1999 Combined Operating Statement
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Inc(Dec) Beginning Ending
in Fund Fund Fund
Revenues Expenditures Balance Balance Balance
Fire Equipment 448,781 246,040 202,741 865,621 1,068,362
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 178,455 (178,455) (178,455)
Budget Correction 400,000 (400,000) (400,000)
1/1199 Fund Balance Adjustment 188,829 188,829
448,781 824,495 (375,714) 1,054,450 678,736
Facilities 7,570,311 7,561,971 8,340 312,774 321,114
Approved by Council-Prior Year/Other Fund 73,804 (73,804) (73,804)
Approved by Council-Current Year 4,740,000 4,741,319 (1,319) (1,319)
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment (229,491) (229,491)
12,310,311 12,377,094 (66,783) 83,283 16,500
Insurance 6,077,915 6,243,442 (165,527) 3,853,969 3,688,442
Budget Correction 845,694 1,600,000 (754,306) (754,306)
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment (34,151) (34,151)
6,923,609 7,843,442 (919,833) 3,819,818 2,899,985
Trust and Agency Funds
Firemen's Pension 191,096 209,647 (18,551) 3,129,310 3,110,759
1/l/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 305,498 305,498
191,096 209,647 (18,551) 3,434,808 3,416,257
Economic Development 13,935 10,944 2,991 23,943 26,934
1/1/99 Fund Balance Adjustment 1,515 1,515
13,935 10,944 2,991 25,458 28,449
Beginning Gross Budget 147,275,530 154,734,653 (7,459,123) 32,392,375 24,933,252
Approved by Council-Prior Year Other Fund 1,483,400 3,467,150 (1,983,750) (1,983,750)
Approved by Council-Current Year 42,697,740 42,932,863 (235,123) (235,123)
Budget Correction 1,041,598 2,216,096 (1,174,498) (1,174,498)
1/1199 Fund Balance Adjustment 4,397,092 4,397,092
New Gross Budget 192,498,268 203,350,762 (10,852,494) 36,789,467 25,936,973
Less:
Internal Service Funds 15,050,239 15,050,239
Other Transfers 34,021,557 34.021,557
Total Budget 143,426,472 154,278,966 (10,852,494) 36,789,467 25,936,973
99ADJORDI zls 9121/99
City of Kent
General Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 54,117,802
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
1998 Parks Cultural Grants accepted in 98-to be used in 99 11/3/98 9,750
1998 Carryover Budget-Economic Development Project 1998 26,361
1998 Carryover Budget-Building Inspector Vehicle 1998 21,000
1998 Carryover Budget-Parks Trail Guide 1998 10,000
1998 Carryover Budget-Police Radios&Equipment 1998 6,521
1998 Carryover Budget-W riterfest Performing Series 1998 3,750
1998 Carryover Budget-Senior Center Bus 1998 18,000
Previously Approved with Council Date
Probation Officer new posifion 6/15/99 32,270
Information Services positions(6.5)- Impact to General Fund 6/15/99 53,807
Permit Positions(13) 6/15/99 320,079
Not Previously Approved for the budget amount
Budget Correction-1999 contribution to the Firefighters Fitness Fund (1) 2,904
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 504,442
Total Expenditures 54,622,244
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 50,906,574
Beginning Fund Balance 8,565,640
Ending Fund Balance (5,354,412)
54,117,802
Budget Adjustment Sources
Parks Cultural Grants 9,750
Probation Revenue 32,270
Permit Revenue 320,079
Ending Fund Balance 142,343
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 504,442
Total Sources of Funding 54,622,244
(1) General Fund contribution to the Firefighter fitness budget per union contract-from End Working Capital
99ADJOR01.xis 9/21199
City of Kent
Street Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 4,607,742
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Not Previously approved for the budget amount
Transfer Out to Fleet Services-Cargo Van purchase (1) 32,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 32,000
Total Expenditures 4,639,742
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 4,721,675
Beginning Fund Balance 793,434
Ending Fund Balance (907,367)
4,607,742
Budget Adjustment Sources
Ending Fund Balance 32,000
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 32,000
Total Sources of Funding 4,639,742
(1) Correction to Van approved in 1999 budget-(thru LID 347-not available)
99ADJORD1.xis 921M
City of Kent
Capital Improvement Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 8,405,384
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved with Council Date
Transfer Out-LID Billing Analyst-Capital Outlay 6115/99 10,475
Transfer Out-Information Services new positions-Capital Outlay 6/15/99 90,000
Transfer Out-Executive Director Contribution-Performing Arts Center 611/99 40,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 140,475
Total Expenditures 8,545,859
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 - 6.773,958
Beginning Fund Balance 2,539,646
Ending Fund Balance (908,220)
8,405,384
Budget Adjustment Sources
Ending Fund Balance 140,475
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 140,475
Total Sources of Funding 8,545,859
99ADJORD1.xis 921/99
City of Kent
Criminal Justice Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 2,507,020
Carryover Budget 2,536,733
Internal Transfers 59,500
5,103,253
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Carryover budget for project carryovers 1998 5,661
Correction-Police Equipment (2) 16,444
Previously Approved with Council Date
COPS Grant Funding 6/15/99 45,111
VIPS contribution 7/20/99 3,273
Internal Transfer Out-COPS Grant 6/15/99 12,323
Not Previously Approved for the Budget Amount
Correction-Latent Light Source-Investigations (1) 18,200
Correction-Domestic Violence Grant-should have been carryover (29,008)
Goals to Recovery Program (3) 10,000
Internal Transfer Out-Goals to Recovery Program 10,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 92,004
Total Expenditures 5,195,257
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 2,303.854
Carryover Budget 2,536,733
Internal Transfers 59,500
Beginning Fund Balance 761,586
Ending Fund Balance _ (558,420)
5.103,253
Budget Adjustment Sources
VIPS Grant 3,273
COPS Universal Grant 32,788
Ending Fund Balance 17,176
Transfer In-Capital Improvement Fund 16,444
Internal Transfer In 22,323
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 92,004
Total Sources of Funding 5,195,257
(1) Approved in the 1999 budget from seized assets,but was missed in budget process
(2) Approved in the 1999 budget but was entered in CIP Fund-moved back to CJ Fund
(3) Establish budget for"Goals to Recovery Program"in the Corrections Facility from ending working capital
99ADJORD1 xIs 921199
City of Kent
Environmental Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 395,291
Carryover Budget 11,600
406,891
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Establish budget for Colonial Cedar cleanup permit fee ORD#2494 1,615
Carryover Budget-Environmental programs 1998 74,224
Previously Approved with Council Date
King County DOH Hazardous Waste Grant 2/2/99 58,013'
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 133,852
Total Expenditures 540,743
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 357,993
Carryover Budget 11,600
Beginning Fund Balance 93,613
Ending Fund Balance (56,315)
4D6,891
Budget Adjustment Sources
Re-establish Carryover Budgets from Environmental Grants 74,224
Contributions-Clean up assessment 1,615
King County DOH Hazardous Waste Grant 58,013
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 133,852
Total Sources of Funding 540,743
99ADJORDI As 9/21/99
City of Kent
Other Operating Projects Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 707,408
Carryover Budget 992,887
1,700,295
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Rail Station Area Plan -moved from Other Capital Projects (1) 47,000
Previously Approved with Council Date
LID Billing Analyst-Furniture and Office setup 6/15/99 10,475
Contribution to Performing Arts Center Executive Director 6/1/99 40,000
Carryover Budget-In city transit clearing, Fire training equip account 44,739
Firefighter Physical Fitness Fund-City Contribution (2) 2,904
Establish Freight Mobility Study-Correction 11/17/98 90,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 235,118
Total Expenditures 1,935,413
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 581,988
Carryover Budget 992,887
Beginning Fund Balance 125,420
1,700,295
Budget Adjustment Sources
Washington State Transportation Grant 90,000
Transfer In-CIP Fund 97,475
Transfer In-General Fund 2,904
Re-establish Carryover Budgets from working capital 44,739
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 235,118
Total Sources of Funding 1,935,413
(1)Approved in the 1999 budget contingent on grant receipt. Grant was not available-this funds the program out of CIP
(2) Per Union contract, city contribution missed in the 1998 and 1999 budget development
99ADJORD1.xls 9111/99
City of Kent
Councilmanic Debt Service Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 5,463,587
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved with Council Date
1999 Bond Issue Disbursement 2099 444
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 444
Total Expenditures 5.464,031
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 5,463,587
Budget Adjustment Sources
Adjust Councilmanic Bond Issue Receipts to actual 444
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 444
Total Sources of Funding 5,464,031
99ADJORD1.xls 921/99
City of Kent
Street Capital Projects Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 9,562,186
Carryover Budget 70,488,107
Internal Transfers 400,000
80,450,293
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Re-establish carryover budget from end working capital 1998 45,802
King County Grant adjustment-match monies received 1998 (59,528)
1998 Establish mitigation fee budget-KC RJC to 272nd Corr. 1998 12,568
SEPA mitigation-Storm Improvements to corridor projects ORD#2494 352,435
SEPA mitigation-196#V200th Corridor ORD#2494 165,828
SEPA mitigation-Asphalt Overlays ORD#2494 (16,838)
SEPA mitigation-212th Pavement Rehab ORD#2494 38,653
SEPA mitigation-Meeker Street Widening ORD#2494 2,000
SEPA mitigation-W leg-224th/228th Corridor ORD#2494 374,291
SEPA mitigation-E leg-224th/228th Corridor ORD#2494 11,137
SEPA mitigation-272nd Corridor ORD#2494 50,160
Correction-Street Striping and Changeable Message Sign (1) 101,574
Correction-Freight Mobility Study-transfer project out to V53 (90,000)
Correction-99 LTGO Bonds: Misc Capital Proj to Street Fund (2) 33,273
Previously Approved with Council Date
Stage three of Trans Improvement Board Grant 1961200 Corridor 4/6/99 11,461,274
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 12,482,629
Total Expenditures 92,932,922
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 9,562,186
Carryover Budget 70,488,107
Internal Transfers 400,000
80,450,293
Budget Adjustment Sources
LTGO Bond issue disbursement 33,273
TIB Grants 11,461,274
SEPA Contributions 990,234
King County Grant (59,528)
DOT Grant correction (90.000)
Re-establish carryover budget with end working capital 45,802
Transfer in-Street Fund 101,574
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 12,482,629
Total Sources of Funding 92,932,922
(1) Budget correction transfer from Street Fund
(2) Previously approved in Fund 190-Other Operating Projects
99ADJORD1.x1s 9/21/99
City of Kent
Parks Capital Projects Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 2,158,433
Carryover Budget 14.548,972
16,707,405
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
1998 Carryover Budget-Paths and Trails 1998 22,751
1998 Carryover Budget-Parks Master Plans 1998 28,574
1998 Carryover Budget-Signage 1998 9,022
Previously Approved with Council Date
Par 3 Irrigation-Bond Disbursement 2/2199 250,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 310,347
Total Expenditures 17,017,752
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 2,243,129
Carryover Budget 14,548,972
Beginning Fund Balance
Ending Fund Balance (24,349)
16,767,752
Budget Adjustment Sources
Transfer In-Par 3 Irrigation Bond Disbursement 250,000
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 250,000
Total Sources of Funding 17A17,752
99ADJORDt.xls 9/21/99
City of Kent
Other Capital Projects Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 1,691,444
Carryover Budget 1,544,213
3,235,657
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
SEPA Mitigation-Storm Improvements ORD#2494 30,646
SEPA Mitigation-O'Conner&Assoc. ORD#2494 6,587
Correction-Transfer out-Police Equipment to Criminal Justice Fund 1998 (16,444)
1998 Correction-move Railroad Study to Other Operating Projects 1998 (47,000)
Previously Approved with Council Date
Correct Councilmanic Bond 212/99 (303,000)
Correct Councilmanic Bond-move costs to Street Capital Projects 212/99 (33,273)
Transfer out- Automation Project 212/99 7,568,000
Transfer out-to Debt Service Fund for Fire Station 75 2/2199 1,622,000
Transfer out-Parks Capital Projects Fund 212/99 435,000
Transfer out-Facilities Projects 2/2/99 8,637,000
Internal Transfer in-Downtown Gateway Projects 2099 596,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 18,495,516
Total Expenditures 21,731,173
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 1,691,444
Carryover Budget 1,544,213
3,235,657
Budget Adjustment Sources
LTGO Councilmanic Bond Issue 19,959.000
SEPA Contributions-Mitigation Fees 37,233
Transfer In-CIP Fund Rail Station Study moved to Other Operating Projects (47,000)
Transfer in for Police Equipment eliminated (16,444)
Correction-Bond Proceeds Reallocated to Street Capital Projects Fund (2,033,273)
Internal Transfer in 596,000
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 18,495,516
Total Sources of Funding 21,731,173
(1) Move previously approved project budget to Facilities project.
(2) Correct 1997 budget to reflect amount listed on capital outlay form.
99ADJORD1.xls 9/21199
City of Kent
Water Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 8,929,788
Carryover Budget 17,979,287
Internal Transfers 3,526,553
30,435,628
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
1998 Carryover Budget-Chlorination Facility at Armstrong Springs 1998 30,000
1998 Carryover Budget-PLC Replacement at Pump Station 4 1998 15,000
1998 Carryover Budget-Radio Repeater 1998 29,710
1998 Carryover Budget-Meter Vaults 1998 8,654
1997 Carryover Budget-Meter Vaults 1997 13,000
1998 Mitigation Fee Establish from KC RJC project 1998 18,708
Budget Correction-(warehouse allocation for capital items) (1) 2,925
Approved by Council current year
Information Services-Cost Allocations 6/15199 10,420
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 128,417
Total Expenditures 30,564.045
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 7,143,029
Carryover Budget 17,979,287
Internal Transfers 3,526,553
Beginning Fund Balance 2,978,000
Ending Fund Balance (1,191,241)
30.435,628
King County mitigation fees 18,708
Ending Working Capital 109,709
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 128,417
Total Sources of Funding 30,564,045
(1)Capital Outlay for tapping machine 8 portable radio moved from Fleet Svcs
99ADJORD1.x1s 9/21/99
City of Kent
Sewerage Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 24,161,028
Carryover Budget 24,302,886
Internal Transfers 4,992,879
53,456,793
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
1998 Carryover Budget-Green River Management Plan 1998 14,115
1998 Carryover Budget-Green River Flood Control 1998 284,181
1998 Mitigation Fee Establish from KC RJC project 1998 27,353
1998 Mitigation Fee for Storm Improvements 1998 8,000
Correct budget for KC grant to match actual monies received 1998 707,006
Establish budget for LID 350 3/3/98 537,808
Correction-Deletes LID budget-replaced by LID 340 (116,000)
Budget Correction-(warehouse allocation for capital items) 1998 2,275
Previously Approved with Council Date
_ Information Service New positions-Cost Allocations 6/15/99 10,152
Establish LID 349 budget 312/99 222,838
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 1,697,728
Total Expenditures 55,154,521
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 23,636,361
Carryover Budget 24,302,886
Internal Transfers 4,992,879
Beginning Fund Balance 3,015,000
Ending Fund Balance (2,490,333)
53,456,793
Budget Adjustment Sources
SEPA Contributions 35,353
Lid 349 Bond Proceeds 222,838
Lid 350 Bond Proceeds 537.808
King County Grant 707,E
Lid 340 replacement budget (116,000)
Correction-Revenue Adjustment (927,325)
Ending Working Capital 1,238,048
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 1,697,728
Total Sources of Funding 55,154,521
99ADJORDI As W21/99
- City of Kent
Golf Course Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 3,161,262
Internal Transfers 617,250
3,778,512
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Carryover Budget-Miscellaneous Project to Operating 75,650
Not Previously approved for budget amount
Merchandise sales to contractor 150,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 225,650
Total Expenditures 4,004,162
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No,3433 3,421,300
Carryover Budget
Internal Transfers 617,250
Beginning Fund Balance
Ending Fund Balance (260,038)
3,778,512
Budget Adjustment Sources
Increase Merchandise sales Revenue 150,000
Ending Working Capital 75,650
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 225,650
Total Sources of Funding 4,004,162
99ADJORD1.xls 9121199
City of Kent
Fleet Services Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 3,038,870
Carryover Budget 142,000
3,180,870
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Carryover budget-Vehicle set up costs 1998 19,071
Correction-Radio and Tapping machine moved to Utility Funds (1) (6,500)
Previously Approved with Council Date
Cost Allocation for Information Service new positions 6/15/99 6,627.
Not Previously Approved For Budget Amount
Correction-Cargo Van Balance-from Unrestricted Street 1998 32,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 51,198
Total Expenditures 3,232,068
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 2,733,247
Carryover Budget 142,000
Beginning Fund Balance 2,960,923
Ending Fund Balance (2,655,300)
3,180,870
Budget Adjustment Sources
Transfer In-Unrestricted Street 32,000
Ending Working Capital 19,198
Total Budget Adjustment Sources_ 51,198
Total Sources of Funding 3,232,068
(1) Initially approved in the 1999 Fleet Services budget.
99ADJORDI As 921M
City of Kent
Central Services Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 5,137,880
Carryover Budget 2,488,218
Internal Transfers
7,626,098
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Carryover Budget-furniture 1998 60,000
Previously Approved with Council Date
Technology Plan-1999 Councilmanic Bond Disbursement 2/2/99 7,568,000
Information Services-new positions 6/15/99 83,034
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 7,711,034
Total Expenditures 15.337,132
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 5,144,749
Carryover Budget 2,488,218
Beginning Fund Balance 61,829
Ending Fund Balance (68,698)
7,626,098
Budget Adjustment Sources
Transfer In-Bond Disbursement 7,568,000
Cost allocation for new positions 83,034
Ending Working Capital 60,000
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 7,711,034
Total Sources of Funding 15,337,132
99ADJORD1.zls 9/21/99
City of Kent
Fire Equipment Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 246,040
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved with Council Date
Carryover-Fire Air Rig 1998 178,455
Not previously approved for budget amount
Transfer to Insurance Fund 400,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 578,455
Total Expenditures 824,495
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 448,781
Beginning Fund Balance 865,621
Ending Fund Balance (1,068,362)
_ 246,040
Budget Adjustment Sources
Re-establish carryover budget with ending fund balance 178,455
Ending Working Capital 400,000
Budget Adjustment Sources 578,455
Total Sources of Funding 824,495
99ADJORDt.xls 9/21199
City of Kent
Facilities Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No.3433 7,561,971
Carryover Budget (269,437)
Internal Transfers 893,142
8,185,676
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds
Carryover Budget-Major Maintenance 1998 73,804
Previously Approved with Council Date
Facilities Projects Funded with Councilmanic 1999 Bonds 2/2199 4,615,000
Furniture&Cost Allocation for new Information Services positions 6/15/99 91,319
Furniture-Office setup for new Permit positions 6/15199 35,000
Total Budget Adjustment Expenditures 4,815,123
Total Expenditures 13.000,799
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No.3433 7,570,311
Carryover Budget (269,437)
Internal Transfers 893,142
Beginning Fund Balance 312,774
Ending Fund Balance (321,114)
8,185,676
Budget Adjustment Sources
Proceeds from Councilmanic Bond 8,637,000
Moved to bond account (4,022,000)
Transfer In-CIP Fund 90,000
Transfer In-General Fund 35,000
Ending Working Capital 75,123
Total Budget Adjustment Sources 4,815,123
Total Sources of Funding 13.000,799
99ADJORDLxIs 921/99
City of Kent
Insurance Fund
Budget Adjustments thru August 31, 1999
Source of
Authorization Expenditures Funding
Expenditures
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 6,243,442
Budget Adjustment Expenditures
Not previously approved for budget amount
Record budget for one time insurance IBNR adjustment 1,200,000
Increase Workers Compensation for increased costs 100,000
Increase Health Insurance for increased medical costs 300,000
1,600,000
Total Expenditures 7,843,442
Sources of Funding
Budget Ordinance No. 3433 6,077,915
Beginning Fund Balance 3,853,969
Ending Fund Balance (3,688,442)
6,243,442
Budget Adjustment Sources
Transfer in-Fire Equipment Fund 400,000
Insurance Contributions 200,000
One time conversion receipts 245,694
Ending Fund Balance 754,306
Budget Adjustment Sources 1,600,000
Total Sources of Funding 7,843,442
99ADJORD1.xls 9/21/99
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: MACK PARK BILL OF SALE - ACCEPT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Director, accept the Bill of Sale for Mack Park submitted by
William Goodwin for continuous operation and maintenance of
1, 400 feet of watermain, 1322 feet of sanitary sewer, 1310 feet
of street improvement and 1, 790 feet of storm sewer and,
release bonds after the expiration period. The project is in
the vicinity of SE 264th Street at 112th Avenue SE .
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. 6E
253_PL `��2530ll_5T �j \p_53T ,�.� •.
p l w m m .25V7H ST II
254TH� PL
\. SE 256TH ST
>a
25e sTJI'� 0�sTJT
\40. 1 .. SR ='358l ! al 9�\ SE 25
o�y \ SIs yf �•' _
t_ ^ 259TH
•_ ^ 60 5E 260TH ST- - ' � •.• PL _5E'-260TH PL`
2.1 ST
m
5 262NO PL '. Ay. ` a� 2d2 `PL
PROJECT LOCATION � Tom.N
z
2 : N
m SE 264TH .,,9T
•= E,- _26U1H 51 '� 'k N 5
m 'y�'--„j 26:y' � •l 1
S 26sTH i PL 265 F,
o �� SE 26TH ST 286
SE 267TH-... 9T �'� % � Si
,.,.�_..__� �...�.._ l _
W "_-
��
SE 267 `
a\-SE 2 CT
26B�H�iT i �, x� n ri SE 286 ^--"-
SE 260TH 5T Y
co
L 7 Sl m
` 4?0`51 _ !`7 1'•1 SE 270TH ST
I SE 2715T Z
ST GQ
i 5E 27200 ST \_ - -Ic Q SE - 272N0 5T
SE 272ND PL >
90 - if JI a a
_ o f ST wI xi Q
.._.�_.-
SE 274 TH S7 F' m 275 ST 'SE ¢ 274TX ST Y
F5E ST -
`\, 276TH .y z
\\t m t m
• l
\ 217TH PL
277 Ft
277 PV
1 I ) 5E 279TH
sE 280rH ST (280TH Ci
_201.5L 5T SE 261 ST ST
i I '
wi
>i a SE 202N0 5T 0 t Gt N
1
7 t`t o� j =� ^ 2830D 5 ^
SE 284TH ST
SE 284TH ST
t\\ W
SE
x
SE 207TH ST N
MRCK PARK
` ®3 /01I
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION ACT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -
AUTHORIZE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works/
Planning Committee, authorization for the Mayor to sign the
Commute Trip Reduction Interlocal Agreement, upon concurrence
of the language therein by the City Attorney.
3 . EXHIBITS: Interlocal agreement and Public Works Director
memorandum
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
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
October 4, 1999
TO: PUBLIC WORKS/PLAN G COMMITTEE
FROM: DON WICKSTROM ` I
SUBJECT: CTR=RLOCAL AGREEMENT
Attached is a copy of the Interlocal Agreement between the City and King County for the
Commute Trip Reduction Program. This is the vehicle that allows the City to be reimbursed
for expenses incurred in running the CTR Program for the Kent Jurisdiction. The funding
actually comes from the Washington State Energy Office but is distributed to jurisdictions
through King County.
The term of this agreement is July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2001. We needed to have our
Ordinance revised to conform to the revised RCW 70.94.521,551 before we could contract
with King County for this next biennium. Our Revised Ordinance was adopted by the Kent
City Council on September 21' so we can now adopt the Interlocal.
MOTION: Recomrriend authorizing the Mayor to sign the Commute Trip Reduction
Interlocal Agreement, upon concurrence of the language therein by the City Attorney.
COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION ACT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into by and between King County (the "County") and
the City of Kent ("City").
WHEREAS, the Legislature enacted RCW 70.94.521-.551, commonly known as the
Commute Trip Reduction Act, to require local governments in those counties experiencing
the greatest automobile-related air pollution and traffic congestion to develop and
implement plans to reduce single-occupant vehicle commute trips; and
WHEREAS, King County and the cities within King County having within their
boundaries one or more "major employers" as defined by RCW 70.94.524(1) are required to
develop and implement commute trip reduction plans; and
WHEREAS, the local jurisdiction commute trip reduction plans are required to be
coordinated and consistent with plans of adjacent jurisdictions and applicable regional plans;
and
WHEREAS, the Legislature appropriated funds to provide technical assistance
funding to local jurisdictions required to develop and implement commute trip reduction
plans; and pursuant to RCW 70.94.544, the Washington State Department of Transportation
shall distribute these funds to counties, which shall in turn distribute funds to those cities
within the county in proportion to the number of major employers and major worksites
within each city; and
WHEREAS, the Parties hereto are authorized to enter into this Agreement pursuant
to RCW 70.94.527(6) and Chapter 39.34 RCW—the Interlocal Cooperation Act;.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
herein, it is hereby agreed:
SECTION 1.0 PURPOSES
The purposes of this Agreement are: (1) To allocate to the City its proportionate share of the
State technical assistance funding for reimbursing the City for its costs of implementing a
commute trip reduction plan and (2)to continue a cooperative approach between the City
and the County in order to address interjurisdictional issues and to meet the statutory
requirements for coordination and consistency among the jurisdictions' respective commute
trip reduction plans.
SECTION 2.0 . DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall apply to this Agreement:
"Administrative Representative" means a person responsible for being the central administrative
contact for issues related to this Agreement as designated pursuant to Section 3.4 of the Agreement.
"Affected Employer" means a private or public employer that, for at least twelve continuous months
during the year, employs one hundred or more full-time employees at a single worksite who begin their
regular workday between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. on weekdays on two or more weekdays.
"Commute Trip Reduction Act" means Chapter 202, Washington Laws of 1991, codified as RCW
70.94.521-.551, as amended.
"Commute Trip Reduction Plan (CTR Plan)" means a plan designed to achieve reductions in the
proportion of single-occupant vehicle commute trips and the vehicle miles traveled as described in
RCW 70.94.527.
"Commute Trip Reduction Program (CTR Program)" means a program designed by an affected
employer to achieve reductions in the proportion of single-occupant vehicle commute trips and the
commute trip vehicle miles traveled as described in RCW 70.94.531, as amended.
"CTR Funds" means state funds authorized by RCW 70.94.544 to assist counties and cities
implementing commute trip reduction plans.
"State" is the Washington State Department of Transportation or its successor agency unless
otherwise noted.
SECTION 3.0 SCOPE OF WORK
3.1 Scope of Work:
(a) The scope of work to be completed by the City in accordance with this Agreement is
described in Exhibit A: Scope of Work which by reference is made a part of this Agreement.
Funds provided to the City under this Agreement shall be used solely to reimburse the City for
its costs incurred in performing the work described in Exhibit A-
(b) Upon written request from the City, the County may assume the City's responsibilities
described in Exhibit A and retain the City's CTR funding in payment for such work. At such
time as the City desires to resume its responsibility for CTR administration as described herein,
it shall provide the County with written notification to that effect at least forty-five days in
advance. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, such change in City/County responsibilities
shall occur at the end of the quarter in which notice was given or, if such provides less than
forty-five days notice, at the end of the following quarter.
2
3 2 Separate Agreements for CTR Services: Consistent with applicable State and local laws and
regulations, the City may enter into separate agreements with the County and other public
agencies or consultants to perform the following CTR tasks under contract: (1) assist
employers in developing CTR programs; (2) review and approve CTR programs, annual
reports, requests for exemptions, modifications or other actions submitted by employers; and
(3) establish and maintain records and produce required reports.
