Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 02/15/2000 i I City of Kent CityCouncil Meeting Agenda CITY OF I Mayor Jim White Counci/members Leona Orr, President Sandy Amodt Connie Epperly Tom Brotherton Judy Woods i Tim Clark Rico Yingling February 15, 2000 Office of the City Clerk 1 I i CITY OF aMT2-ji404T R. SUMMARY AGENDA r KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING a . February 15, 2000 Mayor Jim White Council Chambers 7 : 00 p.m. MAYOR: Jim White COUNCILMEMBERS : Leona Orr, President Sandy Amodt Tom Brotherton Tim Clark Connie Epperly Judy Woods Rico Yingling 1 . CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 2 . ROLL CALL 3 . CHANGES TO AGENDA A. FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF B. FROM THE PUBLIC 4 . PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A. Proclamation - Help the Homeless Day B. Proclamation - Black History Week C. Russell Road Park Award 5 . PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Street Vacation, S . 196th at 58th Avenue South 6 . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes - Approval B. Bills - Approval C. Arbor Village Bill of Sale - Accept t'� U3 D. Wellhead Protection Program - Resolution E. Seattle/King County Health Department Grant Agreement - Accept and Establish Budget F. Bureau of Justice Administration Ballistic Vest Grant - Accept G. Chancellor Park Division 1 Final Plat - Accept H. FEMA Grant for Community Emergency Response Team - Accept I . Purchase of Smith & Loveless Package Pump Station - Approve J. Transportation Improvement Board Grant - Authorize and Establish Budget K. Rhododendron Estates Final Plat - Approve 7 . OTHER BUSINESS d' A. 1999 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments f ee�J 6. CP-n+ehA1a1 Buifdin9 Cus+vd;af Senrr;«s 8 . BIDS None (continued next page) t I SUMMARY AGENDA CONTINUED 9 . REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF 10 . REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES 11 . CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS 12 EXECUTIVE SESSION None 13 . ADJOURNMENT rl 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 . 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 r PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A) PROCLAMATION — HELP THE HOMELESS DAY B) PROCLAMATION — BLACK HISTORY WEEK ��el9nit4. If C) RUSSELL ROAD PARK AWARD CITY OF r Jim White, Mayor jW Planning Department (253)856-5454/FAX(253)856-6454 James P. Hands, Planning Director MEMORANDUM February 3, 2000 TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND KENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: KATHERIN JOHNSON, HUMAN SERVICES MANAGER RE: HELP THE HOMELESS DAY IN KENT Recently Mayor White received a letter from a young man named Tyler Warren. Tyler is 8 years old and a 2nd Grade student at Star Lake Elementary. Tyler expressed his concern for the homeless and wanted to find a way to help. r , The Human Services Commission invited Tyler to attend the January meeting. Tyler outlined his concerns and reinforced his belief that there should be a special day to help the homeless. In order to acknowledge Tyler's efforts, the Human Services Commission requested that Mayor White proclaim Tuesday, February 29d' as Help the Homeless Day in the City of Kent. City Offices, police stations and fire stations will serve as drop off points for any donations. Human Service staff will ensure that donations are distributed to agencies providing assistance to homeless individuals and families in Kent. Tyler will be available to accept the Proclamation on February 15th and would like to briefly address Mayor White and members of the City Council. Attached you will find a copy of Tyler's letter, as well as a letter from his father Terry Warren. If you have any questions, please contact me at 856-5470. cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director John Jendresen, Human Services Commission Chair Judy Bennett, Human Services Planner P:humanserv/19992000Commisslon/Correspondence/rylerWarmnMayorCouncilMemo.doc 220 4th AVE.SO.. /KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (253)856-5200 V/-J-zz ',a o, f CZ,r� rr lo re iOrtc� LGI l L ; 'lL Q 1 �Lb �y I _ 8 LAW OFFICES OF SANDONA, ORDINARTSEV & SMITH , P . L . L . C . 921 INDUSTRY DR. , BLDG 27 STE 921 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 PHONE: (206) -575-9081 FAX: (206) 5 7 5-6 3 4 9 December 30, 1999 To Whom it May 'Concern: Enclosed is a idea and letter that my 8 year old son came up with and wanted to do something about it. This is the reascn for sending you the enclosed letter, we also will be sending copies to school districts around the area, and among others . If you have any questions our home address is 3643 So . 261" ST. Kent, Washington 98102 . Myself I can be contacted at 206-575-9081 (office) or 253-854-5697 after 6 P .M. Thank you for your t_me. Sincerely, Terry T. Warren M X/41 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Public Hearings 1 . SUBJECT: STREET VACATION, S . 196TH AT 58TH AVENUE SOUTH - STV-99-7 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Resolution No. 1561 established February 15, 2000, as the public hearing date for the application by Lincoln Distribution Center, to vacate a portion of S . 196th Street . A staff report recommending approval with conditions is included in the Council ' s packet . 3 . EXHIBITS: Staff report and map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 3 A. Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to close the public hearing. B. Councilmember moves, Councilm mber seconds to approve the Plan ing Director' s recom- mendation of approval with conditions of the application to vacate a portion of 196th Street, as referenced in Resolution No. 1561, and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance upon compliance with the conditions of approval . DISCUSSION: ACTION: m C Council Agenda Item No. 5A CITY OFJS�J rNytQTA Jim White, Mayor Planning Department (253)856-54541FAX(253) 856-6454 James P. Hams, Planning Director PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM February 15, 2000 MEMO TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION TO VACATE A PORTION OF SOUTH 196"' STREET - STV-99-7 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS I. Name of Armlicant i Lincoln Distribution Center c/o CB Richard Ellis 16400 Southcenter Parkway, #100 Seattle, WA 98188 (206) 394-8662 II. Reason for Requesting Vacation The applicant states that a, "Portion of land is available after 196' Street improvements in front of Lincoln Distribution Center. The owner is interested in acquiring this property for the safety of trucks ingress and egress and turning radius into parking lots." III. Backeround The 200'"/196"/192nd Street Corridor right-of-way was realigned in front of the Southcenter Corporate Park's lots 10 and 11. This street vacation is being pursued to vacate a remnant of South 196' Street in front of lots 10 and 11 (occupied by Lincoln Distribution Center) that resulted from the realignment. 2204th AVE. SO.. /KENT. WASHINGTON 9802-589$/TELEPHONE (233)856-5200 Street Vacation — STV-99-7 Page 2 IV. Staff Recommendation After reviewing comments from the following departments and agencies: • Public Works • Police • Fire • Puget Sound Energy and conducting our own review, the Planning Department recommends that the request to vacate a portion of South 196 Street as mentioned in Resolution 1561 and shown on the accompanying map, be Approved with the following conditions: 1. The City shall be monetarily compensated for the value of the right-of-way proposed to be vacated in accordance with State laiw. 2. The City shall retain easement rights for utility purposes in, upon, over and under the entire property to be vacated for it's utilities and/or other public or private utilities and/or facilities which presently exit at the time of approval of this vacation. In r ,, addition, the City shall retain the right to(grant said easement rights to other public, private, or quasi private entities which presently have utilities and/or facilities in, upon, over and under said proposed property to be vacated. 3 The applicant shall relocate the existing fire hydrant, currently located within the existing frontage adjacent to lot 10, block 6, Southcenter Corporate Park Subdivision and within the existing frontage of South 196'Street, to a site approved by the Public Works Department. 4. The applicant shall pay all costs of the fire hydrant relocation and said relocation shall be in accordance with the City of Kent Construction Standards. 1PH/mj p:P/j im-lv stv99.7.doc cc: Fred S. Sattersnom,Planning Manager Enclosures PROPOSED STREET VACATION 1 - STV-99-7 PART OF SOUTH 196TH STREET z NOT TO SCALE COO O , r G L � z I O BZnO Aw. So Ie I i� 1111�41 CONSENT CALENDAR 6 . City Council Action: Councilmember V Ll moves, Councilmember �U`4 seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through K be approved. 6 �J-X-kr &JI Discussion Action 6A. Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of February 1, 2000 . 6B. Approval of Bills . Approval of payment of the bills received through January 31 and paid on January 31, 2000, after auditing by the Operations Committee on February 1, 2000 . Approval of checks issued for vouchers : Date Check Numbers Amount 1/31/00 229618-229848 $ 659, 703 . 04 1/31/00 229849-230326 2 , 852 , 585 .24 $3, 512 , 288 .28 Approval of checks issued for the payroll of January 31 and paid on February 4 , 2000 : Date Check Numbers Amount 2/4/00 Checks 241562-241889 $ 267, 690 . 71 2/4/00 Advices 90738-91380 859, 130 .20 $1, 126, 820 . 91 Council Agenda Item No. 6 A-B Kent, Washington February 1, 2000 The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7 : 00 p.m. by Mayor White . Present : Councilmembers Amodt, Brotherton, Clark, Epperly, Orr and Yingling, Operations Director McFall , City Attorney Lubovich, Fire Chief Angelo, Police Chief Crawford, Public Works Director Wickstrom, Finance Director Miller and Parks Director Hodgson, Councilmember Woods was excused from the meeting. Approximately 75 people were in attendance . CHANGES TO Councilmember Orr added Consent Calendar Item 6L, THE AGENDA the City Attorney added potential litigation to the executive session, and citizens requested the addition of development near Lake Fenwick, the S . 228th corridor project, and the storm drainage rate increase . PUBLIC State of the City Address. Mayor White stated COMMUNICATIONS that Kent is a better, stronger, more vibrant city than ever before, noting progress in the park system, improvements in the transportation system, a lowered crime rate, an upgrade in the credit r rating, and efficient, high quality services . He said that 2000 will be a year of accomplishment including the 196th and 277th corridors, improve- ments on SE 256th, Phase One of the Sounder Commuter Rail Station, numerous park improvement projects, the development of a Civic and Performing Arts Center, and construction of a parking garage. He also spoke of growing the local economy and making progress in the imple- mentation of technology, and thanked the Council and staff for their support . Introduction of Appointee. The Mayor introduced Scott Manthey, his appointee to the Kent Arts Commission, and noted that Mr: Manthey' s photography had been on display in the gallery in January. Groundhog Job Shadow Day. Mayor White read a proclamation noting that Groundhog Job Shadow Day is an opportunity for students to spend one day shadowing professionals from all walks of life in an effort to see how the skills learned in school are put into action in the workplace . He pro- claimed February 2 , 2000 as Groundhog Shadow Day Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 PUBLIC in the City of Kent and encouraged local COMMUNICATIONS businesses to get involved in the program. Colleen Nelson, Principal of Kent Junior High accepted the proclamation, explained that Amanda Wilson had job shadowed the Mayor today, and thanked the Mayor ' s Office for their support . Chamber of Commerce Week. The Mayor read a pro- clamation noting that Chambers of Commerce have served their local communities with distinction and dedication, enhancing the state ' s economy and improving the quality of life for its citizens, and proclaimed February 9-16, 2000 as Chamber of Commerce Week in the City of Kent . Barbara Ivanov, Chamber Director, accepted the proclama- tion and expressed thanks on behalf of the 750 members of the Kent Chamber. Award to Police Department. Connie Epperly, Chair of the Public Safety Committee, noted that the Kent Police Department was recently called upon to assist in the World Trade organization situation in Seattle . She presented an award to Sgt . Brian Jones in appreciation of the outstanding job they have done . Sgt . Jones expressed thanks for this recognition on behalf of the men and women of the Police Department . GFOA Award. Mayor White announced that the City of Kent has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association, which he presented to Cliff Craig of the Finance Department . Finance Director Miller noted that this is a national award, and commended Craig and his staff for their work on the budget . Employee of the Month. Mayor White announced that Marion Taylor of the Police Department has been selected Employee of the Month for February. He noted that she exceeds in handling all tasks in the Corrections Facility Office, and demonstrates genuine kindness and empathy during family visits ,1 with inmates . Police Chief Crawford said that Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 PUBLIC Ms . Taylor always has a smile and follows the Kent COMMUNICATIONS Cares motto. CONSENT ORR MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through L CALENDAR be approved. Clark seconded and the motion carried. MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6A) Avvroval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of January 18, 2000 . PUBLIC WORKS (ADDED ITEM) Develozment Near Lake Fenwick. Charles Crust, 26530 Lake Fenwick Road South, brought up the subject of the Lakeview Ridge development . Deputy City Attorney Brubaker explained that two separate hearings on this matter have been held before the Hearing Examiner and that a final decision has been issued. Crust said he is here to appeal to the Council, and it was clarified that the route of appeal would be to Superior Court . There was no objection from the Council to hearing Mr. Crust ' s comments . Crust distributed a packet of information, spoke in opposition to the development, and presented a petition signed by residents of the area. He explained the history of the area and voiced concern about the amount of septics on the lake, degradation of future ground- water, landslides, septic inspections, control of storm water runoff, costs of street improvements, and the fairness of the DNS appeal process . He asked the Council to deny the building permits . Joe Rupp, 26504 Lake Fenwick Road South, said he wants the Lake Fenwick Basin to be ecologically protected. Ms . Morgan, 4628 Kent Court , voiced concern about danger to turtles, bald eagles, and trees in the area. Mollie Warner, 26724 51st Place, spoke against the development, noting the runoff which occurs after development . Bill haric , 26605 Lake Fenwick Road, said he feels the drain field will not hold up. Bonnie Tanner, 26420 Lake Fenwick Road South, said the aerator in /- the lake is not doing the job and that the lake is no longer pristine, and said she is opposed to the z Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 PUBLIC WORKS development . Becky Friar, 26412 Lake Fenwick Road, voiced concern about runoff, partying at the lake, and pollution, and said the development will ruin the ecological system of the lake . ORR MOVED to make the material received a part of the public record. Epperly seconded and the motion carried. Upon Orr' s question, Lubovich explained the procedures for development issues and noted that the Council has no authority to intervene in the process, except by establishing different regula- tions . He agreed to research this project and respond to Councilmembers . McFall noted that the City has no plans to extend sewer service into the area, as the cost to do so would be prohibitive . HEALTH & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6G) SANITATION Extended Stay America (84th Avenue South) Bill Of Sale. ACCEPT the Bill of Sale for Extended Stay America submitted by Dan Sterns, Director of Extended Stay America for continuous operation 1 and maintenance of 981 feet of watermain improve- ments, 165 feet of sewer main, 427 feet of street improvements and 159 feet of storm sewer and release of bonds after the expiration period, as recommended by the Public Works Director. The project is located at S . 224th Street and 84th Avenue South. (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6H) Falkner Short Plat Bill Of Sale. ACCEPT the Bill of Sale for Falkner Short Plat submitted by Baseline Engineering Inc . for continuous operation and maintenance of 461 feet of sanitary sewer improvements and release of bonds after the expiration period, as recommended by the Public Works Director. The project is located at 22225 93rd Avenue South. TRAFFIC (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6E) 1999 Traffic Strinina Contract. ACCEPT the 1999 Traffic Striping contract as complete and release retainage to Stripe Rite upon standard releases ..� from the State and release of any liens, as Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 TRAFFIC recommended by the Public Works Director. The original contract amount was $62 , 575 . 60 . The final construction cost was $52 , 579 .30 . (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6F) Traffic Interconnects Contract (116th-152nd) . ACCEPT the Traffic Interconnects contract (116th - 152nd) as complete and release retainage to Transtech Electric upon standard releases from the State and release of any liens, as recommended by the Public Works Director. The original contract amount was $33 , 860 . 00 . The final construction cost was $33 , 216 . 00 . STREET (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6C) VACATION Street Vacation 132nd at 272nd ADOPTION of Ordinance No. 3502 vacating a portion of 272nd Street, a dedicated opened street lying generally west of that street ' s intersection with Kent- Kangley Road and 132nd Avenue S .E. TRANSPORTATION (ADDED ITEM) S. 228th Street Corridor. Valerie Ensor, 5207 S . 232 Street, voiced concern about the S . 228th Street corridor which is proposed to go up the hill and meet up with Military Road. Mayor White explained that the City is currently looking at the Environmental Impact Statement on that project . Ensor said this would be a big disruption to the area, and she would like the road diverted. She was advised to speak with the Public Works Director. STORM (ADDED ITEM) DRAINAGE Storm Drainage Rate Increase. Elroy Nicaise, 27532 156th Avenue SE, said his storm drainage rate is three times what it was last year. Mayor White explained that the fees are dedicated to solving flooding in newly annexed areas, and noted that when the residents were in unincorporated King County the storm drainage fees were higher than the new Kent fees. Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 PARKING (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6K) Alpine Vista Parking Survey. DIRECT the Public Works Department to restrict parking in the Alpine Vista area during weekends only, between the hours of 12 : 00 Noon and 8 : 00 p .m. from May 15th to September 15th; and, authorize the Parks Department to apply additional restrictions for special events when appropriate, as recom- mended by the Public Works Committee . At the end of a one year trial period the Public Works Department will report to Council on the effec- tiveness of said restrictions . CONSERVATION (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6I) Ecology Coordinated Prevention Grant. AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign the Dept of Ecology Coordinated Prevention Grant (CPG) agreement, direct staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for same, as recommended by the Public Works Committee . The agreement is effec- tive through December 31, 2001 and specifies the responsibility of the City in working towards the expansion of existing programs as well as the implementation of new waste reduction, recycling programs and education. These programs are administered by the Public Works Department Conservation Specialist . ZONING CODE (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 5A) AMENDMENTS Off-Premises Siang Zoning Code Amendment ZCA-99-2 . At the January 18, 2000 City Council meeting, the Council considered three proposals to amend the off-premises sign regulations . The Council moved to table the matter to this meeting and to forward Proposal 3 for a public hearing. City Attorney Lubovich explained the differences between the ordinance provided in the agenda packet and the Land Use and Planning Board' s version, noting that the changes have been highlighted. He explained and recommended staff amendments to the off-premises sign ordinance affecting Sections 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (2) , 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (6) , and Section 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (8) . Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 ZONING CODE It was agreed that these minor changes would be AMENDMENTS part of the motion. Mayor White opened the public hearing. Yingling noted that there are two amendments which have not been discussed. Lubovich summarized the amend- ments, noting that one (Brotherton' s) is to clarify the language on rotating or moving signs, allowing only tri-vision panels and requiring that they be located in industrial zoning. He said the other two motions (Clark' s amendment) relate to 1, 000 ' setbacks on east-west corridors located within the City of Kent, and dealing with annexation of County areas and restricting the signs which are added to the inventory. Chris Ripley, 26804 102nd Avenue SE, spoke in opposition to allowing more billboard space . Margaret Knight, representing the Make-A-Wish Foundation, 107 Cherry Street, Seattle, read a letter acknowledging the important role which billboard advertising plays in their business and urged the Council to review the ordinance . Janet Brown, representing the Education and Training Center of Green River Community College, 841 N. Central, distributed and read a letter in opposi- tion to the comprehensive revision to the off- premise sign code which was recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board, as it will hinder their ability to communication with the local market . She urged the Council to support the more moderate counterproposal . Steve Spangler, read a letter from Steve West of the Steve West Group which was sent to James Harris of the Planning Department supporting outdoor advertising in the area and noting that it is difficult for small business owners to compete with large multi- location businesses . The letter also said that the limited advertising budgets of small businesses normally do not allow the use of electronic medium, that they are constantly looking for a cost efficient way to reach only potential customers in their local trading area, and commending LaMar Advertising. Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 ZONING CODE Roberta Gunn, Development Director for NW Harvest, AMENDMENTS Seattle, stated that they provide services to the local area and that billboards get their message out to those who need help and those who want to help . She emphasized that media is donated to NW Harvest and that they could not afford that type of advertising. She said they support the current proposal before the Council . John Ness, J & K Media Consulting, Kent, said that if the place- ment of billboards within major thoroughfares and streets with a high level of traffic is restricted, companies may have to accommodate that by an increased number of sites to maintain the level of reach in the market . He added that outdoor advertising provides an affordable opportunity for small advertisers to be competi- tive within their specific areas . Keith Warnack, Director of Public Relations for the Puget Sound Blood Center, said that outdoor advertising campaigns are the most effective way to get their message across . He asked the Council to accept the new amendment which will allow AK Media NW to continue their support of non-profit agencies . Lance D. Sevier, General Manager of Bobcat Northwest, provided a letter dated May 26, 1999, showing how successful their outdoor advertising campaign was. He said he supports the revision to the sign code. Mary Anderson, 25838 68th Avenue South, urged the Council not to let last-minute pressure by tonight ' s speakers change their decision, and to consider both sides . Frank Podany, President of AK Media NW, distributed a letter and said that the code provisions before Council do not allow any larger signs . He also noted that the more restrictive in terms of open area, the less opportunity there is to relocate signs . Podany emphasized that even national corporations on a billboard promote a product available in the City of Kent . He added that they have been working with King County for some time to bring existing billboards back into safety compliance . He concluded by saying that the proposed ordinance is fair. 8 Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 ZONING CODE There were no further comments and ORR MOVED to AMENDMENTS close the public hearing. Clark seconded and the motion carried. ORR MOVED to make the information presented tonight a part of the public record. Clark seconded and the motion carried. CLARK MOVED to adopt Ordinance No. 3501 which amends the off-premise signs zoning code, as amended by the City Attorney regarding technical amendments . Brotherton seconded. Yingling explained that the ordinance limits the numbers of sign structures in the City and gives incentive for the industry to move them to acceptable areas . He noted that it changes the back of a signboard into a space for a sign face, adding profitability to the structure . Brotherton said he supports the basic motion in that it provides for businesses to be more profitable, supports economic development, and provides incentives to move billboards into M zones . BROTHERTON noted that there are no standards for some rotating parts on signs, and MOVED TO AMEND Section 2 of the proposed ordinance by amending the second sentence of KCC 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (3) (d) entitled "Double-faced Signs" to read as follows : "The use of tri-vision panels on a sign face shall not in itself constitute additional sign faces" ; amend KCC 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (5) entitled "Rotating and/or Moving Parts" in its entirety to read as follows : 115 . Tri-vision Panels . Subject to applicable permitting requirements, the allowable faces on off-premises sign structures listed on the official City of Kent off-premise sign inventory may contain tri-vision panels which rotate, subject to KCC 15 . 06 . 030 (E) . Tri-vision panels are the only type of moving parts authorized on off-premises signs and such signs may only be located in an M1, M2 or M3 zoning district" ; and further amend 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (6) entitled "Unpermitted Signs" by replacing the words "rotating or moving parts" in this subsection with the words "tri-vision panels" . 9 Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 ZONING CODE Clark seconded. Yingling agreed with the moving AMENDMENTS parts issue, but not with allowing tri-vision signs only in industrial zones . The motion as amended then failed with Brotherton, Clark and Orr in favor and Amodt, Epperly and Yingling opposed. CLARK MOVED to amend Section 2 of the ordinance by amending Section 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (2) of the code on page 4 by adding a new sentence between the sentence ending with "zoning district" and the sentence beginning with "the owner" as follows : "No off-premises sign may be located within 1 , 000 feet of the rights of way of the following corridors : 180th, 192nd/196th, 212th/Orilla Road/ 226th/228th, James, Willis/516 and the 272nd/277th Street corridors . " Epperly seconded. Clark said the original intent was to protect those areas which are raised roadways going across the valley floor, and that his proposal would protect the public vista for Kent ' s citizens . Yingling and Orr opined that the proposal goes too far, and the motion to amend failed with only Clark in favor. CLARK MOVED to amend Section 2 as follows : As unincorporated areas are annexed to the City of Kent, the total number of off-premises sign structures legally in existence in the area annexed on the effective date of the ordinance enacting this provision will constitute additions to the number of off-premises signs authorized in the city and shall be added to the inventory and be eligible to be relocated as provided for in this section; signs legally installed after the effective date of the above noted ordinance shall be legal non-conforming uses which shall be removed by their owners at the end of ten years from said date . Epperly seconded. Clark explained that this is to prevent the prolifera- tion of signs, and said the issue is whether the unincorporated areas of King County bring their signs with them when annexed to the city. The motion to amend failed with Clark and Epperly in favor and Amodt, Brotherton, Orr and Yingling ., opposed. Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 .ram, ZONING CODE BROTHERTON MOVED to amend Section 2 of the AMENDMENTS proposed ordinance by amending the second sentence of KCC 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (3) (d) entitled "Double-faced Signs" to read as follows : "The use of tri-vision panels on a sign face shall not in itself constitute additional sign faces" ; amend KCC 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (5) entitled "Rotating and/or Moving Parts" in its entirety to read as follows : 115 . Tri-vision Panels. Subject to applicable permitting requirements, the allowable faces on off-premises sign structures listed on the official City of Kent off-premise sign inventory may contain tri-vision panels which rotate, subject to KCC15 . 06 . 030 (E) . Tri-vision panels are the only type of moving parts authorized on off- premises signs" ; and further amend KCC 15 . 06 . 040 (R) (6) entitled "Unpermitted Signs" by replacing the words "rotating or moving parts" in this subsection with the words "tri-vision panels" . It was clarified that the words "and such signs may only be located in an M1, M2 or M3 zoning district" were removed from No. 5 . Yingling seconded. The motion to amend carried. The motion to adopt Ordinance No. 3501 as amended then carried with Clark opposed. APPOINTMENTS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6J) Kent Arts Commission Appointment. CONFIRMATION of the Mayor' s appointment of Scott Manthey to serve as a member of the Kent Arts Commission. Mr. Manthey is a Kent resident with a long time interest in the arts. He has worked in pottery, fine scale models and fine woodworking but has found photography to be most satisfying. His interest in photography began 18 years ago. He enjoyed spending time outdoors mountain biking, golfing and hiking and was so impressed with the beautiful scenery he decided to capture it on film. He will replace Don Jensen and his new term will continue until 10/31/03 . 11 Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 COUNCIL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6L) (ADDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT ORR) Excused Absence. APPROVAL of an excused absence from tonight ' s meeting for Councilmember Woods, who is unable to attend due to illness . PARKS & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6D) RECREATION Kronisch Park Easement To U S West. APPROVAL of an easement to U S West and approval of payment of $1, 500 and miscellaneous improvements by U S West for the same. U S West has requested an easement at Kronisch Park for a cabinet located on a sidewalk, which would block access through the park. U S West has offered to pay $1, 500 for the easement, to relocate the sidewalk, and make miscellaneous improvements to the park. (BIDS - ITEM 8A) Downtown Campus Standby Generator Facility Project. The project consists of installing an emergency generator, an automatic transfer switch, associated conduit, wiring, and housing for the emergency generator. The bid opening on January 20, 2000 resulted in six bids . Stouder General Construction was the lowest bidder at $598 , 378 , which is under the Engineers estimate of $674 , 000 . The Parks Director recommends contracting with Stouder General Construction for $598, 378, plus WSST to install an emergency generator and housing for the downtown campus . YINGLING MOVED to enter into an agreement with Stouder General Construction to install the emergency generators and housing at City Hall for $598, 378, plus Washington State Sales Tax and declare intent to bond and reimburse with bond proceeds . Orr seconded. Hodgson clarified that this system is for the City Hall Campus Centennial Center, and Police Department . The motion carried. ,.,1 Kent City Council Minutes February 1 , 2000 FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6B) Approval of Bills . APPROVAL of payment of the bills received through January 14 and paid on January 14 , 2000 , after approval by the Operations Committee Chair. Approval of checks issued for vouchers : Date Check Numbers Amount 1/13/00 229028-229239 $1 , 038 , 167 . 76 1/14/00 229240-229617 1 , 975 , 757 . 90 $3 , 013 , 925 . 66 Approval of checks issued for payroll for January 15 through and paid on January 15, 2000 : Date Check Numbers Amount 1/15/00 241167-241542 $ 334 , 134 .46 1/15/00 89846-90608 1 , 034 , 775 . 19 $1, 368 , 909 . 65 Approval of checks issued for pavroll for November 30 , 1999 and paid on January 21, 2000 : Date Check Numbers Amount 1/21/00 241543-241561 $ 23 , 751 . 78 1/21/00 90609-90737 187 , 200 . 14 $ 210, 951 . 92 REPORTS Council President. Orr reminded Councilmembers that the Suburban Cities meeting will be held on February 16 in Newcastle . Operations Committee. Yingling noted that the next meeting is at 4 : 00 p.m. on February 15 . Public Safety Committee. Epperly noted that the next meeting is at 5 : 00 p.m. on February 8 . Public Works Committee. Clark noted that King County will hold a meeting to receive public input on cuts regarding Metro routes 176, 187, 188 and 903 at the Federal Way Library, 848 S . 320th, on Friday, February 25, from 3 : 30 to 5 : 00, with a backup meeting from 6 : 30 to 8 : 00 . 13 Kent City Council Minutes February 1, 2000 REPORTS Clark noted that the Public Works Committee will hold their regular meeting 4 : 00 p.m. on February 7 . Planning Committee. Brotherton noted that the committee will meet at 5 : 00 p.m. on February 7 . EXECUTIVE At 9 : 05 p.m. , the meeting recessed to an executive SESSION session of approximately 20 minutes to discuss property negotiations and potential litigation. The meeting reconvened at 9 : 35 p.m. Riverbend EPPERLY MOVED to authorize the Mayor to finalize Golf Complex negotiations and to enter into a lease agreement with Nevada Bob' s for the purpose of selling golf merchandise at Riverbend Golf Complex, to finalize negotiations and to enter a lease agreement with Public Golf Management, Inc . , to provide food service and beverage service at the 18-hole club- house restaurant at Riverbend Golf Complex, and to finalize negotiations and enter into a golf management agreement with Public Golf Management, Inc . , to provide golf management and food and beverage services at the Par Three driving range and the mini-putt-putt facilities at Riverbend Golf Complex. Orr seconded and the motion carried with Amodt opposed. Firefighting EPPERLY MOVED to authorize the City Attorney to Vehicles commence all legal actions necessary to pursue claims against BME and any other contributing parties for the recovery of funds paid for the purchase of two defective firefighting vehicles purchased from BME. Yingling seconded and the motion carried. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9 : 38 p.m. Brenda Jacoberr CMC City Clerk � e Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: ARBOR VILLAGE BILL OF SALE - ACCEPT 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works Director, accept the Bill of Sale for Arbor Village submitted by Olympus Assisted Living, LLC for continuous operation and maintenance of 560 feet of watermain improvements, 360 feet of 6" sanitary sewer, 400 feet of 8" sanitary sewer, 486 feet of street improvements and 402 feet of storm sewer and release of bonds after the expiration period. The project is located at 11427 SE 240th Street . 3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNELIMPACT:. NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6C HN 2 •,': 86 j�R/vV t1�A� lJd QV 66, gy11D 8E .. �E2J s kL 3 ss a2sA yW „^..._EE]2i.eA.'. _ aS - �„T_ Ir; n, W 3.3k PL 88125 QLo .�. .1L.T✓ ai5 dry'_-4 '�' \A ^� a :-. p " NORTH a82]e C�Te.. 15 3, ;m OQ p4g { BE]2B BT 8 2 ��"—_._._.. -- f n(u T ]5 PL NBRIDIAN �' L- W 1 b c R -A 2&,L Ba�25.Zg1 ' V..........w ., - •t ^ ``Yt •'66 c I 9r n1 J JVa . ( .., BB � y9v Bpi I Jv,.�4 �519.�_. ..,.ay9.R729,pL_ PARK • , o, m�..2A3 flT 233a ;y6 ?�3iaTrR p �I ' ,a$324._PL ea 23o as1,»o"TrnLp �a o 8E i]1 eT Ag e}31gT� r: ■ 13 .v G 8232ST \ mi 88331� ]i -231aT I _BBAl7PLp ARr ... y a 6'S'' yfa 1 cT6 J •i`233PL SR234jji ......... 235BT ,Dy4 235AT aa34i lJ0.E0.µxOµ 1� 1..� F Ia00t ry1"x -i------- '1749F�= J 1 8823 8 J5 PL 0 ` ........... . .. .._�....-. BS 375 BTT v 1 _ __ ......y .. 23 PL all 37 .... ~ _ - ��igSpT � � "` o € _ "'° '"_�• `'�; PROJECT LOCATION „p m rvI a?)9Y m 7--;a vicer orrice .� � : off mV � �4 ,. r rm IB34C BT I tl� ! 1 tl W " y 2 e WlOK m' a QZ�y aT��; wT�ILL aemrsAar la 4i. t'/ W CT TN Ri �....:.....f... �.. n m S WM b •m M W tl m 6 a A43.R lo m,. .. ,___. �� C3ISltClilt�a8 /""• 244 CT c e1244 BS �p / \ SPARK e §245 PL J;RARRLLL ■ ~ c OANIHL IPDLIC51 N .• 1247 CT -g.247 FL NNW"wTRIL4 bAM'' HLLf41rtAAY eTAS! 7. . Of n _IATIK.. 1i P eMDa . m ,1 of _ 245P w 8.1 A • i{ e.� .....T,. .{i YL �_.35.I,g 1y`151 If VU -.c 0 cAFmub PMA m n 2ae e?$2 m 'Cd �..._ y ...... rI■.o® y r..c Pw1 ...I W a;53.aF _ �53 aT "�:��]53 LT tm 8 .............. ... a ...........e.......... a '�?dflT ~°N y iry ' y+r ®F �3 `R z 9�I IIWIOOL f M ..\ '� 2L5°S W 'n6�_ '� °�` m .... �........... ` '., b........ ,..' .. ' n WI I r...,,,. 8 256 PL '• .. BEDS 254.P HAPLH AT t l m i.........:'. .........✓ MAR.Al M r T c•"AT .. m eceR c i [ ::... ......... 4� +� n _254 a 25 RILL j ' 54 ^ \ i n ■ v '�' bevex° \94]64.P�, aef tY MIAMIVI"z".n O 6C■IICAILL G63RRMY V <-,rLLU�B tl Hg4 ,.. BTf} �{pW -_ �Ly m 4SF AAM b OS2,Q7/ 'M"-_ TfRAMePVARR a�r[am ]�- ' W m \ � HE 36@��� ARBOR VILLAGE - Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: WELLHEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM - RESOLUTION 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public works Committee, passage of Resolution No. , adopting and establishing the Wellhead Protection Program. [NOTE TO COUNCIL: Because of this document ' s length, staff has not attached Exhibit A to the resolution in the Council packet . However, the Clerk has one copy on file for public review, and a separate copy has been delivered to the Council office for your review. ] 3 . EXHIBITS: Resolution and memo 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds r DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6D DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 1, 2000 TO: Public Works Committee / FROM: Don Wickstrom C2- GU_ RE: Wellhead Protection Program At the January 24"' ' Committee meeting, the Wellhead Protection Program was presented as an information item for your review and comments. Bill Wolinski, Environmental Engineering Manager, will be in attendance to discuss any areas of this program where you may have concerns or further questions. We are requesting that the Wellhead Protection Program be moved forward to full Council for adoption. MOTION: Recommend authorization for Council to adopt a Resolution establishing the Wellhead Protection Program. mp%%ellheud I DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS )anuary 3, 2000 TO: Public Works/Planning Committee FROM: Don Wickstron�—�j —�� RE: Kent Wellhead Protection Plan This item is presented at this time as an information item only to allow the Committee time for review and comment prior to full Council presentation. Bill Wolinski, our Environmental Engineering Supervisor, will be in attendance to present the plan to you for your review and discussion. As mandated by the 1986 amendments to the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the Washington State Drinking Water Regulations (WAC 246-290-135), the Public Works Department has created a Wellhead Protection Program for some of Kent's drinking water sources. Working jointly with Covington Water District and ling County Water District #111, the City delineated the Soos Creek Basin Wellhead Protection Area. Kent's aquifer re-charge area for Clark, Kent and Armstrong Springs exists almost entirely outside our City limits, within the jurisdictions of unincorporated King County, Black Diamond, and the newly incorporated cities of Covington and Maple Valley. To ensure protection of our groundwater resources staff will be using the Wellhead Protection Plan to work with these jurisdictions in the development of policy to ensure that a high quality drinking water source will be available for future use. Proper management of the groundwater is a regional issue and will require multi-jurisdictional cooperation. Adoption of the Kent Wellhead Protection Plan will provide support for the protection of Kent's drinking water sources, proving Kent is a proactive natural resource management leader in the region. MP7799 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, adopting a Wellhead Protection Program to assist with the protection and preservation of the City of Kent's drinking water sources. WHEREAS, the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the Washington State Drinking Water regulations mandate that the City of Kent create a Wellhead Protection Program to preserve and protect the City of Kent's drinking water source; and WHEREAS, the City has delineated the Soos Creek Basin Wellhead Protection Area in cooperation with the Covington Water District and King County Water District No. 111; and WHEREAS, Kent's aquifer re-charge area for its main water sources, the Clark, Kent, and Armstrong Springs, exist almost entirely outside Kent city limits, mainly with the jurisdictions of unincorporated King County, Black Diamond, and the newly incorporated cities of Covington and Maple Valley; and WHEREAS, the Wellhead Protection Plan is designed to ensure protection of our ground water resources through cooperation with these jurisdictions in order to develop a policy that will ensure a high quality drinking water source for future use; NOW THEREFORE, 1 Wellhead Protection Program THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals set forth in this Resolution are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2. Wellhead Protection Program Adopted. The City of Kent Wellhead Protection Program, attached and incorporated as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, is hereby adopted. SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution is declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. SECTION 4. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage. PASSED at a regular open public meeting by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, this day of 2000. CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the City of Kent this day of , 2000. JIM WHITE,MAYOR 2 Wellhead Protection Program ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY I hereby certify that this is al true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, the day of 12000. BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK P�Civin0.ecoWtionWellheWhonnioMry.Erc 3 Wellhead Protection Program Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: SEATTLE/KING COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT GRANT AGREEMENT - ACCEPT AND ESTABLISH BUDGET 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works Committee, authorization for the Mayor to sign the Seattle/King County Health Dept Grant Agreement, direct staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for $40, 370 . This grants provides for two city-wide Household Hazardous Waste Collection and Recycling Events. 3 . EXHIBITS: Grant Agreement 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) S . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds i DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6E DEPART;�IENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 7, 2000 TO: Public WorI Com ittee FROM: Don Wicicstroy RE: Seattle/King County Health Dept Grant Agreement Hazardous Waste Collection Contract #22059D — AM#5 Thy Public Works Department has received an Agreement for funding from Seattle/ICng County Health Dept for two city-wide Household Hazardous Waste Collection and Recycling Events. These special events allow citizens to recycle specific items which are not included within the curbside recycling program. The total budgeted funding under this Agreement is $40,370, MOTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign the Gram iA,reeinent, direct staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for 540,370. EXHIBIT I D 2 2 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON THE LOCAL HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR 2000 ACTIVITIES -his Memorandum cf Understanding between the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health and the City c_ Kent specifies the administrative procedures and monetary reimbursement regarding implementation of the Local Hazardous Waste Management Program. Scone of Work The City of Kent will organize two city-wide Household Hazardous waste Collection and Recycling Events . At these events the following materials will be collected and recycled: lead acid batteries , antifreeze, all petroleum-based products/oil filters and automobile tires . The City will produce and distribute an !PM guide . Reporting Requirements The City shall submit progress reports to the Department with each payment request . Payment requests must be submitted within r 60 days after the completion of the event involved. Budget Attached hereto as "BUDGET/INVOICE" and incorporated herein . We, the undersigned, agree to the above work : RING COUNTY: CITY OF KENT : Ron Sims Date Jim White Date King County Executive Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE OFFICE OF THE KING COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY T EXHIBIT I-A 3UDGET/INVOICE The City of Kent 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent , WA 98032-5895 Steve Burke, Health & Environmental Investigator Seattle-King County Department of Public Health 999 3`" Avenue, Suite 700 Seattle, WA 98104-4039 Period of time : January 1, 2000 to December 31 , 2000 . In performance of an Agreement between the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health and the City of Kent, I hereby certify that the following expenses were incurred during the above mentioned period of time . The Department Program Monitor will have access to details as needed. Signature Date Component Budget Expenses Balance HHW Collection: Local Program Grants $26 , 370 HW Education Public Info/Outreach $14 , 000 Total $40, 370 For Department Use Only D22059D Approved for payment : ti Steve Burke Date Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: BUREAU OF JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION BALLISTIC VEST GRANT - ACCEPT 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the Bureau of Justice Administration Ballistic Vest Grant Funding and establish a budget . Kent Police Department has received notification from the BJA that the grant application has been approved for funding. The grant authorizes 50% reimbursement for the costs of ballistic vests during the period of 3/99 through 9/2003 for a total of $41, 695 . 16 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo to Public Safety Committee 1/20/00 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee (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. 6F Kent Police Department To: Public Safety Committee From: Mary Ann Kern,Admin Services Support Manager via Chief Subject: Bureau of Justice Administration Ballistic Vest Grant Acceptance Date: 1/20/00 I This memo is to obtain council acceptance of the BJA Ballistic Vest Grant. The Police Department has received notification from the Bureau of Justice Assistance that our grant application has been approved for funding. The grant authorizes 50% reimbursement for the costs of our ballistic vests during the period of 3/99 through 9/2003 for a total of S41,695.16. Because of the manner in which we must first purchase the vests as their replacements are needed and because the funding is allocated at 50% of the cost, this project did not fit into a normal stand-alone project. Therefore, Finance has advised us to receive the reimbursements into the general fund revenue in the patrol organization, with the BJA revenue funding source number. Finance has made this recommendation with the suggestion that we advise council that we will revisit our patrol uniform budget later in 2000. This will be to determine whether a budget adjustment needs to be requested to cover our expenditures in the appropriate line item for uniform purchases. If a request to increase our budget is submitted, it would not be any greater than the revenue received from this grant. Thank vou. U:1Uxrdaa\Word DxnnusblaaWatic vet pub safety memo.dx 0U20/008:at PM M.Kem Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: CHANCELLOR PARK DIVISION I FINAL PLAT FSU-99-8 (KIVA #9902850) - ACCEPT 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve the staff ' s recommendation of approval with conditions the Chancellor Park Division I Final Plat and authorize the Mayor to sign the final plat mylar. The Chancellor Park Division I Final Plat is 6 . 26 acres in size and is located on the southern margin of SE 240th Street between 128th Avenue SE and 132nd Avenue SE. King County approved the preliminary subdivision under Ordinance No. 12371 on April 22, 1996 . This subdivision was transferred to Kent by King County upon the annexation of the Meridian Valley area. City staff have reviewed the proposed final plat and finds that it complies with the conditions imposed by King County Ordinance No. 12371 and File No. L94P0014 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo, K.C. Ordinance No. 12371; June 12, 1996 King County Hearing Examiner revised report and recommendation to the King County Council; June 7, 1996 King County Hearing Examiner report and recommendation to the King County Council regarding the decision on zoning variance (File Nos. L94P0014 & L95VA016) ; May 30, 1996 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner (File Nos. L94P0014 and L95VA016) , and map. 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6G CITY OF L�LL�Jr� '14 /� rrovrcTA Jim White, Mayor Planning Department (253) 854-5454/ ax > > - James P. Harris, Planning Director MEMORANDUM February 15, 2000 TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CHANCELLOR PARK DIVISION I FINAL PLAT #FSU-99-8 (KIVA #9902850) On April 22, 1996, King County approved Ordinance No. 12371 accepting the King r County Hearing Examiner's approval of the Chancellor Park Division I Final Plat County File No. L94P0014. Chancellor Park is a 6.26 acre, 32-lot residential plat. Upon annexation to the City of Kent, the preliminary plat came under Kent's jurisdiction. The property is located on the southern margin of SE 2401h Street between 128`h Avenue SE and 132"d Avenue SE. Staff recommends the City Council approve the Final Plat #FSU-99-8 with conditions referenced in the King County Hearing Examiner's report (File No. L94P0014) and as adopted by the King County Council under Ordinance No. 12371. JPH\mj p\fsu998fp.doc Enclosure cc: Fred S. Satterstrom. Planning Manager 220 ath AVE.SO.. /KENT.WASHINGTON 99M-3595/TELEPHONE (253)8565200 E. 2407N ST_N a v' r N .,1 ` t�.f•..{' :..\.,..;'�.� 1 — — - ,-� 'S'P RNT �• IK1[ANp I I �PCDCSMAA, AMU , \, RAC .,l' D RO[T[R ..—' to S.[. 1AO1M $1 _ Non. I-o ep• wCRANO runt°AN rA L CONSUl4xr I_ — a IS', V. '-LJ ' k NCIuBCPL ON10/0)/9A. I O .1 Cv 2 A[RnN:r[[ocArloN a�"I '_ '•.21, ._. •2 .... I — COC-vI SAC P[OIA NNICH C RILNI M wAI , NA Ic.C.SIC Oe 4w. •� _ \ — ��C' NLMC[RML aIAM ,+„TRACT ? .•.• R[da[w R .65 13 9NITCR I. lrI NI I 40.00' 1 I•.TFAC P=•fmp G.F- —& • eR aeao� roI 1.'„r 25 .. 25 5 .14 w y I IZZ:� _ S.• 'aC TRACT F,^, d 1. s 28 1J - y •'12 I e'.31 'JO • .29 .0 .. 10 .'ee-39'la' N 'I I'8 . TRACT w!U S.J �'., `132 '1/ (MIRW rqN fOq CU55 p ' >:1 {1 SIRCAY RCCOCARON) - - -� F- - -II�I �; , . I AIICP1/A1C[OCATI CVl-0 -SAC RRl' [LS1M[S — �KxdAON![ O141u[0 oun Cu6w[[Rrxt -- ------------- - 7 ------- -60 ees le- w 1— —�—1 — I CAP CHANCELLOR PARK DIVISION I FINAL PLAT #FSU-99-8 i 1 June 27, 1996 Introduced by Jane Hague 2 Ord96.1.115 Proposed No. 96-388 3 4 5 6 7 U37 8 ORDINANCE NO. 9 10 it AN ORDINANCE concurring with the recommendation of 12 the Hearing Examiner to approve, subject to 13 conditions (modified) , the preliminary plat of 14 CHANCELLOR PARK, designated Land Use Services 15 Division File No. L94P0014. 16 17 18 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY: 19 20 This ordinance does hereby adopt and incorporate herein as 21 its findings and conclusions the findings and conclusions 22 contained in the revised report of the hearing examiner dated 23 June 12, 1996, which was filed with the clerk of the council on 24 June 27, 1996, to approve, subject to conditions (modified) , 25 the preliminary plat of Chancellor Park, designated land use 26 services division file' no. L94P0014, and the council does 27 hereby adopt as its action the recommendation(s) contained in 28 said report. 29 INTRODUUCCED ,ANnD READ for the first time this 0?O2 day of 30 yl.N" 19 31 PASSED by a vote of this_,!�f day of 32 19 7 Y� 33 KING COUNTY COUNCIL 34 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 35 36 37 38 39 40 VICE Chair 4 ATTEST: 1 Cler Of the Councl�— RECEIVED OCT 15 1996 FINKBEINER DEVELOPMENT INC. June 12, 1996 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER , KING COUNTY, WASHINGT0N 700 Central Building 810 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 296-4660 Facsimile (206) 296-1654 REVISED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL. SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services File ;:o. L34.P0014 Proposed Ordinance No. 96-388 CHANCELLOR PARR Preliminary Plat Application Location: On the southern margin of SE 240th Street between SE 240th Street and between 129th Avenue SE and 132nd Avenue SE ADDlicant: Finkbeiner Development 12011 Bel-Red Road, #206 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 454-7777 PRELIMINARY MATTERS: Plat application submitted; June 3, 1994 Department Preliminary Report issued: May 16, 1996 EXAMINER PROCEEDINGS: Pre-hearing Conference: May 7, 1996 Hearing Opened: May 30, 1996 Hearing Closed: May 30, 1996 On June 12, 1996, both the applicant and the Department of Development and Environmental Services agreed to issuance of this revised report, thereby necessitating a new appeal period. Participants at the proceedings and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the Office of the King County Hearing Examiner. ISSUES ADDRESSED: Street improvement standards; drainage; hydrological analysis method for calculating retention basin size; buffering for off-site Class 3 wetland; fencing; homeowners' association formation; access easement requirement. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS 6 RECOMMENDATION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: "1 Chancellor Park L94P0014 Page 2 FINDINGS: , Finding Nos. 1 through 10 of the Examiner's June 7, 1996 Report and Recommendation are adopted and incorporated here by this reference. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Conclusion Nos. 1 through 9, as stated in the Examiner's June 7, 1996 Report and Recommendation, are adopted and incorporated here by this reference. 2. In addition to the amendments to recommended conditions contained in the plat recommendation on page 7 of the Examiner's June 7, 1996 Report, recommended condition D, below, also is required in order to resolve the principal hearing issue regarding hydrological methodology as well as to assure consistency with Recommended Condition No. 8.a, below. For that reason, plat recommendation D, below, is now added. This additional amendment is entirely consistent with, and necessitated by, the above- adopted findings and conclusions. 3. The Examiner's June 7, 1996 Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) variance decision is not included in this revised report because that decision and its June 7, 1996 effective date remain unchanged. PLAT RECOMMENDATION: GRANT preliminary approval to the proposed plat of CHANCELLOR PARK as described in the preliminary plat drawing received by DDES August 17, 1995, entered in this hearing record a$ Exhibit No. 7, subject to the 26 conditions of final plat approval shown on pages 11 through 15 of the Department's Preliminary Report to the King County Hearing Examiner dated May 30, 1996 (Exhibit No. 2) , AMENDED as follows: A. Recommended Condition No. 8.a is AMENDED as follows: If the applicant proposes to divert the site drainage flows to the drainage systems in SE 240th Street, the conditions of the approved SWM variance (L95V0039) shall be met. %%a B. Recommended Condition No. 11 is AMENDED as follows: Road B, north of Road A, shall be&_ 11611 to urban access standards #r1i s; CCiat segment of.'�itoadKH shag e p � WES blCCRS" IIestablished" ,C. Recommended Condition No. 20 is AMENDED as follows: The buffer associated with the off-site Class 3 wetland (vicinity of proposed Lot Nos. 16 and 19) shall be placed in a Sensitive Area Tract as required by KCC 21.54.110. This y a /or loss of lots 'fhe Exh Oituxt in ae o r nd , s� _reeonfiquratlona �, q�yy rr & �' oY eSHL;shall' a s80" be' as „y, a por�lon (P.Y� bu!„ a ;o" a in c e=ty. �.�se� I,o D. Recommended Condition No. 8.b is AMENDED as follows: If the applicant proposes to discharge the storm drainage to the existing natural discharge points, a Level 3 off-site analysis, per Section 1.2.2 of the SWM manual must be submitted. Due to the downstream capacity problems below the natural discharge points, the site's maximum release Chancellor Park L94P0014 Page 3 rate shall be set at the level of storm that results in the problem occurring and holding that release rate up to the 100-year, ; day event. The Barker Methed again RECOMMENDED this 12th day of June, 1996. R. S. Titus, Deputy King County Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED this 12th day of June, 1996, to the following parties and interested persons: John Altman Pelly Chin Mark Deno Jim Dunning Shupe Holmberg Stanley Fear Bill Finkbeiner Scott Hytrek Jeffrey Jeremiah James Maher New Construction Services Darrell Offe David & Elizabeth Scholzen John L. Scott'Land Dept. Craig Sears Daniel Stucke Barbara Tsopanoglou Kim Claussen, DDES/Land Use Services Division Craig Comfort, DDES/Land Use Services Division Peter Dye, DDES/Land Use Services Division Son Hansen, DDES/Land Use Services Division Tom Koney, Metropolitan King County Council Michaelene Manion, DOES/Land Use Services Division Mark Mitchell, DDES/Land Use Services Division Mike O'Neil, Surface Water Management Division Lisa Pringle, DDES/Land Use Services Division NOTICE OF RIGHT TO ARPEAL AND ADDITIONAL ACTION REQUIRED In order to appeal the recommendation of the Examiner, written notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King County Council with a fee of $125.00 (check payable to King County Office of Finance) ,gD or before June 26. 