3.3 Evaluation and Monitoring: The City shall cooperate with and freely participate in any
monitoring or evaluation activities conducted by the State that are pertinent to its performance
of the Scope of Work and its responsibilities under the Commute Trip Reduction Act.
3.4 Administrative Representatives: Immediately following their execution of this Agreement,
the County and the City shall each designate one person to be the central administrative contact
for matters pertaining to this Agreement, and shall make such designation, as well as any
subsequent changes in such designation, known to each other in writing, immediately after such
designation.
3.5 King County CTR Coordinating Committee: The County shall establish and provide
administrative support to a CTR Coordinating Committee—astaff-level committee with
representatives from Metro and each city in King County required to develop a CTR Plan.
Each entity will name its representative to the committee in its own manner. The purposes of
the committee shall be to (1) provide a forum for efforts to coordinate the development of the
CTR Plans, (2) address issues and share information related to implementation of the CTR
Plans, and (3) address other transportation demand management matters as agreed to by the
committee.
SECTION 4.0 DISBURSEMENT OF CTR FUNDS,
4.1 Amounts Available. The total amount of CTR Funds available to reimburse the City during
the Agreement period shall be calculated annually according to the method described in Exhibit
B: Methodology for Allocating CTR Funds.
4.2 Quarterly Invoice and Progress Report. The City shall submit to the County an invoice and
progress report within thirty days of the end of each quarter which shall, in conformance with
all requirements imposed by the State, set forth the costs for which the City seeks
reimbursement. An invoice for the final quarter shall be submitted to the County within twenty
days of the end of the quarter and shall not be paid if it is untimely submitted. The County shall
provide the City with instructions for the submittal of invoices and quarterly progress reports
consistent with the requirements imposed on the County by the State. The City's invoice shall
reflect the cost of actual work performed and costs incurred in performing the Scope of Work,
_ provided that the invoices and payments for the first seven quarters shall not exceed eighty-
seven and a half(87.5) percent of the total allocation to the City for the biennium
3
4.3 County Processing of City Invoices. Upon receipt of an invoice and progress report, the
County shall forward same to the State. If an invoice and report are not provided by the City
within thirty days of the end of a quarter, the County shall hold same for forwarding to the
State with the subsequent quarters. An invoice for the final quarter shall be submitted to the
County within twenty days of the end of the quarter and shall not be paid if it is untimely
submitted.
4.4 State Processing of City Invoices. The State shall be solely responsible for determining
satisfactory performance of the Scope of Work by the City and determining the extent to which
costs are to be reimbursed. Upon receipt of a quarterly reimbursement from the State, the
County shall remit to the City a warrant for the amount received from the State.
4.5 Under no circumstances shall the County be required by this Agreement to pay any of its own
funds to the City.
4.6 Unused Funds at End of Biennium. At the close of the bienniurn, any funds allocated to the
City, which are unused, shall be reallocated to the cities and the County that have expended in
excess of their allocations, on a per site basis until their expenses for the biennium have been
covered. Unused funds at the end of the 1997/99 biennium shall be similarly reallocated to
cover expenses of cities and the County that have expended more than their allocation for that
time period.
SECTION 5.0 REPORTING.
5.1 Quarterly Reports. When requesting payment each quarter, the City(or its designee) shall
submit a progress report to the County in accordance with the Scope of Work, attached. The
County shall forward the City's quarterly progress reports to the State.
5.2 Auditing of Records, Documents, and Reports. The State Auditor, the County, or the City
and any of their representatives shall have full access to and the right to examine during normal
business hours and as often as the State Auditor may deem necessary, all the records of the
City and the County with respect to all matters covered in this Agreement. Each Party to the
Agreement shall have similar access and rights with respect to the records of the other Parry.
Such representatives shall be permitted to audit and make excerpts or transcripts from such
records and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, and records of matters
covered by this Agreement. Such rights last for three (3) years from the date final payment is
made hereunder.
4
SECTION 6.0 RECAPTURE AND NONCOMPLIANCE PROVISIONS.
Upon notice that the State has determined to suspend or terminate reimbursement of the City, the
County shall have no obligation to continue processing City invoices. In the event the State demands a
refund of any amount paid to the County for distribution to the City, the City agrees to refund said
amount within thirty days directly to the State or through the County as may be required by the State.
The City further agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County against any and all claims,
demands, lawsuits, or liability of any kind which may be asserted against the County by the State for
refund of amounts paid to the City and any costs incurred by the State in recovering same, including
but not limited to attorney's fees.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement with respect
to any event occurring prior to expiration or termination.
SECTION 7.0 REDUCTION IN FUNDS.
If there is a reduction of CTR Funds by the State, and if such funds are the basis of this Agreement, the
County and the City agree to reduce their respective scopes of work or budgets under this Agreement
and/or the Parties may terminate the Agreement, as provided in Section-12.4.
SECTION 8.0 NONDISCREMMgATION.
8.1 General Nondiscrimination Statement: There shall be no illegal discrimination against any
employee who is paid with CTR Funds or against any applicant for such employment because
of race, religion, color, sex, marital status, creed, national origin, age, Vietnam era/disabled
veterans status, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability. This provision
shall include but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer,
recruitment, advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation,
and selection for training.
8.2 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, Public law 101-336: The City must
comply with the ADA, which provides comprehensive civil rights protection to individuals with
disabilities in the areas of employment, public accommodations, state and local government
services, and telecommunications.
SECTION 9.0 WAIVER OF DEFAULT.
Waiver of any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver of breach
of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent
breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this Agreement unless stated to
be such in writing, signed by an authorized representative of the entity making such waiver.
5
SECTION 10.0 SEVERABILTTY. In the event any term or condition of the Agreement or
application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other
terms, condition or application. To this end the terms and conditions of this agreement are declared
severable.
SECTION 11.0 INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS.
11.1 No Joint Venture; Indemnification: It is understood and agreed that this agreement is solely
for the benefit of the Parties hereto and gives no right to any other entity. No joint venture or
partnership is formed as a result of this Agreement. Each party shall defend, indemnify and
hold harmless the other party, its officers, officials and employees from all claims, demands,
suits, actions and liability of any kind which arise out of; are connected with or result from any
errors, omissions or negligent acts of the other party, its contractors, employees or agents in
the performance of the work of this Agreement; provided, however, that if any such liability is
the result of the concurrent negligence of the parties, the obligations under this section shall be
allocated in proportion to the percentage of negligence attributed to each party. Each party
agrees that its obligations under this provision extend to any claim, demand or cause of action
brought by its own employees. The foregoing indemnity is specifically and expressly intended
to constitute a waiver of the indemnifying's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance
Act, RCW Title 51, as respects the other party only, and only to the extent necessary to
provide the indemnified party with a full and complete indemnification of claims made by the
indemnifying parry's employees. The parties acknowledge that these provisions were
specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them.
11.2 State's Nonliability to Subcontractors: The City agrees that the WSDOT and the State of
Washington are not liable for damages or claims arising from the City's performance or
activities under this agreement. The City further agrees to include in each contract for services
or activities using funds provided in whole or in part by this Agreement a provision in which
the contractor agrees that the WSDOT and the State are not liable for damage or claims from
damages arising from any subcontractor's performance or activities under the contract.
11.3 Survival of Indemnification: The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or
termination of this Agreement with respect to any event occurring prior to expiration or
termination.
SECTION 12.0 TERM, DURATION, MODIFICATION AND TERMINATION.
12.1 Term of Agreement: This Agreement shall be effective July 1, 1999. The expiration date for
purposes of performing substantive work and for incurring costs hereunder shall be June 30,
2001, and for final accounting purposes shall be August 31, 2001, unless terminated earlier or
extended pursuant to the provisions hereof.
12.2 Extension/Modification. This Agreement may be amended or otherwise altered only by
written agreement of the County Executive or his/her designee and an authorized
6
representative of the City. Exhibit C: Format for Agreement to Extend and/or Modify the
CTR ILA may be used for such action.
12.3 Termination.
(a) Each Party may terminate its obligations under this Agreement, upon thirty (30) days
advance written notice of the termination to the other Party.
(b) If at any time during the Agreement period the State acts to terminate, reduce, modify, or
withhold the CTR Funds allotted to the County, then either Party may terminate this
Agreement upon giving thirty(30) days written notice to the other Party. The County shall
have the authority and responsibility to ensure that upon temanation of this Agreement, any
remaining CTR Funds are made available in the manner described in Section 4.0 of this
Agreement or returned to the State.
12.4 Non-Appropriation of Funds: If sufficient funds are not appropriated or allocated for
payment under an extension to this Agreement for any future biennium, the County will not be
obligated to make any payments after the end of the then current biennium and this Agreement
will expire.
SECTION 13. CHANGE IN STATUS
13.1 Addition of Cities for Purposes of Allocation of Funds. Any city within the County that is
not Party to an Agreement with the County for the distribution of CTR funds that (a)becomes
affected by Chapter 70.94 RCW and is required to implement a CTR plan and (b) enters into
an Agreement with the County shall be allocated CTR Funds beginning with the next annual
allocation period provided for in Section 4.1 of this Agreement.
7
13.2 Change in Status. If the City finds it is no longer affected by Chapter 70.94 RCW and is
therefore no longer required to implement a CTR plan, it may continue to be a Party to this
Agreement for purposes of participating in the CTR Coordinating Committee for
information sharing, but shall not receive CTR Funds effective with the quarter following
the change in status.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement by having their
authorized representatives affix their signatures below.
Approved as to form: THE CITY OF KENT
By By
Assistant City Attorney Director of
Date:
KING COUNTY:
BY
King County Executive
Date:
EXHIBIT A: Scope of Work
Attachment - Format for Quarterly Reports
EXHIBIT B Methodology for Allocating Funds
EXHIBIT C: Format for Agreement to Extend and/or Modify the CTR ILA
8
EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF WORK
Implementation of Commute Trip Reduction Plans and Programs
BACKGROUND: The 1991 Session of the Washington State Legislature found that automobile
traffic in Washington's metropolitan areas is the major source of emissions of air contaminants and
that increasing automobile traffic is aggravating traffic congestion. Further, the Legislature found that
increasing automobile traffic is a major factor in increasing consumption of gasoline. Reducing the
number of commute trips to work via single-occupant vehicles is an effective way of reducing
vehicle-related air pollution, traffic congestion, and energy use.
To address these problems, the Commute Trip Reduction(CTR) Act was enacted by the 1991
Legislature and signed by the Governor. This Act required cities and counties containing "major
employers" in the eight counties experiencing the greatest vehicle-related air pollution, gasoline
consumption and congestion problems to develop plans and programs to reduce single-occupant
vehicle commute trips. A ninth county became affected by the Act in 1996.
These counties and cities established and implemented commute trip reduction plans for all major
employers within their jurisdiction. The commute trip reduction plans were developed in cooperation
with local transit agencies, regional transportation planning organizations, and major employers.
Additionally, the trip reduction plans are required to be consistent with the guidelines established by
the State's Commute Trip Reduction Task Force.
King County and the sixteen cities affected by the CTR law(Algona, Auburn, Bellevue, Bothell, Des
Moines, Enumclaw, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kent,Kirkland,Mercer Island,Redmond, Renton,
SeaTac, Seattle,and Tukwila) entered into the 1991-1993 CTR Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for the
purposes of allocating State CTR grant funds for the initial development and implementation of CTR
program. Under this agreement the County and the cities passed local CTR ordinances, identified
potentially affected employers, established commute trip reduction zones and zone base year values
and progress year goals, and conducted review of local parking policies as they related to CTR
Beginning with the 1993-1995 allocation, the cities ofBurien and Woodinville were added to the list
of affected CTR cities in King County and began receiving their proportionate share of CTR funding.
In the 1995-1997 biennium, the City of Shoreline was added, with proportionate allocation occurring
in the second year of the biennium. In this biennium, the City of Snoqualmie becomes affected.
This CTR ILA involves on-going program admirustration, including, but not limited to: employer
initial program descriptions, employer annual reports, and employee survey results, where and when
available. It is intended that this CTR ILA will be administratively renewed each biennium with the
scope of work modified as is necessary to accommodate changes in State technical assistance fund
requirements or local conditions.
9
CITY TASKS:
1.0 General Tasks:
The City or its designee will:
1.1 Maintain and administer a CTR ordinance and plan for affected employers in the
incorporated area of the City according to the provisions of RCW 70.94.521-551.
1.2 The City will provide W SDOT with a public hearing notice and copies of any
proposed amendments to its CTR ordinance, plan, and/or administrative guidelines
within the first week of the public review period, and final copies of such action
within one (1) month of adoption.
1.3 Submit to WSDOT, an annual workplan that outlines the major tasks and activities,
including but not limited to employer training and networking activities, employer
program review, survey activities, and advertising and promotional campaigns, to be
conducted for the coming year. The first annual work plan will be submitted with the
first quarterly report and the second with the fourth quarterly report.
1.4 Establish and maintain books, records, documents, and other evidence and
accounting procedures and practices, sufficient to reflect properly all direct and
indirect costs of whatever nature claimed to have been incurred and anticipated to be —
incurred solely for the performance of this Agreement. To facilitate the
administration of the work described in this agreement, separate accounts shall be
established and maintained within the City's existing accounting system or set up
independently. Such accounts are referred to herein collectively as the"CTR
Account." All costs charged to the CTR Account, including any approved services
contributed by the City or others, shall be supported by properly executed payrolls,
time records, invoices, contracts, vouchers, or products evidencing in proper detail
the nature and propriety of the charges.
1.5 Maintain an appeals process consistent with RCW 70.94.534(6) procedures identified
in the Commute Trip Reduction Task Force Guidelines whereby employers in the
incorporated City may obtain a waiver or modification of the CTR requirements,
including establishment of alternative SOVNN9 goals, if they would be unable to
meet the requirements of a CTR plan or ordinance as a result of special characteristics
of their business or location.
1.6 Within forty-five (45) days after June 30, 2000, and thirty (30) days after June 30,
2001, submit to WSDOT a report summarizing overall costs incurred in
implementing the CTR ordinance and plan. Cost shall be reported in a format
provided by WSDOT.
9901iia 6/23/99
1.7 Work collaboratively with and provide technical guidance and support to affected
employers. Provide basic services to help employers set up and maintain their CTR
programs and to reach the applicable program goals. At a minimum these basic
services will include:
1.70 Written information on basic requirements of the CTR ordinance, CTR zones,
and an explanation of how the plan is intended to achieve its goals;
1.71 At least one ETC basic training class per year, using WSDOT provided ETC
Handbook or other training materials reviewed and approved by WSDOT;
1.72 Materials that explain a range of measures and activities that may help the
employer achieve the CTR goals of the local ordinance;
1.73 Forms for annual progress reports that are consistent with the Task Force
requirements.
1.74 Guidelines for employers to prepare their CTR program descriptions and
annual program reports;
1.75 State-supplied employee survey forms and training for employers designed to
achieve a successful survey process;
1.76 Annual review of an employer's CTR program including a determination of
whether the employer is acting in good faith to meet the goals established by the CTR
law;
1.77 Assistance in developing, implementing, and/or modifying an employer's CTR
program;
1.78 Regular opportunities for an employer's ETC to network with other local
ETCs; and
1.79 Promotional materials such as posters, clip art, or articles that will assist the
employer in implementing a worksite CTR program.
1.8 Notify WSDOT prior to sending any surveys to the University of Washington, Office
of Educational Assessment for processing. The notification must include the name of
the worksite and employer identification code for any surveys being submitted for
processing. The notification should be submitted via electronic mail, fax or U. S.
Postal Services.
1.9 Participate in local implementation of the statewide CTR public awareness and
recognition programs developed by WSDOT.
2.0 Quarterly Progress Report and Invoice Voucher. The City or its designee will submit
quarterly reports to the County with the invoice vouchers, in the format provided in Exhibit A-
Attachment, that adequately and accurately assess the progress made by the City in
9901i1a 6/25/99
implementing RCW 70.94.521-551 within thirty (30) days of the end of each quarter for the
first seven quarters and within twenty (20) days of the end of the final quarter.
COUNTY TASKS:
1.0 Liaison: Serve as a liaison between WSDOT and cities, towns, transit agencies, and regional
transportation planning organizations for the purposes of RCW 70.94.521-551.
2.0 Distribute the WSDOT-provided State Program Description &Employer Annual Report Form
to local jurisdictions within the county implementing CTR plans and ordinances, as requested.
9901ila 6R5/99
l 7
ATTACHMENT
to Exhibit A
— Quarterly Report Format
• Name of the Jurisdiction or Organization Submitting Report
• Submitted on behalf of following Jurisdiction(s)
• Contact Person Name
• Contact Person Phone and Fax Number
1. Past Quarter's CTR events and projects:
A detailed summary of implementation assistance provided to affected employers within the
jurisdictions such as site visits, program review, training, networking opportunities, products
and services, publications and promotion materials.
2. Expenditures This Quarter
List actual total expenditures on the last line of the following table. Estimate expenditures by
category as indicated.
This Quarter CTR Fund
Categories CTR Fund Expenditures
Expenditures Year to Date
Program Administration $ $
Training $ $
Em to er support and services $ $
Other(Specify) $ $
Total $ $
3. Jurisdiction (s) Contact Names, Address, and Phone Numbers
Jurisdiction A John Who City of X PO Box 1234 X,WA 98000 Phone (206) 999-9999
4. List of Affected Employers & Worksites in the Jurisdiction.
The information will be submitted in the electronic format provided by WSDOT.
5. Employer Annual Reports Approved During the Quarter.
Attach one electronic or hard copy of any employer annual reports approved by the jurisdiction
during the quarter.
6. Employer Exemptions and Goal Modifications Granted During the Quarter
Provide the name and employer identification code for any worksite which has been granted an
exemption or goal modification during the quarter. Include information about the duration of
all exemptions and information on the type of goal modification granted.
9901iia 6M/99
13
EXHIBIT B: METHODOLOGY FOR ALLOCATING CTR FUNDS
This exhibit describes the methodology for allocating CTR funds among the County and the affected
CTR cities within the county that are required to plan and implement a CTR plan by RCW
70.94.521.-.551, including the City that is Party to this Agreement.
1. Definition: For purposes of this exhibit, the following definition shall apply in addition to
those in Section 2 of this Agreement:
"Actual Affected Employer Worksites" means a worksite of an affected employer for which
the employer has, within the twelve month period ending June 30, (1) submitted a program
description or received an extension of this deadline for this action if authorized by local
ordinance, (2) submitted an annual or other report or requested an extension of the deadline
for submitting such reports, (3)been exempted or otherwise excused from submitting annual
or other reports but is still required to implement an employer CTR program by locally
adopted ordinance, (4) been exempted from all or a portion of CTR program requirements,
or (5) been identified as being an affected work site on as of June 30.
2. Annual Allocation: CTR Funds will be allocated annually based on the State's fiscal year
(July 1 to June 30).
3. Amount to Be Allocated for Each Allocation Period. The amount to be allocated annually
shall be (a) one-half of the total biennial amount of State CTR funds or(b), in the event that the
State/County contract specifies other schedules for disbursements,the total amount to be disbursed
to the County by the State for the State's fiscal year.
4. Allocation Method. State CTR funds shall be allocated annually. The allocation shall be in
direct proportion to the number of actual affected employer worksites compared to the total number
of affected employer worksites within the entire county effective March 31 of each year. The City
shall submit a listing of actual affected employer worksites to the County by April 5 of each year for
purposes of calculating the allocation.
9901iia 6:25199
� C
EA"HIBIT C: FORMAT FOR AGREEMENT TO EXTEND AND/OR MODIFY THE
CTR INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
This general format shall be followed to carry out the provisions of Section 12.2 to extend or mode
the agreement.
The Honorable
Mayor, City of
Address
City, WA xxxxx
RE: Renewal/Modification of Commute Trip Reduction Act Interlocal Agreement
Dear Mayor
The Commute Trip Reduction Act (CTR) Interlocal Agreement (ILA), which allocates state CTR
funds to local CTR jurisdictions and describes required implementation activities, provides in ...
(select one of the following paragraphs or combine as appropriate) . . .
... Section 12.2 that the ILA "may be amended, altered, or extended only by written agreement
of the County Executive and authorized representative of the City." I propose that the ILA be
amended as follows (or, as in Attachment).
I propose that the Agreement be extended, as provided in Section 12.2, for a two year
period beginning June 30, , with modifications to Exhibit A: Scope of Work as attached.
Please indicate your concurrence with this proposal by signing where indicated below and returning
this to me.
Sincerely,
Name
Tang County Executive
I concur with the proposed action.
Mayor, City of
Date
9901ila 6'25/99
is
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19, 1999
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: VACTOR SOLIDS FACILITY - ACCEPT AS COMPLETE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Director, accept the Vactor Solids Facility contract as
complete and release retainage to Archer Construction upon
standard releases from the State and release of any liens .
The original contract amount was $339, 545 . 99 . The final
construction cost was $354 , 217 . 63 . Adequate funds exist within
the project budget to cover the overrun.
3 . EXHIBITS: None
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 October 19 , 1999
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: 277TH STREET SEWER INTERCEPTOR, PHASE ONE - ACCEPT
AS COMPLETE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Director, accept the 277th Street Sewer Interceptor, Phase I
contract as complete and release retainage to Robison
Construction upon standard releases from the State and release
of any liens . The original contract amount was $4 , 013 , 313 . 64 .
The final construction cost was $3 , 728 , 824 . 79 .
3 . EXHIBITS : None
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
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Other Business
1 . SUBJECT: SCHOOL DISTRICT FACILITIES PLAN, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT CPA-99-2 - APPROVE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On September 7 , 1999, the City Council
adopted Resolution No. 1554 authorizing an emergency com-
prehensive plan amendment to adopt the Kent and Federal Way
School District ' s Capital Facilities Plans . The Land Use and
Planning Board held a hearing on the Kent and Federal Way
School District ' s Capital Facilities Plans and recommended
approval with the Federal Way Plan amended to correct the
multi-family figure from $804 . 00 to $786 . 00 .
3 . EXHIBITS : Staff memo, Staff Report dated September 27, 1999,
Kent School District No. 415 Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
from 1999-2000 through 2004-2005 dated April 1999; Federal Way
Public Schools 1998-99 Capital Facilities Plan, and minutes of
the Land Use and Planning Board of September 27, 1999
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Land Use and 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 I� �\ moves, Councilmember ^r J seconds
to approve¢disapprovejmodi€y the Land Use and Planning Board' s
recommendation of approval to amend the Kent Comprehensive Plan
to incorporate the Kent and Federal Way School District plans
(by reference) as a sub-element of the Kent Capital Facilities
Plan (CPA-99-2) , and direct the City Attorney to prepare the
necessary ordinance .
DISCUSSION: B
ACTION: U+ 'C
Council Agenda
Item No. 7A
CITY OF JQ� S\J JS
INVICTA Jim White, Mayor
Planning Department (253) 856-54541FAX(253) 856-6454
James P. Harris, Planning Director
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 19, 1999
TO: Mayor Jim White, Leona Orr, President and City Council Members
FROM: Linda Phillips, Planner
SUBJECT : Adoption of Kent and Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plans
The attached resolution, staff report, and Land Use and Planning Board Minutes contain the
background information for the Kent and Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan
adoption requests.
After conducting a public hearing on September 27, 1999, the Land Use and Planning Board
recommend adoption of both Capital Facilities Plans by reference as additions to the Kent
Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element with one revision.
At the September 27`h public hearing, the revision was requested by Jerri Walker of the Federal
Way School District, who clarified a school district calculation error in the initial impact fee
report. She requested that the proposed multifamily fee for Federal Way be revised from the
originally stated $804.00 to $786.00. The latest draft of the Federal Way Capital Facilities Plan,
with the correct impact fee calculation of$786.00 is included with this packet.
LP\pm\P:ACC 1019.doc
Enc: Federal Way Capital Facilities Plan corrected draft
cc: James P. Harris,Planning Director
Fred Satterstrom,Planning Manager
11-011h AV6 SO_ /KENT_AA`ASHINGTON 9NO3---sKys/TELEPHONE �'S3)R96-5T00
CITY OF l r\,Ll!
INVICTN Jim White, Mayor
Planning Department (253) 856-5454/FAX(253) 856-6454
James P. Harris, Planning Director
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
Public Hearing
September 27, 1999
The meeting of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order by Chair Ron Harmon
at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, September 27, 1999 in Council Chambers of Kent City Hall.
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT
MEMBERS PRESENT James P. Harris, Planning Director
Ron Harmon, Chair Linda Phillips, Planner
Terry Zimmerman, Vice Chair Roger Lubovich, City Attorney
Brad Bell Justin Osemene, Asst City Atty
Steve Dowell
Jon Johnson
David Malik
Sharon Woodford
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ron Harmon MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED to approve the minutes of August 23,
1999. Motion Carried.
ADDED ITEMS TO THE AGENDA
None
COMMUNICATIONS
None
NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS
Planning Director, James Harris announced a workshop would be held at 9:00 am Saturday, October
9 to tour the 1999 comprehensive plan amendment sites.
CPA-99-2 KENT & FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICTS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Planner, Linda Phillips stated that the process of incorporating school capital facilities plans into the
Capital Facilities Elements of Cities and Counties was authorized by the Washington State Growth
Management Act for the purpose of mitigating the effects of population growth on school facilities
in area schools. Ms. Phillips stated that in 1995 the City of Kent adopted an ordinance establishing
a framework for incorporating the capital facilities plans of the Kent and Federal Way School
Districts for the purpose of collecting school impact fees related to new residential development.
Ms. Phillips stated that in 1998 Kent extended the school impact fee collection for two more years.
Ms. Phillips stated that the City Council declared an emergency at their September 7, 1999 meeting
so that the Capital Facilities Plans could be incorporated immediately if they are adopted and not
wait for the cycle of camp plan revisions that the City observes every year.
'-'04111.AV'L. SO_ /KEN"r.N ASHINGTON 9507]-5895/TELEPHONE 1'_57)S56-5200
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
_ September 27, 1999
Page 2
Ms. Phillips stated that upon reviewing the schools' capital facilities plans, it is evident they are
similar to our City's Capital Facilities planning process. Ms. Phillips stated that Kent and Federal
Way inventory existing facilities, set level of service standards and work with their communities to
determine what the standards should be for their school districts. Ms. Phillips stated that when the
school districts assess their needs, they look at population projections and other area data.
Ms. Phillips stated that the school districts look at student generation factors to determine the
number of children generated from the homes in their areas. She stated that they survey their
funding sources and arrive at a calculation that tells them what their school impact fees should be.
Ms. Phillips stated that the Kent School District's impact fees for single families were $3,744.00 in
1998 increasing to $3,782.00 for 1999. Ms. Phillips stated that the school impact fees for
multifamily were $1,000.00 in 1998 and increased to $2,329.00 in 1999
Ms. Phillips stated that the Federal Way School District's impact fees for single families were
$2,883.00 in 1998 with 1999 proposed impact fees estimated at$2,384.00. She stated that the school
impact fees for multifamily were $875.00 in 1998 and the 1999 proposed impact fee is $804.00.
Brad Bell MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED to open the public hearing. MOTION carried.
Jerri Walker with Federal Way School District clarified that there was a calculation error in the
initial impact fee report and that the proposed multifamily fee for this year is $786.00 and not
$804.00.
Gwen Escher as representative for the Kent School District stated that she would be glad to
address any questions. No questions were raised.
Brad Bell MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to close the public hearing. MOTION
carried.
Steve Dowell objected to the tax by stating that it should be broad based, fair and equitable and that
the current tax meets none of those requirements. Mr. Dowell expressed his opinion that legislature
needs to implement a more equitable method to fund our school system
Brad Bell MOVED and Jon Johnson SECONDED to accept staffs recommendation for#CPA-99-2
Kent & Federal Way School Districts Capital Facilities Plan with the amendment to accept the
corrected figure of$786.00 for multifamily and not $804.00 for the Federal Way School District.
MOTION carved unanimously.
9ZCA-99-4 ADULT RETAIL STORES ZONING CODE AMENDMENT
City Attorney, Roger Lubovich stated that in 1995 the City of Kent adopted a comprehensive adult
entertainment business licensing code defining adult retail as adult bookstores, videos and novelty
shops. Mr. Lubovich stated that the current Business License Code defines adult retail as a 20%
stock and trade in adult entertainment material. He stated that the proposed ordinance redefines
adult retail based on a case law as well as a perceived influx of adult retail establishments in the
region.
C'TV OF
Jim White, Mayor
+nvtcT�
Planning Department(253)856-5454/Fax(253) 856-6454
James P. Harris, Planning Director
STAFF REPORT
September 27, 1999
TO: RON HARMON, CHAIR, AND LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD
MEMBERS
FROM: FRED SATTERSTROM, PLANNING MANAGER
SUBJECT: KENT AND FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICTS CAPITAL FACILITIES
PLAN AMENDMENT #CPA-99-2
INTRODUCTION:
A public hearing was scheduled by the Land Use and Planning Board at the September 13, 1999
workshop. The public hearing will be held on September 27, 1999 to consider the Kent and
Federal Way School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. A public hearing is required prior to the
Board's recommendation and the City Council's decision to amend the Kent Comprehensive
Plan to incorporate the school district plans as a sub-element of the Kent Capital Facilities Plan.
Copies of the 1999 Kent and Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plans are attached to
this staff report for your review. The impact fees proposed by the 1999 capital facilities plans
follow:
Kent School District
Single Familv 1998 Impact Fee S3,744.00
1999 Proposed Impact Fee $3,782.00
Multi-Family 1998 Impact Fee S1,888.00
1999 Proposed Impact Fee $2,329.00
Federal Wav School District
Single Familv 1998 Impact Fee S2,883.00
1999 Proposed Impact Fee $2,384.00
Multi-Familv 1998 Impact Fee $ 875.00
1999 Proposed Impact Fee $ 804.00
210 4ih AVE. SO. /KENT.P'ASHINOTON 98032-"95/TELEPHONE f'53,856-5200
Land Use and Planning Board
September 27, 1999
Page 2
BACKGROUND:
The Growth Management Act authorizes local governments to collect impact fees for a number
of capital facilities including schools. On December 19, 1995, the Kent City Council adopted
Ordinance #3260 establishing a framework for the collection of school impact fees. One of the
provisions in the ordinance requires the adoption of school district capital facilities plans as an
element of the City's Comprehensive Plan adopted on April 18, 1995.
In order to implement the City's authority to impose impact fees, the City Council adopted
Ordinance 93281 on March 5, 1996, amending the Kent Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the
Kent and Federal Way School Districts Capital Facilities Plans as a sub-element of the Kent
Capital Facilities Plan. The ordinance also established a base fee schedule for school impact fees
as set forth in each school district's capital facilities plan.
On February 3, 1998, the City Council passed Ordinance #3393 extending school impact fees for
two years. This action requires that Kent's Comprehensive Plan be amended each year to
include the most recent updates to the Kent and Federal Way School Districts' capital facilities
plans.
Both the Kent and Federal Way School Districts have recently updated their respective capital
facilities plans. In order to proceed with amending the capital facilities element of the Kent
Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the school districts capital facilities plans, the Kent City
Council declared an emergency at their September 7, 1999 meeting.
PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Land Use and Planning Board recommend approval of CPA-99-2
Kent and Federal Way School Districts Capital Facilities Plan Amendment and that the City
Council amend Kent's Comprehensive Plan and adopt by reference the 1999 Capital Facilities
Elements of the Kent and Federal Way School Districts.
LP.pm P.Iccschool.doc
enc: 1999 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan
1999 Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan
cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director
Fred S. Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Linda Phillips, Planner
CAPITAL FACILITIES
PLAN
1999-2000 - 2004-2005
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
Metropolitan King County
Kent, Covington, Auburn, Black Diamond, Renton, SeaTac, Washington
APRIL 1999
SCENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
12033 SE 256" Street
Kent, Washington 98031-6643
(253) 373-7000
SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
1999-2000 - 2004-2005
April 1999
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Bill Boyce
Sandra Collins
Susan Follmer
Mike Jensen
Linda Petersen
ADMINISTRATION
Marcia D. Slater, Ph.D.
Interim Superintendent
Daniel L. Moberly
Assistant Superintendent of Business Services
Fred H. High
Executive Director of Finance
Gwen Dupree
Assistant Superintendent of Secondary Education
Beverly J. Cheney, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent of Elementary Education & Instructional Services
Margaret A. Whitney
Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources & Student Support Services
Kent Keel
Executive Director of Information Technology —
April, 1999
Kent School District No. 415
Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
9 999-2000 - 2004-2005
April 1999
For information on the Plan, please call the
Finance & Planning Department at (253) 373-7295.
Capital Facilities Plan
Contributing Staff
Gwenn Escher-Derdowski, Community Planning Administrator
Clint Marsh, Director of Facilities
Kathy Metzener& Karla Wilkerson, Facilities Department
Apni,1999
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
TABLE of CONTENTS
Section Page Number
I Executive Summary 2
I I Six-Year Enrollment Projection 4
III Current District "Standard of Service" 8
I V Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools 12
V Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan 15
V I Relocatable Classrooms 18
V I I Projected Classroom Capacity 20
V I I I Finance Plan and Impact Fee Schedules 25
I X Appendixes 30
scent Scowl District SixNear Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 1
I Executive Summary
This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent
School District (the "District") as the District's facilities planning document, in
compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act,
King County Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn.
This annual plan update was prepared using data available in the spring of 1999
for the 1998-99 school year.
This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the
Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document
for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long
Range Capital. Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies, taking into
account a longer or shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of
facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. Any such plan will
be consistent with this Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan.
The Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan has been adopted by
Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn and
included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of
each jurisdiction. An impact fee implementing ordinance for the unincorporated
areas was effective September 15, 1993. This Plan update has also been
submitted to Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Black Diamond, SeaTac, and
Renton.
A financing plan is included in Section V I I I which demonstrates the District's
ability to implement this Plan.
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in
order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. While the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for
capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs in the
District. The Growth Management Act, King County and City codes and
ordinances authorize the District to make adjustments to the standard of service
based on specific needs of the District.
Beginning in 1998, the District's standard provides for class size reduction for
grades K - 3 from 26 to 22 students. The District's standard class size for grades
4 - 9 should not exceed 29 students, and class size for grades 10 - 12 should
not exceed 31 students. (See Section I I I for more specific information.)
(Continued)
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 2
I Executive Summary (continued)
The capacities of the schools in the District are calculated based on this
standard of service and the existing inventory, which includes some relocatable
classrooms. The District's 1998-99 program capacity of permanent facilities is
24,093 which reflects program changes and the reduction of class size in grades
K - 3. Relocatables provide additional transitional capacity until permanent
facilities are completed.
Kent School District is the fourth largest district in the state. The actual number
of individual students per the October 1, 1998, head count was 26,074. Full
Time Equivalent (FTE) enrollment for this same period was 24,875.90
(Kindergarten at .5 and excluding Early Childhood Education IECE) and Running Start students)_
The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of
transitional facilities were among subjects studied by the Citizens' Concurrency
Task Force. The Final Report of the Concurrency Task Force was approved by
the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993. Findings and recommendations of
the Concurrency Task Force are discussed further in Section I I I of this Plan.
In subsequent years, the current plan is to maintain surplus capacity consistent
with today's surplus. This surplus is achieved primarily through the transitional
use of relocatables as recommended by the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force.
The Concurrency Task Force reaffirms that, as has been the practice and
philosophy of the Kent School District, and also based on the most recent
recommendation of the Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee, portables are
NOT acceptable as permanent facilities. Portables, or, using the more accurate
but interchangeable term, "relocatables" may be used as interim or transitional
facilities:
1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school facilities.
2. , To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased capacity
and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand.
3. To meet unique program requirements.
Use of relocatable and transitional capacity and specific recommendations by
the Concurrency Task Force are further discussed in Section V I of this Plan.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, this Plan will be
updated annually, with changes in the fee schedule(s) adjusted accordingly.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Apnl, 1999 Page 3
[ I Six - Year Enrollment Projection
For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on student yield from
documented residential construction projected over the next six years. (see Tabu 2)
The student generation factor, as defined on the next page, is the basis for the
growth projections from new developments.
King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were
used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (See Table 1)
Based on the 1998 percentage, 8.28% of King County live births, together with
proportional growth from new construction, is equivalent to the number of
students projected to enter kindergarten in the district for the next six-year
period. (See Table 2)
Early Childhood Education students (formerly identified as "Preschool Special
Education [SE] or handicapped") are calculated and reported separately on a .5
FTE basis.
The first grade population is traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten
population due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens.
Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset
by current local economic conditions. With a few notable exceptions, the
expectation is that enrollment increases will occur District-wide in the long term.
District projections are based on historical growth patterns combined with
continuing development of projects in the pipeline dependent on market and
growth conditions.
The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact
to schools and monitor conditions to reflect adjustments in this assumption. The
six-year enrollment projection anticipates significant enrollment growth from new
development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district.
Information on new residential developments and the completion of these
proposed developments in all jurisdictions may be considered in the District's
future analysis of growth projections.
Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments.
The Kent School District serves six permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King
County, the cities of Covington, Kent and Auburn. The Lake Sawyer area has
recently been annexed to the City of Black Diamond and the western portion of
the district includes a small portion of the City of SeaTac.
(Continued)
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 4
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection connnuetll
STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR
"Student Factor"' is defined by code as "the number derived by a school district
to describe how many students of each grade span are expected to be
generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual student
generated rates for developments completed within the last five years.
Following these guidelines, the student generation factor for Kent School District
is as follows:
Single Family Elementary .515
Junior High .197
Senior High .180
Total .892
Multi-Family Elementary .279
Junior High .086
Senior High .063
Total .428
The student generation factor is based on a survey of 3,149 single family
dwelling units and 2,998 multi-family dwelling units. There was no adjustment for
occupancy and studio apartments were excluded. Please refer to Appendix E on
Page 33 for details of the Student Generation Factor survey.
The actual number of students in those residential developments was
determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation
System. In 3,149 single family dwelling units there were 1,622 elementary
students, 621 junior high students, and 566 senior high students for a total of
2,809 students. In 2,998 multi-family dwelling units, there were 836 elementary
students, 257 junior high students, and 189 senior high students, for a total of
1,282 students.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page S
ap
o Ot R Of Ot M1 N m Ot ¢f Ml O O O
Q1 M 6J R t0 Qf O R t0 M1 N Yl tD CO V L
N t0 O p N O O O a 6M m <O
(M
i
_ V Vf N O t0 m r m M co M m m
C V O ^ s�pp stpp N M m R a m N V m
V O O O p (3) Of (3) Of m v] m m Q
N m N N N N N N
n
(Q ` p o N N N CO m Y N N m f N N _ N
Q1 r fV R ^ m N to m N O M r �(] Of M m �O
h Ol Of O Ol Cl Ol W CM C m m V O O
�... N tD N N N V r L
1
to ,^� ae to to a+ M V m to M to m r v t0 S ,�
n � r r to N M N V M m m O N CD
a! z rn tv o of o w t4 to rn to r- tc v_ n m g
N m N � N
■
W
CO m co m to M rn O rn M M (n m M `r rn 1:
. M O 10 M m V Of V m O M M OI r n N Ln W
C) a, h OI Oa OI Ot Cl m Of Cl m CO m N MCM
p rI
C%l cm
y cop ^ O r m N M r CO O O N M ^ m C^C
N
M V n M O u] O .- O V t0 _ R a
:: F! O C O O OI Of Of (3 Of CO r r N M Co. O
N (A N N R .- R .- e- N m m w
N � m
V O N M aE M Of m O N N r O m O m O (f =
N N N M to O m N M t0 T CDm M �i C
m 0 0a0 r m (0 -W N N < _
Z = N Oj N — R R R R N O) o 0
O F 3 N g Y
C� W u: e r O V r m to M 0) M N N 00 m m r C
(... `: OJ CD V V m m M N N m O m N
m Of Mm Mm n r CD t0 V V N N tO
04
0 yy
7 W 40 O O N M V M CM Of &0 m V M m
.� $: r m to r N W O N N V m m m O m to t
CD � i0 r m r r m t0 to V V M N N g
U C' c a0 . . . . . . . CoN M d = c
U) W E E
m
2 0 le
01 ^ u Of CDm a) 0 N O m 0 M M m V M 3
`c
W N W O t0 N m M Ol N t0 m m N .- N V Y Y
U m t0 r n r fO to to to M V V M N O M ? ty mq
Y U co N N
N
ip Y Y
W M c Cl to M m m O m m O V N V O)
m Ln m O O .- M M N O r M O CD
. t0 r t0 te9 V V M M O N M p M M N Y O
O
U H v
r, u t0 M O N M t0 O 'n N V r M O O O G
(n m M m CD N t0 r u7 M V CD CD m V
N u7 te] V V M N M M M M V N M M
r m — .- .- .- r- .- — — R — — m t0 t0 $ u n d
N
a 2 0
• u U
H J N q ty
N Y _
• N 0 CL 2 m
m t m m N vY ci
m CD E h Org o N
r. Y N d 0 y V x
N M V to t0 r m rn W c > E '- t�
0 O! Ql •i0 J g b y
U Q) CD N N 0 N N N N 0 N 0 N N m �. c o c
Ql d V 9 1 7 'o 'aC N U N
m m t`o m m m m m m m m m F- m E F o 0
Y S
u
N
C
Y
Y
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
SIX - YEAR ENROLLMENT PROJECTION
ACTUAL P R O 1 E C T I O N
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 20 44
King County Live Births ' 22,330 21.972 21,817 21.573 21,646 21,719 21,792 '
Increase/Decrease -719 -358 -155 -399 73 73 73
Kindergarten/Birth% = 8.28% 8.28% 8.28% 8.28% 8.28% 8.28% 8.28%
1 Early aWanooa Edwatim 0.3 44 56 58 60 62 65 68
Kindergarten FTE .5 925 896 939 965 994 1,037 1,076
Grade 1 2,064 1.917 1,965 2,043 2,086 2,155 2,225
Grade 2 2,095 2,056 1,990 2,038 2,117 2,158 2,228
Grade 3 2,208 2.079 2,131 2,065 2,113 2,192 2,232
Grade 4 2.045 2,173 2,130 2,182 2,117 2,164 2.243
Grade 5 2,108 2,053 2,282 2,236 2,289 2,220 2267
Grade 6 2,045 2,110 2,139 2.369 2.327 2,375 2,305
Grade 7 2,063 2.054 2,187 2,203 2.422 2.361 2,400
Grade 8 1,970 2,009 2,092 2.224 2,240 2,458 2,398
Grade 9 1,925 1,945 2,047 2,130 2.261 2,277 2,494
Grade 10 1,951 1.904 1,998 2,093 2,164 2,284 2,287
Grade 11 1,846 1,850 1,819 1,909 1.997 2,065 2,179
Grade 12 1,631 1,679 1,718 1,689 1.777 1,861 1,927
Total FTE Enrollment 24,920 24,781 25,495 26,206 26,966 27,672 28,329
w :3
Yearly Increase 315 -139 714 711 760 706 657
Yearly Increase% 1.28% -0.56% 2.88% 2.79% 2.90% 2.62% 2.37%
Cumulative Increase 288 149 863 1,574 2,334 3,040 3,697
Full Time Equivalent(FTE) 24,920 1 24.781 25,495 1 26,206 1 26,966 1 27.672 1 28,329
' Kindergarten projection based on King County actual live birth percentage and proportional growth from new construction.
z Kindergarten FTE enrollment projection at.5 is calculated by using the District's percentage of King County live births
5 years earlier compared to actual kindergarten enrollment in the previous year.(ECE-Early Childhood Education)
a Oct.g8 P223 Headcount is 25,905. Oct 98 full student headcount including 88 Preschool 3 180 Running Start=26.074.
G R O W T H P R O J E C T I O N S - Adjustments for current economic factors
For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates significant enrollment
growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 April, 1999 Page 7
I it Current Kent School District "Standard of Service"
In order to determine the capacity of the District's facilities, the King County
Code refers to a "standard of service" that each school district must establish in
order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service identifies the
program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs
of special need, and other factors determined by the District which would, in the
District's judgment, best serve its student population.
This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School
District. Relocatables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard
of service as the permanent facilities. (see AppendizA, 6 a c)
The standard of service defined herein may continue to change in the future.
Beginning in 1998, the District's standard class size for grades K - 3 was
reduced from 26 to 22. Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic
planning process which may affect aspects of the District's "standard of service".
Future changes to the standard of service will be reflected in future capital
facilities plans.
Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students
Class size for grades K - 3 should not exceed 22 students.
Class size for grades 4 - 6 should not exceed 29 students.
Program capacity for regular education classrooms is calculated at an average
of 25 students per classroom because there are four grade levels at K - 3 and
fluctuations between primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e. Third / Fourth
grade split classes, etc.).
Students may be provided music instruction and physical education in a
separate classroom or facility.
Students may have scheduled time in a special computer lab.
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program.
(continued)
Kent School Distnct six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 8
I I I Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (conunuw)
Identified students will also be provided other educational opportunities in
classrooms for programs designated as follows:
English As a Second Language (ESL)
Self-contained Special Education Programs
Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I)
Gifted Education
Other Remediation Programs
Learning Assisted Program (LAP)
School Adjustment Programs for severely behavior-disordered students
Hearing Impaired
Mild, Moderate and Severe Developmental Disabilities
Developmental Kindergarten
Early Childhood Education (3-4 yr. old preschool handicapped students)
Some of the above special programs require specialized classroom space, as
well as music and physical education classrooms, computer labs, etc.; thus, the
permanent capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced.
Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of
time to receive instruction in these special programs and space must be
allocated to serve these programs. Some newer buildings have been
constructed to accommodate most of these programs; some older buildings have
been modified, and in some circumstances, these modifications reduce the
classroom capacity of the buildings. When programs change, program capacity
fluctuates and is updated annually to reflect the change in program and capacity.
Current Standards of Service for Secondary Students
The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and
educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect
the capacity of the school buildings.
Class size for grades 7 - 9 should not exceed 29 students.
Class size for grades 10 - 12 should not exceed 31 students.
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program.
(continued)
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 9
III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (conru,uea)
Identified students will also be provided other education opportunities in
classrooms for programs designated as follows:
Computer Labs
English As a Second Language (ESL)
Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Preschool and Daycare
Honors (Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs
Basic Skills Programs
Traffic Safety Education
JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps
Variety of Technical &Applied Programs (Vocational Education)
i.e. Home & Family Life (Cooking, Sewing, Child Development, etc.)
Business Education (Keyboarding, Accounting, Business Law,
Sales & Marketing, etc.) Woods, Metals, Welding, Electronics,
Manufacturing Technology, Auto Shop, Commercial Foods,
Commercial Art, Drafting & Drawing, Electronics, Careers, etc.
Many of these programs and others require specialized classroom space which
can reduce the permanent capacity of the "school buildings. In addition, an
alternative home school, choice and transition program is provided for students
in grades 2-12 at Kent Learning Center.
Space or Classroom Utilization
As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized
rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space
during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of
regular teaching stations. Based on the analysis of actual utilization of
classrooms, the District has concluded that the standard utilization rate is 95%
for elementary schools and 85% for secondary schools. In future, the District
will continue close analysis of actual utilization.
Kent School District Citizens' Concurrence Task Force
The Kent School District Board of Directors appointed a Citizens' Concurrency
Task Force, made up of a cross section of the community, to assist in defining
the District's Standard of Service. To accomplish this task, the Task Force was
directed to study Kent School District enrollment history and projections,
demographics and planned new developments, land availability for new schools,
facility capacities and plans, frequency of boundary changes, and portable
(relocatable) vs. permanent facility issues. A meeting for public input was
conducted and the Final Report of the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force was
approved by the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993.
(continued)
Kent School District six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 19W Page 10
if I Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued)
The Final Report of the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force included Findings and
Recommendations and provision for the following long term goals:
A. Seek to reduce classroom utilization rates to allow more
flexibility on the building level.
B. Seek to lower average class size from that established for
the 1992-93 school year.
C. Seek to minimize boundary changes.
D. Ensure that new permanent facilities are designed to accommodate
portables:
1) to resolve current quality concerns
2) to provide for sites for portables to meet increased demand.
E. Pursue modernization of current permanent facilities to resolve
current quality concerns and to provide for additional sites for
portables to meet increased demand.
F. Pursue modernization or replacement of current portables to
resolve quality concerns.
G. Ensure that new portables meet current concerns of quality.
H. Ensure that all sites for portables be modernized and utilities
be installed to meet quality concerns.
I. The quality of facilities, when using relocatable facilities, is a
major concern of citizens of the Kent School District. Use of
relocatable and transitional capacity as well as more specific
concerns and recommendations by the Task Force are further
discussed in Section V I of this Plan.
The Task Force also states that it has reviewed and accepted the explanation of
methodology and the conclusions reached in the enrollment Forecasting System
report and recommends that methodology not be changed without Board
approval.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, t999 Page 11
I V Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools
Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 24,093 students
based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section I 11. Included
in this Plan is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current
capacity. (See Table 3 on Page 13)
The program capacity was updated for changes in programs as well as the
reduction in class size from 26 to 22 in grades K - 3.
Since 1997, Kent Learning Center has served grades 2 through 12 with
transition, choice and home school programs. It is located in the former
Grandview School in the western part of the District. This school was designed
and is currently configured as an elementary school.
Calculation of Elementary, Junior High and Senior High School capacities are
set forth in Appendices A, B and C on pages 30 and 31. A map of existing
schools is included on Page 14.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April. 1999 Page 12
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
INVENTORY and CAPACITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS
1998-99
Year
SCHOOL op.ned ABR ADDRESS Program
Cacacti
Ceariage Cleat Elementary 19M CC 18235.140th Awnw SE. Reaaan 911M 485
Coda Valley Elwnentary 1971 CV 26500 Tembedene Way SE. Covington 96042 413
Covington Elenwntwy 1961 CO 17070 SE Wall Road, Covington 98042 470
Crestwood Elementary 19W CW 25225.1801h Avenue SE. Covington 95042 451
Der"Elementary 1992 OE 11310 SE 248th Street, Kant 9=1 432
East Hill EWrwntry 1953 EH 9525 S 240th Street, Kent 91W31 413
Fanwood Elementary 1969 FW 16600.145th Avrnw SE. Renton SWU 418
Glenrkfge Elennentary 1996 OR 19405.120th Avenue SE,Renton 911056 475
Grose take Elementary 1971 GL 28700-191 at Pea BE. Kant 95042 447
Hor¢a+Eirnentary 1990 HE 27641.144th Avenue SE. Kant 98042 456
Janklna Creak Elementary 1967 JC 26915.156th Avenue SE, Covington 95042 447
Kent Elernentary 1938 KE 317-An Avenue South, Kam 95072 234
Lake Youngs Ekurwntary 1965 LY 19660.142nd Avenue SE, Kant SW42 546
Mahn Sonun Elementary 1967 MS 12711 SE 246th Street. Kam 96031 475
Meadow Ridge Elrnantary 1994 MR 27710.108hh Avenue SE.Kent 95031 447
Mrldien Elementary 1939 ME 25921.140th Avenue SE. Kant SW42 532
Neely-O'Brien Elementary 1990 NO 8300 South 238th Street, Kant 98W2 413
PanOwr Lake Elementary 1934 PL 20631•10Mh Avenue SE, Kent WWI 404
Peak Orchard Elementary 1963 PO 11010 SE 232nd Street, Krrt 98031 470
Pine Tree Elementary 1967 PT 27MS-1169r Avr+w SE, Kent 98W 7 523
Ridgewood Ekenentary 1987 RW 18WO.162nd Place SE. Rental 98058 5" 1
Sawyer Woods Elerlwntary 1994 SW 31135 22Mh Avenue SE.Kent 98042 499
Scenic Hill Elrnwntary 1960 SH 26W5 Woodland Way South, Kent 95031 437
Soos Creak ENrtwntary 1971 SC 12651 SE 2188n Place, Kant 95W1 432
Sp&Vbrook Elementary 1969 SS 20035-100th Avenue SE. Kant 95031 423
Sunrise Elernrintary 1992 SR 22300•132nd Avenw SE. Kom 95042 523
Kent Learning Centrar(Grandview) 1995 LC 22420 Military Road. Des Moines 95196 410
Ekxnentary TOTAL 12,19a
Cedar Heights Junior High 1993 CH 19640 SE 272 Street.Covington 98042 1.011
Kant Junior High 1952 KJ 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 $26
Madson Junior High 1981 MA 16400 SE 251 at Street, Covington 98042 327
Meeker Junior High 1970 MK 12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058 897
Meridian Junior High 1958 MJ 23480.120th Avenue SE, Kam 98031 769
Northwood Junior High 1996 NW 17007 SE 164th Street, Renton 98058 994
Sequoia Juniw High 1966 Si 11000 SE 264th Street, Kart 98031 799
Junior High TOTAL 6.123
Kentlake Senior High School 1997 KL 21401 SE 300th Street,Kant 98042 1.648
Kent4Aeridian Senior High 1951 KM 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98031 1,487
Kentridge Senior High 1968 KR 12430 SE 208th Street, Kant 98031 1.299
Kentwood Senior High 1981 KW 2SWO-164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 1.335
Senior High TOTAL 5.772
DISTRICT TOTAL 24,093
Changes to capacity reflect program changes and reduction in K-3 class site tram 26 to 22.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 April, 1999 Page 13
2 ƒ
\ m a) 2 2 \ / /
. -
CD
m c —
\ \
� � � f � 0
\ 2 /
/ /
f � e ƒ Q
_ | i $
| �
�
! ! , ®a
9 \ q } e
!!
I ! B2 ® |
- &! . ! , f ƒ ' ) k
. | ) f
jam__
® / ® '
! !
/ ® —
! � \
\ $2
\ » (
/ q § /
�
f �
® `---
_ . ,a e:
4
V The District's Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan
At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring of 1998, the following projects are
currently underway in the District:
• Elementary#27a is located at 24700 - 64"Avenue S. near downtown Kent, The school
opened in January 1999 and current students, staff and programs moved to the new
location at that time.The new school retains the name Kent Elementary and boundary
changes and new programs will be implemented in the Fall of 1999.
• Emerald Park Elementary#29 is under construction at the northeast comer of SE 216th
Street and 117th Avenue SE. The school is scheduled to open in the fall of 1999.
• Elementary#30 is in the early planning and construction stages and is scheduled to open
in the fall of 2000. It is in the city of Kent at 119'h Avenue SE and SE 270t'Street.
• Junior High#8 is under review to fill future needs for grades 7 through 9. The Board
authorized purchase of a site for this school at SE 286'" Street on the east side of 124in
Avenue SE. Exact timing.of the opening of the school is currently under review and
dependent on enrollment needs. Other future facilities are listed in Table 4 and shown on
the site map on page 17.