1996. If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and 6 copies -of a written appeal statement specifying the basis for the appeal and argument in support of the appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King County Council on �or before July 3, 1996. Appeal statements may refer only to faces contained in the hearing record; new facts may not be presented on appeal. Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of the Council, Room 403, King County Courthouse, prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on the date due. Prior mailing is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur within the applicable time period. The Examiner does not have authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the Clerk'is not open on the specified closing date, in which event delivery prior to the close of business on the next business day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement. If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not filed within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of this report, or if a written appeal statement and argument are not filed within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the date of this report, the Clerk of the Council shall place a proposed ordinance which implements the Examiner's recommended action on the agenda of the next available council meeting. At that meeting, the Council may adopt the Examiner's recommendation, may defer action, may refer the matter to a Council committee, or may remand to the Examiner for further hearing or further consideration. Chancellor Park L94POO14 Page 4 Action of the Council Final. The action of the Council approving or adopting a recommendation of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive unless a proceeding for review pursuant to the Land Use Petition Act is commenced by filing a land use petition in the Superior Court for King County and serving all necessary parties within twenty-one (21) days of the date on which the Council passes an ordinance acting on this matter. MINUTES OF THE MAY 30, 1996 PUBLIC HEARING ON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NOS. L94POO14 AND L95VA016: CHANCELLOR PARK: R.S. Titus was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Kim Claussen, Craig comfort, Jon Hansen, Mike O'Neil, Bill Finkbeiner, Darrell Offe, Craig Sears, Jim Dunning, Scott Hytrek, Pelly Chin, and Daniel Stucke. The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1 Department of Development and Environmental Services File Nos. L94POO14 and L95VA016 Exhibit No. 2 Department of Development and Environmental Services Preliminary Report to the King County Hearing Examiner for the May 30, 1996 public hearing Exhibit No. 3 Application, dated October 6, 1994 Exhibit No. 4 Environmental Checklist, dated October 6, 1994 Exhibit No. 5 Declaration of Non-Significance, dated January 23, 1996 Exhibit No. 6 Affidavit of Posting indicating April 24, 1996 as date of posting and April 29, 1996 as date affidavit was received by DDES Exhibit No. 7 Revised plat dated August 17, 1995 - Exhibit No. 8 Land Use Map 642E, 643W, 648E, 649W Exhibit No. 9 Assessor Maus SE16-22-5, HE & NW 21-22-5 Exhibit No. 10 Level 1 Drainage Analysis (Baima & Holmberg) , September 14, 1995 Exhibit No. 11 Level 2 Drainage Analysis (Baima & Holmberg) , February 24, 1996 Exhibit No. 12 Traffic study - David Hamlin Associates, February 1995 Exhibit No. 13 Talasaea Wetland/Stream Report, February 8, 1995, June 13, 1995, February 21, 1996, May 10, 1996 Exhibit No. 14 KCRS Variance (File No. L95VO040) Exhibit No. 15 SWM Variance (File No. L95V0039) -- Attachment 3 to Staff Report Exhibit No. 16 Letter from Finkbeiner Development, with attachments, dated May 9, 1996 Exhibit No. 17 Letter from Finkbeiner Development, with attachments, dated May 10, 1996 Exhibit No. 18 Soos Creek Community Plan P-suffix (P-21) NR-13 Exhibit No. 19 Map showing abutting wetland, fence and parking lot Exhibit No. 20 Versions of Policy NR-13, Soos Creek community Plan Exhibit No. 21 Atlas page showing site and vicinity, with relevant intersections highlighted in pink Exhibit No. 22 Letter dated May 11, 1994 from Michael O'Neil, SWM, to Craig Sears Exhibit No. 23 Conceptual drainage plan, with blue highlights Exhibit No. 24 Letter dated May 29, 1996, from David Scholzen Exhibit No. 25 Letter dated May 30, 1996, from Mark Deno Exhibit No. 26 Approved Road & Storm Sewer Plan and Profile for plat of Chancellor Crest RST:gb \plats\194p\194p0o14.rp2 i June 7, 1996 If OFFICE OF KING COUNTY. &RI ME MINER WA HINGTON 700 Central Building 810•Third Avenue RECEIVED Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 296-4660 JUN 1 01996 Facsimile (206) 296-1654 FINKBEINER DEVELOPMENT INC. COMBINED REPORT: A. DECISION ON ZONING (SAO) VARIANCE B. RECOMMENDATION TO THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL. SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services File Nos. L94P0014 & L95VA016 Proposed Ordinance No. 96-388 . CHANCELLOR PARE Preliminary Plat Application SAO variance Application Location: On the southern margin of SE 240th Street between SE 240th street and between 129th Avenue SE and 132nd Avenue SE Anolicant: Finkbeiner Development 12011 Bel-Red Road, 1206 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 454-7777 PRELIMINARY MATTERS: Plat application submitted: June 3, 1994 Department Preliminary Report issued: May 16, 1996 EXAMINER PROCEEDINGS: Pre-hearing Conference: May 7, 1996 Hearing Opened: May 30, 1996 Hearing Closed: May 30, 1996 Participants at the proceedings and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the office of the King County Hearing Examiner. ISSUES ADDRESSED: street improvement standards; drainage) hydrological analysis method for calculating retention basin size; buffering for off- site Class 3 wetland; fencing; homeowners' association formation; access easement requirement. FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATION D Cr ION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: i chancellor Park L94P0014/L95VA016 Page 25; a., FINDINGS: y 1. General Information: (7 Owner/Developer: Finkbeiner Development 12011 - Bel-Red Road, 4206 Bellevue, WA 98005 s� (206) 454-7777 " Engineer/Surveyor: Baima & Holmberg 100 Front Street Issaquah, WA 98027-3817 STR: 21-22-05 Location: On the southern margin of SE 240th Street between SE 240th Street and between 129th Avenue SE and 132nd Avenue SE Zoning: RD 3600P & RM 2400P Number of Lots: 31 Typical Lot Size: Range; from approximately 4,500 to 7,000 square feet Proposed Use: Single-family detached Sewage Disposal: Soos Creek Water. & Sewer District Water Supply: Water District No. ill Fire District: King County Fire District W37 School District: Kent School District Date of Application (Plat) : June 3, 1994 2. Finkbeiner Development (the "applicant") proposes to subdivide 6.18 acres into 31 single-family residential building lots, with lot sizes ranging from 4,500 to 7,000 square feet. A reduction of the preliminary plat drawing is - attached to the Department of Development and Environmental Services ("ODES", or the "Department") Preliminary Report to the King County Hearing Examiner dated May 30, 1996 (Exhibit No. 2) , a copy of which will be attached to those copies of this report which are provided to Metropolitan King County Council members. 3. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The Department issued a threshold determination of non- significance for the proposed development on January 23, 1996. No party or agency objected or filed appeal. By issuing a "threshold determination of non-significance", the Department publicly declared its conclusion that the proposal would not cause probable significant adverse impacts upon the environment and that, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would not be required. 4. The Department recommends granting preliminary approval to the proposed plat of Chancellor Park, subject to 26 conditions of final plat approval which are listed on pages 11 through 15 of the Department's Preliminary Report to the Examiner (Exhibit No. 2) . In its final recommendation, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Department amended its final recommendation in the following ways: a. Street Improvement Stan aryls: Recommended Condition No. ll.b. Recommended Condition No. ll.b, as contained in the Department's Preliminary Report, would require urban subaccess standards for that segment of Road B which is located north of Road A. In its final recommendation, the Department agrees that proposals for half streets could be evaluated and approved by the Chancellor Park L94P0o14/L95VA016 Page 3 Department before engineering plan approval per King County Road Standards (KCRS) Section 2.07. . b. Off-site Wetland Buffering: Recommended Condition No. 20. Recommended Condition No. 20 requires a buffer associated with the off-site Class 3 wetland located in the vicinity of proposed Lot Nos. 16 and 19. The Department interprets this condition as requiring that the buffer be drawn (estdblished) . in a radial manner from any point of the wetland boundary. in this case, this interpretation of KCC 21.54.110 and Recommended Condition No. 20 would require the applicant to provide buffer adjacent to an existing multi-family asphalt parking lot. While the epartment believes that it is restrained from interpreting KCC 21.54 in any other manner, it nonetheless would agree to a recommendation from the Examiner to the Council which would eliminate such an obviously unreasonable and unfair requirement. In so doing, the Department observes, further, that the abutting off-site wetland may be filled in the future pursuant to sensitive area standards contained in the (revised) KCC Title 21A.24. S. The applicant agrees to the Department's recommendation as described in Finding No. 4, above, except for the following: a. Off-site Wetland Buffering; Recommended Condition o. 20. The applicant accepts the off-site buffering solution described in Finding No. 4, above, and as described by the Examiner in the hearing. Such a solution would require the applicant to add a 15-foot- wide building setback line (BSBL) along the north boundary of the proposed 15-foot-wide buffer as it is shown on Exhibit No. 19. However, the applicant asks also for an opportunity to remove the buffer entirely if the abutting off-site Wetland is legally filled prior to final recording of Chancellor Park. b. Drainage: Hydrologic calculation Method; Recommended Condition No. 8.6. The applicant proposes to divert the site drainage flows to the drainage systems in SE 240th Street in compliance with conditions of approval determined by the King County Surface Water Management Division in a drainage variance granted to the applicant (File No. L95V0039) . The Division also requires that the stormwater detention basin size calculation must be based upon the King County "seven- day event", also known as the "Barker Method". The applicant strongly disagrees with using this method of hydrological calculation/analysis. see Finding No. 61 below. 6. The disagreement between the Department and the applicant regarding the method of hydrological calculation for sizing the stormwater detention basin Constitutes the principal issue in this review. The following findings are relevant: a. The Department bases its recommendation to require the Barker method of hydrological analysis on Soo& Creek Community Plan NR-13 and the P-suffix condition adopted to implement it. Soos Creek Community Plan Policy NR-13 contains no reference to the Barker method. It states: Increased on-site retention/detention requirements, as recommended in the Soos Creek Basin Plan, should be adopted and implemented he Chancellor Payk L94P0014/L95VA016 Page 4 an-appendix to the King County Surface Water Design Manual. (Emphasis added. ) However, the P-suffix condition which applies to the vicinity of the subject property (known as Meridian Valley Center) requires "enhanced" detention facilities which shall be sized to maintain peak flows "at or below existing peak flows" for the two, ten, and 100- year storm events, based on the King County SWH seven- day event. The P-suffix condition goes on to say that the enhanced requirement will minimize site-specific, or "cumulative flooding and drainage problems" for residences, businesses and roads in the Meridian valley neighborhood. In addition, however, the Meridian Valley Center P-suffix condition implementing Policy No. MR-13 also requires the construction of several downstream surface water management enhancement projects, particularly increased culvert sizes for conditions up to the "l0o- year/24-hour event." All of these projects should be completed this year. b. There are four downstream culvert enlargement projects required by the Soos Creek Community Plan. As indicated in Finding No. 6.a, above, they all will be complete this year. In addition, the proposed development will not contribute to, or will "bypass" two of those projects; and, the two other projects have been increased in size substantially. Both the Department and SWM disagree with the applicant regarding whether the 'increased size of these culverts is sufficient to accommodate downstream discharges from Chancellor Park and all other potential infill developments within this drainage basin. The Department and SWM argue that the Barker hydrological analysis method mimics real world conditions by recognizing the probability of pre-storm wetness and the impact of sub-surficial "interflow"; whereas, the applicant argues that culverts designed to meet the 100-year/24-hour storm will be designed to accommodate' higher peak flows than would be required by the Barker method. Thus, the applicant concludes, the new downstream improvements should be sufficient to accommodate discharges from Chancellor Park and, cumulatively, like properties. C. Finkbeiner Development filed application for Chancellor Park on June 3, 1994. However, the Surface Water Management Design Manual (SWM Design Manual) was not amended to clearly establish Barker method (or, SWM seven-day storm) hydrological analysis method until one month later. 7. several neighboring property owners have expressed interest in this proposed development, raising the following concerns: a. pencino. The plat of Chancellor Crest is located west of the subject-property. Five Chancellor Crest lots abut the west boundary of Chancellor Park. Some of these abutting property owners want the applicant to construct a fence between the two plats. There are no adopted laws, policies or guidelines which provide for fencing of comparably zoned and developed land uses. O-^ , Chancellor Park L94P0014ZL95VA016 Page 5 , b. Drainage Management. Chancellor Crest Lot No. 8 abuts the west boundary of proposed Lot No. 31 of Chancellor Park. The Chancellor Park drainage system discharges onto the subject property in the vicinity of an embankment retaining rockery located in the southeast corner of Chancellor Crest Lot No. 8 (and the southwest corner of Chancellor Park proposed Lot No. 31) . Some neighbors, the owner of Chancellor Crest Lot No. 8 in particular, express concern regarding whether this discharge will be blocked (thus causing flooding) or will be somehow managed. The Department indicates that this circumstance should not constitute any problem for anyone because both law and policy require the applicant to accept upstream water which discharges upon the property at the location it is received and to discharge the water which,, flows from the subject property at its existing discharge location. Consequently, the applicant must necessarily pipe that drainage outfall further downstream, particularly if the applicant wishes to assure that proposed Lot Nos. 30 and 31 are developable and therefore marketable. C. Homeowners Association (HOA) . Some neighboring Chancellor Park residents see a public benefit potential by merging the Chancellor Park and Chancellor Crest homeowner associations or by associating them in some other acceptable manner. There is no policy basis for either the Department or the Examiner to make such a recommendation. However, the applicant indicates that he agrees with the suggestion in principle and would be willing to investigate it further with the Chancellor Crest HOA. -IN d. Access Easement; Recommended Condition No. 15. An access easement benefitting tax lot number 131 (abutting the southwest corner of the subject property) crosses the south 30 feet of the subject property. The Department recommends that this ingress/egress easement be "relinquished" prior to final approval/recording. The Department further recommends that if the easement is not relinquished it shall be placed in a separate tract. This requirement, contained in Condition No. 15, is a routine requirement applied consistently to all plats when necessary. The applicant does not object. However, the owner of tax lot number 131, Daniel Stucke, objects, contending that the alternative access proposed by the applicant. (proposed Road B as shown in the preliminary plat drawing) would be less convenient to him than the existing easement access. In addition, some Chancellor Park neighbors express concerns regarding the size of proposed Chancellor Park lots (smaller than Chancellor Crest) and their expectation that there will be smaller houses, resulting in a "downward drag on their property values". Some express concern that the proposed development will result in an increase of vandalism in the area. 8. The applicant requests a variance from the standards established by KCC 21.54.310, regulating development proposals in the vicinity of streams. Because the buffer from an adjacent Class 3 stream extends onto the proposed subdivision site, the applicant requests a variance to reduce the required buffer width. To mitigate the impacts of piping the Swale on-site and reducing the buffers, the Chancellor Park L94P00141L95VA016 Page 6 applicant proposes to create a water quality pond along the east boundary of the site, in the vicinity of Lot No. 8, ,^ then releasing water back to the stream as it leaves the proposed subdivision site. The DDES Ecologist reviewing this proposal agrees with these measures. The DDES Subdivision Technical Committee concludes that the pond provides more protection to the off- site stream than the buffer areas that would otherwise be provided. The required showings for a variance, established by KCC 21:58.020, are provided on page 9 of Exhibit No. 2, as well as the authority to grant variances and the definition of a variance. See also KCC 21.04.915, KCC 21.58.010, and KCC 21.58.020. 9. Except as noted above, the facts and analysis contained in the Land Use Services Division Preliminary Report dated May 30, 1996 are correct and are incorporated here by reference. A copy of the Land Use Services Division report will be attached to those copies of the examiner's report which are submitted to the King County Council. 10. Any portion of any of the following conclusions which may be construed as a finding is incorporated here by reference. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant should not be required to base the size of the stormwater retention/detention facility on the SWM seven-day event, also referred to in this hearing record as the Barker method. This conclusion and recommendation is not based upon the applicant's arguments but rather based upon the fact that this plat application pre-dates the County's formal establishment of the Barker method. This application should be regarded as vested at a time when the County had not clearly enunciated by policy, guideline, basin plan, drainage manual standard, or otherwise, the method which the Department and SWM now seek to impose. obviously, then, this conclusion does not apply to any future applications in the Meridian Valley vicinity. 2. No fence should be required between the subject property and abutting Chancellor Park lots for the reason indicated in Finding No. 7.a, above. J. Regardless of how it is resolved, the Stucke access easement issue will be resolved prior to final plat recording. - Recommended Condition No. 15 is sufficient to assure that. No change in that condition is required. 4. The same conclusion applies to the concerns regarding drainage system discharge in the vicinity of Chancellor Crest Lot No. 8 and Chancellor Park proposed Lot No. 11. These concerns must and will be addressed before final plat recording. 5. Based upon the whole record, and according substantial weight to the determination of environmental significance made by the Environmental Division, it is concluded that approval of this subdivision as recommended below would not constitute a major action significantly affecting the quality of the environment. All evidence of environmental impact relating to the proposed action and reasonable alternatives to the proposed action have been included in i .-. the review and consideration of this action. Chancellor Park L94P0014/L95VA016 Page 7 6. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, the proposed subdivision will comply with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, Soos Creek Community Plan, Subdivision and Zoning Codes, and other official land use controls and policies of King County. 7. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, this proposed subdivision will make appropriate provision for the public health, safety and general welfare and for drainage ways, streets, other public ways, water supply, and sanitary wastes; and it will serve the public use and interest. a. The conditions recommended in the Land Use Services Division's Preliminary Report as amended below are in the public interest and are reasonable requirements. 9. The requested sensitive areas variance, which is actually a zoning variance, requested by the applicant, is consistent with applicable codes. Granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements id the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. Nor will it be contrary to the goals and purposes of the Sensitive Areas Code (see Finding No. 8, above) . Granting the requested variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which this property is situated. consequently, the requested variance should be approved as recommended by the Department, Subject to DDES review and approval of detailed plans for the proposed water quality pond prior to engineering plan approval for the proposed plat of Chancellor Park. PLAT RECOMMENDATION: GRANT preliminary approval to the proposed plat of CHANCELLOR PARK as described in the preliminary plat drawing received by DDES August 17, 1995, entered in this hearing record as Exhibit No. 7, subject to the 26 conditions of final plat approval shown on pages 11 through 15 of the Department's Preliminary Report to the King County Hearing Examiner dated May 30, 1996 (Exhibit No. 2) , AMENDED as follows: A. Recommended Condition No. 8.a is AMENDED as follows: If the applicant proposes to divert the site drainage flows to the drainage systems in SE 240th Street, the conditions of the approved $WM variance (L95V0039) shall be met. The hydraleq�eal methedelogy for detention sising •nest be the King Geent daye'-ent faka the Barker Method) B. Recommended Condition No. 11 is AMENDED as follows: a� `"`ngin plan .r Road B north of Road A, shall be improvedve to urban access standards im"y�'opwa o 1"ia'P "e� desigi: oE� tha'' s e�,�+of RoadKBF�ehaY7.. baeevaT�YatedP$and"""-J ao o�ed b DDES,-before. 5e% ln.e „ fapp;oval`.. p Y, rdar:.s established by.XCRS 'Section consistent ui`h,sta C. Recommended Condition No. 20 is AMENDED as follows: The buffer associated with the off-site Class 3 wetland (vicinity of proposed Lot Nos. 16 and 19) .shall be placed in a Sensitive Area Tract as required by Chancellor Park L94P0014/L9 SVA016 Page 8 1 1 1 KCC 21.54.110. This may result in the reconfiguration ;..SS ... ,..«S• .nw Y,t'C�r�-.:.�.:r�.r,_.nccvr.,+„'x.�sar� @..a4,:_,7•i:w:1�':h;::x iaa"�2 yJ : ::R^.!':�i wti h'�%•, ��!CJ:�:I :!C.1 ein��i!A�aC:_ If9�r!!1! _r:•^ :.:.�_�a1`:.•_JL=..I:If..:'2:_tV_=Y RECOMMENDED this 7th day of June, 1996. R. S. Tit Deputy King County Hearing Examiner "SAO" VARIANCE DECISION: The requested sensitive areas variance to realign and/or relocate (that is, pipe) a Class 3 stream and reduce the associated buffer is APPROVED. ORDERED this 7th day of June, 1996. R. S. Titus, Deputy King County Hearing Examiner Acting as Zoning Adjustor TRANSMITTED this 7th day of June, 1996, to the following parties and interested persons: John Altman Pelly Chin Mark Deno Jim Dunning Shupe Holmberg Stanley Fear Bill Finkbeiner Scott Hytrek Jaffrey Jeremiah James Maher New Construction Services Darrell Offe David & Elizabeth Scholzen John L. Scott Land Dept. Craig Sears Daniel Stucke Barbara Tsopanoglou Kim Claussen, DDES/Land Use Services Division Craig Comfort, DDES/Land Use Services Division Peter Dye, DDES/Land Use Services Division Jon Hansen, DDES/Land Use Services Division Tom Koney, Metropolitan King County council Michaelene Manion, DDES/Land Use Services Division Mark Mitchell, DDES/Land Use Services Division Mike O'Neil, Surface Water Management Division Lisa Pringle, DDES/Land Use Services Division QR�LIMINA_ay PLAT APPLICATION: NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL AND ADDITIONAL ACTION REQUIRED In order to appeal the recommendation of the Examiner, written notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King County Council with a fee of $125.00 (check payable to King County Office of Finance) on or before June 21. 1996. If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and 6 copies of a written appeal �. statement specifying the basis for the appeal and argument in ., support of the appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King { Chancellor Park L94POO14/L95VA016 Page 9 I County Council on or before June 28. 1996. Appeal statements may ( .� refer only to facts contained in the hearing record; new facts may not be presented on appeal. Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of the Council, Room 403, King County Courthouse, prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on the date due. Prior mailing is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur within the applicable time period. The'Examiner does not have authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event delivery prior to the close of business on the next business day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement. If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not filed within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of this report, or if a written appeal statement and argument are not filed within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the date of this report, the Clerk of the Council shall place a proposed ordinance which implements the Examiner's recommended action on the agenda of the next available Council meeting. At that meeting, the Council may adopt the Examiner's recommendation, may defer action, may refer the matter to a Council committee, or may remand to the Examiner for further hearing or further consideration. Action of the Council Final. The action of the Council approving or adopting a recommendation of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive unless a proceeding for review pursuant to the Land Use Petition Act is commenced by filing a land use petition in the Superior Court for King County and serving all necessary parties within twenty-one (21) days of the date on which the Council passes an ordinance acting on this matter. SAO VAR ANC A CA ON: NOTICE OF RIGHT O APPEAL AND ADDITIONAL ACTIQN REQUIRED Pursuant to Chapter 20.24, King County Code, the King County Council has directed that the Examiner make the final decision on behalf of the County regarding SAO variance applications. The Examiner's decision shall be final and conclusive unless proceedings for review of the decision are properly commenced in superior Court within twenty-one (21) days of issuance of the Examiner's decision. (The Land Use Petition Act defines the date on which a land use decision is issued by the Hearing Examiner as three days after a written decision is mailed. ) MINUTES OF THE MAY 30, 1996 PUBLIC HEARING ON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NOS. L94POO14 AND L95VA016 - CHANCELLOR PARK: R.S. Titus was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Kim Claussen, Craig Comfort, Jon Hansen, Mike O'Neil, Bill Finkbeiner, Darrell o£fe, Craig Sears, Jim Dunning, Scott Hytrek, Pelly Chin, and Daniel Stucke. The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1 Department of Development and Environmental Services File Nos. L94POO14 and L95VA016 Exhibit No. 2 Department of Development and Environmental Services Preliminary Report to the King County Hearing Examiner for the May 30, 1996 public hearing Exhibit No. 3 Application, dated October 6, 1994 Exhibit No. 4 Environmental Checklist, dated October 6, 1994 Chancellor Park L94P0014/L95VA016 Page 10 Exhibit No. 5 Declaration of Non-Significance, dated January 23; 1996 Exhibit No. 6 Affidavit of Posting indicating April 24, 1996 as date of posting and April 29, 1996 as date affidavit was received by DDES Exhibit No. 7 Revised plat dated August 17, 1995 Exhibit No. 8 Land Use Map 642E, 643W, 648E, 649W Exhibit No. 9 Assessor Maps SE16-22-5, NE & NW 21-22-5 Exhibit No. 10 Level 1 Drainage Analysis (Baima & Holmberg) , September 14, 1995 j . Exhibit No. 11 Level 2 Drainage Analysis (Baima & Holmberg) , February 24, 1996 Exhibit No. 12 Traffic study - David Hamlin Associates, February 1995 Exhibit No. 13 Talasaea Wetland/Stream Report, February 8, 1995, June 13, 1995, February 21, 1996, May 10, 1996 Exhibit No. 14 KCRS Variance (File No. L95V0040) Exhibit No. 15 SWM Variance (File No. L95V0039) -- Attachment 3 to Staff Report Exhibit No. 16 Letter from Finkbeiner Development, with attachments, dated May 9, 1996 Exhibit No. 17 Letter from Finkbeiner Development, with attachments, dated May 10, 1996 Exhibit No. 18 Soos Creek Community Plan P-suffix (P-21) MR-13 Exhibit No. 19 Map showing abutting wetland, fence and parking lot Exhibit No. 20 Versions of Policy NR-13, Soos Creek Community Plan Exhibit No. 21 Atlas page showing site and vicinity, with relevant intersections highlighted in pink Exhibit No. 22 Letter dated May 11, 1994 from Michael O'Neil, SWM, to Craig Sears Exhibit No. 23 Conceptual drainage plan, with blue highlights Exhibit No. 24 Letter dated May 29, 1996, from David Scholzen Exhibit No. 25 Letter dated May 30, 1996, from Mark Deno Exhibit No. 26 Approved Road & Storm Sewer Plan and Profile for plat of Chancellor Crest RST:gb \plats\194p\194p0014.rpt , CiD DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES � LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER May 30, 1996 -PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:15 A.M. IN ROOM 2 3600- 136th Place Southeast Bellevue, WA 918006-1400 Phone: (206) 296-6640 PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK FILE NOS: L94P0014 AND SAO VARIANCE AND L95VA016 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.: 96.388 A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION: This is a request for a subdivision of 6.18 acres into 31 lots for detached single-family dwellings. The lot size ranges from approximately 4,500 to 7,000 square feet. See Attachment I for a copy of the proposed plat layout: B. GENERAL INFORMATION: Developer/Owner: Finkbeiner Development 12011 Bel-Red Road,#206 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206)454-7777 Engineer/Surveyor: Baima&Holmberg 100 Front Street Issaquah, WA 98027-3817 (206) 292-0250 STR: 21-22-05 Location: Located on the southem margin of SE 240th Street between SE 2401h Street and between 129th Ave SE and 132nd Ave Southeast, Zoning: RD 3600P&RM 2400 P Number of Lots: 31 - Typical Lot Size: Ranges from approximately 4,500 to 7,000 square feet Proposed Use: Single family detached Sewage Disposal: Soos Creek Water and Sewer District Water Supply: Water District No. 1 I Fire District: King County Fire District #37 School District: Kent School District Application Dale: June 3, 1994 Note: The applicant has requested a sensitive area variance to realign/relocatc(i.e., pipe)a Class III stream and reduce the associated buffer. The variance application will be heard concurrently with the plat application. S1a6RpVL94P0014.rpt plLLrn4 PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95VA016 C. HISTORY/BACKGROUND: The Subdivision Technical Committee of King County has conducted an on-site examination of the subject property and has discussed the proposed development with the applicant to clarify technical details of the application and to determine the compatibility of this project with appli- cable King County plans and codes and other official controls regulating this development. As a result of preliminary discussions, the applicant presented the Technical Committee with a revised plat on August 17, 1995. The primary modification included the locating the cul-de-sacs on-site, and an alternative, which requires off-site right-of-way. In addition, the applicant pro- vided a pedestrian access easement to SE 240th Street. D. THRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA),RCW 43.21C, the responsible official of the Environmental Division(ED)issued a threshold determination of non-significance(DNS)for the proposed for the proposed development on January 23, 1996. This determination is based on the review of the environmental checklist and other pertinent documents, resulting in the conclu- sion that the proposal would not cause probable significant adverse impacts on the environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement(EIS)was not required prior to proceeding with the review process. E. AGENCIES CONTACTED: 1. King County Natural Resources&Parks Division: No Response. 2. King County Planning&Community Development Division: No Response. 3. King County Fire Protection Engineer: Fire protection engineering preliminary approval has been granted. 4. Seattle-King County Health Department: The comments from the Health Department have been incorporated into this report. 5. Kent School District: The comments from the School have been incorporated into this report. 6. Soos Creek Water& Sewer District: The comments from this district have been incorporated into this report. 7. Water District No. 111: The comments from this district have been incorporated into this report. S. Washington State Department of Ecology: No response. 9. Washington State Department of Fisheries: No response. 10. Washington State Department of Natural Resources: No response. 1 I. Washington State Department of.Wildlife: No response. 12. Washington State Department of Transportation: No response. 13. King County Conservation District: No response. 14. METRO: No response. Sta6apVL94p0014.rpt -2- . I i PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK. AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS.L94P0014 AND L95VA016 15. City of Kent: No response. F. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: 1. Topography: The majority of the site gradually slopes from the west towards the east. The slopes range from approximately 4 to 15 percent. 2. Soils: One surface soil is primarily found on this site per King County Soil Survey, 1973. The majority of the site is classified AgC. There may be small areas/pockets of the site classified AgB. a. Ag_Q-Alderwood gravely,sandy loam;6-15%slopes. Runoff is slow to medium and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil has a moderate limitation for foundations, due to a seasonally high water table and slope. It has a severe limi- tation for septic tank filter fields due to very slow permeability in the substratum. b. AgB-AJderwood gravely, sandy loam; 0-6%slopes. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil type has a moderate limitation for low building foundations due to a seasonally high water table, and severe limitations for septic tank filter fields due to very slow permeability in the substratum. 3. Hydrography: Wetland and stream reports prepared by Talasaea Consultants(dated February 8, 1995, June 13, 1995, and February 21, 1996)indicate the presence of a Class 3 wetland located in the northeast comer of the site, and another Class 3 wetland located immediately off-site, in the vicinity of proposed lots 16 and 19(revision received August 15, 1995). The reports also identify a"broad swale" which runs west to cast in the vicinity of proposed lots 31 to proposed lot 9. The site is lies within the Soos Creek sub-basin of the Green River drainage basin. Refer to the analysis section for further discussion. 4. Vegetation: The site is primarily covered in pasture grasses, Scattered evergreen/ deciduous trees and brush occur in limited numbers(primarily in the south-southeast comer of the site). 5. Wildlife: Small birds and animals undoubtedly inhabit this site; however, their population and species are limited due to nearby development. 6. Mapped Sensitive Areas: The Sensitive Areas Map Folio does not identify any mapped sensitive areas as being present on this site. G. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: The property lies in a urban/suburban area of south-southeast King County east of the city of Kent. The developed plats of Chancellor Crest(48 lots ranging from 6,000 to 12,800 square feet) and Kensington High(134 lots approximately 7,200 square feet)adjoin the west and south boun- daries of the site. Meridian Green apartment complex abuts the northeast corner of the site. Adjoining Elie northwest, southwest, and southeast are large parcels approximately J to 15 acres in size. The Meridian Valley Golf and Country Club is located less than 1/4 mile cast of the site. The site itself is currently pasture. It. SUBDIVISION DESIGN FEATURES: 1. Lot Pattern and Density: The applicant is proposing to utilize provisions of the King County Code for lot size averaging. Staf-ItpU1.90001-Upt -3 - PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95VA016 2. Internal Circulation: The lots will be served by Road B, which extends to the north (subaccess) and the south(minor access). 3. Roadway Section: The roads are proposed to be constructed to urban standards. Note: The applicant submitted and received a variance to the 1993 King County Road Standards for length of cul-de-sac(excess of 600 feet). Refer to attachment 2. I. TRANSPORTATION PLANS: 1 I. Transportation Plans: The King County Interim Transportation Plan indicates that SE 240th Street is designated as a principal arterial. The subject subdivision is not in conflict with this plan, nor with the King County Urban Trails or Bicycle plans. 2. Subdivision Access: The site will gain access from 132nd Avenue SE, via SE 245th Street (within Kensington High), 129th Avenue SE(Chancellor Crest), with the extension of "Road A." 3. Traffic Generation: It is expected-that approximately 310 vehicle trips per day will be generated with'full development of the proposed subdivision. This calculation includes service vehicles(i.e., mail delivery, garbage pick-up, school bus)which may currently serve this neighborhood, work trips, shopping, etc. 4. Adequacy of Arterial Roads: This proposal has been reviewed under the criteria in King County Code 21.49(Adequacy of Existing Roadways and Intersections)and King County Code 27.40(Road Mitigation and Payment System). a. Level-of-Service(LOS)is a common term used in the traffic engineering profession. LOS is a qualitative description of the operating conditions within a traffic stream and its perception by motorists and passengers. These conditions are described in terms of speed, travel time, the freedom to manuever, traffic interrup- tions, comfort, convenience, and safety. The level of service is designated by six letters, A through F, with LOS A indicating good operating conditions with little or no delay, and LOS F indicating the worst conditions. LOS F needs to be mitigated when a proposed development has a direct impact on an intersection or roadway. Direct traffic impact is defined as any new increase in vehicle traffic or increase in vehicle traffic generated by proposed development which equals or exceeds ten peak-(tour, peak-direction trips on a roadway or intersection. The applicant submitted a traffic study which discussed the traffic from the proposal on area roads and intersections, as well as trip generation, trip distribution, level-of-service, and existing road improvements. The report, prepared by David I. Hamlin and Associates(dated February 1995), studied impacts of this project at the following intersections: SE 248th Street/129th Avenue SE SE 245th Street/132nd Avenue SE The study indicates that the two intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service with and without the proposed plat. Therefore, no additional mitigation, other than payment of King County's MPS fees, is required. NOTE: It is anticipated that the frontage improvements along SE 240th Street will be constructed as part of the King County CIP project for major widening. The King County Department of Transportation(aka Department of Public .;1ar.RpVL94P0014.rp1 -4- PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95VA016 Works) has reviewed the traffic study and is in agreement with the recommendations. b. King County Code 21.49: The peak-hour traffic generated by this subdivision falls below the threshold requiring mitigation(ten peak-hour, peak-direction trips). The existing arterial system will accommodate the increased traffic volume generated by this proposal. c. King County Code 27.40: .King Cbunty Code 27.40, Mitigation Payment System (NIPS), requires the payment of a traffic impact mitigation fee(NVS fee)and an administration fee for each single flintily residential lot or unit created, MPS fees are determined by the zone in which the site is located. This site is in Zone 361 per the MPS/Quartersection list. MPS fees may be paid at the time of final plat recording, or deferred until building permits are issued. The amount of the fee will be determined by the applicable fee ordinance at the time the fee is collected. J. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Schools: This proposal has been reviewed under RCW 58.17.110 and King County Ordinance 10162 (School Adequacy). a. School Facilities: The subject subdivision will be served by elementary,junior high, and senior high schools located within the Kent School District. b. School Capacity: The Kent School Board has adopted interim capacity figures "1 which determine their ability to accommodate additional students. The figures reveal the district has adequate capacity to accommodate the anticipated students generated by this proposal. C. School Impact Fees: Ordinance 12148 requires than an impact fee of$3675.00 per lot be imposed to fund school system improvements to serve new development within this district. Payment of this fie, in a manner consistent with Ordinance 10162, will be a condition of subdivision approval. d. School Access: The District has indicated that the future students from this subdivision will be bussed to the elementary,junior high and senior high schools. Walkway conditions to the bus stop currently consist of sidewalks and gravel shoulders, ranging from 6-8 feet in width. 2. Parks and Open Space: The nearest developed community park is North Meridian Park located approximately one mile north-northeast of the site. Gary Grant Sons Creek Park and regional trail lies approximately one-quarter to one-half mile east of the proposed subdivision. 7. Fire Protection: The Certificate of Water Availability from Water District No. I I I indicates that water is presently available to the site in sufficient quantity to satisfy King County Fire Flow Standards. Prior to final recording of the plat, the water service facilities must be reviewed and ^� approved per King County Fire Flow Standards. Surf-rtp✓t.94P0(n4.rpr -5 - PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 M-M L95VA016 K. UTILITIES I. Sewage Disposal: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision by means of a public sewer system managed by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. A Certificate of Sewer Availability, dated July 22, 1994, indicates this sewer district's capability to serve the proposed development. The Health Department has recommended preliminary approval of this proposed method of sewage disposal. Note: Per preliminary Health Certificate, dated September 29, 1994, "no sewer lines shall be located within 100 feet of the existing offsite private well(Tax Lot 131)." The Department of Development and Environmental Services concurs with this recommendation. 2. Water Supply: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision with a public water supply and distribution system managed by the Water District No. 111. A Certificate of Water Availability, dated August 16, 1994, indicates this district's capability to serve the proposed development. The Health Department has recommended preliminary approval of this proposed method of water supply. The Department of Development and Environmental Services concurs with the Health T Department's recommendation. L. COWREHENSIVE AND COMMUNITY PLAN: 1. Comprehensive Plan: This proposal is governed by the 1985 King County Comprehensive Plan which designates this area as Urban. The following policies of the Comprehensive Plan are relevant to the proposed subdivision: E-302 When environmentally sensitive features are discovered through technical review of a development proposal, the need to protect the sensitive features should be factored into site planning. Development plans should ensure that structures locate on unconstrained portions of the site, and that clustering, if approved, is compatible with surrounding land uses. These considerations may result in a reduction in density from that otherwise allowed by the zoning. E-321 Water quality,natural drainage,fish and wildlife habitat,and aesthetic functions of rivers,streams,lakes and Puget Sound should be protected. E-322 New development adjacent to rivers, streams, lakes and Puget Sound should preserve an undisturbed corridor wide enough to maintain natural functions. 2. Community Plans: The subject subdivision is located in the Soos Creek Community Planning Area, which designates this site to be developed at a density of 12 to 18 units per acre. The applicant is proposing a density of 5 dwelling units per acre. Note: This application was submitted prior to the adoption of King County Code 2IA; therefore, the minimum density requirements ofKCC 21A are not applicable. SmfdlpV1.94POet 4.mt -6- PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95VA016 The fallowing P-suffix conditions have been established for this site by the 1991 Soos Creek Community Plan: a. Clearing and Grading: The amount of clearing and grading to occur on the site is limited to road and utility construction and a percentage of the individual lot based on the lot size. This is reflected n recommended Condition No. 24. b. Seasonal Restrictions: Clearing and grading are not permitted between October through March,unless activities are determined to be exempt(e.g., landscaping of C. Street Trees: Street trees shall be provided on all public streets created as part of or on the perimeter of a subdivision development. Street tree requirements are referred to in recommended Condition No. 24. d. Pedestrian Circulation: In new formal subdivisions, pedestrian walkways from the interior of the plat to the perimeter shall be provided. The internal roads will be constructed to urban standards, and connect to an existing urban roadway system. In addition, if a public school,community business, community facility(e.g., parks, trails, etc.)and/or bus stop or park-aed-ride is located within 1,000 feet to 1/2 mile of the subdivision site, the development is required to provide a pedestrian connec- tion off-site to that facility. The applicant is proposed to provide and improve a pedestrian access easement to the north boundary of the site(through the deten- tion tract). This will provide access to the bus stops located on SE 240th Street and 132nd Avenue SE. Refer to recommended Condition No. 24. '1 C. Meridian Valley Center: This condition applies to those areas contributing flow to Soos Creek Tributary 0091A, north of SE 256th Street. This condition requires "enhanced detention requirements to minimize site-specific or cumulative flooding and drainage problems for residences, businesses, and roads in the Meridian Valley Neighborhood Center." The"enhanced detention facilities shall be sized to at least maintain peak flows at or below existing peak flows for the 2, 10, and 100-year storm events, based on the King County King County Surface Water Management Division(SWM)7-day event"(aka Barker Method). The P-suffix also states that prior to development in this area, SWM must determine that various culvert improvements(e.g., SE 255th Street)have been installed. At this time, improve- ments at various locations have occurred, or are anticipated to be completed this summer(1996). Refer to recommended Condition Nos. 7 and 8 for drainage requirements. M. STATUTES/CODES: The following state statutes and/or County codes are relevant to the proposed subdivision: 1. Sensitive Areas KCC 21.04.823 Streams. "Streams"means those areas of King County where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A defiled channel or bed is an area which demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water and includes but is not limited to bedrock channels,gravel beds,sand and silt beds and defused-channel swales. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. This definition is not meant to include irrigation ditches,canals, storm or surface water runoff devices or other entirely artificial watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or used to convey stream naturally occurring prior to construction in such watercourse. Streams are further categorized as follows: ...C. Class 3 streams. "Class 3 streams"means those streams that are intermittent or ephemeral during years of normal rainfall and are not used by salmonids. Sror-apra.94ro014.rj,r -7- PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95VAO16 KCC 21.54.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to identify environmentally sensitive areas and to supplement the development requirements contained in the various use classifications in the King County Code by providing for additional controls without violating any citizen's constitutional rights. Coal mine, erosion, flood, landslide, seismic, steep slope, and volcanic hazard areas;and streams, wetlands and protective buffers, all as defined in KCC Title 21, constitute environmentally sensitive areas that are of special concern to King County. The standards and mechanisms established in this chapter are intended to protect these environmentally sensitive features in King County. By regulating development and alterations to sensitive areas, this chapter seeks to: "A. Protect members of the public and public resources and facilities from injury, loss of life, property damage or financial losses due to flooding, erosion, landslides, seismic and volcanic events, soil subsidence, or steep slope failures; "B. Protect unique, fragile, and valuable elements of the environment including :cod its habitat; T. Mitigate unavoidable impacts to environmentally sensitive areas by regulating alterations in and adjacent to sensitive areas; ' "D. Prevent cumulative adverse environmental impacts to water availability, water quality, wetlands, and stream; "E. Protect the public trust as to navigable waters and aquatic resources; KCC 21.54.260 Wetlands—Provisions. Development proposals on sites containing wetlands shall meet the requirements ofKCC 21.54.260 through.290. Wetlands and required buffers shall not be altered except as expressly authorized by this chapter and all approved alterations shall have an appropriate mitigation plan where King County determines,upon review of special studies completed by qualified professionals, that � either: A The wetland does not serve any of the valuable functions of wetlands identified in KCC.21.04.923,including but not limited to wildlife habitat and natural drainage functions;or B. The proposed development would protect or enhance the wildlife habitat, natural drainage,and/or other valuable functions of wetlands and would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter. The required studies may include habitat value,hydrology, erosion and deposition,and/or water quality studies. Such studies shall include specific recomtnenda- tions for mitigating measures which should be required as a condition of any approval for such development. The recommendations may include,but are not limited to,construction tech- niques, or design,drainage, or density specifications. KCC 21.54.310 Stream standards. A. Stream Buffers. 1. All buffers shall be measured from the ordinary high water mark as identified in the field or, if that cannot be determined,from the top of the bank. In braided channels, the ordinary high water mark or top of bank shall be determined so as to include the entire stream feature. 2. The following buffers on each side of the ordinary high water mark are minimum requirements. d. Class 3 streams-25-foot buffer. f. Any stream adjoined by riparian wetland or other adjacent sensitive area shall have the buffer which applies to the wetland or other adjacent sensitive area unless the stream buffer requirements are more expansive. S. Any stream restored,relocated, replaced or enhanced because of alterations should have at least the minimum buftbr required for the class of stream involved. 3. The department may recommend buffer averaging in instances where it will provide additional resource protection provided that the total area on-site contained in buffer remains the same. C. Sensitive area tracts and setback areas for streams. Streams and their buffers shall be placed in a separate sensitive area tract as provided in KCC 21.54.110. scar-RpM94POO ta.rpt -8 - PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS.L94P0014 AND L95VA016 v E. Building and Setback Lines. Unless otherwise specified, a minimum building setback line of 15 feet shall be required from the edge of the stream buffer. Prohibitions on the use of hazardous or toxic substances and pesticides or certain fertilizers in this area may be imposed. F. Permanent survey markings, signs, and fencing. The permanent survey markings, signs, and fencing requirements of KCC 21.54.120 shall apply. (Ord. 9614 § 94, I990) 2. Variances: KCC 21.04.915 Variance. "Variance"moans an adjustment in the application of the regulations of a zoning ordinance to a particular piece of property in a situation where the property, because of special circumstances found to exist on the land, is deprived, as a result of the imposition of the zoning regulations, of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The adjustment in the application of the regulations shall remedy the disparity in privilege. A variance shall not be used to convey special privileges not enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, and subject to the same code restrictions. (Ord. 9614 § 70, 1990: Ord. 1161 § 10, 1972) KCC 21.58.010 Authority to grant variances. A Except as provided in KCC 21.58.052, the manager or his designee shall have the authority to grant a variance from the provisions of this title when the conditions as set forth in Section 21.58.020 have been found to exist; provided,that any variance granted shall be sutj'ect to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is �..� situated. B. The zoning adjustor may grant variances as provided in KCC 21.58.052,subject to the same limitations and requirements as set forth in this section. (Ord. 7714 ( 1, 1986: Res. 25789 ( 2800, 1963.) KCC 21.58.020 Required showings for a variances Before any variance may be granted,it shall be shown: A Because of special circumstances applicable to subject property,including size, shape,topography,location,or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning code is found to deprive subject property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification;provided,however,the fact that surrounding properties have been developed under regulations in force prior to the adoption of Ordinance No.9614 shall not be the sole basis for the granting of a variance. B. The granting of the variance will*not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated,or contrary to the goals and purposes of the sensitive areas code as set out in KCC Chapter 21.54. (Res.25789 (2801, 1963.) 