• Northwood Junior High (#7) opened in the fall of 1996. Kentlake Senior High opened in
the fall of 1997. Each of these schools, combined with portables, continue to provide
capacity for increases to enrollment from new development.
Each of the elementary schools has capacity planned for approximately 540 students
each, depending on placement of special programs. Junior high schools are planned
for a program capacity of approximately 1,065 students and Kentlake Senior High (#4)
has a current program capacity of 1,648.
County and city planners, decision makers and school districts are encouraged to
consider safe walking conditions for all students when reviewing applications and
design plans for new developments. This should include sidewalks, pull-outs and turn
arounds for school buses.
Included in this Plan is an inventory of projects by type, size, location or region, and
estimated completion date. Also included in the inventory are sites identified by the
District, which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future. (so*rase 4)
The voter approved 1990 Bond Issue for $105.4 million included funding for the
purchase of eleven sites for some of these and future schools, and the sites acquired
to date are included in this Plan. Funding is secured for purchase of additional sites.
Not all undeveloped properties meet school construction requirements and some
property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs.
Based on voter approval of $130 million in construction funding in February 1994,
elementary schools # 29 and # 30 are the last two to be constructed which have
received voter approval. The Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee is in the process of
reviewing future needs and is expected to make a recommendation to the Board for a
future bond election for capital projects.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 15
`?
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
Projects Planned, Under Construction, or Providing Additional Capacity
Site Acquisitions included
Protected Propxted %for
SCHOOL / FACILITY / SITE LOCATION Type Status comdetW Program new
Oata Capacity Gtowltl
AaOeemert AOPinrY
ELEMENTARY (Numbers assigned to htmre schools may not coretete with number of easong schools.)
• Kent Elementary Replacement N 27a ' 24700-64th Avenue S,Kent New' In Progress 19N 222(net) 50%
'New Kent Elarnentery a 27a will replace the current Kant Elementary School (45a.231)
Emerald Park Elementary(1129)(Funded) 11800 SE 216th St,Kent 9=1 New cee.maree 1999 465 50%
- Elementary 0 30 (Funded) 11919 SE Z70th St,Kent 98MI New Review 20M 485 50%
Elementary 0 31 (Unfunded) To be determined 2 New Planning 20027 540 75%
Elementary a 32 (Unfunded) To be determined New Planning 20037 540 75%
JUNIOR HIGH
Junior High 0 8 (Unfunded) SE 286th St 8 124 Av SE,Kent New Pretimm"" 20037 1.065 75%
Planing
SENIOR HIGH
Kentlake Senior High(/4) 21401 SE 300 St,Kent 98042 New Open 1997 1,648 40%
Addetiotlal
TEMPORARY FACILITIES CapeGty
Rekl<atabbs For placement as needed New Planning 1999 25-31 ucn 100%
SUPPORT FACILITIES
Satellite Bus Facility To be determined = New Planning 7 N/A
OTHER SITES ACQUIRED Type
Covington area (Near Mattson JH) SE 251 & 164 SE, Covington 98042 Elementary
Covington area (Scarseila) SE 290 8 156 SE, Kent 98042 Elementary
Ham Lake area (Pollard) 16820 SE 240, Kent 98042 Eiementary
Horseshoe/Kcevies Lake area(West) SE 332&204 SE, Kent 98042 Junior High
Shady Lake area (Sowers,etc.) 17426 SE 192 Street, Renton 98058 Elementary
So.King Co.Activity Center(Nike site) SE 167&170 SE, Renton 98058 School or
Suppon Facility
Notes:
'New Kent Elementary a 27a will replace the current Kent Elementary School
=Some sites are acquired but placement has not been determined.
Facility needs are currently being reviewed by Citizens Facilities Planning Committee.
Kent School Distnct Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 April, 1999 Page 16
lid
411
i<,
\ r i• t�r
SOF
•^
sc:..i > • i � •turf ,yam
y EIV�..` R•i• V I � Y� X.
.f • f1
11aa S 1r y Ny- ,. �
- Y " •a.y. a.w ' ' j .. = t' `,\./,' :ram
Af
.tom- �1\•�M^;.` � o �: y I ,.. V 1•
..X ,,,,- � �l.r^ I •,\ � S � I Tud.sirr lqr
E1J Il i a rw
36
31
97
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 F _
CNLw ,
Sites Acquired or Under Construction
S = Senior High site •- = Y.
J = Junior High site \ -
E = Elementary site .+. 1 • U f "'
X = Support Facility site -
t -
c` I-,
Map coulee: King Caurlry Planning d Commtmlly Devebmerf Q Drvieion
Site fdeNdcation oy Kent SeMd Dtctrxl 1•
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
April, 1tiGG Pape 17
i
V I Relocatable Classrooms
t --
Currently, the District utilizes 149 total relocatables. Of this total, 69 are utilized
to house students in excess of permanent capacity, 75 are used for program
purposes at school locations, and five for other purposes.(See Appendices A s C D)
Based on enrollment projections and funded permanent facilities, the District
anticipates the need to purchase some relocatables during the next six-year
period.
In the Final Report approved by the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993, the
Kent School District Citizens' Concurrency Task Force reaffirmed that, as has
been the practice and philosophy of the Kent School District, based on the most
recent recommendation of the Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee, portables
(or "relocatables") are NOT acceptable as permanent facilities.
t In addition to the Findings and Recommendations regarding portables listed in
Section I I I, "Standard of Service," the Task Force also listed some specific
concerns in regard to use of portables as interim or transitional capacity:
t
I. The quality of facilities, when using relocatable facilities, is a major
concern of citizens of the Kent School District. That the Kent School
t District should consider the following factors and priorities when
using, purchasing and modernizing portables:
A. HIGHEST CONCERNS
1. Adequate heat
2. Portable covered walkways, where practical
3. Adequate ventilation
4. Fire Safety
B. MODERATE CONCERNS
1. Adequate air conditioning
2. Security
3. Intercoms / Communication
4. Restroom facilities
5. Storage facilities
6. Crowding / class size
7. Noise
8. Availability of equipment (i.e. projectors, etc.)
9. Lack of water (use bottled water/portable tanks for drain)
(Continued)
Kent school District six-year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 18
V t Relocatable Classrooms (conunuea)
For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively
accurate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan as well as in
((` the Concurrency Task Force Report. The reports also reference use of
{ portables or relocatables as interim or transitional capacity/facilities.
`{ During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that
f! all of the District's relocatables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During
the useful life of some of the relocatables, the school-age population may
decline in some communities and increase in others, and these relocatables
provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community.
Although the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force has reaffirmed that portables are
i not acceptable as PERMANENT facilities, they did recommend that portables, or
relocatables, may be used as interim or transitional facilities:
i
1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school
facilities.
2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased
capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet
that demand.
3. To meet unique program requirements.
Portables, or relocatables, currently in use will be evaluated resulting in some
being improved and some replaced. Quality concerns will be among those
addressed by the next Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee in review of
capital facilities needs for the next bond issue.
The Plan projects that the District will use relocatables to accommodate interim
housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of relocatables, their
impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the
interrelationship between relocatables, emerging technologies and educational
restructuring will continue to be be examined.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan - April, 1999 Page 19
V I I Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacities
t
i As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study was updated for changes in
j special programs as well class size reduction in Grades K - 3. As shown in the
It Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 13, the program capacity is
{{� also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts. (s«r bl.:ss 5A43-c
on pages 21.24)
The first school day of October is set by OSPI as the enrollment count date for
the year. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student enrollment for October 1, 1998
was 24,875.90 with kindergarten students counted at .5 and excluding Early
Childhood Education students (ECE - preschool special education) and
College-only Running Start FTE's. (See Tables 5 S 5 A-&C on pages 21-24)
A headcount of all students enrolled on October 1, 1998 totals 26,074 which
continues to rank Kent School District as the fourth largest district in the state of
Washington.
Based on the enrollment forecasts, current inventory and capacity, current
1 standard of service, relocatable capacity, and future planned classroom space,
the District anticipates having sufficient capacity to house students over the next
six years. (See Table 5 and Tables 5 A-S-C on Pages 21 -24)
i
This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There
will be significant need for new schools to accommodate growth within the
District. Some schools, by design, may be opened with relocatables on site.
Boundary changes, movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market
conditions, and educational restructuring will all play a major role in addressing
overcrowding and underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 20
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
TOTAL DISTRICT
SCHOOL YEAR 1998-99 1999.2000 1 2000-2001 2001-2002 1 2002.2003 2003.2004 1 2004-2005
Actual P R O J E C T E D
Permanent Pro ram Capacit ' 24,093 24,093 24.800 25.285 25,285 25.825 27,430
New Permanent Construction '
Elementary#27a 222
k Kent Elementary replacement-Net Capacity Gain
Emerald Park Elementary#29 485
Elementary#30 485
Elementary#31 (Unfunded)" 540
Elementary#32 (Unfunded)4 540
Junior High#8 (Unfunded)' 1.065
Pmmnem Program Capacity Subtotal 24,093 24.800 25.285 25.285 25,825 27,430 27,430
Interim Relocatable Capacity
Eiarnenlary Rebotahte Capacity Required 1,350 450 250 575 260 - 175
Junior High Relocatahle Capacity Required 232 435 812 116
senior High Reloadhls Capacity Required 186 465 651
TotalRelocatable Capacity Required 1,350 450 482 1,010 1,198 465 942
TOTAL CAPACITY ' 25,443 25,250 25,767 26,295 27,023 27.895 28,372
2
TOTAL FTE ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION 24,920 24,781 25,495 26.206 26,966 27.672 28.329
DISTRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 523 469 272 89 57 223 43
' Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity.
Z FTE=Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment (ie. ECE Preschool Handicapped 3 12 day Kindergarten student=.5).
a 1998-99 total classroom relocatable capacity is 1,901.
New facility needs are currently being reviewed by the Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 April, 1999 Page 21
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL YEAR 1998-99 1999.2000 1 2000.2001 1 2001-2002 1 2002-2003 2003-2004 1 2004-2005
Actual P R O J E C T E D
Elernentory PermenorMP nsmCapee 11,788 12,198 12,905 13.390 13.390 13.930 14,470
Kent Looming Cantor-Special Program r 410
New Permanent Elorywritary Construction
Kent Elementary#27a 222 (Nel Capacity)
Replace KeN Elwnentery 4S8-234-222 No Capacity
Emerald Park Elementary (#29) 485
Elementary#30 485
Elementary#31 (Unfunded)` 540
Elementary#32 (Unfunded) 540
Subtotal 12,198 12,905 13.390 13,390 13,930 14,470 14,470
1 350 450 250 575 200 175Relocatable Capacity Required 2
F
TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13.548 13,355 13,640 13,965 14.130 1_4 470 14,645
FTE ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION 3 13,534 13.340 13,634 13.958 14,105 14,356 14.644
SURPLUS (DEFICM CAPACITY 14 15 6 7 25 104 1
Kent Learning Center is a special program at Grandview School serving students in Grades 2 through 12.
The school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school.
2 Capacity is based on standard of service for program Capacity.
FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projection (ECE & Kindergarten = .5)
New facility needs are currently being reviewed by the Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee.
Kent School Cistrict Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A Aonl, 1999 oaq.. ?r
i
I
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
JUNIOR HIGH
i
!i
2002 SCHOOL YEAR 1998-99 19n'm- oo z000.zcol 2001.2ooz -2003 2003.2004 2004-2005
Actual P R O J E C T E D
Junior HIgh PetmaneN Program Capacity 8,123 6,123 6,123 6,123 6,123 6,123 7,188
i
t New Pw manam Junior High Camtructicn
i
Junior High #8 (Unfunded)3 1,065
Subtotal 6,123 6,123 6,123 6,123 6,123 7.188 7,188
Relocatable Capacity Required 1 232 435 812 116
TOTAL CAPACITY ' 6,123 6,123 6,355 6,558 6.935 7.188 7,304
FTE ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION 2 5,958 6,008 6,326 6,557 6,923 7,096 7,292
SURPLUS DEFICIT) CAPACITY 165 115 29 1 12 92 12
' Capacity numbers are based on standard of service for program capacity.
2 FTE=Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment/Projection
Approximately 10 Junior High students are served part of the day at high schools for advanced placement.
a New facility needs are currently being reviewed by the Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee. _
April, 19N Page 23
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
SENIOR HIGH
SCHOOL YEAR 1998-99 1999.2000 1 2000.2001 2001-2002 1 2Oo2-2003 2003-2004 2004.2005
t Actual P R O J E C T E D
i
SenW High Permunent PrOgnIffll Ca pae 5.772 5.772 5.772 5,772 5,772 5,772 5.772
New Permanent Senior High Construction
Subtotal 5,772 5,772 5,772 5,772 5,772 5,772 5.772
Relocatable Capacity Required t 186 465 651
TOTAL CAPACITY t 5,772 5,772 5,772 5,772 5,958 6,237 6,423
FTE ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION 2 5,428 5,433 5,535 5,691 5,938 6.210 6,3 33
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 344 339 237 81 20 27 30
t Capacity numbers are based on standard of service for program capacity.
2 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment, excluding full time Running Start students.
Approximately 10 Junior High students are served part of the day at high schools for advanced placement.
New facility needs are currently being reviewed by the Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 C Apnl, I Page 24
i
E
V I I I Finance Plan
1
The finance plan shown an Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District
plans to finance improvements for the years 1999 - 2000 through 20C4 - 2005.
The financing components include secured and unsecured funding. The plan is
based on voter approval of future bond issues, collection of impact fees under
the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to
State Environmental Policy Act.
Kent Elementary # 27a, replacement for the existing Kent Elementary School, is
the last school for which the District expects to receive state matching funds
under the current state funding formula.
For the Six-Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based an estimates
from Kent School District Facilities Department.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 19W Page 25
V
cr
_ � N
G1
a a
{7{• b pN1 5 N 8 p}�
N M M N
ro: ysti
Qr M N N N N N
s�
' :kiln
N Q a
O :? :. 04
0 5 Z
W
CC U o a5 tD
N
C Z « w w m
r .J
to
0 a G
2 W
to X
U r N ci �i 5
Z :.4: y
uj
O m
o
N :
� g
N
1 C
N p A
N N = T d
CdC 3 a.
m E E o o LL
� T O
c a a w L c w
w y+ M81
• LL LL LL D D D
o u > $ y
N m N J Z u J m N
w E w c E
m . Y
Q n k7 m w <
H Z 0
U <
Z n a A m m ok < a. O F-
A A c m m O
a E E w w w v LL m r r LL
t
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
? Student Generation Factors - Single Family Student Generation Factors - Multi-Family
Elementary 0.515 Elementary 0.279
Junior High 0.197 Junior High 0.086
Senior High 0.180 Senior High 0.063
j Total 0.892 Total 0.428
Projected Student Capacity per Facility SPI Square Footage per Student
Elementary 540 Elementary 80
Junior High 1,065 Junior High 113.33
Senior High 1,650 Senior High 120
i
Required Site Acreage per Facility Average Site Cost/Acre
Elementary (required) 11 Elementary $0
Junior High (required) 21 Junior High $0
Senior High (required) 27 Senior High $0
New Facility Construction Cost/Average Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost
Elementary $8,514,297 Elementary C 25 $57,000
Junior High $19.115.525 Junior High @ 29 $57.000
Senior High $0 Senior High Q 31 $57,000
•See average calculation&on Pg.27a
4
fi.
Temporary Facility Square Footage State Match Credit
Elementary 84,196 Current State Match Percentage 0.000A
Junior High 24,360 Previous State Match 55.64%
Senior High 20,840
Total 4% 129,396 Boeckh Index Factor
Current Boeckh Index $99.83
Permanent Facility Square Footage
Elementary 1,282,101
Junior High 738,840 District Average Assessed Value
Senior High 830,629 Single Family Residence $162.224
Total 96% 2.851,570
Total Facilities Square Footage District Average Assessed Value
Elementary 1,366,297 Multi-Family Residence $47,652
Junior High 763,200
Senior High 851,469
Total 2.980,966 District Debt Service Tax Rate
Current /$1000 Rate $2.97
Developer Provided Sites/ Facilities
Value 0 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate
Dwelling Units 0 Current Bond Buyer Index 5.11%
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 27
For impact fee calculations, construction costs are based on the average costs
of the last four elementary schools and the next elementary school, and the
average costs of the last two junior high schools and the next junior high school.
i
Elementary Schools Cost Average
Sawyer Woods $6,463,054
Meadow Ride $6,996,325
Glenrid a $8,032,895
Kent Elements #27a $10,122,095
Emerald Park #29 $10,957,114
Average Cost of
5 elementary schools $8,514,297
Junior High Schools Cost Average
Cedar Heights $14,488,028
Northwood $17,100,049
Junior High #8 $25,758,498
Average Cost of
3 junior high schools $19,115,525
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 27a
t
r
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence ^
Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre)/Facility Capacity)x Student Generation Factor
Reouuee Silo Acresga I Average Site Cost/Acre I Facility Capacity Siutlem Factor
A 1 (Elementary) 11 s0 540 0.515 $0.00
A 2 (Junior High) 21 s0 1,065 0.197 SO.00
A 3 (Senior High) 27 s0 100 0.180 $0.00
It A—> $0.00
' Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence
Formula: ((Facility Cost I Facility Capacity)x Student Factor)x(PennanenUTutal Square Footage Ratio)
Construction Coot Feciley Capecirf SludeM Fedor Foetege Rota
I 81 (Elementary) S8.S14297 S40 0.516 0.96 $7,795.31
8 2 (Junior High) $19.1IS,= I.WS 0.197 0.96 $3,304.49
B 3 (Senior High) $O 1,650 0.180 0.96 S0,00
0.892 B—> 511,189.80
Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence
Formula: ((FacilBy,Cost/Facility Capacity)x Student Factor)x(Temporary I ToW Square Footage Ratio)
Facility Coat Facility Capacity Stuewx Factor Fociage Ratio
C 1 (Elementary) $57.000 25 0.515 0.04 S46.97
C 2 (Junior High) $57,000 29 0.197 0.04 $15.49
C 3 (Senior High) S57,000 31 0.180 0.04 $1324
0.892 C—> 575.69
State Match Credit per Single Family Residence
Formula: Boeckh Index x SPI Square Footage x District Match% it Student Factor
Boockh Index SPI Fegage District Match% Studerx Factor
D 1 (Elementary) $99.83 6o 0 0.515 $0.00
D 2 (Junior High) S99.83 113.33 0 0.197 $0.00
D 3 (Senior High) $99.83 120 0 0.180 $0.00
D—> $0.00
Tax Credit per Single Family Residence
Average Residential Assessed Value s162,224
Current Debt Service Tax Rate $2.97
Bond Buyer Index Interest Rate 5.11%
Discount Period (10 Years) 10 TC—> $3,700.58
Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility/Site Value pvrNling Units
0 0 FC—> 0
Fee Recap
A - Site Acquisition per SF Residence $0.00
B - Permanent Facility Cost per Residence $11.189.50
C a Temporary Facility Cost per Residence $75.69
Subtotal $11.255.49
0 = State Match Credit per Residence $0.00
TC=Tax Credit per Residence S3,700.58
Subtotal S3,700.58
Total Unfunded Need $7.564.92
Developer Fee Obligation S3,782.46
FC =Facility Credit(if applicable) 0
Net Fee Obligation per Single Family Residence 53,782.46
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 28
IX
Appendixes
Appendix A: Calculations of Capacities for Elementary Schools
Appendix B: Calculations of Capacities for Junior High Schools
Appendix C: Calculations of Capacities for Senior High Schools
Appendix D: Use of Relocatables
Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey
Appendix F: Summary of Changes to 1998 Capital Facilities Plan
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE
Site Acquisition Cost per Multifamily Residence Unit
Formula: ((Acres x Cost oer Acre)/Facility Capacity)x Student Generation Factor
R"wred Sib Acrea4e I A•eraee S.I.CotuAcre I Fan1iN CapacM I SWdenl Feq
A 1 (Elementary) 11 so 540 0.279 S0.00
A 2 (Junior High) 21 so 1.065 0.086 $0.00
A 3 (Senior High) 27 $0 1,850 0.063 $0.00
A—> $0.00
Parma lent Facility Construction Cost per Multifamily Residence Unit
Formula: ((Faculty Cost/Facility Capacity)x Studer Factor)x(Permanent/Total Squaro Footage Ratio)
Construction Coal FxiliN Capacity, Student Factor Fools"Ratio
81 (Elementary) $8,514.297 540 0.279 0.96 $4,223.09
82 (Junior High) $19,115.54 1.065 0.086 0.96 51,481.86
B 3 (Senior High) So 1,650 0.08:f 0.96 $0.00
0.428 8—> $5.704.95
Temporary Facility Cost per Multifamily Residence Unit
Formula: ((Facility Cost/Facility Capacity)x Student Factor)x(Temporary/Total Square footage Ratio)
Facility Coal Facial,Capacity Studer Fee, I Feorage Ratio
C I (Elementary) 357.000 25 0.279 0.04 525.44
C 2 (Junior High) $57,000 29 0.086 0.04 $6.76
C 3 (Senior High) $57,000 31 0.063 0.04 $4.83
0.428 C—>• S36.84
State Match Credit per Muhi-Family Residence Unit
Formula: Bosckh Index x SPI Square Footage x District Match% x Student Factor
Swcxh Index SPI Foote" District Match% Studwd Factor
D 1 (ENnrntary) S99.83 8o 0 0-79 $0.00
R D 2 (Junior High) $99.83 113.33 0 0.086 $0.00
D 3 (Senior High) S99.83 120 0 0.063 $0.00
?' D—> 50.00
Tao Credit per Multi-Family Residence Unit
Average Residential Assessed Value $47,652
Current Debt Service Tax Rate SZ97
Bond Buyer Index Annual Interest Rate 5.11%
Discount Period (10 Years) 10 TC—> $1,082.82
Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility/Site Value Dwelling Units
0 0 FC—> 0
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisition per Mufti-Family Unit $0.00
B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit S5.704.95
C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit $36.84
Subtotal $5.741.79
D - State Match Credit per MF Unit $0.00
` TC-Tax Credit per MF Unit $1.082.82
Subtotal - $1.082.82
Total Unfunded Need $4.658.97
Developer Fee Obligation $2,329.49
FC=Facility Credit(if applicable) 0
Net Fee Obligation per Mufti-Family Residence Unit 52.329.49
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April, 1999 Page 29
x
s
v
N
QJ
Y
4
m Xc .� �. S x I O O T m 0 00 A O '\
N • N m J_ S i a = S • Y Y • O • M O a • W
ir
r 3 3 3 A
• i• R
N f S J bm n N . r A Q 5 • �` m =
O 2 � 9 . g 3F � 3 AA � • Y � S s S � � 3 � � � j( QJ y+ O ..E � q Dp
� �' 4 � O M u • � 3 i x � � -' O .�
Y p • G
s {�
a m a m ci m z s f o < c�i a m
it Q
V V 0 it m
r • � V a N V v O � N INJ Ip V V N O O y 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 V O ' pOYO O
= • o
y y1 y1 yy11 yy11 {{�� pN ((JJ�� yy11 (p(p�� �p�p11 � s En a
' N ,
3 3 S o 0y0 D p 0 Qm
n
3 _
— m o
• 3 . Z p i
wa N a a a a N N a � N a a O� N a a a a � � a a a a a • �{ : < �
jJ
D = Q 3 0
a
• S m co
a m r 2
ym N v x: n 0
..r = O N y a 0 O N + y a N r N O r N O r N a a N N r r a r C
' r
m
N
o O r O W O O O N O u u O N N y y N 0 0 0 W + N 0 0 0
c ":r ¢ • 8 T
r
a • c t� U O
0 0 0 $ O N N O O O N N N $ O O O N N N O 0 0 .;� :
"s CL
a s » co r m
J
Z
EOIJ
2 y
3 N a V N 1p 1p p y O Y
y g m
$ J 3 z
T
0
x —
3
N
Q7
Y
'T R.
< S o r 2
i Q IE tll
n 3 ti 4 > s $ i s • Tr Jc w S 46
• � � : N u � �^ ]S N S 3 S � _ � z W �^
30
s a a s s
a e �
p s > 3 u y
IT n r s r T
ir
Q �
s n
n a g S v 4 q Q
r N w u � � V �S c � � � � �{ �i .°1i � g • S � Q
J IT M a RI v Y S
N J O C O N v r S • N O O O O S N • T A
w y
„ a a
x V r N Y 9 V m t° r O O Q � • � a � O m
D m i
G
^ N
Q N r r r r � � q (p ••, \ 9 �
Dca
o
D
O
c . N T c • 311r-
N Z � Z N
3 O O
3 m p _ Y O g T V T
S
a
m
T
® � Z
m g m
!Q Y'
3
v
0
u
/ ƒ m
= } 2 - {
w k } \ to -
} M cr
-
` )
- g -
� k B \
� � IK }
| SL ) { }
° k q
a 0
§ � � � � } ƒ � § } ■ R
�� ) � ` 7 � m o
ROM
§( | ! § t r
| SL ) \ g f
� - k
x
s
N
N r yy yy11 m y_y _ m
U V S O S � S O V S +
a m �^cm>• —m�'c 3' tn0n' 34r $y3m2— oyocp c y tn3L(D �co �(n�m �;ma �-0' C o
3o
>c 7 mo mm od � g 0m0 m gmm
o 3o t3 u o amoo <m 0c N O — vn a 0( Pe xa o m
3 o Do m 1O �°� ..� m To 3 06 � n rtt _y � a = Ao m n
' m m m o m n o. F _ : m T a O fn o m w a a m
v u n CL ens wo m — � m
g a 3 0 3 ay m O >• m 0 n d—
S G
8 7 m F oo m a 0 m O
A cny m N CD
m
S g N o g o a 3 CL o
8 d 0 m 3
e
�_ co
_ N y pp yypp p C � m in
m N 01 m
N V r s m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O o 0 o L n r n N $ N N N L S n n ; 9 m a 3 (n Z
o n P < P < m n r m P F P `L o N
n ' : a
� N
Q = 30
D Y P N u = N r N r r a C 0 _^
(O N U N p p b b P ff{JJJ 3' J V 0 O O y1 P S y = $ N O V 7s V
a + P y b
fT1 A P — m r
;3y o JO
O y N U N 0 N 0 W 0 V N = 0 V N V U W S w P W + 0 p $ m N S N O r O T rI x } N {J S S O U S g b m a N N d O P $ P W u N r N N U 01 + P Y P r d A
C C C Z
3
s
Q) O N O V O O g O i b V yi in
o o o o 0 o o o 0 o o a o o --Io r + o o o + o o o o o Ap o�p 0 0 o + o
G.
a u to W N VL+r `Si w a o
m # SmLB W � mYPtFom d ,�,
� ur
c c
m m
0 0 0 0 o o o o 0 0 0 0 o o m_ o o o o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 m
N
m m
d d
¢ C
� pa Oory y O1 1No Op� O P Op O O 1p Op�pp O O O OO {p Op O 0 o q O O O O O O p O p O rp O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
d
n A
72
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0
C poQj pp N V N 1pp pp Opt p yO pp O - VI r i/ � O r N � � = u 'N yy11 r p u pp (n
9 _
O
W
Appendix F - Summary of Changes to April 1998 Capital Facilities Plan
The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") is updated annually based on previous Plans in
effect since 1993. The primary changes from the April 1998 Plan are summarized here.
Kent Elementary #27a has completed construction and Emerald Park Elementary #29
is under construction with opening scheduled for January and September, 1999
respectively. Elementary 30 will start construction soon. Citizens' Facilities Planning
Committee is reviewing future facility needs and is expected to make a
recommendation to the Board in Fall of 1999.
Changes to capacity reflect some reduction in Gass size for grades K - 3 as well as
annual program changes. Changes in portables or transitional capacity reflect
purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement of portables between facilities
Permanent facility costs and site cost per acre have been adjusted to reflect averages
of costs for schools built most recently. The district expects to receive no state
matching funds for schools in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually.
Student enrollment forecast is updated annually.
The student generation factor survey was updated to reflect developments added or
deleted and changes in student yield. Changes reflect no adjustment for occupancy
and exclusion of studio apartments per agreement with members of the development
community. Survey data is included as Appendix E.
Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors include:
ITEM oradeType FROM TO Comments
Student Generation Factor Elem 0.512 0.515 Updated in 1999 Plan
Single Family (SF) Jr 0.188 0,197
Sr 0.140 0.180
Total 0.840 0.892
Student Generation Factor Elem 0.235 0.279 Updated in 1999 Plan
Multi-Family (MF) Jr 0.080 0.0m
Sr o.o62 0.063
Total 0.377 0.428
State Match 55.64% 0% Per SPI
Soeckh Index (Cost per square foot) $97.23 s99.83 Per SPI
Average Assessed Valuation SF $149,635 $162.224 Per Puget Sound ESD
AV-Average of Condominiums &Apts. MF $48.992 E47,652 Per Puget Sound ESD
Debt Service Tax Rate $2.97 $2.97 Per King County Assessor
General Obligation Bond Interest Rate 5.19% 5.11% Market Rate
Impact Fee- Single Family SF $3.744 S3,782
Impact Fee-Multi-Family MF $1,888 $2,329
Kent School Distnct Six-year Capital Facilities Plan APPENDIX F April, 1999 Page 34
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
1998/99
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BOARD OF EDUCATION
Linda Hendrickson
Holly Isaman
Joel Marks
Ann Murphy
Jim Storvick
SUPERINTENDENT
Thomas J. Vander Ark
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................ i
INTRODUCTION.................................................. ii-iv
SECTION I THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Introduction............................................................. I-1
Inventory of Educational Facilities............................. I-2
Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities.................... I-3
Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities.......................... I-4
Needs Forecast -New Facilities.............................. I-5
Six Year Finance Plan.............................................. I-6
SECTION II MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Introduction............................................................. II-1
Map - Elementary Boundaries.................... II-2
Map - Junior High Boundaries.................... II-3
Map - Senior High Boundaries................... II-4
SECTION III SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Introduction............................................................. III-1
Building Capacities................................................... III-2
Portable Locations................................................... III-4
Student Forecast...................................................... III-6
Capacity Summaries................................................. III-8
King County Impact Fee Calculations....................... I11-13
SECTION IV SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 1997/98 PLAN IV-1
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act
(SHB 2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991), and under the School Impact Fee Ordinances
of King County Code 21A, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249 effective
December 21, 1995 as amended, and the City of Kent Ordinance No. 3260 effective
March 1996, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its 1997/98 Capital Facilities Plan
as of April 1999
This Plan has been adopted by King County, the City of Kent and the City of Federal
Way and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction by reference.
This plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of
each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Auburn and City of Des Moines have not adopted
a school impact fee ordinance.
- The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas
within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning
Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area
Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the
Federal Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries.
King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to
meet the region's need for housing, jobs, services, culture and recreation. This Plan's
estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption.
This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which
requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not
intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may
prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies. Additional plans will be consistent
with the six year Capital Facilities Plan. At this time, Federal Way Public Schools is
evaluating the need for and possible timing of future bonds.
iii
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INTRODUCTION (continued)
In October of 1997 the District convened a Study and Survey Committee. The Committee
was made up of patrons, parents, professional consultants, school staff and central
administration staff. The charge of the Committee was divided into four focus areas on a
continuum, which lead to recommendations to the Board of Education. The four focus
committees were:
i. Educational Plan Committee
2. Special Education Committee
3. Classroom Standards and Facility Use Committee
4. Future Alternative Committee
Two recommendations were sent forward to the Board of Education from this committee.
The first recommendation was to move to a Pre K-5 elementary, 6-8 middle school, and 9-12
high school grade configuration beginning in the fall of 2002 or as additional high school
space allows. The Board of Education approved this recommendation at the October 12,
1998 regular Board Meeting. This grade configuration is believed to be more responsive to
student needs. It will allow for smaller elementary enrollments with room for lower primary
class sizes. The middle school allows two-year preparation for the WA State 71" grade test,
matches the Federal Way Public Schools 8" grade gateway test, and matches most western
Washington districts. Middle schools are also thought to be a better way to address the
needs of adolescence in a period of transition from elementary to school to high school. The
four-year high school plan combines the 9-12 graduation credit system, allows two-year
preparation from the 10' grade test, and physically places the high school students together.
The second recommendation brought forward from the committee to the Board of Education
was a bond proposal. Federal Way Public Schools must meet the needs of a growing student
and community population. The District must be flexible with building, programs and
staffing to meet the needs of the 2 1" Century, while being financially responsible and
sensitive to the current tax rates. A flexible, cost effective and educationally beneficial
approach that integrates academics and high tech/high skill preparation is needed. By
extending the existing debt and creatively using new and existing facilities, the District can
meet these complex needs with no increase in local tax rates.
The bond proposal of$83 million was arrived at after receiving input from parents, staff and
the community. Member of the Citizens for Federal Way Schools and senior staff members
met with school staff and PTSA groups. This process concluded with two daylong meetings
among a group of faculty members. Based upon information the District received, it became
apparent that people wanted a comprehensive high school (S44 million); a middle school
($17 million); expansion and improvement of existing schools (S9 million); replace of
Truman High School
iv
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
($6 million) and other general improvements ($7 million). Additional planned improvements
included in the bond proposal are; parking and pedestrian safety, playgrounds and sports
fields, new classroom start-up and music equipment, information systems and networks and
emergency communications.
The Board of Education unanimously approved this bond recommendation at the February 8,
1999 regular Board Meeting. This proposal will be submitted for voter approval on May
18, 1999.
Federal Way Public Schools opened the Internet Academy in the 1996/97 school year. This
program currently serves approximately 615 students, 375 are full time students. Internet
Academy has grown from about 60 students to the current 615 in less than two years. The
forecast for growth in this program is to serve approximately 1400 full time students by the
year 2004.
Internet Academy is currently operating out of leased space consisting of administrative areas
and a computer lab area. Additionally, some lab sections are scheduled in the current high
school facilities during non-school hours. There is an anticipated need of approximately
2000 square feet of additional space over the next two years. This capacity is not included in
the analysis of instructional spaces. The facility needs are unique to a program of"distance
learners".
The Marketing Academy is also operating out of leased space. This program serves
approximately 60 students. Capacity needs for Marketing Academy have not been addressed
in the analysis of instructional space.
Federal Way Public Academy will open in the 1999/00 school year in six portables on the
Illahee Junior High site. This school will serve 120 seventh and eight grade students.
SECTION I
THE CAPITAL FACILITES PLAN
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION I - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be gathered to
determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing community.
1. This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and
expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. This is followed by
a Financial Plan which shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and
update modernization needs listed.
I
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Adelaide 1635 SW 304th Street Federal Way 98023
Brigadoon 3601 SW 336th Street Federal Way 98023
Camelot 4041 S 298th Street Auburn 98001
Enterprise 35101 5th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023
Green Gables 32607 47th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023
Lake Dolloff 4200 S 308th Street Auburn 98001
Lake Grove 303 SW 308th Street Federal Way 98023
Lakeland 35675 32nd Avenue S Auburn 98001
Mark Twain 2450 S Star Lake Road Federal Way 98003
Meredith Hill 5830 S 300th Street Auburn 98001
Mirror Lake 625 S 314th Street Federal Way 98003
Nautilus 1000 S 289th Street Federal Way 98003
Olympic View 2626 SW 327th Street Federal Way 98023
Panther Lake 34424 1st Avenue S Federal Way 98003
Rainier View 3015 S 368th Street Federal Way 98003
Sherwood Forest 34600 12th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023
Silver Lake 1310 SW 325th Place Federal Way 98023
Star Lake 4014 S 270th Street Kent 98032
Sunnycrest 24629 42nd Avenue S Kent 98032
Twin Lakes 4400 SW 320th Street Federal Way 98023
Valhalla 27847 42nd Avenue S Auburn 98001
Wildwood 2405 S 300th Street Federal Way 98003
Woodmont 26454 16th Avenue S. Des Moines 98198
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Federal Way Public Academy '9"" 36001 1"Ave S Federal Way 98003
Illahee 36001 1st Avenue S Federal Way 98003
Kilo 4400 S 308th Street Auburn 98001
Lakota 1415 SW 314th Street Federal Way 98023
Sacajawea 1101 S Dash Point Road Federal Way 98003
Saghalie 33914 19th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023
Totem 26630 40th Avenue S Kent 98032
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Decatur 2800 SW 320th Street Federal Way 98023
Federal Way 30611 16th Avenue S Federal Way 98003
Thomas Jefferson 4248 S 288th Street Auburn 98001
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS
Merit School 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003
Harry S Truman High School 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003
LEASED SPACE
Internet Academy 32020 1"Ave S Federal Way 98003
Marketing Academy 1928 S Sea Tac Mall Federal Way 98003
I-2
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CURRENT INVENTORY NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES
Developed Property
Administrative Building 31405 18th Avenue S Federal Way 98003
MOT Site 1066 S 320th Street Federal Way 98003
Central Kitchen 1344 S 308th Street Federal Way 98003
Federal Way Memorial Field 1300 S 308th Street Federal Way 98003
Leased Space
Community Resource Center 1928 S Sea Tac Mall Federal Way 98003
Security Offices 30819 14' Ave S Federal Way 98003
Undeveloped Property
Site# Location
9' 27`s Avenue SW & Dash Point Road
23 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW
35 S 351st Street & 52nd Avenue S
40 E of loth Avenue SW Between SW 334th & SW 335th Streets
63 E of47th Avenue SW & SW 314th Place
71 S 344th Street & 46th Avenue S
72 36600 block of Pacific Highway S
84 3737 S 360th Street
96 S 308th Street & 14th Avenue S
Notes:
Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction requirements.
Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed to house students in the
District.
There is a pending sale on this property.
I-3
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NEEDS FORECAST -EXISTING FACILITIES
EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF
FUNDS
Truman High School Modernization with expansion (1)
Purchase and Relocate Interim Capacity (1)
Portables
Decatur High School, Federal Expansion (1)
Way High School and
Thomas Jefferson High
School
Various School Sites Parking Safety; Network (2)
Upgrades; Automated
Libraries;
Elementary Playgrounds; High
School Sports Fields;
Emergency Communications.
Notes:
(1) Anticipated source of funds is state matching funds, Impact Fees, future bond issues or
non-voted debt issues.
(2) Anticipated source of funds is future bond issues.
I4
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NEEDS FORECAST - NEW FACILITIES
NEW FACILITY LOCATIO ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS
N
MOT Site 1 Unknown N/A
Senior High School Site Unknown 2
New Senior High School Building Unknown 2
New Middle School Site Unknow 2
New Middle School Unknown 2
Notes:
(1) Construction of Maintenance, Operations and Transportation (MOT) site is dependent on
sale of current MOT site.
(2) Anticipated source of funds is state matching funds, Impact Fees, future bond issues or
non-voted debt issues.
I-5
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Six Year Finance Plan
Secured Funding
Sources 1999 201111 2MI 2002 2003 2004 Total Revenue
Impact Fees 1 $1,000.000 S60,764 $1,060,764
Land Sale Funds 2 S1,000,000 $2.500,000 $1.050.152 S4,550,152
State Match Funds 3 $832,166 S44,302 S876,468
TOTAL S1,832,166 S3,544,302 S1,110,916 s0 so so S6.487,384
Unsecured Ftinding Sources
State Match Funds 6 S7,000,000
Bond or Levy Funds 4 $83,000,000
Land Fund Sales S800,000
Impact Fees 5 $1,500,000
TOTAL S92,300,000
NEW SCHOOLS 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total Cost
New Middle School S2.000,000 S12,000,000 $3,000,000 S17,000,000
New Middle School Site $1,000.000 $1,000,000
New Senior High School S5,000,000 S20,000,000 $15,000,000 S500.000 $40,500.000
New Senior High School Site $1,000,000 S2,200,000 $3,200,000
MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSION
Truman Senior High(Alternative) $3,500.000 S2,500,000 56,000,000
Expansion Three Hi h Schools $2.500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $7,500.fact
Expansion Elementary Schools S750,000 S750,000 S1,500,
TEMPORARY FACILITIES
Portables(8) S276,805 S276,805
OTHER
Safety Improvements(9s) S500,0001 $1,000,000 S1.000.000 $500,000 S3,000,000
School lm rovements(9b) $500.000 S2,000,000 $1,600,000 S200,000 $200,000 $4,500,000
Facilities Department $250,000 S250,000 S250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 S1,500,000
Library System Improvements S650,000 $650,000 $1,300,000
MISS stem Project S600,000 $100,000 $700,000
TOTAL S1,500,000 s6,250,000 $19,200,000 S40,850,000 $18,950,000 $1,226,805 S87,976,805
NOMi:
1. These fees arc currently being held in a King County,City of Federal Way and City of Rent impact fee account,and will be
available for use by the District for system improvements.
2. These funds come from various sales of land and are set aside for estimated expenditures.
3. Guaranteed suite match reimbursements.
4. These funds,if secured,will be used for future projects,
5. These arc projected fees based upon known residential developments in the District over the next six years.
6. These funds arc projected slate matching funds.
7. These funds are projected land sale income.
8. These fees represent the cost of mos'ing and siting existing portables. The District may choose to purchase new
portables in the years shown. This estimate may also include the cost of purchasing these portables.
9a.These projects have been approved by the Board of Directors and cover most schools. These projects do not increase capacity.
These projects inccude parking and pedestrian safety improvements at 15 elementary schools.
9b.These projects have been approved by the Board of Dirceton and cover most schools. These projects do not increase capacity.
Them projects include.school nclworks,information and library swicros;new classroom start up;elementary playgrounds and high school sports fields;
music equipment;emergency communication.
1-6
SECTION II
MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION U- MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Federal Way Public Schools (the District) has twenty-three elementary schools (grades K-6), six
junior high schools (grades 7-9), three senior high schools (grades 10-12) and two alternative
schools (grades 7-12) for the 1998/99 school year. On April 20, 1996 the Federal Way Public
Schools Board of Education adopted the boundaries for these schools. The following maps show
the service area boundaries for each school for each grade level (the alternative schools, Harry S.
Truman High School and Merit School, serve students from throughout the District). The
identified boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of
programs which affect school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas.
The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility
infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public
facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to that
development. School Districts are different. If the District does not have permanent facilities
available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries can
be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding facilities.
Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken lightly. It is
recognized that there is a potential impact on students who are required to change schools.
Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school.
It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the construction of a
complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth throughout the district
and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the district, not just around a single
development.
II-1
'a IIA
FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 210Code
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
�,. ,.
®y1R., �a� •�
1 .11
2 Mark Turain FA
SCHOOLSw Code
is
is Oly.11.view C-7
�• �. ►1 _
/ j4 -
C
,�
�.
WWI
k. 4t . �•
Ti, C�[�11 ' i T1L, "TIva! wa�c If•.:e�.,
pp rrw '
tGw€€
TF
� .
Fr
Tail . "Ply
_ irrr i2lC
rm
•KKR �: .�.� — :3� p'�I�,�:F
�ea, _ �<
r { b
wry M
vueuc sc�oois /
Junior High School Boundaries
FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 210 YW
I
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
COG-• Code-- —�i - r
10 Ad L1ide C$ 64 Illabee E-9 -
16 SH6sdcon $ 66 Kilo G-6 -- -
28 Camelot G$ 62 Lakora D$ _ I
22 Eniarprise D-9 61 saealswes E-S -
14 Green Gables A-7 70 S"natis C$
30 lake 0011off G$ 65 Toavm G-] _
11 Lake Grow D$ a L21rlt F$ ow' _..n -
]] Lakeland F-9 - sm.
2 Mark Twain F$ _ ..Y •j
29 MM erIN Hill H-5 SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS '-
8 i Minor Lake E$ i / J
5 Nautilus E$ Code `h N
15 Olympic%A" C-7
21 Panmar Lake E$ 60 DaeaNr C$ -
37 Rainier Vie w F-10 81 Federal Way E$ -
41 Slrervrood Forest 0$ 83 Thomas Jefferson GA
24 Silver Lake 0.7 8 Harry S.Truman F$ •�
26 Star Lake Ga 8 Mern F$
2S Sunnyerest G-2 - a
13 Twin Lakes B-6 - 1'• -
27 Valhalla GJ FU ra School Site,— -
7 Wildwood F-S Surplw Slave — 'i•- <
1 Woodmonl F-7
19 Educational Carrier ar FE$4 — cw.--99 F.Wrrc Suppcft Sorvce
97 WintananceOperations-Transporta60n
Parka- D p" }
A B �^
- — 1
OERAL WAY. WgSN/NGTON and V/C/N/T
MAN
I � c
•A'TRT•i"{'1,—"as e� — t 1 b � a ,1 '• —e N
ee . /JJJJ�•
12
i • Wi13;31• S •_ �
® -i f i 0 4 ••
O k IO
AY Federal Way Public Schools
r-
(253) 945-2000 - - ---
E F C �H
II-3
Senior High School Boundaries
FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 210
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS ..I.: C.
Code-- Cow--
10 AAMaldr CJ 64 Mother, E•9
1S Briancon 84 N Kilo G-6 1 i' fir' 2
28 Camabt 0-0 62 Lakote Dd a
22 Enterprise D4 H Saeajaeraa Ed '
14 G.Gables A-7 70 Saphalla Cd
70 Lola DolloN Gi 66 Totem GJ
11 lake Grow D4 a merll F46 i M
77 Li kalanA FA -
2 Mark Twaln F4
29 Meredith HIII Ns SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS J
6 Mirror Lake E4
6 Nautilw E3 Copp.. ■ I '
16 O"Pic View C-7
21 P.~lab Ed 80 DeeaWf C$
77 RaInIN ViewF-10 81- FeWnIWry ES
at Shanrootl Femt Dd 67 71wmo Jefferson
aon O - • •+++w
M 81hw Lake 0-7 8 Henry S.Truman Fd tj
-
28 Sur Lake G.7 a Merit F-4 w.
26 Smnlyme@t G•2 _ z -. i 1 - `•�
17 Twln Lake@ B4 J
27 Valhalla GA Futter,School SKe@— ;
7 Wllnwuan Fd Surplus Shea — - _ •-
1 Woodman F-3 - '�•
100 EAuuBaal Sella Carter FJi _
69 Future Support Services E-6 _ CaG__.
97 h1alntemnra4)pare1ftm-Tmmporte6on Ed _}. •t• !!I
Parke-
A
FEDERAL WAY. WASHINGTON and V/C/N!T ♦ "�I _ r' - ;i
1 - 6.
rover 1 3 ° rtrwx�' i •anx
N R •� - — wVVV ty t • � i
l � nr •Ls S� � l
a
+rwpr..r.xr�r e b — rii 9 9
•ws.rr..ru. / � �\ i• r • j I 4•• e7� i ` r `•li+`M.jr i � r ,
FEDERALI
rwm.ra rrxiw (253) 945-2000 __... _• -•CI,
'
••F G N
II-4
SECTION III
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Building Capacities -The Education Program
Portable Locations
Student Forecast - 1999 through 2004
Capacity Summaries
King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi Family Units
!II.1
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Building Capacities
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to
ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public Instruction
establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not take into
consideration the education program needs. The District has identified a Building Program
Capacity for each of the schools in the District. This Full Time Equivalent (FI'E) capacity is
based on:
• The number of classrooms available in each school
• Any special requirements at each school
• The contracted class load by grade level
In general, the District's current standard provides that the average class size for a standard
classroom for grade K is 24 students , for grade 1-6 is 26 students and grades 7-12 is 25
students. Gate (Gifted and Talented Education) classrooms are 25 students, individual
education programs classrooms are 15 students, and special education classrooms are 12
students. This size is determined based upon current ratios and trends as well as the
classroom physical size. Educational Program Capacities change every year. This analysis is
for the 1998/99 school year. The capacity of an individual school could and does change at
any time depending on program changes which may require additional space.
III-2
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES
ELEMENTARY BUILDING JUNIOR HIGH BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY PROGRAM CAPACITY
Adelaide 488 Illahee 821
Bri adoon 528 Kilo 854
Camelot 374 Lakota 741
Enterprise 512 Saca'awea 828
Green Gables 494 Sa halie 768
Lake Dolloff 482 Totem 709
Lake Grove 476
Lakeland 488 1998 TOTAL 4,721
Mark Twain 503
Meredith Hill 498 Junior High Average 787
Mirror Lake 398
Nautilus 542 SENIOR HIGH BUILDING
_ Olympic View 450 PROGRAM CAPACITY
Panther Lake 514
Rainier View 468 Decatur 1,121
Sherwood Forest 550 Federal Way 1,308
Silver Lake 528 Thomas Jefferson 1,266
Star Lake 502
Sunnycrest 462 1998 TOTAL 3,695
Twin Lakes 502
Valhalla 1 494 Senior High Average 1,232
Wildwood 428
Woodmont 450 ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY
1998 TOTAL 11,131
Merit School 16
Elementary Average 4847 Truman High School 194
1998 TOTAL 210
Notes:
Elementary program capacities are based on the number of teaching stations
in the building, contracted class size, and special use classrooms in place
during the 98/99 school year. All available instructional space is calculated.
Secondary program capacities are based on peak loading.
The calculation is based on 25 students per available
teaching stations.
Capacities were calculated by the Study and Survey Committee.
I1I-3
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Portable Locations
The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic
education. It is not efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity for
500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates throughout the
year and from year to year.
Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students until
permanent facilities can be built or boundary adjustments can be made. When permanent
facilities become available, the portable(s) is either moved to another school for an interim
classroom, or used for other purposes such as storage or child care programs. Some portables
may not be fit to move due to age or physical condition. In these cases, the District may
choose to buy new portables and surplus these unfit portables. It is the practice and
philosophy of Federal Way Public Schools that portables are not acceptable as permanent
- facilities.
The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for
temporary educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools.
III-4
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
PORTABLE LOCATIONS
PORTABLESLOCATED PORTABLES LOCATED
AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AT SENIOR HIGHS
NON ,ON
INSTRUmoO INSf uU ONAL 'tt RUMONAL INSTRUCTIONAL
Adelaide 3 Decatur 4
Bri adoon I Federal Way1
Camelot I Thomas Jefferson
Enterprise 2 Truman/Merit 8 1
Green Gables 1
Lake Dolloff 3 TO-TALI 13 1
Lake Grove 2
Lakeland I
Mark Twain 3
Meredith Hill I PORTABLES LOCATED
Mirror Lake 2 AT SUPPORT FACILITIES
Nautilus I
_ Olympic View 2 Science&Testing K 1
Panther Lake 3 5-Mile Lake 1
Rainier View 2 MOT I
Sherwood Forest 3 Clothing Bank 1
Silver Lake 4
Star Lake 4 TOTAL 4
Sunn crest 1
Twin Lakes 2 1
Valhalla HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES
Wildwood 4
W oodmont 2
Mirror Lake 1
TOTAL 48 1 Sherwood Forest 1
Total 2
PORTABLESLOCATED
AT JUNIOR HIGHS
NON
INSTRUCTIONAL WUUCnONAL
Illahee 3
Kilo 3 1
Lakota 3
Saca'awea 2
Sa hahe 4
Totem 5
TOTAL 20 1
III-5
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAY
Student Forecast
Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development. Enrollment
projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget preparation. The majority of
staffing requirements are derived directly from the forecasted number of students. Allocations for
instructional supplies and materials are also made on the basis of projected enrollment. Other
expenditures and certain revenue projections are directly related to enrollment projections.
Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department. Projections
must be detailed at various levels, district total, school-building totals, grade level and program level
to include vocational and special education students.
The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis of a group
that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time. In a stable population
the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses historical information to develop averages
and project the averages forward. This method does not trace individual students; it is concerned
with aggregate numbers in each grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of
history and weighted factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out of the school
system are common, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases
survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The district
collects information on birth rates within the district's census tracts, and treats these statistics as a
cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years.
The Federal Way School District is using three distinct methods for projecting student enrollments.
The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated
• The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts. These are
forecast of enrollment for one year. The projections vary depending on the number of years of
historical information and how they are weighted.
• The second method uses enrollment-forecasting software tied to a geographic information
system. MicroSAM- software establishes survival, migrant and repeater rates for each grade
level in a pre-defined geographic area. These rates are matched to the number of housing units
per area. The rates are then used to project the following year's enrollment based on the number
of planned new housing units. The software will project for five years.
• The third method is a projection using an enrollment projection software package that allows the
user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these projections for the
district level. The Enrollment MasterTM software provides statistical methods including trend line,
standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of these methods. This software produces
a five-year projection of school enrollment.
Short-term budget projections may be more conservative than the standard grade progression model.
For the 1998/99 school year, the district chose the Enrollment MasterTM projection using a two-
III-6
FEDERAL.WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
parameter method. This is the method suggested when a district is increasing or decreasing at a rate
that is different than the standard grade progression model. Standard grade progression is a
reasonably accurate method for the near term future when the near future looks much like the near
past. Using six years of enrollment history in the Federal Way District encompasses high growth
years and zero growth years which fall outside the range of the standard progression model. This
phenomenon is partially explained by the incorporation of the City of Federal Way and its affect on
new housing starts in recent history.
Long range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the cohort survival
method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther out the projections are
made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections are studied annually. The study
includes information from the jurisdictional demographers as they project future housing and
population in the region. The long-range projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a
similar age trend in student populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial
management for the State of Washington.
Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The Federal Way
School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions comprising the school
district geography. These projections create a vision of the school district in the future.
III-7
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections
Simplified FTE(K Headcount= .5 FTE;Junior High FfE=.989 Headcount;Senior High FTE_ .932 Headcount)
Total K-12 Percent
School Year Elementary Junior High SeniorHi h FTE Change
1992-93 10,342 4,352 3,681 18,375
1993-94 10,545 4,432 3,750 18,727 1.9%
1994-95 10,505 4,626 3,758 18,889 0.9%
1995-96 10,689 4,838 3,796 19,323 1.1%
1996-97 10,863 4,930 3,913 19,706 1.9%
1997-99 11,123 5,073 4,082 20,278 2.8%
1998-99 11,480 5,099 4,060 20,639 1.7%
P1999-00 11,656 51153 4,321 21,130 23%
P2000-01 11,799 5,247 4,399 21,444 LS%
P2001-02 11,796 S,498 4,480 21,774 LSto*
P2002-03 11,795 S,73S 4,416 21,946 0.8%
New Configuration Elementary K-S Middle School 6-8 high School 9-12
P2003-04 9,976 5,703 6,539 22,219 1.2%
P2004-OS 10,102 5,610 6,780 22,492 L2%
Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast
23,000 i 3.0%
22,000 2.5%
21,000 f
e 2.0%
20 000
l l ! � � f • I i a
w l i i i e I w
= 19.000 1 I I i 1 I I I 1 1.5% 2
e 18,000
1 1.0%
17,000
16.01015,000 L• ,' I I I I 1
• , I I I I I I � I � ' i ' i
1p 'Y°p 141 ^ce,8.' 9 Q� Q`9',,p'Ly°a �h
Q 9 Q'C Q'C,,p
G
2�
School Year
FTE S Percent of Change
111-8
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Capacity Summaries
All Grades, Elementary, Junior High, and Senior High Schools
The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student Forecast
information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled facilities and
why there is a need for the district to use temporary facilities or interim measures.