1 C. In the case of sensitive areas as defined in KCC Chapter 21.54,the variance granted shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate(fie permitted uses. N. ANALYSIS: The Subdivision Technical Committee has identified this following issues involved in the preliminary review and recommendations of this proposal: I. Wetland: The applicant submitted a wetland/stream study and addendum studies prepared by Talasaga Consultants, dated February 8, 1995,June 15, 1995, and February 21, 1996. The studies delineated and evaluated the wetland found on-site(Class 3)and off-site (Class 3)in the vicinity of proposed lots 16 and 19(August 1995 revision). The on-site wetland is located in the northeast comer of the:,site. A portion of this wetland is pro- posed to be filled by King County Department of Transportation during the widening of s1ar-Rp(/t.94t0014 n)r - PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95VA016 r~ SE 240th Street. The applicant proposes to alter the remainder of this Class 3 wetland for use as part of the drainage facilities required for this proposal. Per King County Code 21.54.280, the applicant is permitted to fill small isolated wetlands, provided the wetland's functions and values are provided elsewhere on-site. The applicant has indicated that the wetland functions are exclusively hydrologic and therefore can be mitigated by the construction of the stormwater management facilities. The wetlands ecologist for DDES has reviewed the site and the studies provided by the applicant, in addition to the sensitive areas ordinance and is in agreement with the delineation and classification of the on-site and off-site wetlands. Given the small size and extremely limited functions of Class 3 wetland located in the north.portion of the site, staff is in agreement with the applicant's analysis and recommendation of the R/D facilities as full mitigation of the proposed impacts to this wetland. However, it is recommended that the 25-foot buffer and 15-foot building setback line required for the off-site wetland be provided since a reduction of this buffer was not included in the SAO variance request. This may result in the reconfiguration and/or loss of lots. 2. Swale: The Talasaea studies identify a"broad swale" which runs west to east(across proposed Lots 31 to 9;August 15, 1995 revision). The upstream area which contributes to this swale/stream is limited to a•3.85-acre basin which has been developed by single- family homes. Based upon the review of the adjacent developed plat of Chancellor Crest, it appears that this swale may have continued west; however, it was subsequently filled with the development of the plat, As a result, the existing swale on the proposed sub- division site begins at the outfall of the Chancellor Crest drainage facilities and continues east. As this feature moves eastward and leaves the proposed subdivision site, the channel becomes more visible and"demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water...." (KCC 21.04.823). In fact, the parcel to the east(Tax Lot 1),which was part of a pre- viously recorded short plat(DDES file no. S89S0002),identifies this feature as a Class 3 stream, which required 25-foot buffers and a 15-foot building setback. The ecologist for DDES has reviewed the site, the information submitted by the applicant, and the sensitive areas ordinance. As a result of this review, there is not conclusive evi- dence the swale(on the proposed subdivision site)was"created"as a result of the drain- age from the adjacent subdivision or was a stream which existed prior to development. DDES has determined that the portion of the swale located on-site does not meet the definition of stream per King County Code 21.04.823. However, as this features reaches the east property boundary of the proposed site,and continues east, the stream character- istics(i.e., defined bed, clear evidence of the passage of water, etc.)become apparent. Therefore, it is considered a Class 3 stream. However, the required 25-foot buffers for this stream extend onto the Chancellor Park site. 3. Sensitive Areas Ordinance Variance• The applicant has requested a variance(DDES File No. L95 VA016)from the standards of King County Code 21.54.310 which established provisions for the protection of streams in King County. The code provision states that streams shall not be altered except as authorized by King County Code(KCC 21.54). Because the buffer from the Class 3 stream extends onto the proposed subdivision site, the applicant has requested a variance to reduce the required buffers. To mitigate the impacts of piping the swale on-site, and reducing the buffers,the applicant has proposed to create a water quality pond along the east boundary of the site(Lot 9),which would release water back into the stream as it leaves the proposed subdivision site. The DDES ecologist has reviewed this proposal and is in agreement with the recommendations. It is the Sub- division Technical Committee's position that the proposed pond provides more protection to the off-site stream than the buffer areas that would otherwise be provided. smr-RpuL94t0014 rpt - 10- PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95VA016 4. Ingress/Egrees Easement: Located along the south boundary of the proposal is a 30-foot easement for ingress/egress. It appears this'easement provides access for Tax Lot 131, which adjoins the west boundary of the proposed subdivision. The current plat(August 1995 revision)has two lots(4 and 5)whichl conflict with this easement. In addition, this easement significantly reduces the building area on proposed Lots 4 and 5. To prevent potential conflicts between future lot owners and this easement, the STC recommends that this easement be relinquished prior to final 4pprovaVrecording of the subdivision. Note: the southerly extension of proposed Road B appears to provide an alternative access to Tax Lot 131. If the easement cannot be relinquished prior to final approval, the STC recommends a 30-foot easement be placed in a separate tract. This will result in the reconfiguration and/or loss of lots. 0. CONCLUSIONS: The subject subdivision will comply with the goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan and will comply with the requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning Codes and other official land use controls of King County,based on the conditions for final plat approval. P. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the subject subdivision, revised and received August 17, 1995, be granted preliminary approval subject to the following conditions of final approval: 1. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19 of the King County Code. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication which includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952. 3. The area and dimensions of all lots shall meet the minimum requirements of the RM 2400P and RD 3600P zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved prelim- inary plat, whichever is larger. Minor revisions to the plat which do not result in substan- tial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Building and Land Development Division. 4. The applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department. S. NI construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 8041. 6. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant,water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. If all lots are 35,000 square feet in size or more, they are exempt per KCC 17.08.030. 7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance:with drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04 and storm drainage requirerjtents and guidelines as established by Surface Water Management. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location of lots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. The following conditions represent portions of the Code and requirements and shall apply to all plats. a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1990 King County Surface 1 Water Design Manual. DDES approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. SWMp✓1.900014.re I I - PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK , AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L95 VA016 b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DDES Engineering Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: t "All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings# on file with ODES and/or the Department of Public Works. This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with plans on file." The following conditions specifically address drainage issues and Meridian Center P-suffix (� '\ 8 P is B conditions for this particular subdivision: (aj If the applicant proposes to divert the site drainage flows to the drainage systems in SE 240th St., the conditions of the approved SWM variance(L95V0039)shall be met. The hydrological methodology for detention sizing must be the King County 7-day event(aka the Barker Method). . If the applicant proposes to discharge the storm drainage to the existing natural discharge points, a Level 3 off-site analysis, per Section 1.2.2. of the S WM manual must be submitted. Due to the downstream capacity problems below the natural discharge points, the site's maximum release rate shall be set at the level of storm that results in the problem occuring and holding that release rate up to the 100- year, 7-day event. The Barker Method again would be utilized for detention sizing. 9. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. M The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 27.40, Pw Mitigation Payment System(NIPS),by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The applicant has the option to either: (I)pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, or(2)pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen,the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that, "All fees required by King County Code 27.40,Mitigation Payment System(NIPS), have been paid";if the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amounk in effect as of the date of building permit application. I �(l The following are required road improvements for this subdivision, to be constructed per the 1993 King County Road Standards: a. Road A shall be improved to urban subaccess street standards. b. Road B, north of Road A, shall be improved to urban subaccess standards. C. Road B, south of Road A, shall be improved to urban minor access standards. . d. Tracts B and C shall be improved to minor access standards. S Star-RptIL90W14 rpt - 12 - PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS. L94P0014 AND L93VA016 f//e. Tract F must be a minimum 20 feet, with an 18-foot paved surface cross slope in J one direction and curb with thickened edge on one side. Radius returns on paved aprons shall have 10-foot radii. . C. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered by King County, pursuant to the variance procedures in the King County Road Standards (KCRS 1.08) 12. As proposed by the applicant, to accommodate the SE 240th Street CIP, additional right- of-way and/or easements shall be provided Along the north boundary prior to final CJ `� approval. </ Lots 26 and 27 shall have undivided ownership of Tract F and be responsible for its e/ maintenance. A note to this effect shall be placed on the face of the final plat. 4 Lots 18-21 shall have undivided ownership of Tract C and be responsible for its maintenance. Lots 14-17 shall have undivided ownership of tract B and be responsible for it its maintenance. A note to this affect shall be placed on the face of the final plat. v'i�15.) The ingresslegress easement located along the south boundary shall be relinquished prior lam/ to final a roval/recordin If the easement if not relinquished,it shall be laced in a / vl' PP g• q P I j Sk separate tract. Note: This may result in the reconfiguration and/or loss of lots. ;/Gi 1 (lH,yi I j I K 16, The planter islands(if any)within the cul-de-sacs shall be maintained by the abutting lot owners. This shall be stated on the face of the final plat. ..� I\ V I N l� IT The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: 7 RESTRICTIONS FOR SENSITIVE AREA TRACTS AND SENSITIVE AREA SETBACK AREAS Dedication of a Sensitive Area Tract/Sensitivo Area Setback Area conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tract/setback area. This interest includes the preservation of native vegetation for all purposes that benefit the public health, safety and welfare, including control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, visual and aural buffering, and protection ofptartt and animal habitat, The Sensitive Area Tract/Sensitive Area Setback Area imposes upon all present and future owners and occu- piers of the land subject to the tract/setback area the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the easement. The vegetation within the tract/setback area may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from King County Building and Land Development Division or it successor agency, unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the tract/setbapk area and the area of development activity must be marked or otherwise flagged to the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction or other development activity on a lot subject to the Sensitive Area Tract/Sensitive Area Setback Area. The required marking or 1 flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities-ties in the vicinity of the sensitive area are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required building setback line, unless 1I otherwise provided by law. d18. All lots adjoining an area or having area with an SAT restriction snail be provided with an acceptable boundary delineation between the lot or portions of the lot and the area restricted with the SAT. Said boundary delineation shall be in place prior to ally grading StauRNtn.94110014.rpt 13 - PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FII-E NOS.L94P0014 AND L95VA016 t� or clearing of the subdivision and remain in place until a dwelling is constructed on the lot and ownership transferred to the first owner-occupant. 1 III 19. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as outlined in KCC 21.54. Prior to engineering plan approval, the applicant shall provide Notice on Title as outlined in KCC 21.54.100. Temporary marking,permanent survey marking, and signs as specified in KCC 21.54.120 shall also be addressed prior to commencing con- struction activities on the site. I ,20. The buffer associated with the off-site Class 3 wetland(vicinity of proposed Lots 16 and 19, August 17, 1996 revision)shall be placed in a sensitive area tract as required by KCC 21.54.110. This may result in the reconfiguration and/or loss of Itos. i 21, If lot make-up area is required, calculations demonstrating compliance, including the provision of sufficient Flat, dry, usable open space, must be submitted prior to approval of l the plan and profile. { ,tr Kam• ' t �tr 22. A homeowners'associati-n)or other Workable orgardzat o hall be established t the satisfaction of DDES whiccl r vides f r the ownership and continued maintenance of the sensitive area tract(s)iind p� edestrian pat . do,, ;n � - •1 23 A 15-foot-wide building setback line(BSBL)from the edge of the sensitive area buffer(s) shall be shown on the face of the final plat. 2.4. The following conditions shall apply to implement the P-suffix conditions that apply to this property: r a. Clearing and Grading: The applicant has the option to clear the individual building envelopes during construction of the roads and utilities or upon approval of the individual building permit. If the building envelopes are to be clearing during road and utility construction, the individual building envelopes shall be shown on the engineering plans and limited to the following maximum area(1991 Soos Creek Community Plan, page 148): 1) Lot Size(in sq.fi.) Building Envelope 5,000-9,000 45%of the lot size 9,001-15,000 35%of the lot size Greater than 15,000 5,000 square feet -2) The clearing limits for each building envelope•shall be clearly marked or flagged on each lot and inspected prior to any clearing. b. Street Trees: 1) One street tree shall be planted on average every 30 feet along both sides of residential access streets within the development. 2) All street trees shall be planted in accordance with Drawing 23 of the 1987 King County Road Standards. 3) Only street trees on the list of trees approved by the DOES arborist may be planted. 4) A street tree plan and bond quantity sheet shall be provided for the review and approval of DDES prior to or at the same time as submittal of the engineering plans. SWr-Rptn.94p0014.rpt - 14 - t l/ `.AT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE ( L94P0014 AND L95VA016 Bonding for the stl. .e be required. The bond must be submitted F j prior to plat recordin, ,nail include installation, one year's maintenance and plant costs. A S53„landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. 6) Planted trees shall be healthy. Deciduous trees shall have a minimum trunk diameter of 13/4 inches at the time of planting; evergreen trees shall be a minimum of 4 feet tall at the time of planting. 7) The street trees must be installed within two years of construction or final recording, whichever occurs first. 8) The street trees shall be owned and maintained by the homeowners' association. C. A pedestrian access easement shall be provided from the northerly terminus of Road B to SE 240th. The easemendshall be a minimum of 8 feet in width, with a 5-foot paved surface. The pedestnall easement/shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association. ,,// r•;l j _ u-f i 25. The subdivision shall comply with the requirements of the sensitive areas(SAO)variance. )F 1 26. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Ordinance 10162 and Ordi• nance 12148, which impose impact fees to find school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a condition of final approval,fifty percent(50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be assessed and collected immediately prior to recording using the fee schedules in effect when the plait received final approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated evenly to the dwelling units in the plat and shall be collected prior to building permit issuance. Q. SAO Variance Recommendations: The applicant shall submit detailed plans for then proposed water quality pond for review and aprpoval by DDES Sensitive Areas staff prior to engineering plan approval. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The subdivision shall conform to KCC 16.82 relating to grading on private property. 2. Development of ilia subject property may require registration with the Washington State Department of Licensing,Real Estate Division. 3. Preliminary approval of this application does not limit the applicant's responsibility to obtain any required permit or license from the!State or other regulatory body. This may include obtaining a forest practice permit from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for tree removal. MC:KC:lm TRANSMITTED TO PARTIES LISTED HEREAFTER: King County Hearing Examiner King County Conservation District Steven C. Townsend, P.E., Supervising Engineer,Land Use Inspection Section SmFItpVL941W I-0.q,t PROPOSED PLAT OF CHANCELLOR PARK AND SAO VARIANCE FILE NOS.L94P0014 AND L95VA016 King County Hearing Examiner Lisa Pringle, Supervisor, Site Plan Review Section Mark Mitchell,Planner III Kim Claussen, Planner 11 Craig Comfort, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section Jon Hansen, Senior Ecologist, Site Development Services Section _ FinkbeinerDevelopmentc. l"1i�_'�..1 i 12011 Bel-Red Road, #206,Bellevue, WA 98005 t j Baima&Holmberg ` MAY .1 100 Front Street,Issaquah,WA 98027-3817 i V David and Elizabeth Scholzen 24216- 129th Avenue SE, Kent, WA 98031 Stanley Fear 24315 - 129th Avenue SE,Kent,WA 98031 Scott Hytrek 24224 - 129th Avenue SE, Kent, WA 98031 New Construction Services 17233 - 140th Avenue SE, #5, Renton, WA 98038 John L. Scott Land Department 3580- 146th Place SE, Suite 450, Bellevue,WA 98007 Jeffrey Jeremiah 18220- 160th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98058 James Maher 12907 SE 245th Street,Kent, WA 98031 Barbara Tsopanoglou 24508 - 129th Place SE, Kent, WA 98031 a Star•RpuL94PW14.mt 16- S.£. 240TH ST_N a .fT — 1,;�.r. . . R '-.J.� ua 3a• .p '1�le u1i0 Ia00p':.K T!e . y WE AND - \ 5 TRAC 110 S E i111,Siss '. \" , • �a'ep(sEP I 14- NOTE.ILAS.0 nCUSM a. T .a I _ IND LOC.\ CONSUL fpF (� _ AND LOCASCO Or SAIMA — —1 n ; I, ia7 �•, ZJ '. Y NUBCRC ON I0/O3 W /9.. µRPM♦[IOCARON OfJ `I _ •'.21 '2 .. Cul-O( SAC RC RES - J •1 / \ ..':: m CXIII:RIOXOF AY We( OarAwCO I I ..'-.. EUAwC'YNbN(EPmO PLAN n.TRACT C $ UEVIE W -GS I O , 7 16 , CIS BVRwNO � I N N9Yxa" b I Q ................ n000' ) I f.M1 TRAC S iP 3eoo _ i tiI 26 .PPP 25 .ta 76 w TRACT 27 28 13 )x 30 - .29 S / ` 6O' ICa •�8 ee sa la Mu SN[oA , =' ',1^�.'• `)S,x; TRACT STREAM RCLoc.PW)7 'CUTClAs RI I op !� J cai`R4ATC LWiww(WJ �'.)a...rR � �6',. I w.r .. owIN91Ao of oar.,Nm a N \ R(a('C"U"CPNIL PUN 4 0© 30 ASCUC.Nr — 15 7 5 sqI T hull;Cnuun' I:u:nln and I:n tinrrrnle Ilil'taiuu I4'I>•vlln!911 ul 111LIir\\brAr \'rAa Uuililu,K • aKl\idly\ISr I:..vn+iKl October 25, 1995 William S. Holmberg, P.E. Baima and Holmberg. Inc. 100 Front Street South Issaquah, WA 95017 RE: Reouest For Variance- Plat orChancellor Park -(DDE-S File L95V0040) Dear Mr. Holmberg: Thank you for your application or March 27, 1995 to the Department of Development and Environmental Services(DDES)for a variance from Section 2.05(B)of the king County Road Standards (KCRS) concerning the length of the cul-de-sac street in the plat of Chancellor Park. The traffic circulation pattern in the neighborhood will be reviewed through the preliminary platting process. I approve a variance for the length of the permanent cul-de-sac if this cul-de- sac will be the final street configuration for the plat. Thank you for writing. if you have any questions concerning these findings, please feel free to call Lydia Reynolds, Manaccr of Projcci Support Services, at 296-6520. Sincerely, / � l .'Jesse Krail, P.E. Manager Roads and Engineering Division JK:TB:pm I�Nac�melv�- 2 61ne County Department or I'ublic W.rks and SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL Deparimcn(nmurks,Planning,and Resources REQUIREMENTS/STANDARDS • VARIANCE REQUEST n•M,n...: aALY la4 Nu - awtu l:•rl...rm..,,....: Chancellor Park L94POO14 r.N wmu: 14XP C.0. r. IT..n. NE 21.22-5 Shupe Holmberg 392.0250 Shupe Holmberg 992-0250 .Yngln 11.41 INMrrrM111r1a Mnr1 Bain a S Holmberg, Inc. 100 Front St .S Issanuah 99027 100 Fr ow h 9 27 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEM: I'lease he sure In Include all plans,=kcicLes,maps and reports Mich may w1st In Ins nnnplels and Ihnel)'revlev mJ cnnslJerallnn o(Ihls varlanrr request Failure to prel'Ids all psrllnenl Infnrmalian may result In delayed processing or dental of ILIs requc%I.Piease suhnl it Ilds rtgnal anI applk.10,rte In Illy Ilulldlny and Laml 1)...Wpmenl(IIALD)Dlrltlon's Cemmerclal or Subdirlslon Products penal(Counter,al the I:a}Ip::inle I.W..s Ilulldh,0„3600.U61h I'lace SE,Ildlel'ue IVA.,90006.1400.:Fur addlllonal Infurma(lon,pliant:9r..6C.00. Rr•.FGR TO SECTION 1.41N CHAPTER 1 OFTIIESUnFACE 1VATER DESIGN MANUAL FOR VARIANCES DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUEST: This is a request to be allowed to divert stonnwater runoff from a proposed 32 lot subdivision to an area downstream of the natural discharge point. A PI'LI CA R LC C I IAI'l-ER(S)/SECTI ON(S): . Section 1.2.1 of 1990 SWM Manual - Core Requirement H1: Discharge at the natural .l US'1'IPICATfON(sec attachments,pa�cs location_In_): Sec justification attached. R� C`.E:FV1.^ lilt, ; ".3''i995 ..;;IJD uSL SEWI(, A I ITI I0r 171T1 ON.CIC NA TUR RSn 1ll�q[I,'Iel'3=n'}I1111'MIOT'aNT'Af.1:Y A1'ItiUI'AI. ��r'�f" .n // /F•NvJ ��� •] s-I/'/J IAn Y Wl:.l:PONPNT1a al' I -'UII:M}NnwC.l •fllL}le / :All r'}I n'Allfll; }ILYnAI' W'IL AA LUI'1'YII'ISIUA'}IA NACI :KJIG.\'r.0 1\1'AI YI\'MIUT•ANA'AnI:Y a'11'. YYUI \}NNwI:I:M IIA 1: 1 IAYolwL ( 11 .A'IAL ( IAI'1'YorAL 1 )ueNUL / fY�nPn'm}'I:n AIP n'A N.r newt .cnrtmvl:uATmeAL bo Mb.l CONDITIONS OF rrro\'AI,• �//••vn'v Ci..L.!' 4�/S$— �y/ L/e(/�7,��/1 l ,Lr 7 l/nl� nr.A 5c'e- (C�cif�r!' f n fmAl.:n.LU In rI=lon nua 1 Cnens ln:. slf}I�/mrMmNl l aAI.n lYsl'I:Cr1nR( I AITl.ifw>TI I m:%I fy l:Nrq Vla:Y11 IP)R See re t,r r<-1 P�1�achrnel� 3 I of 2 page 1 of 1 SWM Variance No. L95V0039. Chaneellnr r• 1 �"/ r Revised Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall be required to provide an addendum to the Level 1 analysis where �. the diverted flow paths navel outside of Public Drainage Easements or Public Rights of Way. The applicant shall also provide adequate mitigation measures and/or obtain written permission from those potentially damaged downstream property owners identified in the study. The need for permission shall be reviewed and approved by DDES staff prior to engineering plan approval. 2. The conveyance capacity of the flow diversion route must be in compliance with Section 1.2.4 Core Requirement 4: Conveyance System Sizing. The applicant shall demonstrate that adequate capacity exists for the additional flows from the diversion. Furthermore, if an abandoned storm line is utilized, the applicant shall demonstrate that the system functions properly and is structurally sound. There shall be no obvious deterioration of the pipes and catch basins, catch basins shall be located at changes in slope or direction of the pipe, and there should be no history of maintenance problems. If capacity is shown to be inadequate, additional on-site controls and/or off-site improvements shall be required, to be approved by DDES staff. 3. If the SE 240th Street CIP project is not constructed, then the applicant shall install a new storm conveyance system. The new system must take flows to Soos Creek Tributary 0091A, below the area which currently exhibits capacity problems. I�i�tcY�rnet.�{--3 2 of LE 1.94 POO 14 P'Zt Name: Chancellor Park Owner: Finkbeiner Development STR: NE NE 21-22-5 Number of Lots: 31 Acreage. 6.18 © PROPOSED Dt .__4�0or SUBDIVISION N Dth—..iL.._._.—.—.—.. � -{a--.—.—._..—.—ne•rs i n de•r j R-48-P o-P R-24P I a I R-12-P �'1 I R'q'p 2 R=18-P I j = I R-18•P P FI ! i s. I I � " = R-4-P i 5= I _ I 1211 N R-4-P j S.E. 248th 52. -.—.. .~..�..7t 22 �r C s.t. um n. r I I\ I APR V 91996 I � s < Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: FEMA GRANT FOR COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM - ACCEPT 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance of grant funds, and authorization for the Mayor or his designee to sign the contract between the Washington State Military Department and the City of Kent Office of Emergency Services . In support of the City' s CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) and disaster preparedness, the Fire Department applied for a grant from FEMA to help with the cost of the training. The City has been awarded a grant of $1, 500 . It is a matching grant which will more than cover funding of the program. 3 . EXHIBITS: Executive summary 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Fire Chief (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: l ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6H EXECUTIVE SUMMARY January 30, 2000 TO: Public Safety Committee FROM: Norm Angelo, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Community Emergency Itesppnse.Team (CFRT41; patrQu&M" INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: The City of Kent began the Community Emergency Response Team training in 1999 for citizens, employees and business representatives. Approximately 80 students participated in an intensive eight-week course covering the following topics: Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Fire Extinguishment and Recognition of Hazardous Materials, Disaster Medical Operations, Search and Rescue, Disaster Psychology and Team Organization. To maintain the high level of interest by the participants, a continued education program was developed to begin in the year 2000. The City of Kent applied to Washington State Emergency Management Division for grant monies to help fund the necessary continued education program for these CERT members. The grant proposal included funding for specialized training equipment, course instructors and printed material. !" The proposal was approved by Washington State with funding made available through a grant award from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Contract#EM010160 between Washington State Military Department and City of Kent Office of Emergency Management awards $1,500 in grant monies to the City of Kent. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Director of Emergency Management is requesting the approval by Public Safety to sign the Contract and move forward with the year 2000 continued education program for CERT members. SIGNIFICANCE: To ensure the priorities of the City Council are met by providing and maintaining a CERT program to the community of Kent. These grant monies will assist in achieving the goal of having a successful CERT program in the City of Kent. BUDGET/ECONOMIC IMPACT: The grant contract requires a 50%non-federal match of which the City is responsible to meet. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Explore other funding options and sources. 2. Do nothing, which is the least preferred alternative. / 11 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF SMITH & LOVELESS PACKAGE PUMP STATION - APPROVE 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works Committee, authorization to purchase a package sewerage pump station manufactured by Smith & Loveless, Inc . The Sales Agreement has been received and the purchase price is $257 . 991 . The attached Public Works Director' s memorandum explains the project and the reason for the sole source purchase. 3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Director memorandum 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds � . DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6I r DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 7, 2000 TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Don Wickstrom TA RE: Purchase of Smith &Loveless Package Pump Station For new Lindental Pump Station The Public Works Department requests authorization to purchase a package sewerage pump station manufactured by Smith & Loveless, Inc. Council authorization is required due to the dollar amount of the purchase. The Sales Agreement has been received and the purchase price is $257,991. The price is within the anticipated price range based on previous quotations and estimates. This is a sole source purchase, therefore was not advertised for bids. Mayor White has waived the bid requirement. The attached memo explains the project and the reason for the sole source purchase. MOTION: Recommend authorization to full Council purchase of the Smith & Loveless Package Pump Station for the purchase price of $257,991.00. WNW oil DEC 07 1999 PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING "T MEMORANDUM December 2, 1999 TO: Mayor White FROM: Don Wickstrom" RE: Waiver request for Lindental Pump Station purchase The Public Works Department requests a waiver of the bidding requirements for the purchase of the new Lindental Pump Station package. The Department desires to purchase a package station manufactured by Smith & Loveless, Inc. Section 3.70.080 of the procurement ordinance 43187 allows the mayor to waive the advertised bid requirements of Section 3.70.030 under specified circumstances. For this purchase, the basis for the waiver specified in the ordinance is "that a bid, or the bidding requirements of Section 3.70.030, would otherwise not be practical or in the city's best interests. The pump station project is scheduled for construction this summer. Bids are anticipated for February with award in March and construction beginning soon thereafter. The contractor will excavate a large hole to install the station, construct a building, install other equipment items and piping and perform other site improvements. However, if the station was included in the construction contract to be supplied by the contractor, the order would not be placed until March after signing of the contract. Due to the long lead-time for manufacture of the pumping station package, it would not be available to install until fall at the earliest. Our plan is for the City to purchase the station now in an effort to keep the installation on schedule for next summer. The procurement ordinance applies to this purchase since the cost is well above the qualifying $50,000. If advertised for bids, any pump station manufacturer could bid if their product conforms to the plans and specifications. Under these conditions we have no control over the brand of station purchased. The sewer department has a strong preference for the Smith & Loveless station and feels that it is in the city's best interest to purchase only this brand station for the following reasons. 