The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summarizing the entire
District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary,junior high, and
senior high levels individually.
The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in
place each year.
III-9
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY-ALL GRADES
Actual Projected--
CAPACITY 1998 1 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
BUILDING PROGRAM z
CAPACITY 19,757 19,757 19,757 19,837 20,261 f 21,035 22,359
G9
Add or subtract changes to capacity y
a
A
Special Education Changes (26) (26) (26) a (26) (26)
Truman High modernization and expansion 106
Increase Capacity at Three High Schools 450
New Middle School 800 y
New High School a• 1,350
0
Adjusted Program Capacitv 19,757 19,757 19,837 1 20,261 121,035 1 22,359 22,333
ENROLLMENT
Basic FTE Enrollment 20,619 121,130 121,444 1 21,774 121,946 122,218 22,492
Internet Academy Enrollment 181 500 1 700 1 750 800 850 900
Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy 20,438 20,630 120,744 1 21,024 21,146 21,368 21,592
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPACITY (681) (873) 1 (907) (763) 1 (111) 991 741
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY
Current Portable Capacity 2,025 2,025 2,175 2,175 21Uj75- 2,175
Add/Subtract Portable Capacity
Federal Way Public Academy I50
Adjusted Portable Capacity 2,025 2,175 2,175 2,175 2,175 2,175 2,175
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY 1,344 1,302 1,268 1,412 2,064 3,166 1 2,916
III-10
CaPSUA19811E4DER 07115199
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY-ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Actual -- Projected --
CAPACITY 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
BUILDING PROGRAM
CAPACITY 11,131 11,131 11,131 11,105 I1,079 11,053 11,027
G
n
n
a
1. Special Education Changes (26) (26) (26) =1 (26) (26)
Adjusted Program Capacity 11,131 11,131 111,105 11,079 111,053 911,027 I1,001
ENROLLMENT
Basic FfE Enrollment 11,480 111,656 111,799 1 11,796 111,795 1 9,976 110,102
2. Internet Academy 53 100 125 125 150 150 150
Basic FI'E Enrollment without Internet Academy 11,427 11,556 11,674 11,671 11,645 9,826 9,952
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPACITY (296) (425) (569) (592) 1 (592) 1,201 1,049
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 3.
Current Portable Capacity 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
Add/Subtract portable capacity
Move to High School (125)
Adjusted Portable Capacity 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1.200 1,200 1,075
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY 904 775 631 608 608 2,401 2,124
NOTES:
1. Add Programs 3 ECEAP, 1 SBD(Severely Behavioral Disordered)and 1 Pre-School Program
This reduces Basic Education capacity in the school years indicated.
2. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities.
3. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and
other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily
house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a
calculated number only. The actual number of portables that%till be used
will be based upon actual population needs.
III-11
CAPSUAM lrEADER 07115199
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY-JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Actual Projected--
CAPACITY 1998 1 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
BUILDING PROGRAM
CAPACITY 4,721 4,721 4,721 4,721 4,721 n 5,521 5,521
v
0
1. Add New Middle School 800 �
d
0
Adjusted Program Capacity 4,721 4,721 4,721 4,721 5,521 ' 5,521 5,521
ENROLLMENT
Basic FTE Enrollment F5O
0 5,153 5,247 5,498 5,735 5,703 5,610
2. Internet Academy 200 275 275 275 175 175
Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy 1 4,953 4,972 5,223 5,460 5,528 5,435
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPACITY (290) (232) (251) (502) 61 (7) 86
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 3.
Current Portable Capacity 500 500 650 650 650 650 650
Add/Subtract portable capacity
4. Federal Way Public Academy 150
Adjusted Portable Capacity 500 650 650 650 650 650 650
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY 210 418 399 148 711 643 736
NOTES:
1. Add new middle school
2. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities.
3. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and
other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily
house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a
calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used
will be based upon actual population needs.
4 Federal Way Public Academy will increase capacity at one junior high site.
III-12
C4PSUM98 IIE4DER 07115199
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY-SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Actual Projected --
CAPACITY 1998 1 1999 2000 2001 2002 z 2003 2004
BUILDING PROGRAM E
CAPACITY 3,905 3,905 3,905 4,011 4,461 Cj 4,461 5,811
w
c
Add or subtract changes in capacity A
0
1. Truman Remodel 106 �
2, Add Capacity to Three High Schools 450 12
21
3. Add New High School 1,350
0
Adjusted Program Capacity 3,905 3,905 4,011 4,461 4,461 5,811 5.811
ENROLLMENT
Basic FI'E Enrollment 4,120 4,321 4,398 4,480 4,416 6,539 6,780
4. Internet Academy 59 200 300 350 375 525 575
Basic Ed without Internet Academy 4,061 4,121 4,098 4,130 4,041 6,014 6,205
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPACITY (156) (216) (87) 331 420 (203) (394)
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 5.
Current Portable Capacity 325 325 325 325 325 325 325
Add\Subtract portable capacity
Add from Elementary 125
Adjusted Portable Capacity 325 325 325 325 325 325 450
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY 169 109 238 656 745 122 56
NOTES:
1. Truman High School modernization and expansion
2. Add capacity to three existing high schools
3. Add new high school
4. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities.
5. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and
other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily
house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a
calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used
will be based upon actual population needs.
III-13
CAPSUA19811FiiDEH 07115199
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
KineyCounty the City of Federal Way, and the City of Kent Impact Fee Calculations
Single and Multi-Family Residences
Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees to
help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities.
To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was
established. This formula can be found in King County Code 21A and was also substanially
adopted by the City of Federal Way and Kent. The formula requires the District to establish
a "Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be added to a school
district by each new single or multi-family unit and to gather some standard construction
costs, which are unique to that district.
- STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS
Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for single
family units and multi-family units. The factors used in the 1998/99 Capital Facilities Plan
were derived using actual generation factors from single family units and multi-family units,
which were constructed in the last five- (5) years.
- IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee
Calculation for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 2 1 A and the
Growth Management Act.
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
lI1-14
tnD � 0 0 .n- � m 0 ONI O t•f n
m 0
C d
9 UOm OO tDr tp r 00 n 7 Urf�D
o m oontornntoo m � m
F O LL m m m O O m o m N t D F LL O t D C
y ton rnm n c m n> rnn y NO
c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
L O) N O m n N O N — m L Q m
cm
C m O m O O t D tmp m O)C ^_ O
= m o r m o n n m O Q Q m v. = m $ rn
9 U Q O t 7 0 0 0 O m m O m Q
O q om OMNtDo " mm r O > tpnt� O
� y LL 0 � 0 � � 0 0 � � � G c to O
y O C O O O G C O C G i0 O O
L m
OIr � W O Mbn .Q- � n0 -' Ol•• � � W N.
= 6CI .p. h OI O M O m y Q c7 O _Iff V Y f�0 N tQ'f:
0 O m 0 0 t7 N Q m O N 0
p OO-
� ipLL •- N N .N- � Or - NN O CyLLpp �.
--
c aci entDo � rmt� on :o :9 � `oormi r'
oeh otn t� Qmnom m e m Q m.
d9 Ut0 � 0 MN t0mm0t0 'O m0 tiNm O.
7 deh QO t7N QOt7Om :Q E mON
E « c� nm a Dommom U. o
dy V' MQmN Q t7O � OCJ � dN 00
L W o O G O O G C O G 0 W C G
Vi
a7 L O ow
O 0 i
y S C we S C
U E o a Q N Q Q m o o FIT
E `o m m
EEC = c ..
._� c z Z y y
< C
F } ` O co S O wm
Q cai ao NQ � n � � � " �
m •iva ad =p ea
E •— y e «
rn � z C z ' y d
e _
0
a 00E- `n
= uza a d m n o n m m Q m m r a. a
0j ce E y m m r
U F- E E ip � '- Q N � .- N � N E E JN N
y E N Gti Edy E = mom
U rnO = z i Gt ZW y
m U eo S
`o ='' N
3 d cp c ffiEcm rn
fr7 Z f
G
� T
T
a
m c
a' ty = — NM
mNQ m aLL — oo 0
Em d N NM C) O N O� O Q E m d
D pl ;
O 3
z c 0 Z C O
y y
C
F p F
Z
W d LU
f c
p o m F O
j u of c = moo c aci > d
O H ` E °' mL3 00 Goo m
E E
` ° ° ` m H U U a
o ti v U
2wFraaIF; Qv mtn
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL. FACILITIES PLAN
IMPACT FEE
School Site Acquisition Cost: Student Student
Facility Cost/ Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/
Acreage Acre Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR
Elementary .........._0.00.. ....................$�.. ..................484 ..................0.4080 ...............0 0615 $0 $0
Jr High _20 00 $50,000.. ..................787 .............. O 1563 .0 0342 $199 $43
.. .........................
Sr High F40.00 $80,000 1,232 0.1146 0.0410 $298 $106
TOTAL 5496 5150
School Construction Cost: Student Student
%Perm Fac./ Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/
Total Sq Ft Cost Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR
Elementary 96.95% $0 484 0.4080 .0615 $0 $0
Jr High .9695% $17,000,000 ..........787 ..................01563 0
.0.0342 $3,273 $716
.. .....................
Sr Highttl 96.95% $50,000,000 1,232 0.1146 0.0410 $4,509 $1,613
(q Senior High includes new Senior High S 40,500,000 TOTAL $7,71 52,329
Expansion three Senior Highs $7,500,000
Tn°nan High Expansion 52,000,000
_ Temporary Facility Cost: Student Student
%Temp Fac. Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/
Total Sq Ft Cost Size SFR MFR SFR MFR
Elementary 3 05% $55,361 .. .25 ..................0408.01
4080 ...............0 0615 $28 $4
.. .........................
Jr High .3 05% $55,361.. ...................?5. ..................0 1563 .............._0 0342 $1 1 $2
Sri 3.05% $55,361 25 0.1146 0.0410 $8 $3
TOTAL1 $46 S9
State Matching Credit Calculation: Student Student
Boeck Cost/ Sq.Ft. State Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/
Sq Ft Student Match SFR MFR SFR MFR
Elementary .599:68.. ......................._0 60.62% 0.4080 .............._0 0615 $0 $0
..........................
Jr High $99.68.. .................._l ........._60 62%0 ..................0:1563 ...............0 0342 $1.058 $231
New Sr High $99.68 120 60.62% 0.11461 0.0410 $831 $297
Total 51,889 5529
Tax Payment Credit Calculation SFR MFR
Average Assessed Value(April 99) .$153,095 .$35,488
Capital Bond Interest Rate(March 99) 5 11%0 5 11%
..... . .......
Net Present Value of Average Dwelling $1,175,869 5272571
Years Amortized 10 10
............................ ............................
Property Tax Levy Rate $1.42 $1.42
Present Value of Revenue Stream 51,670 5387
Single Family Multi-Family
Residences Residences
Mitigation Fee Summary
Site Acquisition Cost $496 $150
Permanent Facility Cost $7,782 $2,329
Temporary Facility Cost $46 $9
State Match Credit ($1,889) (3529)
Tax Payment Credit ($1,670) (S387)
Sub-Total S4,766 51,573
50%Local Share $2,383 $796
impact Fee S2,383 5786
r""'e III-16
°vue°
9:39 AM
SECTION IV
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION IV
SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The 1998/99 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 1997/98 Capital
Facilities Plan. The changes between the 1997/98 Plan and the 1998/99 Plan are listed.
SECTION I - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
Leased Space is added to the inventory
CURRENT INVENTORY OF NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITES
Developed Property
Leased space is added to the inventory
Undeveloped Property
Site 98 is sold
Site 9 is pending sale.
NEEDS FORECAST- EXISTING FACILITIES
Expansion of Decatur High School, Federal Way High School and Thomas Jefferson High
School is added.
Parking Safety, Network Upgrades, Automated Libraries, Elementary Playgrounds, High School
Sports Fields, and Emergency Communications are added
NEEDS FORECAST - NEW FACILITIES
New Elementary site and New Elementary School are removed.
New High School site, New High School and New Middle School are added.
The Six Year Finance has been rolled forward to reflect 1998/2004
IV-1
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
CAPACITY
Changes to building program capacity between the 1997/98 Capital Facilities Plan and the
1998/99 Capital Facilities Plan can be found on page III-3.
PORTABLES
The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables
purchased. Portable Locations can be found on page III-5
STUDENT FORECAST
The Student Forecast now covers 1998 through 2004. The new forecast reflects an increased
rate of growth at a decreasing rate observed in the District. The student forecast can be found
on page III-8
CAPACITY SUMMARY
The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities and
- student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown as
increases to capacity.
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION - KING COUNTY CODE 21A
The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The adjustment
made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee between the 1997/98
Capital Facilities Plan and the 1998/99 Capital Facilities Plan can be found on page IV-3.
IV-2
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1998/99 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAIN
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 1997/98 TO 1998/99
STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS
Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a
period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation. The changes in
student Generation factors between the 1997/98 Capital Facilities Plan and the 1997/98
Capital Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age
of the developments.
IMPACT FEE
Item From/To Comment
Percent of Permanent Facilities 97.34 % to Report #3 OSPI
96.95%
Percent Temporary Facilities
2.66% to Updated portable inventory
3.05%
Temporary Facility Cost $62,368 to Updated cost of most recently
$55,361 purchased portable (Adelaide
Elementary)
Boeck Cost/Sq. Ft $97.23 to Change per SPI
$99.68
State Match 59.89% to Change per SPI
60.62%
Average Assessed Value SFR - Per Puget Sound Educational Service
$143,979 to District (ESD 121)
$153,095.
MFR - $34,641
To $35,488.
Capital Bond Interest Rate 5.19% to Market Rate
5.11%
Property Tax Levy Rate $1.47to $1.42 Per King County
Single Family Fee $2,882. to Calculated Fee
$2,383.
Multi Family Fee $874 to $786 Calculated Fee
IV-3
9
X '
£ At
1
t
J
I
f`
�f
1 S
J
II
.' • 111
t.
PUB L C SCHOOI S
21
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Other Business
1 . SUBJECT: TONELLI REZONE (RZ-99-3) - ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: In 1983 , the Tonelli rezone site was
reclassified to MRG subject to several conditions relating to
density and design of development . The present Tonelli rezone
application proposed to retain the same MRG zoning classifi-
cation but to remove the "contract rezone" conditions . This
would allow development to take place according to existing
ordinances and regulations . A public hearing was held before
the Nearing Examiner on October 6 , 1999 and the Hearing
Examiner recommended approval of the proposed application on
October 11, 1999 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff report, Findings & Recommendation, and
ordinance
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:
Councilmember � ��� moves, Councilmember seconds
to accept/reject/modrfT the findings, conclusions, and recom-
mendation of the Hearing Examiner on the Tonelli rezone
application (RZ-99-3) , and adopt Ordinance No. ,I1 which
removes the contract rezone conditions .
DISCUSSION:
ACTION: ✓ ' � �}
Council Agenda
Item No. 7B
CITY OF A"L22
�NVIC'rA Jim White, Mayor
Planning Department (253) 859-3390/FAX(253) 850-1544
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: TONELLI REZONE #RZ-99-3 KIVA #9901685
APPLICANT: American Property Development
REQUEST: A request to rezone approximately 12.19 acres of property from MRG,
Garden Density Multifamily with contract density and design
conditions(#RZ-83-1), to MRG, Garden Density Multifamily without
additional conditions.
LOCATION: The subject property is located at 22440 88'Avenue S.
APPLICATION FILED: August 10, 1999
DETERMINATION OF
NONSIGNIFICANCE ISSUED: September 9, 1999
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1999
RECOMMENDATION ISSUED: October 11, 1999
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: James P. Hams, Planning Director
Fred N. Satterstrom, Planning Department
Kurt Hanson, Planning Department
Roger Lubovich, City Attorney
Gary Gill, Public Works Department
PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Pat Schneider, representing American Property
Greg Borrego, American Property
Other
Reid Olsen
Page 1 of 6
220 4th AVE.SO.. /KENT.WASHINGTON 98032-5595/TELEPHONE (253(556-5200
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Tonelli
#RZ-99-3
EXHIBITS: 1. Hearing Examiner file containing application,
staff report, Determination of Nonsignificance
and public notice.
2. Letter from Paul and Elva Vert
3. Contour map with key
SUMMARY OF RECORD
Request:
The applicant proposes to rezone approximately 12.19 acres from the current zoning of MRG,
Garden Density Multifamily with contract conditions to MRG, Garden Density Multifamily. The
contract conditions limit development of the property to the intensity and design of that approved
in 1983 following review of the Tonelli Rezone/Maple Hills Condominium application(#RZ-83-1).
Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits submitted at the open record public hearing, the
following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are entered by the Hearings Examiner:
FINDINGS
1. On August 10, 1999, American Property Development(Applicant), on behalf of August and
Richard Tonelli, filed a request with the City to rezone approximately 12.19 acres from the
current zoning of MRG, Garden Density Multifamily with contract conditions to MRG,
Garden Density Multifamily. The contract conditions limit development of the property to
the intensity and design of that approved in 1983 following review of the Tonelli
Rezone/Maple Hills Condominium application (#RZ-83-1). Exhibit 1, Application.
2. The subject property is located at 22440 88' Avenue South and consists of two parcels of
10.85 acres and 1.34 acres. The property surrounding the subject property to the northwest
is zoned CM-1. The property to the northeast of the subject property is zoned SR-6. The
property directly to the east is zoned SR-2. The property directly to the south is zoned MRH.
The property to the west was recently zoned MRG [#CPA-98-2(E)]. Land use around the
subject property includes commercial manufacturing, medium density multifamily and
single-family residential developments. The parcels immediately north of the subject
property are not platted. There are single-family houses located to the east of the subject
property beyond the sensitive slope hazard area. Exhibit 1, Application; Site View;
Testimony of Mr. Hansen.
3. The subject property is presently undeveloped. Sensitive area regulations of the Kent Zoning
Code adopted after the approval of the present zoning prohibit development on
approximately 6.8 acres of the property due to the steep slopes on the eastern boundary. The
subject property is heavily vegetated with deciduous and evergreen trees located on the
slopes. Most of the area that would remain in its present undeveloped condition is on the
2 of 6
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Tonelli
#RZ-99-3
west facing slopes. There would be a significant buffer between any development allowed
on the site and the single-family homes on the top of the west facing slope. Testimony of
Mr. Hansen.
4. A Planned Unit Development proposed for the subject property in 1983 has been abandoned.
The applicant has submitted a proposed development design under the name Silver Springs
Apartment Complex to construct approximately 100 units on the subject property. Testimony
of Mr. Hansen. The Applicant has applied for financing from the Housing Finance
Commission (HFC) and requests action on the rezone request prior to the end of October
when the HFC intends to issue bonds. Testimony of Mr. Borrego.
5. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map designates the subject property as Low Density
Multifamily at a maximum of 16 units per acre. The land use element also contains goals
and policies relating to the location, density, and design of future development in the City
and in the Potential Annexation Area. The goals and policies relevant to this application for
a rezone include:
Goal LU-8: The City of Kent adopts a 20-year housing target of 7,500 new
dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King County through
an interlocal agreement on housing targets in the unincorporated area within Kent's
Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-8.1: Provide in the land use plan adequate land and
densities to accommodate both city and county targets within the Potential
Annexation Area. Average net residential densities throughout the Potential
Annexation Area should be at least four units per acre in order to adequately
support urban services.
Goal LU-9: Provide opportunities for a wide variety of housing types, options, and
densities throughout the city and the Potential Annexation Area.
The current MRG zoning,with contract conditions, allows for development of 80 residential
units on the property. The proposed MRG designation, without contract conditions, would
allow for development of 195 units if it were not for other restrictions on the site. The
Applicant proposes construction of approximately 100 units as a separate application now
under consideration by the Planning Department. Testimony of Mr. Hansen; Exhibit 1, Staff
Report.
6. 88th Avenue South is a substandard road with a 30-foot right-of-way and no curbs or
sidewalks. The Public Works Department has identified specific improvements that will be
necessary on South 228°Street and 88' Avenue South to ensure that development of the
property does not burden the transportation system in the area. These improvements include
the dedication of property along South 228' Street and 88' Avenue South for right-of-way
3 of 6
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Tonelli
#RZ-99-3
and paying a proportionate share for the future improvements to South 228" Street and 88'
Avenue South. Testimony of Mr. Hansen; Exhibit 1, Staff Report.
7. Some circumstances have changed since the present zoning was adopted in 1983. First, at
the time the present contract zoning was approved, the City was concerned that there would
not be adequate sewer capacity to serve the anticipated development in the vicinity
surrounding the subject property. A re-evaluation of sewer capacity, coupled with lower
density development than initially anticipated, indicates sufficient sewer capacity to provide
for development to MRG densities. Secondly, the City Council adopted sensitive area
restrictions that limit the amount of development that can occur on the property. These
restrictions were adopted after the contract rezone restrictions. Thirdly, the development
proposal associated with the contract rezone has been abandoned.' Exhibit 1, Staff Report;
Testimony of Mr. Hansen.
8. Notice of the open record hearing on the rezone application was properly posted,mailed and
published in accordance with City ordinances. Exhibit 1, Affildavits of Notice. No one
opposed the rezone. Two citizens raised questions about the potential impact of the rezone
on traffic in the area and on the single-family residences to the east of the subject property. _
Testimony of Mr. Olsen; Exhibit 2, Letter from Verts. The City responded that the entire
west-facing slope would be protected from development under the City's sensitive areas
ordinance and that no development of the property could occur without improvement to the
road system in the area. Testimony of Mr. Hansen.
9. A Determination of Nonsignificance(#ENV-99-41) was issued for the rezone proposal on
September 9", 1999. Exhibit 1, Environmental Review.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
The Hearings Examiner has jurisdiction to hold an open record hearing on this quasi-judicial rezone,
and to issue a written recommendation for final action to the Council,pursuant to RCW 35A.63.170
and Chapters 2.32 and 15.09 of the Kent City Code.
Since the development basis for the adoption of contract rezone has been withdrawn, it is likely the contract rezone
conditions are no longer applicable. However, to make certain the contract conditions adopted by ordinance no
longer appear on as restrictions on title,the Applicant and City believe it is appropriate to officially amend the
zoning ordinance to remove these conditions.
4of6
- Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Tonelli
#RZ-99-3
Criteria for Review
Section 15.09.050(A)(3) of the Kent zoning Code sets forth the standards and criteria the Hearings
Examiner must use to evaluate a request for a rezone. The City Council of Kent specifies that a
request for a rezone shall only be granted if:
a. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
b. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be compatible with
development in the vicinity;
C. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the
property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated;
d. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current zoning
district to warrant the proposed rezone;
e. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the
citizens of the City of Kent.
Conclusions Based on Findings
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council has
adopted a Comprehensive Plan Map, goals and policies since the adoption of the current
zoning in 1983. The map, goals and policies all encourage development of this subject
property in a manner consistent with the MRG zoning designation and other development
ordinances(including the sensitive areas ordinance)without the conditions contained in the
1983 zoning designation. Findings of Fact No. 1,5 & 8.
2. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be compatible with
development in the vicinity. Property in the area is developed with a mix of commercial
and residential uses. The proposed MRG designation would serve as a transition zone
between high and low density developments. The Applicant proposes to develop the site
with 100 residential units. Although this is less than the 195 units that might be allowed
without sensitive area restrictions, and more that the 80 units approved in 1983, the proposed
development would create additional housing units within a mixed commercial/residential
area in a manner consistent with the City's goals and policies. Findings of Fact No. 1,2,3
& 8.
3. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity
of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated. If
approved, the rezone would allow for twenty more residential units than are allowed under
the current contract zoning. Improvements are necessary to the street system in the area to
accommodate additional residences. However, these impacts can be mitigated if
improvements are made to South 228' Street and 88'Avenue South. Findings of Fact No.
1 & 6.
5 of6
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Tonelli
#RZ-99-3
4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current zoning
district to warrant the proposed rezone. The changes in sewer capacity, city ordinances
and development proposed for the subject property are substantial changes in circumstances
that will be addressed by the proposed rezone. Contract rezones are difficult to track in
public records. Often, the conditions associated with a contract rezone get"lost"when code
updates are published. The conditions, however, technically still apply to the property. The
proposed rezone will"clean up"the City's zoning ordinance in a manner consistent with its
Comprehensive Plan. Finding of Fact No. 7.
5. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of
the citizens of the City of Kent. The proposed rezone from MRG,with conditions, to MRG
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan that has undergone extensive review by the City
Council and citizens of the City. No one has objected to the application of the MRG zoning
designation to the site. Findings of Fact No.1-8.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and testimony and evidence presented
at the Public Hearing, Hearings Examiner recommends this application for a rezone from MRG,with
conditions, to MRG be approved. It is the Hearings Examiner's opinion that the rezone request
meets the criteria for approval established by the Council.
Dated this I I' day of October, 1999.
._74tm" Pam: 4V4M&.,
THEODORE PAUL HUNTER
Hearing Examiner
6 of
CITY OF J Q\U!2 JS
ravr�T� Jim White, Mayor
Planning Department (253) 856-5454/FAX(253) 856-6454
James P. Harris, Planning Director
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 856-5454
STAFF REPORT
FOR HEARING EXAMINER MEETING OF OCTOBER 6TH, 1999
FILE NO: TONELLI REZONE #RZ-99-3 KIVA #9901685
APPLICANT: Chris Carraher, American Property Development
(425) 455-2433
REOUEST: A request to rezone approximately 12.19 acres of
property from MRG, Garden Density Multifamily with
contract density and design conditions (#RZ-83-1), to
MRG, Garden Density Multifamily without additional
conditions.
STAFF
REPRESENTATIVE: Kurt Hanson, Planner
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Description of the Proposal
The applicant proposes to rezone approximately 12.19 acres from the current zoning
of MRG, Garden Density Multifamily with contract conditions to MRG, Garden
Density Multifamily. The contract conditions currently attached to the parcels limit
the development's intensity and design to that proposed under the Tonelli
Rezone/Maple Hills Condominium application (#RZ-83-1). This design pre-dated
the City of Kent sensitive area regulations. The attached conditions require building
access roads and multifamily structures on the side and top of a steep slope classified
as a severe hazard area in the City's hazard area overlay maps. If proposed today, the
project would be denied access to that portion of the property due to conflicts with
hazard area regulations. At the existing zoning (MRG with conditions), it would be
possible to create approximately 80 units on the two subject parcels. Under the
220 4th AVE.SO.. /KENT.WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (253)856-5200
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA #9901685
proposed zoning, it would be possible to create approximately 195 units (12.19 acres
at 16 units per acre.
Sensitive area regulations of the Kent Zoning Code would prohibit development on
approximately 6.8 acres of the property due to the steep slopes on the eastern
boundary. The applicant has submitted a prospective development design under the
name Silver Springs Apartment Complex under (Planning Department permit
#9902133) with approximately 100 units proposed on the subject parcels. A total of
251 units are proposed for the entire Silver Springs project which covers both the
rezone site and two additional adjacent parcels.
B. Location
The subject property is located at 22440 88' Avenue South.
C. Size of Property
The subject parcels total approximately 12.19 acres in size (parcel #1822059339 is
10.85 acres, parcel #1822059319 is 1.34 acres).
D. Zoning
The property surrounding the subject site to the northwest is zoned CM-I. The
property to the northeast of the subject site is zoned SR-6. The property directly to
the east is zoned SR-2. The property directly to the south is zoned MRH. The
property to the west was recently zoned MRG [#CPA-98-2(E)].
E. Land Use
The two subject parcels currently are undeveloped, and along with the adjacent two
parcels are proposed for development as the Silver Springs Apartment Complex
totaling 251 dwelling units. Commercial manufacturing, medium density
multifamily and single-family residential developments surround the subject parcels.
The parcels immediately north of the subject property are not platted, resulting in
low density (if any) development. There are developed plats located to the east of
the subject property beyond the sensitive slope hazard area.
F. History
The subject property was annexed to the City of Kent in 1958 as part of a 66-acre —
annexation (Ord. 967). The property has had several land use applications filed and
processed by the City. In 1982, the Maple Hills Condominiums Planned United
Development (#PUD-82-1). This proposal was considered in conjunction with a
2
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA#9901685
rezone application #RZ-83-1 (Tonelli). As a result of this rezone request, the site
was reclassified to MRG with conditions which limited the total number and density
of units and, further, placed restricts on the site design and layout of units. The
associated PUD never materialized for financial reasons and the anticipated project
was never built.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Environmental Assessment
A Determination ofNonsignificance(DNS) (#ENV-99-41)with no conditions for the
rezone proposal was issued on September 9", 1999.
B. Siznificant Physical Features
Topography. Wetlands and Vegetation
The eastern boundary of the site is indicated on the City's Sensitive Area map as
having severe west-facing slopes,which average approximately 25-30 percent. There
are portions of the property where the slope slightly exceeds 60 percent. The site is
heavily vegetated, with significant deciduous and evergreen trees located on the
slopes. Prior to development on any of the subject parcels, the developer will have
to submit a tree plan and geotechnical report for Planning/Public Works Department
approval.
C. SiQnificant Social Features
1. Street System
The subject property is located adjacent to 88' Avenue South. This street is
classified a Residential Collector. The street has a public right-of-way width
of 60 feet, approximately 20 feet of which is paved. The Public Works
Department has identified specific improvements which will be necessary on
South 228'Street and 88' Avenue South to serve subsequent development
of the property. These improvements include (but are not limited to) the
dedication of property along South 228' Street and 88' Avenue South for
right-of-way and paying a proportionate share for the future improvements
to South 228' Street and 88" Avenue South.
2. Water System
The site is served by an 8-inch water main located on the east side of 88'
Avenue South.
3
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA#9901685
3. Sanitary Sewer System
There is an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line located along 88' Avenue
South.
4. Stormwater System
A stormwater system will be necessary to accommodate any subsequent
development. The developer will be required to construct a stormwater
treatment system in accordance with Kent Construction Standards in
conjunction with a development proposal.
5. LIDs
No Local Improvement Districts exist at this time.
III. CONSULTED DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES —
The following departments and agencies were advised of this application:
City Administrator City Attorney
Director of Public Works Chief of Police
Parks & Recreation Director Fire Chief
Building Official City Clerk
In addition to the above, all persons owning property which lies within 300 feet of the site
were notified of the application and of the public hearing.
Staff comments have been incorporated in the staff report where applicable.
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW
A. Comprehensive Plan
In 1995, the Kent City Council adopted the Kent Comprehensive Plan, which
represented a complete revision to the City's 1977 comprehensive plan. The 1995
plan was prepared under the provisions of the Washington State Growth
Management Act. The Comprehensive Plan, through its goals and policies,presents
a clear expression of the City's vision of growth for citizens, the development
community, and other public agencies. The plan is used by the Mayor, City Council,
Land Use and Planning Board, Hearing Examiner, and City departments to guide
decisions on amendments to the City's zoning code and other development
4
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA#9901685
regulations, which must be consistent with the plan, and also guide decisions
regarding the funding and location of capital improvement projects.
LAND USE ELEMENT
The Land Use Element of the plan contains a Land Use Plan Map, which designates
the type and intensity of land uses throughout the city, as well as in the entire
potential annexation area. The Land Use Plan Map designates the subject property
as Low Density Multifamily at a maximum of 16 units per acre. The land use
element also contains goals and policies relating to the location, density, and design
of future development in the City and in the Potential Annexation Area.
Goal LU-8: The City of Kent adopts a 20-year housing target of 7,500 new
dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King County through
an interlocal agreement on housing targets in the unincorporated area within Kent's
Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-8.1: Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to
accommodate both city and county targets within the Potential Annexation Area.
Average net residential densities throughout the Potential Annexation Area should
be at least four units per acre in order to adequately support urban services.
Goal LU-9: Provide opportunities for a wide variety of housing types, options, and
densities throughout the city and the Potential Annexation Area.
Planning Department Comment:
As mentioned, the Land Use Plan Element in the Comprehensive Plan designates the
subject property as Low Density Multifamily(16 dwelling units per acre). This area
was designated as Low Density Multifamily to ease the transition between the
Medium Density Multifamily to the south and the Single Family Residential to the
north. Its proximity to commercial development located to the west, south, and east,
and the presence of many urban services, particularly water and sewer make it
feasible for Low Density Multifamily. The existing zoning of MRG with conditions,
limits the allowable density to less than the Land Use Plan contemplates for that area.
This proposed rezone is supported by the goals and policies cited above. The
development of vacant or underutilized properties within the City prevents further
urban sprawl on the edges of the planning area. In addition, infill development
provides a much more efficient means of providing services and enhancing
" pedestrian opportunities. One of the overall themes of the comprehensive plan is to
provide a wide variety of housing types and opportunities to accommodate projected
population growth without converting single family land to multifamily.
5
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA#9901685
Development of multifamily residential land to its density potential is supportive of
this theme. At the existing zoning (MRG with conditions), it would be possible to
create approximately 80 units on the two subject parcels. Under the proposed
zoning, it would be possible to create approximately 195 units (12.19 acres at 16
units per acre). The City of Kent Zoning Code incorporates the sensitive area
regulations, which would prohibit development on approximately 6.8 acres of the
property due to the steep slopes on the eastern boundary. The applicant has
submitted a prospective development design (Silver Springs Apartment Complex,
KIVA#9902133) with approximately 100 units proposed on the subject parcels.
Therefore, the rezone would create additional housing opportunities in the area, and
help the City meet its anticipated housing targets.
HOUSING ELEMENT
Goal H-1: Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide range of housing
options throughout the community that are accessible to community and human
services, employment opportunities, and transportation, and by being sensitive to the
environmental impacts of development. —
Policy H-1.2: Guide new residential development into areas where
community and human services and facilities are available, and in a manner
which is compatible with the land use element.
Policy H-1.7: Continue to utilize regulatory measures to control impacts of
residential development on the environment and on water quality. Review
these regulations periodically to assess their overall effectiveness and their
impact on housing cost and supply.
Goal H-2: Provide sufficient, diverse, and affordable housing for the existing and
projected population of Kent.
Policy H-2.1: Promote a wide range of housing to meet the needs of our
diverse population and insure that this housing is available throughout the
community for people of all income levels and special needs.
Planning Department Comment
The proposed rezone is supported by relevant goals and policies of the housing
element. The proposed location is easily and well served by existing services, and
is conveniently located in proximity to community services and facilities. Also, as
noted elsewhere in this report, the proposed rezone is consistent with the Land Use
Plan Map, which contemplates higher densities for this area than are allowed under
the existing zoning.
6
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA#9901685
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Goal TR-I: Coordinate land use and transportation planning to meet the needs of
the City and the requirements of the Growth Management Act.
Policy TR-1.1: Locate commercial, industrial, multifamily, and other
uses that generate high levels of traffic in designated activity centers around
intersections of principal or minor arterials or around freeway interchanges.
Policy TR-1.2: Coordinate new commercial and residential
development in Kent with transportation projects to improve affected
roadways.
Policy TR-1.5: Ensure consistency between land use and
transportation plans so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are
compatible.
Planning Department Comment:
The Growth Management Act requires consistency between land use and
transportation planning. As noted, the Land Use Plan identifies the area of the rezone
for low density multifamily at 16 units per acre. The Public Works Department has
identified specific improvements, which will be necessary on South 228'Street and
88' Avenue South to serve subsequent development of the property. These
improvements include (but are not limited to)the dedication of property along South
228" Street and 88'Avenue South for right-of-way and paying a proportionate share
for the future improvements to South 228' Street and 88' Avenue South
B. Standards and Criteria for a Rezone Reouest
The following standards and criteria(Kent Zoning Code, Section 15.09.050) are used
by the Hearing Examiner and City Council to evaluate a request for a rezone. Such
an amendment shall only be granted if the City Council determines that the request
is consistent with these standards and criteria.
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Planning_Department Comment
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map designates the subject parcel as Low
Density Multifamily, allowing densities of up to 16 units per acre. The proposed
MRG zoning allows densities of up to 16 units per acre. Therefore the proposed
7
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA#9901685
rezone is consistent with the density range called for in the Land Use Plan Map for
the area. As mentioned earlier, the proposed rezone is also consistent with the
applicable goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be
compatible with development in the vicinity.
Planning Department Comment
The proposed rezone would not have a negative impact on existing development in
the vicinity. There are several multifamily developments located in the vicinity of
the subject area which are built to higher density than proposed in the rezone; the
Court of Flags apartment complex is located to the south and Chandler's Bay
apartment complex is located to the southeast. Development of the subject site to
medium density multifamily would be compatible with existing development in the
vicinity of the rezone.
3. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the
vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be
mitigated.
Planning Department Comment
As mentioned, it would be possible to create 80 units on the subject parcels under the
current zoning. There is the potential for additional lots to be created under the
proposed rezone (the applicant is currently proposing approximately 100 units). 88th
Avenue South is a substandard road with only a 30-foot right-of-way, and currently
no curbs or sidewalks. Conditions will be identified to mitigate impacts to the
transportation system for any subsequent development of the property. It is likely,
however, that these conditions would be similar for development activity under the
existing zoning.
4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the
current zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone.
Planning Department Comment
When this property was rezoned to MRG with conditions (#RZ-83-1) in 1983, the
density restrictions were based on the City's estimated projection for high density
development potential within the surrounding area. This projection resulted in a
concern for the ability to serve such development with sanitary sewer. Subsequently,
the area has developed less densely than originally projected. Re-evaluation of the
sewer service has shown potential development to MRG densities on the subject
8
Staff Report
Tonelli Rezone
#RZ-99-3 KIVA #9901685
parcels can be accommodated by the existing sewer service in the area. In addition,
it is appropriate to eliminate the condition of the original rezone which restricted
development according to a referenced site plan. Sensitive area regulations adopted
by the City since 1983 make it impossible to develop the site as shown on said site
plan.
In 1998, the adjacent parcels were rezoned from CM-1, Commercial Manufacturing,
to MRG, Multifamily Residential at 16 units per acre (#CPZ-98-5).
5. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general
welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
Planning Department Comment
The proposed rezone is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
Subsequent development on the site will have to meet applicable codes and
regulations, including mitigation of anticipated environmental impacts. Therefore,
the rezone proposal will not adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare
of the citizens of the City of Kent.
V. CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the merits of this request and the Code criteria for granting a rezone,the City
staff recommends APPROVAL of the Tonelli Rezone request.
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
September 29, 1999
S:permit\plan\report\9901685#RZ993rpt.doc
9
Sr
1 i
Re ` ECT RTr I
F `
OT 4 Ii.
S I
� II
-
i Lm II
,vv wa..,us —� _ e.,�r.r�.V s� �IIIY•'s �. _ ._-mom .an �Swwe��r
SITE PLAN
RSA
APPLICATION NAME: TONELLI #RZ-99-3/KIVA 99901685
REQUEST: REZONE REQUEST
VICINITY AND SITE PLAN MAP North
i
ORDINANCE NO. _
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, relating to Land Use and Zoning,
rezoning two parcels of property comprising of
approximately 12.19 acres, located at 22440— 881h Avenue
South, from MRG, Garden Density Multifamily with
contract density and design conditions, to MRG, Garden
_ Density Multifamily without conditions (Tonelli Rezone —
RZ-99-3).
WHEREAS, an application to rezone approximately 12.19 acres from the
i
current zoning of MRG, Garden Density Multifamily with contract density and design
conditions to MRG, Garden Density Multifamily without conditions, was filed on August
10, 1999; and
'I
WHEREAS, the City's SEPA responsible official issued a Determination
of Nonsignificance (DNS) with no conditions for the proposed rezone on September 9,
1999; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Tonelli Rezone was held before the
Hearing Examiner on October 6, 1999; and
1 Tonelli Rezone
WHEREAS, the Hearing Examiner issued findings that the Tonelli Rezone
is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed rezone and subsequent
development activity would be compatible with the development in the vicinity, that the
proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the
property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated, that circumstances
have changed since the establishment of the current zoning district to warrant the proposed
rezone, and that the proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general
welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent; and
I
WHEREAS, the findings are consistent with the standards for rezone set
forth in Sections 15.09.050(A)(3) and 15.09.050(C) of the Kent City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Kent Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the
Tonelli Rezone on October 11, 1999, as submitted by the applicant; and
i�
WHEREAS, the City Council moved to accept the findings of the Hearing
Examiner and the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for approval of the Tonelli Rezone
from MRG, Garden Density Multifamily with contract density and design conditions to
MRG, Garden Density Multifamily without conditions; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The property located at 22440 — 881h Avenue South, Kent,
Washington consisting of approximately 12.19 acres (parcel #1822059339 is 10.85 acres
i
and parcel #1822059319 is 1.34 acres), depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, is rezoned as follows:
2 Tonelli Rezone
Parcel numbers 1822059339 and 1822059319 located at 22440 — 881h Avenue
South, Kent, Washington, shall be rezoned from MRG, Garden Density Multifamily
with contract density and design conditions to MRG, Garden Density Multifamily
without conditions.
SECTION 2. Severability. If any one or more sections, sub-sections, or
sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain
in full force and effect.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
J iATTEST:
i
I
I
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
i
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
!I
3 Tonelli Rezone
PASSED day of , 1999.
APPROVED day of , 1999.
PUBLISHED day of 1999.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed
by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
I
I
I
I�
i�
'I
P?Civil\OrGN811GC\TonclliRaone.doc
I
�I
I
4 Tonelli Rezone
t i II
E�
goe I ii ! jj.
r 9U ECT RIY
1
L
I 1
1 t jl
. LOT
1 r
��...� SITE PLAN
ara
APPLICATION NAIME: TONELLI 4RZ-99-3/KIVA 99901685
REQUEST: REZONE REQUEST
CINITY ANC SITE PLAN MAP
North
/11
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 19 , 1999
Category Other Business
1 . SUBJECT: CORRECTIONS ARCHITECTURAL CONTRACT - AUTHORIZE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Renovations proposed at the Corrections
Facility involve replacing the HVAC system, ADA upgrades on the
showers, replacing domestic water piping, replacing the outdoor
canopy and steel chair lift at the recreation area, laundry
expansion, and an office addition. Architects BCRA were
unanimously selected by a Design Review Committee for design
services on this project .
The Parks Director requests authorization to enter into an
architectural and engineering agreement with Architects BCRS in
the amount of $196, 292 . 00 , plus Washington State Sales Tax for
design services on the remodel/renovation of the Corrections
Facility.
3 . EXHIBITS: BC proposal
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: si n Review Committee and Staff
(Committee, Sta f, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL ERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED- $196 , 292 . 00 , plus WSST
SOURCE OF FUNDS : CI
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
1
Councilmember moves, Councilmember ``X seconds
authorization to enter into an agreement with Architects BCRA
in the amount of $196, 292 . 00 , plus Washington State Sales Tax
for repairs and renovation to the Kent Corrections Facility.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 7C
City Of
Memo
1
To; Mayor White and City Council / r
From: Charlie Lindsey, Superintendent of Facilities Managemen NL{C
CC: John Hodgson, Director of Parks& Recreation
Date: 10/08/99
Re: Authorization to Enter Into Agreement
I am requesting authorization for the Mayor to sign a contract with Architects BCRA for design and
bidding of the renovations at the Corrections Facility authorized in the 1999 budget The attached
memo from Mike Hattrup outlines the scope of the project.
•Page 1
Interoffice Memo
Date: 10/7/99
To: Lindsey, Charles
cc: Hodgson, John
Frorrc Mike Hattrup
RE Corrections Facility Project
Charlie,
Here is a breakdown of the latest fee proposal from Architects BCRA for the Corrections Facility
project design. I recommend going before City Council to obtain their approval such that we the City of
Kent enter into an agreement with Architects BCRA for these design services.
Description Design Cost Construction Cost
Replacement of HVAC equipment 70,855 481,700
DDC controls 7,150 105,000
Shower Modifications 27,450 183,000
Domestic Water piping replacement 30,460 69,195
New Office Addition 39,460 195,000
Outdoor Canopy 10,750 84,500
Laundry Addition and modifications 7,657 43,700
Wheel Chair Lift in Outdoor Rec. Area 2,510 13,500
Pre Design
Total Cost w/o tax
Sub Totals 196,292 1,175,595 1,371,887
Washington State Sales Tax 101101.17
Total Cost w/tax
Final Totals 196,292 1,276,696 1,472,988
Mike. Hattrup
10I7KJ9 Confidential 1
10/7/99
Michael Hattrup
Capital Projects Coordinator
220 4'Ave. S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
RE: Revised Initial Proposed MACC, Estimate Breakdown and Design Fee for the
Modifications and Addition to the Kent Correctional Facility based on revised
scope of September 29, October 5 and October 6, 1999
Dear Mike,
The following is our revised Probable Estimated Construction Costs using the recently
developed scope of work as determined from our August 6`h meeting along with your
direction from our telephone conversations of September 15', 29 h'October 5 and October
6, 1999.
Listed below are the Probable Estimated Construction Cost breakdowns and their related
Probable Design Fees. Washington State Sales Tax and permitting fees are not included
in the figures for Probable Estimated Construction Costs.
Domestic water supply for the cell block area and other locations will be selectively
replaced. Minimal demolition will be required as a result of selective replacement of
piping. Please refer to the memorandum dated October 6, 1999 and the letter dated
August 10,1999 from Path Engineering for HVAC along with the plumbing design
assumptions which we attached to our previous estimate of August 12, 1999.
At your direction, we no longer include the increase of electrical service for new heating,
ventilation and air conditioning as part of the HVAC equipment replacement. After
consulting with Gene Wentworth of Cross Engineers, we have determined that this will
reduce, but not eliminate the scope of associated electrical work. New breakers, conduit
and wire as well as modification of the existing main switchboard has been included
serve the new units.
CF: Contingency Factor
• Replacement of HVAC Equipment:
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
$481,700.00 $70,855.00
Breakdown: 1) Structural penetrations and
2) curb modifications— 10
3) locations @
$2,500.00 each x 1.5CF Subtotal: $37,500.00
1
2) Seismic connections of Subtotal: $12,500.00
HVAC units— 10 locations @
$833.00 each x 1.5CF
3) New HVAC rooftop
equipment * Refer Path Eng.
Memo
Item #1 Subtotal: $ 375,000.00
Item 92 Subtotal: $20,000.00
4) Electrical support of HVAC Subtotal: $2,200.00
systems, metering for existing
panels
5) Modify existing Subtotal: $4,500.00
switchboard for new 14VAC
6) New electrical conduit, Subtotal: $30,000.00
wire, breakers, panels to
HVAC units
• DDC Tema. Controls
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
$105,000.00 $7,150.00
Breakdown: 1) New DDC Control System. * Refer Path Eng. Memo
Item 44 Subtotal: $105,000.00
• Shower Modifications
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
$183,000.00 $27,450.00
Breakdown: 1) Increase no. of showers at Subtotal: $132,000.00
cellblocks and dorms by 1
additional shower: construct
shower enclosure, depress slab
for new shower pan, gang
shower, stainless steel surround
over CMU walls. Convert 1
existing shower into ADA
shower.
2) Water service and shower
fittings to ADA showers.
Refer Path Eng. Memo
Item 95 Subtotal: $35,000.00
3) Electrical modifications
(lighting and power)
Subtotal: $16,000.00
2
• Domestic Water Piping Replacement:
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
$69,195.00 $30,460.00
Breakdown: 1) Coordination, repair wall Subtotal: $14,195.00
finishes, remove/patch GWB
ceiling, remove and replace
glued tile ceiling, remove/patch
plaster ceiling, cleanup.
2) Replace selected domestic Subtotal: $55,000.00
HW, CW, and HWH piping.
* Refer Path Eng. Memo, and
scope revision per 10/6/99
memo at owner request.
Item#6 Subtotal: $69,195.00
Outdoor Canopy:
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
$84,500.00 $10,750.00
Breakdown: 1) New 1,100 sf canopy @ Subtotal: $55,000.00
$40.00/sf x 1.25CF
2) New side security screen @ Subtotal: $15,000.00
$21.42/sf(4' high x 1401f)
x1.25CF
3) Fire sprinkler extension . * Refer Path Eng. Memo.
Item # 8 Subtotal: $7,500.00
4) New lighting system @ Subtotal: $7,000.00
$6.36/sf x 1100 sf
• Laundry Addition and Modifications:
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
43$ ,700.00 $7,657.00
Breakdown: 1) New 120 sf addition @ Subtotal: $18,800.00
$125.33/sfx 1.25CF
2) New (2)washers and (2) Subtotal: $18,000.00
dryers
3) New plumbing for washers. * Refer Path Eng. Memo
Item # 9 Subtotal: $10,000.00
_ 4) New electrical at laundry Subtotal: $1,200.00
addition
5) HVAC modifications Subtotal: $2,200.00
3
6) Site modifications Subtotal: $1,000.00
• Wheel Chair Lift in Outdoor Rec. Area:
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
$13,500.00 $2,510.00
Breakdown: 1) New wheel chair lift (lump Subtotal: $10,000.00
sum)
2) Electrical for Lift(lump Subtotal: $2,500.00
sum)
3) Modifications to guard rail Subtotal: $1,000.00
ADDITIVE ALTERNATE TO THE BASE CONTRACT
• New Office Addition:
Probable Estimated Construction Cost Probable Design Fee
$195,000.00 $39,460.00
Breakdown: 1) New 1,000 sf addition @ Subtotal: $150,000.00
$120.00/sfx 1.25CF
2) New skylight in hallway Subtotal: $20,000.00
(lump sum)
3) New HVAC system @ Subtotal: $10,000.00
$10.00/sf x 1,000 sf
4) Fire sprinkler extension @ Subtotal: $5,000.00
$5.00/sf x 1,000 sf
5) New Electrical System @ Subtotal: $10,000.00
$10.00/sfx 1,000 sf
It must be kept in mind that many assumptions have been made to arrive at these figures
and virtually no design other than very conceptual discussions have taken place. These
figures are a fair beginning point to start with. It will be necessary to refine the scope and
sequencing along with Probable Estimated Construction Cost as we get further into the
scoping and design phases. However, for the construction work as described above,
Architects BCRA•Tsang proposes the following total project design fees not to exceed
the basic project scope and alternate listed below. Included in the total design fees
proposed are our costs to date for pre-design work involved in estimating probable
construction costs in assistance to define the project scope:
4
Architects BCRA-Tsang:
TASK Principal Proj. Arch TOTAL
PRE DESIGN
Includes meetings with Owner, Site visits,
Design review, Design development, cost
estimates (with revisions)
Hours 40 61.5
Rate $105.00 $75.00
Hourly cost $4200.00 $4612.50 $8812.50
Path Engineers:
TASK Principal Proj. Arch TOTAL
PRE DESIGN
Includes meetings with Owner, Site visits,
Design review, Preliminary Engineering, cost
estimates (with revisions)
Hours 12 22.5
Rate $120.00 $95.00
Hourly cost $1440.00 $2137.50 $3577.50
TOTAL $12,390.00
Design fee proposed for basic scope described above not to exceed:
$156,832.00
Design fee proposed for basic scope plus alternate for New Office Addition, not to
exceed:
$196,292.00
We hope this information is adequate for your immediate needs and look forward to
working with the City of Kent on this project. Please contact us if you have any
questions
Respectfully
Paul Akiyama, Principal
Architects BCRA•Tsang
5
Interoffice Memo
Date: 10/7/99
To: Lindsey, Charles
Cc: Hodgson,John
From: Mike Hattrup
RE: Corrections Facility Project
Charlie,
Here is a breakdown of the latest fee proposal from Architects BCRA for the Corrections Facility
project design. 1 recommend going before City Council to obtain their approval such that we the City of
Kent enter into an agreement with Architects BCRA for these design services.
Description Design Cost Construction Cost
Replacement of HVAC equipment 70,855 481,700
DDC controls 7,150 105,000
Shower Modifications 27,450 183,000
Domestic Water piping replacement 30,460 69,195
New Office Addition 39,460 195,000
Outdoor Canopy 10,750 84,500
Laundry Addition and modifications 7,657 43,700
Wheel Chair Lift in Outdoor Rec. Area 2,510 13,500
Pre Design
Total Cost w/o tax
Sub Totals 196,292 1,175,595 1,371,887
Washington State Sales Tax 101101.17
Total Cost w/tax
Final Totals 196,292 1,276,696 1,472,988
Mike. Hattrup
10n199
REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE > 21
C. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
D. PUBLIC WORKS/PLANNING COMMITTEE
E. PARKS COMMITTEE
F. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
ll
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES
September 21, 1999
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Judy Woods, Sandy Amodt, Tim Clark
STAFF PRESENT: May Miller, Dena Laurent, Brent McFall, Becky Fowler, Sue Viseth, Jed
Aldridge, Chris Hills, Cliff Craig, Tom Brubaker, John Hillman, Marty Mulholland, Dea Drake,
Jackie Bicknell
The meeting was called to order by Chair Judy Woods at 3:28PM. A change was made to the agenda
to reverse the order of items 3 and 4.
Anproval of Minutes of August 17, 1999
Committee Member Tim Clark moved to approve the minutes of the August 17, 1999. The motion
was seconded by Committee Member Sandy Amodt and carried 3-0.
Approval of the Combined Check-Detail Vouchers dated September 15, 1999
Finance Director May Miller presented the combined check-detail vouchers dated September 15,
1999. Tim Clark moved to approve the vouchers. Sandy Amodt seconded the motion and it carried
3-0.
July Financial Report
May Miller said the General Fund Revenue graph on Page 7 of the July Financial Report shows that
overall revenue is still coming in a little under budget. The percentage and dollar amount shown at
the bottom of the graph is cumulative January through July, and right now it's 1% under budget
which is very close in a $50,000,000 budget. The significance of being 1% under budget is that last
year at this same time the City was S1,500,000 or 6% over budget. The budget is very conservative
and staff is budgeted at 100%. There are always some position vacancies which means there is
money for carry over every year, but this year it's a tighter situation without the usual amount of
carry over.
Property tax is very predictable and is collected at about 98-99% of the total tax. The following year
delinquent accounts are collected so every year the figures are very close on Property Tax. Sales
Tax, on Page 10, is a more volatile revenue source. August was better than July and was almost right
on budget. However, if it is looked at collectively, it is still 2%2 % under budget. That's the area
where over-collecting is planned because of budgeting very conservatively. On page 11, the
percentages are shown by category. Contracting is still holding as indicated by the building permits
and the strong activity there.
The areas that are really way behind in the budget are Wholesaling and Manufacturing. There are
two things causing the decline. In the past there were some big one-time-only electronic projects.