1. All but one of our existing stations are S&L. S&L is an industry leader and the city has had excellent results with these products. The longevity has been excellent with minimal repair. Lindpswaiver.dodmkv File 10.1 Project 97-3005 2. The sewer department stocks various parts for the S&L stations. These are standard parts that can be used on the various S&L stations and are easy to obtain. If another brand station is installed, additional parts will have to be stocked. 3. The crews are familiar with the operation and maintenance of the S&L stations. Other brands will complicate the situation. 4. The crews would have to be trained for the 0 & M of the new brand. This also complicates the situation for new employees. The option would be to hire the work done by the pump station company, however this would be more expensive. In addition to the time saved if the City purchases the station prior to the construction bid as explained above, more time can be saved by not going through the bidding process. If you concur with the reasons for waiver of advertised bid requirements stated above in the memorandum, please indicate your agreement by signing where indicated below. WHITE, MAYOR Lincipswaiver.doo'm kv File 10.1 Project 97.3005 I ' Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD GRANT - AUTHORIZE AND ESTABLISH BUDGET 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization for the Mayor to sign the grant agreement, direct staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for $148, 400 for the Pedestrian Safety and Mobility Program, as recommended by the Public Works Committee. The Department of Public Works has received a grant agreement in the amount of $148,400 for the Pedestrian Safety and Mobility Program. 3 . EXHIBITS: Grant agreement 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6J I CI TY ���—► Slule of rvashinstnn r c; 0 :)' 2 Transportation Improvement Board �\ Post Olrice Box 40901 0lvmpiu, WA 98504-0901 February 4, 2000 Mr. Don Wickstrom, P.E. Public Works Director City of Kent 220 -4th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Transportation Improvement Board FY 2001 Pedestrian Safety & Mobility Program (PSMP) TIB Project Number P-P-106(P01)-1 Washington Ave West Harrison St to James St Dear Mr. Wickstrom: The Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) approved the FY 2001 Pedestrian Safety and Mobility Program at its meeting on January 28, 2000. We are pleased to announce that the subject project was selected for PSMP funding in the amount of$148,400. The current policy allows PSMP projects to use the application information as the prospectus, eliminating r the need to submit a design/construction prospectus. PSMP projects selected in the FY 2001 program must be completed by July 1, 2002. The next steps in proceeding with your project are listed below: • Complete the enclosed proposed Project Schedule and fax to the TIB office as soon as possible. • Sign the two enclosed project agreements and return them to the TIB office by March 3, 2000. One agreement form will be returned to your office after the executive director of the Transportation Improvement Board executes it. • Send a copy of the plans and bid documents to your TIB project engineer when the project is ready to advertise. Approval to advertise must be obtained prior to advertising the project. • In accordance with TIB guidelines, an Updated Cost Estimate form (TIB Form 190-015) is required when you are considering contract bids but prior to contract execution. When you receive verbal or written approval from the TIB staff, you may award the contract. All TIB forms are available from cur Web Site at www.tib.wa.gov Please contact Fred Brower at (360) 705-7898 for assistance. Sincerely, Omar Mehyar Region Manager OM:cmc Enclosures Phone: 360.70.5.-.WO Fr.c -ii✓J.;U+.Ii,Q ill ICrh.irr: n•. u.d ,i.,__: Urban Pedestrian Safety & Mobility Program (PSMP) IWO Project Agreement for Design & Construction Lead Agency Project Number City of Kent P-P-106(P01)-1 Project Title&Description Washington Ave West Harrison St to James St Total Amount Authorized Authorization to Proceed Effective From $148,400 January 28, 2000 IN CONSIDERATION of the allocation by the Transportation Improvement Board of TIB matching funds to the project and in the amount set out above, the agency hereby agrees that as condition precedent to payment of any TIB matching funds allocated at any time to the above referenced project, it accepts and will comply with the terms of this agreement, including the terms and conditions set forth in RCW 47.26; the applicable rules and regulations of the Transportation Improvement Board, and all representations made to the Transportation Improvement Board upon which the fund allocation was based; all of which —, are familiar to and within the knowledge of the agency and incorporated herein and made a part of this agreement, although not attached. The officer of the agency, by the signature below hereby certifies on behalf of the agency that federal, state, and local funds represented to be committed to the project will be available as necessary to implement the projected development of the project as set forth in the TIB Prospectus, acknowledges that funds hereby authorized are for the development of the design and construction proposal as defined by Chapter 167. Laws of 1988. Projects in clean air non-attainment areas are subject to air quality conformity requirements as specified in RCW 70.94. The lead agency certifies that the project meets all applicable Clean Air Act requirements. IN CONSIDERATION of the promises and performance of the stated conditions by the agency, the Transportation Improvement Board hereby agrees to reimburse the agency from TIB matching funds allocated, and not otherwise, for its reimbursable costs not to exceed the amount specified. Such obligation to reimburse TIB matching funds extends only to project costs incurred after the date of the Board's allocation of funds and authorization to proceed with-the project. LEAD AGENCY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD Signature of Cnavmar✓Mayor cw,, Executive Director u^^ale Fcrm 190�9 Remsed MCO Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Consent Calendar 1 . SUBJECT: RHODODENDRON ESTATES FINAL PLAT FSU-97-2 (KIVA #9903179) 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve the staff ' s recommendation of approval with conditions the Rhododendron Estates Final Plat and authorize the Mayor to sign the final plat mylar. This agenda item is to consider the final plat application submitted by Bob Newman for the Rhododendron Estates Final Plat . The Hearing Examiner issued the Findings with conditions on the preliminary plat on April 15, 1998 and an Order of Clarification was issued May 7, 1998 . The City Council approved the preliminary plat on June 2 , 1998 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo and map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds /- DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6K CITY Of ,_L�r-4h rNVIC'rA Jim White, Mavor Planning Department (253) 856-5454/Fax (253) 856-6454 James P. Harris, Planning Director MEMORANDUM February 15, 2000 TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RHODODENDRON ESTATES FINAL PLAT #FSU-97-2 (Kiva#9903179) On June 2, 1998, the Kent City Council approved the Hearing Examiner's recommended approval with conditions of the Rhododendron Estates Final Plat #FSU-97-2 (Kiva #9903179), a 4.78 acre, 16-lot residential plat. The property is located at 25809 124th Avenue SE. Staff recommends the City Council approve the Rhododendron Estates Final Plat #FSU-97-2 (Kiva #9903179) with the attached conditions and authorize the Mayor to sign the mylar. JPH\mj p\fsu972 fpcc9903179.doc Enclosure cc: Fred S. Satterstrom, Planning Manager RHODODENDRON ESTATES #FSU-97-2 KIVA #9903179 THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS THE RHODODENDRON ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT ON APRIL 15, 1998. THE KENT CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ON JUNE 2, 1998 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. A. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The Owner/Subdivider shall comply with all applicable conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for ENV-97-46 for this subdivision. B. PRIOR TO RECORDING THE SUBDIVISION: 1. The Owner/Subdivider shall receive approval for engineering drawings submitted to the Department of Public Works, and either construct or bond for the following: a. A gravity sanitary sewer system to serve all lots within the proposed subdivision. b. The septic system serving the existing home within the proposed plat shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health Department Regulations. C. A water system meeting domestic and fire flow requirements for all lots. Water will be provided by Water District #111 of King County and the Owner/Subdivider shall meet the requirements of both the City of Kent and Water District #111 for this water system. d. A public stormwater drainage system for the subdivision. Detailed Drainage Plans will show how the 100-year post-developed stormwater runoff from this development will be collected, conveyed, stored, treated and released to the City stormwater drainage system in compliance to the Kent Construction Standards. (1) The Owner/Subdivider shall construct an on-site detention/retention pond system in accordance with the Kent Construction Standards to mitigate for potential impacts to stormwater runoff quantity. (a) The minimum detention storage volume will be that volume required to detain the 100-year, 24-hour design storm while releasing at rate no greater than 70 percent of the pre-developed 2-year, 24-hour design storm (the release criteria established in the Soos Creek Basin Plan for discharges to Soosette Creek.) (b) The pre-development condition shall be assumed to be forest/grass only unless otherwise determined by the Director. r Rhododendron Estates Conditions of Approval #SU-97-2 (c) The public on-site stormwater detention/retention pond shall have interior slopes no steeper than 3:1; and a ramp no steeper than 6:1 to provide access to the bottom. The use of concrete walls, rockeries, or gabions will not be acceptable for the design of this public stormwater facility. (2) An infiltration pond retention system is the preferred alternative for mitigation of stormwater impacts. This alternative shall be required unless proven unfeasible by the Owner/Subdivider's design engineer in the submittal for the Detailed Drainage Plan. Proof of being infeasible will require soil logs which extend at least 5 feet below the bottom of the proposed pond bottom to show that any impervious layers do not consist of thin lenses. (3) Roof downspouts for each house and garage shall be directed to Roof Downspout Infiltration Trenches meeting the requirements of the Department of Public works including overflow pipes connected to an approved conveyance system. The Detailed Drainage Plans will include an !" approved detail for the Roof Downspout Infiltration Trenches, and will provide private stormwater stubouts to each lot for future connection to the Roof Downspout Infiltration Trenches. The face of the final plat shall contain the following restriction: AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE, RESIDENCES CONSTRUCTED ON LOTS OF THIS SUBDIVISION MUST PROVIDE ROOF DOWNSPOUT INFILTRATION TRENCH SYSTEMS PER DETAILS SHOWN ON THE APPROVED STORMWATER PLANS. (4) The required downstream analysis for this development will include an analysis for capacity, erosion potential, and water quality from the point of discharge from the site downstream a distance of at least one quarter mile. (a) This downstream analysis will clearly identify the existing and future capacity of each link in the drainage system for the appropriate downstream reach if a 100 percent infiltration retention facility is not used. (b) Should any link or element in the downstream capacity be insufficient to convey the future 25-year, 24-hour peak flow rate, the /. Owner/Subdivider shall either provide necessary off-site Page 2 of 8 Rhododendron Estates Conditions of Approval #SU-97-2 improvements to convey the future 25-year, 24-hour design peak flow (and to provide off-site drainage easements where necessary), OR further detain/retain stormwater and restrict the release rate of stormwater to ensure that the capacity of the existing conveyance system will not be exceeded. (c) In addition, the Owner/Subdivider's design engineer shall identify all downstream reaches which cannot convey the future 100-year, 24- hour design storm without overtopping or pressure flows. (d) Similarly, should an erosion problem be exacerbated by the proposed release conditions, then the Owner/Subdivider will have to further restrict the release of stormwater from this development, or to provide suitable off-site mitigation. (e) The Owner/Applicant shall obtain and convey appropriate public drainage easements to the City of Kent for any part of this specified reach which does not currently have a public drainage easement. Where these reaches are part of an identified stream, the public '1 drainage easements will be include the required creek buffers for the class of stream. (5) The Owner/Subdivider shall submit a Landscape Plan for within and surrounding the retention/detention facility to the Kent Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval prior to approval of the Detailed Drainage Plans. (6) No portion of the "hard" stormwater quantity management system (ponds, access roads, pipes, or similar appurtenances) shall be permitted within the creek buffers. Well vegetated biofiltration swales or biofiltration strips, on the other hand, may be permitted within the creek buffers providing additional restoration is provided for the existing, inadequate creek buffers as deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works. e. An open-to-the-air stormwater treatment system in accordance with Kent Construction Standards to mitigate for potential impacts to stormwater runoff quality. Acceptable stormwater treatment facilities meeting this requirement in their preferred order include: infiltration after pretreatment; biofiltration swales; wet ponds; extended detention ponds; and created wetlands. Alternatives and experimental treatment facilities will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the Department of Public Works. Page 3 of 8 Rhododendron Estates Conditions of Approval #SU-97-2 (1) The stormwater treatment system shall be entirely within the approved retention/detention facility tract. (2) Easements for biofiltration swales across private lots will not be acceptable to meet this requirement. (3) Only the outer 25-feet of the creek buffers, or the outer 25-feet of wetland buffers if they are larger than the creek buffers, may have stormwater quality facilities within them. In addition, the only stormwater quality facilities permitted within either buffer shall be limited to well vegetated biofiltration swales or biofiltration strips. f. A Detailed Grading Plan for the entire subdivision which includes provisions for utilities, streets, retention/detention ponds, stormwater treatment facilities, and a building footpad for each lot. These plans shall be designed to eliminate the need for processing several individual Grading Permits upon application for Building Permits: phasing of grading on a lot-by-lot basis is not recommended. g. A Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Plan for the entire subdivision which reflects the Detailed Grading Plan discussed above, and the Detailed Tree Plan mentioned below. h. A Tree Plan detailing clearing limits, trees to be removed, caliper and type. Grading Plans can not be approved without an approved Detailed Tree Plan. i. Street Plans for the Plat Road (tentatively identified as Southeast 258th Street). Construct the plat street to the requirements within the City of Kent Construction Standards for a Residential Street, including a 32-foot wide paved roadway; cement concrete curbs and gutters; five-foot wide cement concrete sidewalks on both sides of the street; a City-approved lighting system; storm drainage facilities; street channelization and signing; utilities and appurtenances, and 35- foot radius curb returns at the intersections of the plat street and 124th Avenue Southeast and "122nd Place Southeast". The applicant shall work with the Public Works Department to incorporate street narrowing options in the vicinity of the wetland/stream. Where the plat street crosses a stream, a "fish-friendly"oversized culvert shall be required which has a gravel bottom and meets Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife HPA conditions and requirements. Page 4 of 8 i Rhododendron Estates Conditions of Approval #SU-97-2 j. Street Plans for the north-south Plat Road (tentatively identified as 122nd Place Southeast). The Owner/Subdivider has two options for this street: (1) Option 1: Obtain the required right-of-way from the adjacent property owner to the west (Kent School District) and dedicate that right-of-way to the City. For this option, the Owner/Subdivider shall construct a paved street at least 20 feet in width, with the crown of the pavement coincident with the centerline of the provided right-of-way, and the face of curb located 16-feet east of that centerline. In addition, the Owner/Applicant shall construct a 5-foot wide cement concrete sidewalk along the east side of the street; a City-owned street lighting system; traffic signs which prohibit parking on both sides of the street; water and sewer line extensions to serve properties to the north and south; a stormwater conveyance system; and appurtenances as needed. (2) Option 2: Dedicate the entire 44-foot wide minimum right-of-way width and construct the full Residential Street. For this option, the Owner/Subdivider shall construct a 32-foot paved street with curb and gutter on both sides; 5-foot wide cement concrete sidewalks on the east side of the street; a City-approved street lighting system; water and sewer line extensions to serve properties to the north and south; a stormwater conveyance system; and appurtenances as needed. k. Street Plans for the widening/improvement of 124th Avenue Southeast across the entire subdivision frontage as described in the SEPA DNS for this subdivision. 2. The Owner/Subdivider shall permanently protect the approved and preserved, and/or enhanced, or created wetland(s) and it's bufYer(s), and the creek and its buffers by creating a separate Sensitive Area Tract and by dedicating the tract to the City. This Sensitive Area Tract shall be consistent with the wetland and wetland buffer map contained within the approved Wetland Delineation Report and/or approved Wetland Mitigation Plan, or the approved creek buffers, as appropriate. The Owner/Subdivider shall provide a legal description of said tract prepared by a licensed land surveyor, prior to issuance of any construction permits. The Sensitive Area Tract and the following language shall be included on the face of the recorded plat: Page 5 of 8 1 Rhododendron Estates T Conditions of Approval #SU-97-2 SENSITIVE AREA TRACTS DEDICATION OF A SENSITIVE AREA TRACT CONVEYS TO THE PUBLIC A BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN THE LAND WITHIN THE TRACT. THIS INTEREST INCLUDES THE PRESERVATION OF NATIVE VEGETATION FOR ALL PURPOSES THAT BENEFIT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, INCLUDING CONTROL OF SURFACE WATER AND EROSION, MAINTENANCE OF SLOPE STABILITY, VISUAL AND AURAL BUFFERING, AND PROTECTION OF WATER QUALITY, PLANT ECOLOGY AND WILDLIFE HABITAT. THE SENSITIVE AREA TRACT IMPOSES UPON ALL PRESENT AND FUTURE OWNERS AND OCCUPIERS OF THE LAND SUBJECT TO THE TRACT THE OBLIGATION, ENFORCEABLE ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC BY THE CITY OF KENT, TO LEAVE UNDISTURBED ALL TREES AND OTHER VEGETATION WITHIN THE TRACT. THE VEGETATION WITHIN THE TRACT MAY NOT BE CUT, PRUNED, COVERED BY FILL, REMOVED OR DAMAGED WITHOUT APPROVAL IN WRITING FROM THE CITY OF KENT. THE COMMON BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE TRACT AND THE AREA OF '^ DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY MUST BE MARKED OR OTHERWISE FLAGGED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY OF KENT PRIOR TO ANY CLEARING, GRADING, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OR OTHER DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY. THE REQUIRED MARKING OR FLAGGING SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL ALL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES IN THE VICINITY OF THE SENSITIVE AREA TRACT ARE COMPLETED. NO BUILDING FOUNDATIONS, STRUCTURES, OR OBSTRUCTIONS (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO DECKS, PATIOS, OUTBUILDINGS AND OVERHANGS) ARE ALLOWED WITHIN 15 FEET OF THE SENSITIVE AREA TRACT. 3. A constructed wetland-type design for the detention/water quality pond in the southeast corner shall be required. The design shall mimic natural systems through dense, native plant landscaping throughout the facility and integrated with stream buffer plantings in the southeast comer. Sensitive area tracts shall be deeded to the City for the stream, wetland, and buffer areas that are not contained within proposed lots. Dedication of Native Growth Protections Easements (NGPE) for those lots adjoining the stream buffer area (Lots 4, 8, 16, and 3) sufficient in width to create/maintain an average total buffer width to the stream of 100 feet or greater, with the minimum r Page 6 of 8 Rhododendron Estates Conditions of Approval #SU-97-2 width not less than 75 feet wide in any location. These NGPE areas shall be landscaped with a dense planting scheme of native trees and shrubs. The NGPE boundaries shall be fenced with split rail wood fencing along their entire lengths and sensitive area signs shall be installed (one sign per lot). By including the detention/water quality area and with a minor modification to the NGPE for lot 14, the site plan submitted 3-23-98 can meet the 100 foot average requirement for areas north and south of the road, as long as all sensitive traCVNGPE areas are designed and planted as natural buffers to the stream and wetland and the stormwater constructed wetland facility can be designed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. A minimum 5-feet wide building setback shall be established from the NGPE. A wetland mitigation plan addressing the proposed unavoidable impacts to the existing wetland and wetland buffers on site shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, based on the final approved wetland boundaries. In addition, the applicant shall revise the draft wetland delineation report based on the City's comments and re-submit for review and approval. A landscape plan for all sensitive areas shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works and Planning Departments 4. The Owner/Subdivider shall dedicate all necessary public right-of-way for the improvements listed in Section A and B, above, and provide all public and private easements necessary for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the required improvements identified in Section B. a. Unless otherwise provided for in a previous deed, the Owner/Subdivider shall dedicate, or Quit Claim deed, sufficient right-of-way, across and through the property frontage, and off-site as necessary, for the construction of the following: (1) 124th Avenue Southeast, to City Standards for a Residential Collector Arterial street, with a minimum half-street right-of-way width of 39 feet across the entire frontage of the subdivision, but also including the right-of- way required to construct the full 36-foot street section, and the off-site right-of-way necessary to construct the pavement transition tapers to the north and south of the site. (2) 122nd Place Southeast, to City Standards for a Residential Collector street with a minimum street right-of-way width of 44 feet, and sufficient right- of-way to provide the specified curb return radii. 1 Page 7 of 8 Rhododendron Estates Conditions of Approval �. #SU-97-) (3) The plat street, to City Standards for a Residential street, minimum right- of-way 49 feet, and 35-foot radius curb returns at the intersection of the plat street at 122nd Avenue Southeast and 122nd Avenue Southeast. b. The dedication or Quit Claim deeds for right-of-way shall be based upon a survey to be performed by a licensed land surveyor of the subject property, 124th Avenue Southeast, the area for the right-of-way for 122nd Place Southeast, and adjacent affected properties, and shall clearly delineate the existing and future public right-of-way, property lines, curb lines, paving limits, and other public and private improvement 5. The owner/subdivider shall dedicate five percent of the site area for parks and recreation or pay fee in lieu of dedication pursuant to KCC Section 12.04.490 of the Kent Subdivision Code. C. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT ON ANY LOT IN THE RHODODENDRON ESTATES SUBDIVISION (SU 97-02). THE OWNER/SUBDIVIDER SHALL: 1. Execute all required EMAs specified above. 2. Convey all required off-site drainage easements (or off-site Sensitive Area Tracts) required above. 3. Construct all improvements required in Sections A & B, above. 4. The Owner/Subdivider shall receive approval for detailed Grading Plans AND Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plans in conformance to the City Construction Standards. 5. As-built drainage plans for the entire site shall be prepared by a certified land surveyor and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 6. The Owner/Subdivider shall receive approval for a Detailed Tree Plan submitted to the Kent Planning AND Department of Public Works. Page 8 of 8 Y// {.1'10//11/ON .Y///. .IfJ All L.t'YS//LJ/PN .➢Nl N! I L('OMI. YM 'IN I O I„111L `Nm'N o N 4�(. Sc :nm�S ,/,/.VJfJ/J.fl;l.7 a.�v l:anrlii.s 1 •o JIr%/ oul jsaeau1soN '15102.zo •r � O YY � � i � �sP /t I .= a p �� — ' •. r%�t`.w �X➢�� Ana F 5` `�,. I P. OEM Z" r (DE co tCS g 1/1641 zz: oil �� 61 8'S Id Fuzz[ 6 RECEIVED I NOV } 4 1997CITY OF KENT PLANNING DE Am MEN s , E i Kent City Council Meeting Date February 15 , 2000 Category Other Business 1 . SUBJECT: 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (CPA-99-3 (A-J) /CPZ-99-1, 2, 3 , 4 , 6, 8 , 9) 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: By ordinance, amendments to the Kent Comprehensive Plan are processed collectively once every year. Applications for ten (10) plan amendments were received by September 1, 1999 . Nine (9) of these applications involved proposed changes to the comprehensive plan map. The Land Use and Planning Board held public hearings on November 22 and November 29, 1999 and on January 24, 2000 . The Board' s recommendations are detailed in the attached report . 3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo dated February 15, 2000; staff report and minutes of the LUPB dated November 22, 1999; staff report and minutes of the LUPB dated November 29, 1999; staff report and minutes of the LUPB dated January 24, 2000 . 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Land Use & Planningt Board (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to approve/modify/deny the Land Use & Planning Board' s recommendations on the proposed 1999 comprehensive plan and zoning amendments, and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance (s) . DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 7A CITY OF I o`.�� J�, t.�tcr� Jim White, Mayor Planning Department (253)856-54541FAX(253) 856-6454 James P. Harris, Planning Director MEMORANDUM February 15, 2000 TO: LEONA ORR, PRESIDENT AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: MAYOR JIM WHITE SUBJECT: #CPA-99-3 (A-J)/#CPZ-99- (1-9) 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAIN AND ZONING AMENDMENTS It is my pleasure to forward to the City Council the Land Use and Planning Board's recommended Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments for 1999. These recommendations are presented to you as per RCW, 35A.63.070, 071 and 072. Attached is the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendations for both the Comprehensive Plan changes (CPA-99-3, A-J) and the implementing zoning amendments (CPZ-99-1, 1-9). The Land Use and Planning Board conducted public hearings on the Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments on November 22 and 29, 1999 and January 24, 2000. A City Council workshop was held at 5:30 p.m. on January 18, 2000. As outlined in the attached staff report, the City received ten proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan. Nine of these requests involve changes to the Land Use Plan Map. The proposed comprehensive plan amendments have been reviewed concurrently with corresponding changes to the Kent zoning map, where applicable. The Land Use and Planning Board considered the following applications at their public hearings. A summary of each application is provided below, followed by the Planning Board's recommended action on amending the Land Use Plan Map and zoning map (see attachments A and B for maps of proposed amendment sites): Proposal A - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential one unit per acre to Single Family Residential 3 units per acre for the property located at 14845 SE 264th Street. (Cairnes #CPA-99-3(A)/#CPZ-99-1) The Planning Board is recommending that the applicant's request for a land use designation of Single Family Residential 3 be DENIED, and the zoning remain SR-1. Proposal B - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 8 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for property located at 25835 116th Avenue SE. (TNS Condo #CPA-99-3 (B)/#CPZ-99-2) The Planning Board is recommending that the applicant's request for a land use designation of Low Density Multifamily Residential be APPROVED, and the zoning changed to MRT 16, Townhouse/Condo, 16 units per acre maximum. ?'