The City has tracked eight vendors and although it was predicted that there would be less one-time-
only projects, that is coming in even less than predicted. The other area is the Manufacturing
Exemption which can also be used by wholesalers if they are buying equipment that's going to be
used in manufacturing. When that exemption first started people could take it annually and didn't
even have to necessarily do it the first year. Now all of a sudden the manufacturing exemptions are
Operations Committee Minutes, 9/21/99 2
starting to show up. The state doesn't give a report that says who took the exemptions, so when —
revenue dips down for a month, it's fairly obvious that that one month is probably a one-time or even
a cumulative exemption.
Retail sales are still up, even though Internet sales might be competing, and are 13% over what they
were a year ago, but still 1-2% under budget. It's not that much but is still a concern and is being
closely watched, with even less one-time-only money being budgeted for next year with no increase.
Director of Operations Brent McFall said the data was comparisons of 1999 year-to-date with 1998
year-to-date. The City had already experienced declines in the wholesaling and manufacturing
collections in 1998, and this shows the compounding impacts which are greater now than they were
in 1998. 1998 was the first big year of impact with about $800,000 decline compared to 1997. So
it's still continuing to bear fruit in terms of its impacts on the General Fund Revenues. Ms. Miller
said there are no details for August sales yet except for the total number which is slightly under
budget.
The Utility Tax, shown on Page 12 is almost right on budget and running very close with some up
slightly and some down slightly. Building Permit activity was processed through the budget change
in July and revenue spread out in the Building Permit staffing and revenue forecast. That has been
added now and it looks like it's running around 9%z % under budget through July. The basis for that
was in January and February, which the graph shows was over budget those months. March was a
little under, but by April it was up again with the numbers looking sound. Then in May, June and
July it was under budget, so that revenue will be watched. Brent McFall pointed out that this revenue
is for building permit fees only and does not include zoning permits which fee schedule was revised
by Council within the last year. Ms. Miller said it is difficult to predict building permit activity as it
has always been very volatile. Mr. McFall added that one impact is that permit fees are based
primarily upon value of construction and there has been much more single family residential
construction now than in the past and not as much commercial and industrial. More permits are
being issued now than ever with a greater workload and more inspections, but the City is collecting
less permit fee revenue because it takes 100 houses to equal one industrial property.
Sandy Amodt asked how many acres of industrial property were still available in the City. Mr.
McFall said there wasn't much. Boeing is subdividing some of their excess property at the Space
Center which will bring some additional inventory onto the rolls, but there is not a lot of just vacant
developable industrial land. Most of the parcels that are left are encumbered in some way by
wetlands or being oddly shaped, etc. There are redevelopment activities going on which may add
some additional inventory of available land and the Horseshoe Acres Annexation will add a small
amount of inventory.
Ms. Miller continued that Recreation Fees, shown on Page 14, are over budget by about 91/2 %.
Page 15 shows Fines and Forfeitures which is revenue received from all the different tickets. That's
running 26% over budget, and includes the addition of probation revenue. Those both are on the
positive side and more than make up for what the Building Permit is short.
Page 17 shows an accumulation of all in the General Fund. Some revenues are over and some under. _
The adjustment column shows the City is up about $412,000 in revenue. However, usually it's up
about $1,500,000. The adjustment column supports the current hiring freeze. $900,000 is forecast
for 1999 to help achieve a stronger fund balance to go into next year with. Revenue numbers and
expenditure numbers are still being worked, but by the second meeting in October there should be a
lot better idea of what those numbers will be.
Operations Committee Minutes, 9/21/99 3
The Capital Improvement Fund, shown on Page 19, is suffering some of the same shortfall because of
the Sales Tax, but on the other side more land was sold this year resulting in a higher Real Estate
Excise Tax which more than makes up for the Sales Tax shortage. Revenue is about $1,000,000 over
in the CIP Fund from what had been expected. Half of that is from the second '/< % Real Estate
Excise Tax, half of which goes for park development and the other half into the CIP Fund.
The Golf Course Fund shown on page 16 was slightly better than in June. May had been 13% under
budget and June was 14%, but by July it was only 6.7% under budget. Even though July was a better
month, the cumulative figure of the totals from January through July is shown as being about 14.3%
under budget or $302,000. Normally August is the highest revenue month for the Golf Course, but
good weather can help extend that out into the fall.
The Self Insurance Fund on Page 22 shows the Workers Compensation Fund which was set up many
years ago. The rates have been kept the same without an increase since the fund was originally
established by using the interest, and monitoring claims. Every few years an Actuarial Study is done
which looks at the claims that have been filed but not yet paid. The study said that for future
protection, that accounting transaction needs to be increased with a higher fund balance. At this point
it looks like a S100,000 budget adjustment will be needed and the recommendation is to take that
amount out of the Fire Equipment Reserve Fund and increase the IBNR claims and bring that fund
balance back in line.
Risk Manager Chris Hills said there is a medical component to worker compensation and the costs of
medical treatment have gone up. There hasn't been an adjustment made for that to this point. In
addition there are more employees and consequently even if the claim rates stay the same there will
ultimately be more claims and so costs go up as a result of that. The Actuarial Study also
recommended a S400,000 reserve and to achieve that an increase in the level of contribution is
proposed so the City will be able to adequately cover future needs. Once that reserve is established,
the actuarial projections will be used for claim cost projections and money collection on an annual
basis. Ms. Miller said the fund balance will be $417,000 this year and $432,000 next year, and then
the reserve for claims that aren't yet filed will be increased to the level recommended by the study.
The Health Insurance Fund claims have gone up significantly. There have been a significant number
of simultaneous claims of a very serious nature with claims ranging $20,000, $40,000, and $80,000 in
one week. Becky Fowler, Benefits Manager, said claims are increasing significantly for everyone
and a lot of employers are finding medical claims to be in double digit figures. Drug costs have
increased 45% over last year, a lot of which has to do with the designer drugs on the market and a
push by the drug companies to get the new drugs out. Doctors also push them.
Ms. Fowler said the last time she looked at the claims for Blue Cross there were 18 large claims over
S30,000. In one claim in August, staff doesn't know who the person is because only the figures are
received, the City went through the stop loss coverage which is $100,000 individually on each
employee. Estates West is picking up the remaining balance of the claims from that individual. The
high utilization of claims right now is causing the first medical fund rate increase, which hasn't been
increased since 1992. The City is looking at a one-time-only increase this year and a 15% rate
increase for next year. The Health Insurance Fund also had an actuarial study performed and the
medical rates will be restructured after seeing how this year works out in costs.
Brent McFall said that over the years the self-funded medical coverage has saved the City a lot of
money and still continues to save a lot of money, but there have been a number of large claim
Operations Committee Minutes, 9/21/99 4
incidents in the last 1-2 years from covered dependents as well as employees. The City has talked for —
years about how healthy it is, but it has an aging work force as the baby boomers move through the
system and that impacts the claims as well. Also, over the last four years there has been a 76%
increase in employees.
Ms. Miller said that the actuarial study recommended an increase on the accounting side of the entry
by a significant amount that would give protection in the potentiality that the City would go out of
business. On the cash side the recommendation is to take a$300,000 one-time-only adjustment from
the Fire Equipment Fund that will be needed to pay the actual claims process through the end of
December. Then next year a 15% rate increase would be established and 15% the year after that, if
needed once the trend of actual claims, health insurance, prescriptions, etc. is known. Ms. Miller said
that Sue Viseth, Director of Employee Services, will be meeting with the unions to look at co-pays
and the health of the insurance policy and fund.
The Liability Insurance Fund is also self-insured and those rates have been held the same for years
with the City maintaining quite a healthy fund balance. Employee Service and its Risk Management
policies have really helped in that regard. The goal had always been to get it over a million and it
looks like it will be S1,400,000 at the end of this year and possibly up to S1,600,000 next year. The
City's Property Insurance is a stop-gap self insurance for small vehicles up to $25,000, and is
maintaining fine with a $71,000 fund balance. The Fire Equipment Fund had built a fund balance to
a million dollars before purchase of a piece of equipment this year. About $400,000 a year is put into
that fund with Kent being one of the only cities that pre-funds fire equipment. Fire Chief Norm
Angelo looked at some of the vehicles that were going to be replaced and recommended that a couple of them be moved to a future bond issue and not be funded out of the Fire Equipment Fund. He has
one piece of equipment purchase planned for this year for$146,000. Some equipment has been
repaired and the life extended out longer. By not replacing one of those big pieces of equipment,
money is saved and the fund balance builds significantly.
If the $400,000 is taken from the Fire Equipment Fund, that would still leave a very significant fund
balance. Some of that money may actually have to be used to help bring the operating budget into
balance. Ms. Miller said a serious question to ask is at what point can the City afford to pre-fund
capital at the risk of cutting employees and services, and does Kent need to do what other cities do
and bond for huge pieces of equipment such as fire trucks.
The Vacancy Page on Page 18 of the report shows that as of the end of July there were 48 positions
vacant in the General Fund and another 24 in other funds for a total of 72 vacant positions. Some of
those positions were filled in August but others have become vacant since then. The hiring freeze
was established towards the end of August. Brent McFall said the freeze is not a solid freeze, but sort
of a rolling freeze, that will try to keep between 35 and 45 positions open at any given time for the
General Fund which is pretty consistent with City practices. There will always be a certain amount
of turnover and a certain percentage of work force positions vacant when the total number of full time
employees is around 780. The hiring freeze was instituted in order to take a very judicious look at
the open positions, stretch some of them out and fill on the priority of need. By keeping some
positions open for a little longer periods of time the City can get through what should be a temporary
situation with respect to the sales tax receipts.
May Miller said that one month salaries of the 48 vacant positions in the General Fund equal
$225,000. Any time that many positions can be kept open for just one month as opposed to even two
Operations Committee Minutes, 9/21/99 5
weeks, that helps build cash to make up for the short fall in sales tax and helps keep the General Fund
sound and the City moving forward.
Budget Adjustment Ordinance
Brent McFall said staff will be presenting the Mayor's Proposed Year 2000 Budget in the next month
and this adjustment is housekeeping for 1999 to get it out of the way so as not to distract from the
Year 2000 Budget. May Miller explained that a total overall summary shows the whole City budget
with $135,000,000 worth of carryover capital projects. This adjustment ordinance of$29,000,000 is
fairly small considering the overall city budget. Almost all of the adjustment is in Street Capital
projects and other capital projects. Twice a year all the budget changes are combined that have been
approved all year long, and put in one summary document. Even though the budget ordinance is
$49,000,000, $46,000,000 has already been approved at previous Council meeting.
There were a few internal transfers in Corrections that had not been approved by Council.
Sometimes funds get put in the wrong project and a lot of the adjustments are correcting in nature.
Those corrections amount to S2,216,000 that have not been seen before. The Firefighters Fitness
Fund was missed for $2,900. A cargo van was approved and was to be funded out of a LID, but the
LID closed before the van could be purchased so the money needs to be put back in the Street Fund.
A $10,000 Corrections Facility program, The Goals to Recovery, that helps people with drug
addiction and funded from the Criminal Justice Program was missed. $18.200 for police
investigation equipment called Latent Light Source was approved last year but got missed when the
budget was put together.
Golf course merchandise sales right now are going over budget. There is actually an additional
$150,000 in revenue in which the City just turns around and pays it back out to the contractor. To be
able to do that, the budget needs to be increased both on the revenue side and the expenditure side.
The $400,000 transfer out of the Fire Fitness Fund, $100,000 to workers comp and $300,000 to
health is included. There were also some miscellaneous corrections and an amendment to the City
code that makes the Council's salaries in compliance with state minimum wage as they are currently
out of compliance.
Tim Clark asked about the $7,700,000 grouping under Central Services on Page 2 of the Ordinance.
Ms. Miller said that was the proceeds of the technology bond sale for$7,568,000 which was
approved by Council on February 2, 1999, plus one new position that was approved by Council on
June 15, 1999. Brent McFall said Information Services and Facilities are funded by charging back
the user departments, but when the bonds were sold, the bond portion of the technology plan which
brought $6,000,000 into the Central Services Fund, wasn't in the budget. Ms. Miller said the figure
also included some Police and Fire radios and the City generators.
Sandy Amodt asked for an explanation of the $150,000 additional revenue and payment to the
contractor for the golf course merchandise revenue. Ms. Miller explained that the way the contract
reads, the City pays 100% of merchandise sales to the contractor which is coming in over budget, so
the City will be required to write out a voucher and pay 100% of the merchandise sales. To be in
compliance for the state auditor the revenue side and the expenditure side needs to be increased by
even amounts. Brent McFall added that even though the City has a general contractor at the golf
course, SSMD, Nevada Bob's is like a sub contractor for merchandising. All of the sales, whether its
greens fees, range balls, or merchandise, are sales of the City of Kent and so the revenue comes into
the City who then has to pay it back out to the contractor. In this case 100% of the merchandise sales
Operations Committee Minutes, 9/21/99 6
goes back to the contractor. The contractor collects it, gives it to the City and the City pays it back.The merchandise sales were greater than anticipated so the budget needs to be adjusted to reflect that.
Tim Clark moved to approve the necessary code amendment and budget adjustment ordinance
for adjustments made from January 1, 1999 through August 31, 1999 totaling $49,234,432.
Sandy Amodt seconded the motion which carried 3-0.
Sandy Amodt asked if Kent was the largest industrial area west of the mountains. Mr. McFall said he
believed it was between Kent and Everett. Everett has been impacted significantly by the
manufacturing sales tax exemption and has been very active in leading the charge and trying to get
the rules clarified, and legislatively they have been a great partner with Kent on the matter. Out of
the five cities, Kent, Everett, Renton, Auburn, and Redmond, with major manufacturing and
wholesaling business, it appears that Kent is being hit the hardest. Redmond is impacted by a
different exemption, but the impact is about the same for all except that Kent is experiencing an
increasing decline while the others are holding steady at their initial decline of a year ago.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:19PM.
Jackie Bicknell
City Council Secretary
PUBLIC WORKS/PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
September 20, 1999
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Tim Clark, Tom Brotherton, Rico Yingling
STAFF PRESENT: Don Wickstrom, Roger Lubovich, Larry Webb, Bob Holt, Jackie Bicknell,
Connie Epperly, Tom Brubaker, Sandy Amodt, Ed Crawford, Cyndi Wilbur
PUBLIC PRESENT: Jim and Elsy Rust, Michael Browder, Charlie Kiefer
The meeting was called to order by Chair Tim Clark at 4:12PM. There were five items added to the
agenda: Citizen Comments from Charlie Kiefer, Adult Retail Moratorium Extension, Billboard
Moratorium Extension, Crosswalk at 5`h and Gowe, Interactive Electronic Signs.
Chair Clark gave the order of presentation as:
1. Approval of Minutes
2. Citizen Comments from Charlie Kiefer
3. Closure of 256`h at 291h St.
4. Pedestrian & Vehicular Crossing at Novak & Central Streets
5. Adult Retail Moratorium Second Renewal—Resolution
6. Billboard Moratorium Renewal,
7. Crosswalk at 51h and Gowe
S. Interactive Electronic Signs.
Approval of Minutes of August 16, 1999
Committee Member Tom Brotherton moved to approve the minutes of August 16, 1999. The motion
was seconded by Tim Clark and carried 2-0.
Citizen Comments from Charlie Kiefer
Charlie Kiefer, 27319 11o`h Avenue, said he had two items to present. The first issue involved a
resolution the City passed on April 21, 1998 regarding the Track X Closure, the road reversal in
support of the new corridor. He asked if the City could put the agreements necessary for finalization
of that issue on a fast track. Tim Clark said if he remembered right, the City was changing a through
road into a cul de sac, and Mr. Kiefer's property would then be fronted out the backside. Mr. Kiefer
said he would vacate access to the new corridor and go in and out to the north. He is waiting on the
City for finalization and was told someone was working on it, but he hadn't seen any results. The
issue is clouding some of the titles to the properties there and if he wanted to move or refinance his
home, he wouldn't have legal access to his property, nor would his neighbors to theirs.
The other item Mr. Kiefer brought to the Committee regarded the trespassing of the City for the last
two months on his property during construction of the new corridor. He said he is meeting tomorrow
with City staff and they are close to working out a deal. He had asked for the meeting to get
everybody together that had been working on the issue so the details could be worked out. Mr.
Kiefer wants a written agreement from the City regarding the trespass issue and compensation for the
trespass. He said he had presented a list of what he thought was fair to Public Works Director Don
Wickstrom last week and there was a tentative agreement between them. One compensation asked
for was an evergreen planting along the embankment where the new retaining wall is being built.
The 200 foot embankment will slope up to the sidewalk and road, and in lieu of the street trees that
were going to be planted, Mr. Kiefer had requested a different type. However, after some research,
he found that the suggested plantings are not on the City street tree list. He asked that the Committee
Public Works/Planning Committee, 9/20/99 3
Mr. Browder suggested putting in speed bumps and said he would welcome more police presence.
Even though it may be expensive to put an officer there, the overall cost to the community would be
less than to close off the corridor. He said a lot of the complaints came from 291h Place between 256`h
and 259`h, and a barricade on 256`h would not solve their traffic problem. The traffic there is coming
from Pacific Highway from the north end of Fred Meyer and down 256`h and making a right turn into
the Pacific Point or Appian Way apartments. A barricade would not curtail that traffic,
most of which is taking a short cut to avoid the light at 2591h and Pacific Highway, and to get either to
Reith Road or Military Way using that route. Mr. Browder said there should be a lot more research
done before making a rash decision to close the road as it would affect property values.
Lieutenant Bob Holt, Kent Police Department and administrative liaison between the Police
Department and the West Hill where the subject area is located, said the individuals that live in the
apartment complexes, the 4-plexes, and the school district have not been heard from. Another
observation is that a gate would not allow a school bus to drive through to access the area and would
have to drop kids off in another location. Lieutenant Holt said the accidents where vehicles have
ended up in yards along that one intersection were previous to the stop signs going up. The stop
signs have helped to slow down traffic. The proposed gate would not eliminate neighborhood traffic
going through there at a high rate of speed, and from a police perspective it wouldn't solve the
complete problem. Also, from a police perspective all sides need to be heard and everything
explored before a decision is made.
Rico Yingling asked Lieutenant Holt if he had talked to the neighbors or people that live in the
apartment complexes. Lieutenant Holt said he had spoken with the management, but had not talked
to the individual residents of the apartments. He had talked with the neighbors that live on 29`h
Street. The apartment managers don't want a gate. The people that live on 29`h in the neighborhood
east of the apartments do want a gate.
Tom Brotherton asked if other options had been explored like traffic circles on the street to see if that
would solve the speeding problems. Connie Epperly said 29th street isn't wide enough to do
anything like that, and people park on the street because they have really short driveways and there
are no sidewalks on either side.
Rico Yingling asked if the problem was just a high speed traffic problem or if there were other
concerns as well. Connie Epperly said it was just the traffic problem. From 2561h to 259`h it's like a
drag strip and there are no places to put traffic lights. The road slopes down and where it becomes a
flat surface it's a complete blind. If a car is coming down at a high rate of speed and runs the stop
sign (which even the school busses have done), and somebody is crossing the street, there will be an
accident. There are a lot of seniors that live in the neighborhood that have been there for a long time
and their general understanding was that the road would never be opened. Their frustration is that
they feel they were promised one thing and something completely different has happened.
Fire Marshall Larry Webb said that when the area belonged to King County,jersey barriers blocked
the street. Gates and chains have been tried in similar situations, but if the tenants don't want them
they disappear. Residents cut the lock or chain, hook a four-wheel drive up to the gate and pull it
over. The Fire Department can cut a chain gate for access, but would need a cul de sac for
turnaround. Mr. Webb said he had a concern with garbage trucks, school busses, and other
unknowns that would be driving down the road, backing up or getting trapped down there. Connie
Epperly said the garbage trucks have two separate days for pick-up. One day they service all the
apartments and another day they go straight up 29`h from 259`h to 252nd
Public Works/Planning Committee, 9/20/99 4
Rico Yingling asked if the issue had been through the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program. Don
Wickstrom, Public Works Director, said the issue had not been through that program which would
involve getting support from at least a 60% majority of the property owners in order to take any
action.
Tim Clark summarized the choices the Committee could take: 1. Install the barrier. 2. Refer it to the
Traffic Improvement Control Program. 3. Refer it back to Committee with further information
gathered.
Rico Yingling suggested sending the issue to the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program. Mr. Clark
commented that the City is in the process of making some restructuring within Public Works to
accommodate the problem of growth and its encroachment on the current quality of life. He said he
did not want to leave the citizens hanging with the idea that the City was not concerned or aware of
the problem or that nothing would be done. Mr. Yingling gave a reminder that quick action had been
taken in similar situations because that was what the Committee had thought a neighborhood wanted,
but it didn't solve the problem and actually annoyed more people than it helped. He felt fairly quick
action could still be taken and the issue given a high priority in the Neighborhood Traffic Control
Program.
Tim Clark said he would take that comment as a motion from Mr. Yingling and reiterated the
motion as: refer the issue to the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program. He seconded the
discussion. Tom Brotherton created a friendly amendment to move action on the issue to the
second stage. He explained that the first stage is where an analysis of the area is done and a passive `
solution proposal given that would include stop signs or additional enforcement or education with a
wait period to gather information to see if the action was working. Mr. Brotherton said using the
Neighborhood Traffic Control Program is appropriate, but since the issue had been on the table quite
some time and the Committee had received a petition signed by a majority of the residents along 29`h,
that it should be moved to the second stage instead of going with the passive items that would be the
first stage. He summarized that there is already a known problem, enforcement has been tried, signs
have been tried, and there is still a problem, so moving it along to identifying an enduring solution to
slowing the traffic is the best thing to do. Rico Yingling said he would like an update at the very
earliest date possible on what had been done or what future action would be taken. The motion was
voted on and carried 3-0.
Pedestrian and Vehicular Crossing at Novak and Central
Tom Brotherton said a new multiple family dwelling on Central Avenue and Novak Street has
created a crosswalk safety issue. Novak is a short, dead-end street that goes into the subdivision.
People have to cross Central to catch the bus going north. Also, there are services, restaurants, and
small stores across the street and the concern is that people are going to be crossing without a
crosswalk. Central is on a curve there and traffic is very busy and going at high speeds. The plan is
to put in a crosswalk with a traffic light in a year or so, but the concern now is that in the interim
there would be a safety hazard for pedestrians and cars at that point. He asked for an analysis of the
road and a judgement as to whether anything could be done in the interim before the actual light and
crossing is put in place to reduce the possibility of accidents. Perhaps the only thing needed would be _
educating the people about the nature of traffic and a crosswalk at that area and working with the
owner of that property to educate his tenants.
Don Wickstrom said the City is working on formation of a LID to install a signal at the intersection,
but between the LID process and the signal construction process, it would probably be a year or more
Public Works/Planning Committee, 9/20/99 5
before the signal would be operational. Forming the LID has been given priority status and staff is
talking to one of the property owners and it appears the owner will support the LID. Mr. Wickstrom
said crosswalks oftentimes give a false sense of protection. A yellow flasher could be put up that
would hang across the road and say `Crosswalk'. That probably would cost $10-15,000. Tom
Brotherton asked about the possibility of installing a light ahead that would warn pedestrians that
there was possible traffic, or tabs on the road or a rumble strip to get their attention. Mr. Wickstrom
said staff would need time to research what could be done and would come back to the next meeting
with possible options.
Adult Retail Moratorium.
City Attorney Roger Lubovich said the current moratorium on adult retail establishments expires
October 29`h. The purpose of the extension is to allow Council sufficient time to consider proposed
code amendments that are currently pending before the Land Use and Planning Board relating to
adult retail establishments. The extension is for six months, but would expire when the ordinance
took effect. There must be a public hearing on the moratorium renewal.
Tom Brotherton moved to recommend passage of the proposed Resolution renewing the
moratorium relating to adult retail establishments and to forward the resolution to the full
Council for a hearing at its October 5, 1999 meeting. The motion was seconded by Rico
Yingling and carried 3-0.
Billboard Moratorium Renewal
Roger Lubovich said this is the first renewal for the Billboard Moratorium which will expire October
17, 1999. The purpose of the proposed Resolution is to renew the moratorium for an additional six
months to allow Council sufficient time to thoroughly analyze all the information gathered and to
consider proposed code amendments relating to billboards.
Rico Yingling moved to recommend passage of the proposed Resolution renewing the
moratorium relating to billboards and to forward the resolution to the full Council for a
hearing at its October 5, 1999 meeting. The motion was seconded by Tom Brotherton and
carried 3-0.
Crosswalk at 5`n Avenue South and Gowe Street
Councilmember Sandy Amodt addressed the Committee on the need for a crosswalk at Gowe Street
and 5`h Avenue South. The seniors who live in the three apartment complexes close to Gowe Street
and 5`h Avenue South, Webster Court, Titus Court, and Gowe Court asked for a meeting in May to
discuss the crosswalk issue. About 20 people came to the meeting at which a request was given for a
crosswalk on Gowe Street leading over to the Chamber of Commerce area. There are many reasons
the seniors want a crosswalk there, not the least of which is a small grocery store that will be going
in. That's something the seniors have been waiting for in downtown Kent for quite some time as
they will no longer have to walk all the way over to Safeway. They utilize that area for crossing and
will continue to do so regardless of whether there's a crosswalk or not, but they asked Ms. Amodt to
check into the potential for getting a crosswalk there with stop signs. A church of about 400 people
is going into the nearby school and it will be using that section of street to access the small grocery
store on Sundays and Wednesday nights.
Joanne Johansen, apartment manager at Webster Court, circulated a petition to the three apartment
complexes. Currently there are 85 signatures and another packet that has been misplaced will add
more signatures when found.
Public Works/Planning Committee, 9/20/99 6
Ms. Amodt said she is asking Public Works to look into whether a crosswalk is feasible. She did
some research and found another crosswalk on Smith Street that is in the identical type of situation
but is even closer to the curve in the road. There have been no incidences of anyone being hit on that
crosswalk and Smith Street has approximately three times as much traffic and is a four-lane street.
Gowe is a two-lane street.
Don Wickstrom said he had just received the petition and had given it to his traffic people to see what
the implications were. At this point there has been no response. Tom Brotherton asked how long it
would take to get a response back. Mr. Wickstrom said he would assume it would a month or longer.
He reiterated that crosswalks can give a feeling of protection and oftentimes the pedestrian is safer
without the crosswalk because they're more cautious of what's happening.
Interactive Electronic Signs
Tim Clark said that interactive electronic signs are a distraction to drivers. A primary example of
such a sign is the one off of I-5 at Fife on the Indian Reservation land. The question is whether staff
has been given direction to go forward on reviewing the standards for such signs and their potential
placement. The issue would go before the Land Use and Planning Board.
Roger Lubovich said the recently adopted ordinance addresses street use right of way, but this issue
deals particularly with the Zoning Code and signs on private property. Tim Clark said it was
important to get the appropriate and defining legal language of the signs to allow the Law
Department to specifically address the issue. Rico Yingling asked if the tri-panel signs would be
included in the review. Mr. Clark said this issue would strictly address the electronic signs such as
the big one on I-5.
Tom Brotherton moved to request Administration to initiate a research project and review
possible restrictions of Interactive Electronic Signs, defined as being like the one on I-5 at Fife,
as part of the Zoning Code review that's in progress now. Rico Yingling seconded the motion
and it carried 3-0.
Tim Clark asked for Rico Yingling's concurrence on approval of the minutes for August 16`h. Mr.
Yingling concurred with the approval of the minutes to make it a 3-0 vote.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:05PM.
Jackie Bicknell
City Council Secretary
REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
EXECUTIVE SESSION