-O ath AVE.SO.. I KENT.wASH[NGTON 93032�5R95/TELEPI j '41)fcb-5200 P 99-3 (A-!)/#CPZ-99-1 (1-9) — 1999 COMP PLAN& ZONING ANIENDML-NTS � 2000 Page-1 Proposal C - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for property located at 13602 SE 282nd Street. (Clasen #CPA-99-3 (C)/#CPZ-99-3). The Planning Board is recommending that the applicant's request for a land use plan designation of SF-6 be APPROVED, and the zoning changed to SR-6. Proposal D - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 1 unit per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for property located at 24039 146`h Place SE. (Pacific Industries #CPA-99-3 (D)/#CPZ-99-4 The Planning Board is recommending that the applicants' request for a land use plan designation of Single Family Residential 6 be DENIED, and the property remain SR-1 on the zoning map. Proposal E - Lotto #CPA-99-3 (E) This application was located outside of the Kent City Limits and was returned to the applicant until such time it is annexed or considered for such. Proposal F- A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for property located at SE 244th Street at 108th Avenue SE. (Tolles/Fox/Braun#CPA-99-3(F)/#CPZ-99-6) ^� The Planning Board is recommending that the applicants' request for a land use plan designation of Low Density Multifamily be DENIED and the zoning remain SR-3. The applicants for this 2royosal have since requested that their application for comprehensive plan amendment and zoning change be withdrawn. Proposal G - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for property located at 27842 and 27854 132"d Avenue SE (Fortunate #CPA-99-3 (G)) The Planning Board is recommending that the applicant's request for a land use plan designation of Single family Residential 6 units per acre be DENIED. There was no separate zoning request made by the applicant on this property. Proposal H - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Mixed Use Limited Multifamily to Low Density Multifamily Residential for property located at the southeast corner of 102nd Avenue SE and SE 2361h Street. (Flower Court #CPS-99-3 (H)/#CPZ-99-8) The Planning Board is recommending that the applicant's request for Low Density Multifamily Residential plan designation be APPROVED, and the ^� zoning changed to MRT 16, Townhouse/Condo Residential, 16 units per acre maximum. A�u -3 I -J)/mCPZ-99-1 (1-9)— 1999 CONIP PLAN& ZONING AMENDMENTS , 2000 Page 3 Proposal I - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 8 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for property located in the 27000 block of 132nd Avenue SE. (Meridian Associates #CPA-99-3 (I) /#CPZ- 99-9). The Planning Board is recommending that the applicants' request of a land use plan designation of Low Density Multifamily Residential be APPROVED and the zoning changed to MRT 12, Townhouse/Condo 12 units per acre maximum density on the zoning map. Proposal J- Updates to the Capital Facilities Element. (City of Kent Finance Department #CPA-99-3(J)) The Capital Facilities Element in the comprehensive plan which was adopted in 1995 contains a great deal of information relating to inventories of existing capital facilities, estimated costs of anticipated future facilities, and projected revenues to fund these facilities. These components of the Capital Facilities Element are all required under the Growth Management Act (GMA). The Planning Board held a public hearing on the proposed CFP amendment on January 24, 2000 and voted to forward the plan amendment to the City Council without recommendation. At the City Council workshop held on January 18, 2000, planning staff introduced the issue of Urban Separators in regards to this years proposed plan amendments. Urban Separators are generally areas of low-density residential development and/or open space, which provide a physical and visual transition between municipalities. This language is written into the CountyWide Planning Policies, which the City of Kent endorsed in 1994. Two of this years proposed comprehensive plan amendments are properties located within designated Urban Separators (Caimes and Pacific Industries amendments). Staff recommends that the City Council table action on these two plan amendments until and following a full discussion of the impact of this countywide policy. Staff will be available at the February 15, 2000, City Council meeting to discuss the Planning Boards' recommendations on these proposals and answer any questions about these applications. JPHIMJlpmIS:IPUBLICIPIanninglCPA993 (A-J) 021500 CC HRG.doc Attachments: 11/22199, 11/29/99, 1/24/00 Staff Reports 11122/99, 11/29/99, 1/24/00 LUPB Minutes cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Kevin O'Neill, Senior Planner Matthews Jackson, Planner/GIS Coordinator Diana Nelson, Planner May Miller, Finance Director CITY OF S� l'7 11 f Mvrore Jim White, Mayo Planning Department (253) 856-5454/FAX(253)856-6454 James P. Harris,Planning Director STAFF REPORT NOVEMBER 22, 1999 MEMO TO: RON HARMON, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: MATTHEWS JACKSON, PLANNER/GIS COORDINATOR SUBJECT: 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS NOVEMBER 22, 1999 HEARING ♦ #CPA-99-3(B)/CPZ-99-2 TNS AMENDMENT ♦ #CPA-99-3(C)/CPZ-99-3 CLASEN AMENDMENT ♦ #CPA-99-3(F)/CPZ-99-6 TOLLES/FOX/BRUAN AMENDMENT ♦ #CPA-99-3(H)/CPZ-99-8 FLOWER COURT AMENDMENT ♦ #CPA-99-3(J)/CITY OF KENT CIP INTRODUCTION In April, 1995, the Kent City Council adopted the Kent Comprehensive Plan, which was prepared and adopted under the provisions of the Washington State Growth Management Act(GMA). The GMA requires that comprehensive plans combine land use, transportation, capital facilities, and other elements in a way, which is both internally consistent and consistent with plans from other jurisdictions in the region. The GMA also requires that a city's development regulations implement and be consistent with the plan. The GMA establishes procedures for the amendment of plans, and stipulates that plans can only be amended once a year unless an emergency is declared which requires immediate action. Pursuant to the provisions in the GMA, the City Council adopted an ordinance (Ordinance#3237) outlining procedures for the amendment of the City's plan. These procedures are now outlined in Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code. The City's procedures ordinance established September I of each calendar year as the deadline for applications to be submitted to the Planning Department for proposed amendments to the plan. 1999 AMENDMENTS As of September 1 of this year, the Planning Department received ten (10) applications for amendments to the comprehensive plan. Nine applications were initiated by private property owners, and one application was initiated by the City of Kent. One application was returned to the _204,h AVE.SO.. /KENT.WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (2531856-5200 Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments '\ November 22, 1999 Page 2 applicant because it was determined to be outside of the existing Kent City Limits and premature for any land use or zoning changes. The proposed amendments are summarized below: 1. #CPA-99-3(A)/CPZ-99-1 CAIRNES AMENDMENT- A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 1 unit per acre to Single Family Residential 3 units per acre for the property located at 14845 SE 264t' Street. (Caimes) 2. #CPA-99-3(B)/CPZ-99-2 TNS AMENDMENT - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 8 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at 25835 116'Avenue SE. (TNS Condo) 3. #CPA-99-3(C)/CPZ-99-3 CLASEN AMENDMENT -A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for the property located at 13602 SE 282nd Street. (Clasen). 4. #CPA-99-3(D)/CPZ-994 PACIFIC INDUSTRIES AMENDMENT - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 1 unit per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for the property located at 24039 146'Place SE. (Pacific Industries) 5. #CPA-99-3(E)/CPZ-99-5 LOTTO NURSERY AMENDMENT—Denied/Retumed —not in the City. 6. #CPA-99-3(F)/CPZ-99-6 TOLLES/FOX/BRUAN AMENDMENT -A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at SE 2441' Street at 1081" Avenue SE. (Tolles/FoxBraun) 7. #CPA-99-3(G) FORTUNATO AMENDMENT - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for the property located at 27842 and 27854 132nd Avenue SE (Fottunato) 8. #CPA-99-3(I)/CPZ-99-8 FLOWER COURT AMENDMENT - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Mixed Use Limited Multifamily to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at the se comer of 102nd Avenue SE and SE 236' Street. (Flower Court) 9. #CPA-99-3(1)/CPZ-99-9 MERIDIAN ASSOCIATES AMENDMENT-A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 8 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located in the 27000 block of 132' Avenue SE. (Meridian Associates) 111 Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 22, 1999 Page 3 10. #CPA-99-3(.n KENT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT AMENDMENT - Amendments to the Capital Facilities Element. (Kent Finance Department) It should be noted that any proposed changes to the Land Use Plan Map will be reviewed concurrently with corresponding amendments to the zoning map except for the proposed Fortunato amendment. This applicant chose to not seek a rezone of the subject property at this time. 1999 Hearing Process At the recommendation of the Land Use and Planning Board, staff has separated the proposals into two sets to be heard at separate hearings. At the November 22, 1999 hearing,staff will be presenting items numbered#CPA-99-3(B), #CPA-99-3(C), #CPA-99-3(F), #CPA-99-3(H), and CPA-99-3(J). This memorandum will present information about each of these proposed amendments. Maps have been prepared, and are attached, for each area,which will be affected by the proposed changes to the Land Use Plan Map and zoning map (Attachment A). Each proposed amendment will be analyzed and staff s recommendation will be noted. The second set of amendments will be heard at the next hearing scheduled for November 29, 1999, and will include#CPA-99-3(A), #CPA-99-3(D),#CPA- 99-3(G), and#CPA-99-3(I). STANDARDS OF REVIEW Section 12.02.050 of the Kent City Code outlines the standards of review, which must be used by staff and the City Council in analyzing any proposed comprehensive plan amendments. Proposed amendments are to be examined based on the following criteria: 1. The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare; 2. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the plan that warrant an amendment to the plan; and 3. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the comprehensive plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities elements of the plan. The proposed plan amendments have been analyzed based on these criteria. r� Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments 1 November 22, 1999 Page 4 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Proposal B - #CPA-99-3(B)/CPZ-99-2 Change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for property located at 25835 116'Avenue SE (TNS Condo Amendment) Applicant: Thomas and Jane Sharp Existing Plan Designation: SF-8, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 8 units/acre Low Density Multifamily Existing Zoning: SR-8, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 8.71 units/acre MRT-16, Townhouse 16 units/acre Background The subject site consists of two tax parcels and covers an area of approximately 2.37 acres. The site is located on the west side of 116'Ave. SE. The site is currently zoned Single Family Residential- � 8 Units/Acre and the land use designation is Single Family-8 Units/Acre Maximum. A single-family residence and accessory buildings currently occupy the site. The site contains an area that has been identified as a stream in the City's wetland inventory. The area north, east and a portion of the area south of the subject property is zoned and has a land use designation of Medium Density Multifamily Residential. This area is developed with multifamily apartments. The majority of the,area south of the subject property is zoned and has a land use designation of Single Family Residential- 8-units/acre maximum. The area is developed with single family dwellings on large lots. Across 116'Ave., the land has a land use designation of and is zoned Single Family Residential-6 units/acre. This area is developed with single family dwellings on large parcels. Analysis The applicant is requesting the Low Density Multifamily land use designation and the Multifamily Residential Townhouse MRT-16 zone. The MRT-16 zone was recently adopted by the City to meet the community need for townhouse condominium homeownership options. The creation and development of this type of housing meets the City's housing goals and policies, which are as follows: Goal H-4 - Expand home ownership opportunities for all income groups via land use regulations,financial strategies, and the removal of barriers to lending. Policy H-4.1 - Revise zoning and development standards to facilitate small lot sizes, Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 22, 1999 r Page 5 manufactured housing on single-family lots, townhouses, condominiums, clustering, and other options which increase the supply of affordable home ownership opportunities. The current zoning of this property could potentially allow 20 single family dwellings to be located on the subject property. Approval of rezone of this property from SR-8 to MRT-16 would result in a potential density of 37 dwelling units on the property, a total potential increase of 17 units. It is unlikely that this could be built to the maximum density either as single family detached residences or as townhouses, due to the site constraints of parcel configuration and the presence of a stream as well as the requirement for two parking spaces per unit. However, MRT zoning does allow for more flexibility of unit placement, clustering and innovative design to deal with the constraints of the property and efficiently utilize this site, than does SR-8 zoning. The site is accessed by 110' Avenue Southeast,which is currently classified as a Residential Street. With the completion of the South 272nd/South 277' Street Corridor project, it is likely that 116'Avenue SE. will be reclassified as a Residential Collector Street. This section of 116' Avenue Southeast is currently identified within the City's 2000—2005 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and will require little or no additional mitigation by the applicant. The site has a stream which transverses the middle of the property. The stream must bridged in order to develop the west half of the property. The stream is not salmon-bearing. Wetland buffers of 25 or 50 on each side of the stream will be required to protect the stream from i^ development activity and use. A wetland report and on-site investigation at the time of development of the site will determine the buffer width. Recommendation The uses surrounding this site are a mixture of multi-family residential and single-family residential. Development of this site with townhouses, as required by the MRT-16 zone is consistent with the existing neighborhood and would function as a transitional area between differing densities and types of residential uses. The potential impact of additional traffic to 116' Avenue SE. is minimal. Wetland buffers required, as part of the development process of the site will protect the stream on the property. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request for Low Density Multifamily Residential and MRT-16 zoning. Proposal C - #CPA-99-3(C)/CPZ-99-3 Change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for property located at 13602 SE 282"d Street(Clasen Amendment) Applicant: Donald and Barbara Clasen Existing Plan Designation: SF-3, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 3 units/acre SF-6, Single Family 6 units/acre Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments '1 November 22, 1999 Page 6 Existing Zoning: SR-3, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 3.63 units/acre SR-6, Single Family 6.05 units/acre Background The subject site consists of 2 tax parcels and covers an area of approximately 11.21 acres. The site has a land use designation of SF-3, Single Family Residential, 3 units per acre maximum density, and is zoned SR-3, Single Family Residential, 3.63 units per acre. The site is located in the Meridian annexation area, which became a part of the city on January 1, 1996. The applicant is requesting a change to a land use designation of SF-6, Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre, and a zoning of SR-6, Single Family Residential, 6.05 units per acre in order to make the property more viable for subdivision and construction of single family detached residences. Analysis Two single family residences and accessory buildings currently occupy the site. The site contains areas which have been identified as wetlands in the City's wetland inventory. Properties to the north and east are zoned SR-6 and have a land use designation of SF-6. Included in the vicinity of this proposal is the approved South Ridge subdivision which includes some 153 lots adjacent to the subject on the east. A portion of the South Ridge plat was a request for a 1997 Comprehensive Plan Amendment known as the Clasen/Dinsdale amendment. This property, located adjacent to this years request on the east, received approval for a change in land use designation from SF-3 to SF-6 and zoning from SR-3 to SR-6. This is consistent with the request being heard today. Properties to the west are zoned SR-3 and have a land use designation of SF-3. Properties to the south are zoned SR-1 and have a land use designation of SR-1. There are two major considerations when considering this property for development. One is the protection of the wetlands and the other is the improvement to existing substandard transportation facilities. Preservation and buffering of a delineated wetland will limit the amount of potential development on the site. The subject property is in an area which is slowly developing into typical suburban residential developments. Most of the platting activity has occurred in the areas designated SR-6. Primary access to the site is along SE 282nd Street. This is a substandard road which is not constructed to City of Kent Construction standards. As a part of plat approval, the developers of the South Ridge plat will be required to improve SE 282nd Street across a portion of the wetland in order to provide a secondary access to the project other than 144"Avenue SE. Subsequent development of the proposed Clasen property would likely require additional offsite improvements to SE 282nd Street. "1 Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 22, 1999 Page 7 (Revised) There are several goals and policies in the Kent Comprehensive Plan which encourage new single family development which is sensitive to wetlands, and capital facilities. Overall Goal: Encourage a future growth and development pattern which implements the community's vision, protects environmentally sensitive areas, and enhances the quality of life of Kent residents. Goal H-1 —Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide variety 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 LU-8.1 —Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to accommodate both city and county housing 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. Recommendation Upon review of the standards of review and the merits of the applicants request, staff is recommending approval of the Clasen amendment. Any proposed development on the site would be compatible with existing and future single family residential development in this area. The pending development of the South Ridge plat will start a significant change in the nature of this area. The City has a wetlands ordinance and Construction Standards which are in place to protect sensitive areas and provide adequate transportation facilities. Development on this site will create new single family residential neighborhoods which are a high priority of the Kent City Council. Proposal F- #CPA-99-3(F)/CPZ-99-6 A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located on SE 244'h Street at 1081" Ave. SE. (Tolles/FoxBraun Amendment) Applicant: Robert Thorpe Existing Plan Designation: SF-3, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 3 units/acre LDMR Low Density Multifamily Existing Zoning: SR-3, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 3.63 units/acre SR-3, Single Family 3.63 Units/Acre MRD,Duplex Multifamily 10units/acre MRG,Low Density Multifamily �" 16 units/acre Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments ' November 22, 1999 Page 7 There are several goals and policies in the Kent Comprehensive Plan which encourage new single family development which is sensitive to wetlands, and capital facilities. Overall Goal: Encourage a future growth and development pattern which implements the community's vision,protects environmentally sensitive areas, and enhances the quality of life of Kent residents. Goal H-1 —Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide variety 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 LU-8.1 —Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to accommodate both city and county housing 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. Recommendation Upon review of the standards of review and the merits of the applicants request, staff is recommending approval of the Clasen amendment. Any proposed development on the site would be compatible with existing and future single family residential development in this area. The pending development of the South Ridge plat will start a significant change in the nature of this area. The City has a wetlands ordinance and Construction Standards which are in place to protect sensitive areas and provide adequate transportation facilities. Development on this site will create new single family residential neighborhoods which are a high priority of the Kent City Council. Proposal F- #CPA-99-3(F)/CPZ-99-6 A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located on SE 244' Street at 108"Ave. SE. (Tolles/Fox/Braun Amendment) Applicant: Robert Thorpe Existing Plan Designation: SF-3, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 3 units/acre SF-6, Single Family 6 units/acre Existing Zoning: SR-3, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 3.63 units/acre SR-3, Single Family 3.63 Units/Acre MRD,Duplex Multifamily IOunits/acre MRG, 16 units/acre -ON Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November22, 1999 Page 8 Background The subject site consists of four tax parcels and covers an area of approximately 9.12 acres. The site is located on the north side of SE. 244'Street and on both the west and east side of the unimproved public right-of-way for 108' Ave. SE. The site is currently zoned Single Family Residential-3 Units/Acre and the land use designation is Single Family-3 Units/Acre Maximum. Three single- family residences and accessory buildings currently occupy the subject property. The site contains several areas that have been identified as wetlands in the City's wetland inventory. A majority of the area north of the subject property is zoned Community Commercial and has a land use designation of Mixed Use Limited Multifamily. This area is partially developed with a mini- warehouse self-storage complex with the remainder being vacant land. The balance of the area north of the subject property is zoned Medium Density Multifamily Residential and has a land use designation of Medium Density Multifamily. This area is developed with multifamily apartments. The areas south and east of the subject property and the abutting parcel to the west is zoned Single Family Residential-3 units/acre maximum and has a land use designation of Single Family-3 units/acre maximum. The area is developed with single family dwellings on small to large lots. The area to the west of the abutting SR-3 zoned parcel is zoned Community Commercial-Mixed Use with the land use designation of Mixed Use Limited Multifamily. This area is developed with small �- commercial buildings and some undeveloped land, which is currently in the process of being developed as a mini-warehouse self-storage complex. The proposed zoning request would result in the retention of the SR-3 zoning on a strip of land approximately 100 feet in depth, adjacent to SE 244' Street and changing the zoning to MRD, Duplex Multifamily Residential on a second strip of land, approximately 120 feet in depth, directly north of the SR-3 zoning district. The remainder of the subject property would be zoned MRG, Low Density Multifamily Residential. Analysis The current zoning of this property could potentially allow 30 additional single family dwellings to be located on the subject property. Approval of a rezone of this property from SR-3 to MRD and MRG would result in a potential density of two additional single-family dwellings in the area remaining in the SR-3 zone, ten duplexes with a total of twenty units in the area proposed to be zoned MRD and 107 multifamily apartment units in the area proposed to be zoned MRG. The total potential increase due to rezoning would be 99 dwelling units. However, it may not be possible to construct the site to the maximum density due to the location of several wetlands on the property and residential parking requirements. The subject property abuts commercial and multifamily zones on the north side. Although the area is beginning to change from solely single-family residential uses,the other three sides of the property �-. still abut single family zones and dwellings. While the intent of a creating a transitional buffer area Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments 1 November 22, 1999 Page 9 between the low density single-family residential uses and the higher density multifamily uses is a laudable idea, this specific proposal is unlikely to create a sufficiently wide area to actually buffer the single family uses. In addition, the resulting narrow strips of mixed zones, which jog and meander over the property, are difficult for the City to effectively administer zoning and development activity. The site abuts the north side of Southeast 244' Street and unimproved 108ih Avenue Southeast runs through the east side of the subject property. The Public Works Department has determined that 108' Avenue SE. will be extended to SE. 244' Street. The extended 108' Avenue SE. is classified as a Residential Collector, as is SE. 244' Street. The rezone and development of this site with multifamily housing would necessitate the donation of additional right-of-way and the construction of 108'Avenue SE. as a condition of development. The site has several wetlands located on the property. Wetland buffers around the perimeter of each wetland will be required to protect the wetlands from development activity and use. A wetland report and on-site investigation at the time of development of the site will determine the buffer width. Recommendation '1 The uses surrounding this site are a mixture of low density single-family residential and commercial zoning or uses. Although higher density single family residential development or townhouses may be appropriate in this area; the requested zoning proposal results in a series of very small fragmented zones, which is not compatible with efficient management of city development. Therefore, Staff recommends denial of the applicant's request for Low Density Multifamily Residential and MRD and MRG zoning. An alternative option that the Board may wish to consider is to change the comprehensive plan land use designation to SF-8 and rezone the property to the SR-8 zoning district, which would allow higher density single-family residential development or enable a future comprehensive plan amendment/rezone to the MR-T Multifamily Residential Townhouse zone. If the Board should prefer this option, Staff would recommend that all of the parcels be rezoned between the commercial zoned land to the west and 108'Avenue SE. as well as the two parcels abutting the east side of 108' Avenue SE. Proposal H - #CPA-99-3(H)/CPZ-99-8 A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located at the southeast corner of 102n° Avenue SE and SE 236t° Street (Flower Court Amendment) Applicant: Pacific West Development LLC Existing Plan Designation: MU-R, Mixed Use Proposed Plan Designation: ^1 Limited Multifamily Low Density Multifamily Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 22, 1999 Page 10 Existing Zoning: CC-MU Proposed Zoning: Community Commercial/ MRT-16, Multifamily Townhouse Mixed Use 16 units/acre Background The subject property consists of three tax parcels and is approximately 2.5 acres in size. The site is located at the southeast intersection of 102'd Avenue SE and SE 236' Street. 102nd Avenue SE terminates at the north end of the property; SE 236' is currently not open and development adjacent to the site. The current land use designation is Mixed Use and the zoning is Community Commercial. The site is located within the Mixed Use overlay area. The property is currently vacant. The properties to the northwest, west, and south are designated as Multi-family Residential in the comprehensive plan, zoned MRM and MRG and are developed with multi-family residential uses. The parcels to the east designated in the plan as Mixed Use, zoned CC and are developed with commercial uses. These commercial uses are oriented towards 104'Avenue SE, located to the east. There is a large parcel to the north of the site which is undeveloped; Garrison Creek runs through the southern portion of this parcel. The applicants are requesting a change in the land use designation to Low Density Multifamily and a change in the zoning to MRT in order to construct a condominium townhouse development. The size of the property would potentially permit approximately 40 units on the site. Analysis As mentioned above, the subject parcel is surrounded by both commercial and residential uses. The applicant maintains that the site is not appropriate for commercial uses, given its lack of street frontage on 104'h Avenue SE. The applicant also states that a residential development on the site would be more compatible with the surrounding uses than commercial development, which is what the present zoning allows. Residential development typically has less impact than commercial development due to lower trip generation and less impervious surfaces. The current zoning of the site allows for developments which combine commercial and residential uses. A mixed use zoning overlay was established in 1997 which allowed for mixed use development on some parcels in the city, including the subject property. Under the existing zoning, multi-family residential uses are permitted, but at least 25 percent of the total floor area of the development must be a commercial use. The subject property was included in the mixed use overlay because it appeared to be a good location to combine commercial and residential uses, given its proximity to both types of development. The applicants proposed a mixed use development on the site, but found that the requirement to use 25 percent for commercial uses was not feasible given the site's lack of visibility from 104'Avenue SE. Subject: #CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 22, 1999 Page I The comprehensive plan contains several goals and policies which encourage housing to locate in close proximity to commercial and other community services. These include the following: Policy LU-8.3—Locate housing opportunities within close proximity to employment, shopping, transit, and human and community services. Policy LU-9.1 —Allow and encourage high to medium density residential development in the downtown and designated activity centers. Goal H-1 —Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide variety 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. One important issue with regard to the future development of this site, regardless of whether it is residential or commercial, is transportation access. As mentioned, this site is located at the northern edge of 102nd Avenue SE. 102"d Avenue already serves a number of residential developments, and development of the site will put a greater burden on the road. SE 236' Street is currently not open adjacent to the parcel,but is open at the north edge of the commercial parcel -y to the east of the site, and intersects with 104d'Avenue SE It maybe advisable to open the remainder of SE 236' Street to enable future residents of the project, should the plan and zoning amendment be approved, to use this street without burdening 102"d Avenue SE. However, it will be important to design the street improvements in such a way as 102'Avenue will not be further impacted by drivers using it instead of 104'Avenue to get to James Street. Recommendation This proposed amendment appears to be consistent with the standards of review outlined in the Kent City Code pertaining to comprehensive plan amendments. The proposed development would be more compatible with surrounding uses than commercial development, and would have less of an impact with regard to traffic than the existing zoning would allow. Therefore, staff recommends that the proposed amendment be approved Proposal J- #CPA-99-3(J) Update of Capital Facilities Element Applicant: City of Kent Finance Department The Capital Facilities Element in the comprehensive plan which was adopted in 1995 contains a great deal of information relating to inventories of existing capital facilities, estimated costs of anticipated future facilities, and projected revenues to fund these facilities. These components of the Capital Facilities Element are all required under the Growth Management Act(GMA). A large -1 Subject: .#CPA-99-3(A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 22, 1999 Page 12 scale revision to the element is planned for 1999, however the recently passed Initiative 695 will force changes to many decisions already made. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Land Use Board recommend approval to the City Council of the updates to the Capital Facilities Element as prepared by the Finance Department, and as shown in Attachment B. CONCLUSION In summary, the staff recommendations for the set of five proposed plan amendments are as follows: Proposal B - Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Low Density Multifamily in the comprehensive plan and MRT-16 on the zoning map. Proposal C - Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Single Family Residential 6 in the comprehensive plan and SR-6 on the zoning map r-. Proposal F - Recommend that the applicant's request for Low Density Multifamily and MRD, MRG, and SR-3 zoning be denied. Proposal H - Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Low Density Multifamily in the comprehensive plan and MRT-16 on the zoning map. Proposal J - Recommend the update of the Capital Facilities Element per the recommendation of the City of Kent Finance Department. If you have any questions prior to the November 22nd public hearing, please contact me at (253) 856-5441. MApm\P:\CPA99-3.MM3.doc Enc: Attachments A&B cc: James P. Harris,Planning Director Fred Satterstrom,Planning Manager Kevin O Neill,Senior Planner Diana Nelson,Planner Mayene Miller, Finance Director c ^l Y M � 5'- Mr •�93�L hw Y. �fjY ��' � ��• Y` `' ate & r ° ' 1► � a 77 FE Fin, V Z w Q N w a W cn _ •— U _ 4, z N a e � 00 � 3 U N • cr) r J F i cl Ii , � i -=�� � ► � e l � a4 � � I I ! II I s C I i C 1 9 i�l O fq®!m lowj.I 6 i ' a I . I o a ! a n • f�. � Lamy 1 , p C V; I i I Q iQ ! J L s � I ❑I,ol I °I I �? I� I• a •b I I ,��m � I IR WL r.0yi; 10 i I ,QK� ' •wOl LL l a I i°��I G i i i u Z cn r ry W CO _ CIO � es 04 N � 29AV"t I LJ I 7 I /• I I :�i j � cm o _15 c � N CL I ( ! f I i i I � I � ; n � I � I • G W I J I I ( la I c e l I . Bic . ) T • ` 1Ca n a ° oP-N � .. �) �� • i '� � �� <; , w_ '_ - i - -�� s.". a � ., _� , � v I . a � :�, � _ j � ,; �� � �,j � n ;� _ , ����� .� C C �f 7- • r. W ✓ca rY<- ry 4 f _ G� Y.w�.fr 11 r �] � tiyt �3rz CS ��K:-r-Y F: .y ,.. 3 r_,�-xz - :�%c-�-.a: sY -v Cm �I w�� .c c � � .:� �' +� , �a�. �t p I ■ �,-�� a I:Li- Into--- is I: _ t ' giy' j -yS aoeld L1160L I.L { co ' , TCD - i Q r I + •1 .� `f. I ��g L1 r � J I r � I l i h ! •'•. • I 5 ti LL 0 LL S ` ' CE � _ • 1L - d s q 1 a 6 g S c ai cm K N cm til .I - • � a I ......................................................... = f I i I i i CCSe s i STpF � i ceS t', f i _ • 4---. • S (e Y ✓ r t S IN 4 ATM t��� — m d �• +'�SW!'3TSLV� T�5 i � �j' ��L•Si'L�� - . - m m dw - Z � W i a ------•----• - .... •3•g aoeld 4360t I, U$m Cfl L 2 a - I v! ¢ U J0. 0 a IM x —c Q C nQ. G N - 4 y AI v— •a•G 8� 4Le O- i .ram o➢ I L a LL H I N I 2 = N aci p r - - I � N CL I QA^ I ti !E {9 u z a � LU 0 .� U N a ui z U N o , •r J a W X "V Fri 99 I agosp j 1 UlfCam Big== i IQI� ICc N 1 , , I a4t� o! ill 1 J L I .• r l I{ 1 n Chi cr � � o LL 3 Cal No Mao Emma gm I I I I Gm <_ I " i -z.! ,�LAI I \) �J11111.� p e I i ?6- _�. CCTV OF U2 r rNV(CTA Jim White. Mayor Planning Department (253) 856-5454/F,4X(253) 856-6454 James P. Harris, Planning Director LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Public Hearing November 22, 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, November 22, 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 Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Terry Zimmerman, Vice Chair Kevin O'Neill, Sr. Planner Brad Bell Matthews Jackson, Planner/GIS Steve Dowell Diana Nelson, Planner Jon Johnson Tom Brubaker, Deputy City Attorney David Malik Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary Sharon Woodford APPROVAL OF MINUTES Brad Bell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED to approve the minutes of September 27, 1999. Motion Carried. ADDED ITEMS TO THE AGENDA #ZCA-99-2 Billboard Regulations Amendment Update COMMUNICATIONS None NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS Planning Director, James Harris stated that the Land Use and Planning Board would hold a public hearing :Monday, November 29, 1999 to complete the hearings for the 1999 comprehensive plans. 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OVERVIEW Planner Matthews Jackson explained the procedural process for hearing comprehensive plan applications. He stated that the City of Kent received ten applications with nine applications submitted by private citizens for changes to the land use plan map and one request from the City of Kent Finance Department to update their Capital Facilities Element. Mr. Jackson stated that the City of Kent Finance Department has requested withdrawal of their application CPA-99-3(J) due to changes to the City budget because of Initiative 695 passing. He stated that this item would be brought back to the Land Use and Planning Board later in the year as an emergency item. Mr. Jackson stated that each amendment is reviewed based on the standards of review in the Kent City Code. "O 1ih A�F. SO- /KENT.%k ASHINGTON 980?7 589$/TEI-EPHONF ? 856-5'00 Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 2 CPA-99-3(B)/CPZ-99-2 TNS AMENDMENT Planner, Diana Nelson described this submittal as consisting of two tar parcels, 2.37 acres in size and located at 25835 116 Ave SE. The site is zoned single family residential with 8 units per acre and a land use designation of single family, 8 units per acre. Ms. Nelson stated that the site currently consists of a single-family residence with accessory buildings. She stated that a stream which transverses the middle of the site is identified on the City's wetland inventory. Ms. Nelson stated that the areas to the northeast and a portion of area south of the subject parcel, have land use and zoning designations of medium density multifamily and is currently developed as multifamily apartments or condominiums. Ms. Nelson stated that the majority of the rest of the area south of the property is zoned single family residential, 8 units per acre and has a land use designation of single family, 8 units per acre. She stated that across 116th, the land is zoned SR-6 with a land use designation of single family, 6 units per acre and is currently developed with single family homes on large parcels. Ms. Nelson stated that the applicant is requesting that the comprehensive plan designation be changed on this property to low density multifamily and that the zoning be changed to the new MRT Multifamily Residential Townhouse which requires townhouse development only. This designation does not allow multifamily stacked apartment units. She stated that this zone was recently adopted by the City in response to community need for townhouse homeownership options. Ms. Nelson stated that the current zoning of the property would allow approximately 20 additional -. single family dwelling units if no changes were made to the comp plan designation or the zoning. Ms. Nelson stated approval of a rezone and comp plan amendment from SR-8 to MR-T16 would result in a potential density of 37 total dwelling units, a potential increase of 17 units over what would currently be allowed. She stated that the new designation would allow for attached townhouse units, which is better suited to the long and narrow configuration of this parcel. Ms. Nelson stated that potentially this parcel would not be developed to the maximum density due to the parcel configuration, the location of the street and the need for two residential parking spaces per unit. Ms. Nelson stated that the site is accessed by 116th and with the completion of the 272nd/277th Street Corridor project, this site would likely be reclassified as a residential collector as identified in the City of Kent's Year 2000-2005 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. Ms. Nelson stated that there is no additional mitigation required in order to develop this site as proposed. Ms. Nelson stated that the proposed site is located in an area of mixed multifamily and single family residential. She stated that this proposal is consistent with the existing neighborhood and this site would act as a transitional area between higher density multifamily to the north and single family to the south. Ms. Nelson stated that the additional traffic to 116th would be minimal. Ms. Nelson stated that staff recommends approval of the applicant's request to low density multifamily residential and MR-T16 zoning. Chair, Ron Harmon submitted two letters for the record; one letter from Daniel W. Symonds as Exhibit 1 and one letter from Mr. and Mrs. Yadon as Exhibit 2 which addressed police protection, schools, traffic improvements, wetlands and ground water runoff. City Engineer, Gary Gill stated that 116th Avenue serves as a residential collector arterial. He stated that 1 16th Avenue is going to be improved as part of the 277th Corridor and turning lanes and related Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 3 improvements will occur right at the intersection. Mr. Gill said that the improvements between Kent Kangley and Southeast 256th Street are listed as part of the six year transportation improvement program which will include widening of SE 256th from I 16th just east of 132nd to three lanes minimum and five lanes at major intersections. Board member Terry Zimmerman asked how the effects of I-695 would influence the plans for 116th Avenue Southeast. Mr. Gill stated that the impacts at this point are speculative. He stated that there could be difficulty in obtaining grants from State or Federal Government levels in the future. Mr. Gill stated that development of this site as proposed would probably show only a mild increase in traffic flow based on the site's developmental constraints as well as the potential road widening. He stated that development from a typical townhouse or multifamily units tend to generate 60% less trips than from single family residential developments. Brad Bell MOVED and Jon Johnson SECONDED to open the public hearing. MOTION CARRIED. Tom Sharp, 25801 116th Ave Southeast stated that he is the applicant and owner of the two parcels submitted for future development. He stated that the stream running through this parcel is not a salmon bearing stream and that it will be enhanced as part of the overall design in developing this site. He stated that even though the potential build-out for the property would hold 30 units per acre, he said that the actual development could possibly accommodate 13.25 units per acre. Jon Johnson MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Brad Bell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED to accept Planning Staffs recommendation for MR-T16 on #CPA-99-3(B)/CPZ-99-2 TNS Amendment. MOTION CARRIED unanimously. #CPA-99-3(C)/CPZ-99-3 CLASEN AMENDMENT Matthews Jackson stated that the Clasen property is located at 13602 SE 282nd Street with 132nd located to the west. He stated that SE 282nd Street is an unimproved road. The site consists of approximately 11.25 acres. Mr. Jackson stated that the applicant requests a change in the land use designation from SF-3 Single Family Residential, 3 units per acre and change in the zoning from SR-3 to SR 6, which would allow approximately 6.05 units per acre of single family residential. Mr. Jackson stated that this application came forward to the Board last year under the name of the Burridge Amendment. He stated that at that time planning staff recommended approval and the Board, after taking public testimony and deliberating, recommended denial of this application, which was upheld by the City Council. Mr. Jackson stated that the plans for the current request is similar to last year's application with information added based on questions raised by the Board at their workshops. He stated that the site is currently unoccupied by existing single family residences and out houses. Mr. Jackson stated that the property to the east of the site is largely undeveloped and heavily treed as well as partially encumbered by a substantial wetland area. Mr. Jackson stated that this site is next to the approved South Ridge Development, which will bring 153 lots to the vicinity. He stated that the South Ridge property abuts the proposed site on the East Side and will bring sewer and water facilities from Soos Creek to serve the site. Mr. Jackson stated that the density of the property is 3.71 units per acre under existing zoning. Mr. Jackson stated that Planning Staff received an addendum to this application with additional information from Baseline Engineering stating that it is likely that about 301/0 of the site will not be Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 4 developed due to wetlands and buffer requirements. He stated that existing zoning would allow for about 40 units on the site and the applicant indicates that with the 30% reduction in buildable area as well as a rezone to SR-6, a maximum density of 48 units would be possible. Mr. Jackson stated the properties located to the north and east of the site are currently zoned SR-6 and Comped SF-6. He stated that property to the south is designated as SF-1 in the comp plan and to the west of the site there are areas that continue with the SR-3 and SF-3 designation. Mr. Jackson stated that planning staff recommends approval of this application as this property will be transitioning to more typical suburban type lots and capital facilities such as sewer and water will be moving into the area. He stated that a condition of development on the proposed site will include improvements to Southeast 282nd Street and the Southridge Development has been required to develop through access between 14th and Southeast 132nd Street. Brad Bell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED to open the public hearing. Motion Carried. Joel Kwakenat, 13639 Southeast 282nd Street stated that his property is located directly south of the proposed site. He stated that the wetlands on the eastern portion of the proposed site was surveyed in the summer revealing an inadequate picture of how much water stands on the property and stated that the wetlands need to be delineated better. He inquired how far a setback is from a designated wetland to buildable soil and questioned if some of the wetlands are incorporated as part of the lots being proposed for development. Mr. Kwakenat stated that 282nd Street is unimproved and has two 36-inch culverts running under the street east of the site. He stated that these culverts are scarcely able to handle the current volume of water runoff from surrounding developments. Mr. Kwakenat stated that he would like to know what specific road improvements are planned for Southeast 282nd Street. Alan Stuckey, 13456 Southeast 282nd Street stated that his property is located directly west of the proposed application boundary. Mr. Stuckey submitted a letter addressing his concerns, for the record, as Exhibit#3. Mr. Stuckey stated that the proposed development would be inconsistent with the character and use of adjacent and nearby property. He stated that the applicant's property would be difficult to develop due to steep hills and ground water drainage problems, as well as the way homes are facing in relation to the road. Mr. Stuckey stated that the staff report discusses the wetlands but does not mention other water located in the area and how much of the drainage of one property depends on the lay out of another property. He stated that some of the lots have drainage systems that handle both rainwater run-off and water from underground streams from adjacent properties. Mr. Stuckey stated that his property has a man made pond that captures drainage from the pasture area of the property as well as water runoff from the uphill properties to the west. Mr. Stuckey stated that water is funneled to the edge of the property proposed for rezoning and then works its way along Southeast 282nd to the wetlands. He said that changing the zoning to 6 units per acre rather than 3 units per acre could impair the drainage system. Kim Adams Pratt, 555 West Smith, Kent, WA stated that she is the Clasen's attorney. She stated that her office represents Don and Barbara Clasen in their efforts to have their property rezoned and the comprehensive plan changed to that affect. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 5 Ms. Pratt stated that the Clasen went to the expense of having Baseline Engineering look at the drainage issues. She submitted a letter from Terrell Ferguson with Baseline for the record as Exhibit #5. Ms. Pratt stated that Mr. Ferguson explains in his letter that he has worked extensively with the South Ridge development. Ms. Pratt stated that it would be premature at this time to have specific drainage designs and plans in place for this site. She stated that the engineer indicates that the City would require that onsite drainage capacity issues be specifically addressed at the time of development. Ms. Pratt stated that the engineer indicates that the drainage concerns would also be addressed when street improvements are made. Ms. Pratt stated that as part of the development of South Ridge, public water would be brought in. She stated that the Clasen property will not be hooked into the community well when the property is developed, thus the water levels will not be reduced nor would the water quality be jeopardized. Ms. Pratt stated that Southeast 282nd Street is going to be improved to address traffic concerns. She stated that this site is in an urban growth area where the intent is to make intensive use of land for location of building structures and impermeable surfaces. Ms. Pratt stated that growth is to be encouraged in the urban areas so that we do not have the rural sprawl. She stated that the South Ridge development to the east is currently zoned SR-3, three units per acre, and those neighbors will get three units per acre rather than the two houses they see on the eleven acres right now. Ms. Pratt stated that the Clasen need this change to develop the parcel consistent with an urban growth area, provide more affordable housing as well as protect the wetlands. Ms. Pratt said that the Clasen need the SR-6 designation to develop the property cost effectively with approximately 4.36 lots per acre. Ms. Pratt stated that the neighbors concerns have been addressed in regard to public health safety and welfare and that this amendment is consistent with the Kent Code, the King County Policies on Growth Management and the Growth Management Act. Ms. Pratt responded to Board member Terry Zimmerman's concerns regarding water runoff onto neighboring properties if development takes place on the proposed site. Ms. Pratt stated that the neighbors would have recourse through the developer of the property after plat approval. She stated that neighbors would receive notification of any preliminary plat development and have opportunity to analyze the plans and bring their concerns to another public hearing where they can have their issues addressed in a specific manner. Don Clasen, 136 SE 282 St., Kent, WA stated that he is the applicant and owner of the property proposed for rezone. He stated that the property has been in his family for over 50 years and they have seen dramatic changes in this area from a rural to a suburban community over the years and continued change is inevitable. Mr. Clasen spoke at length on the drainage concerns of his neighbors. He stated that he has made the effort to speak to all of his neighbors and stated that the source of their concerns was lack of information where upon he attempted to explain the application process to his neighbors. Charles Burridge, 27001 114th Ave SE, stated that he is the developer of the 148 lot South Ridge development. He stated that the water retention system was ealaiged to address water run off issues in the area. Mr. Burridge stated that 282nd Street is being improved with sidewalks on both sides of Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22. 1999 Page 6 the street in addition to a 12-inch water line,which will tun from 132nd to 144th Street. He stated that sewer will be available along 282nd Street and to the Clasen's property. Curt Newell, 28110 134th Place SE, stated that his property is located to the west of the Clasen's property. He stated that the 40'x40' man made catch basin abutting the rear of his property reached capacity over the veterans holiday with the water overflowing into the low point at the back of his property then existing across Mr. Clasen's property. Mr. Newell stated that what staff has determined to be a stream through the Clasen property is actually a low spot in the field. He stated that his primary concern is with drainage and the impact on the surrounding areas with the potential for flooding due to increasing density. He stated that last year four out of seven board members voted to deny approval of this rezone to SF-6, single family six units per acre after viewing the site. Mr. Newell questioned how wetland setbacks would be determined and cautioned staff to look at the plans carefully to assure that all issues would be addressed prior to any development occurring. He voiced his support of the improvements along 282nd Street. Mr. Newell voiced concern that his well is 35' from the edge of the existing road surface and questioned which direction the road would be widened, as he fears he would be forced to shut down his well and hook into city water. Mr. Newell questioned who would pay for the water running to his property. Mr. Newell stated that he lives about 600 feet up the road on 134th Place and stated that he favors sewer lines being brought in to the area but questioned when he would be forced to shut down his '1 septic system. Mr. Newell stated that he feels with a careful drainage plan that the rezoning could be put into effect efficiently, however, he stated that he prefers that the zoning remain as it is and would like to see decreased density on this site. Mr. Newell encouraged the Board to consider the water flow as it exists all times during the year and not just during the summer during their deliberations. Mr. Jackson stated that the wetland buffers for this site are part of the Soos Creek system and would likely be given a 100 foot wetland buffer delineation with an additional 100 foot buffer extension beyond the wetland delineation areas. Mr. Jackson stated that no individual lots would be a part of that wetland or buffer area. Mr. Jackson stated that the Cities typical storm water standard is to maintain or decrease the water flow on property. He stated that the City's stringent construction standards for storm water facilities provides for on-site detention and treatment of storm water as well as requiring downstream analysis. Mr. Jackson stated that Mr. Newell's well would have to be evaluated by the City but that he could retain his septic system unless it failed, then the City could mandate a connection at that point. Mr. Jackson stated that the Soos Creek Sewer& Water District serve this area. Mr. Gill concurred. Mr. Jackson stated that regardless of rather this amendment is approved for higher density, road improvements will occur along 282nd St. with the addition of curb gutters and sidewalks. City Engineer, Gary Gill stated that once sewer and water is available in an area, system hookup is -y regulated by each jurisdiction's mandates for connection. He stated that the City of Kent is governed by Seattle King County Health department's regulations which stipulates when a public sewer system reaches within 200 feet of a person's property, the property owner can be required to connect to public sewer. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 7 Mr. Gill stated that normally if a resident sells his property and the lending institution is aware that public sewer is available, they would in all probability require hookup at that point. He stated that if a resident is served by a public or domestic well that functions without compromising public health issues, then the well can continue to operate until surrounding property is further developed at which time the well system will be shut down. Mr. Gill stated that the Public Works department is attempting to develop systems that will enhance ground water infiltration, in order to discourage individual well systems that pump ground water from the local aquifers. Mr. Gill stated that the two drainage courses on the subject property drain into the Soosette Creek tributary, a salmonid stream, which flows into Big Soos Creek. He stated that the wetland associated with that stream is a highly classed, forested wetland with a 100' minimum setback required from the edge of the delineated wetland. Mr. Gill stated that he was unsure how the wetlands on the proposed site would be classified. He stated that the wetlands do not appear to be forested, so they would be assigned a lower classification of 2 or 3 which requires a 25 or 50 foot minimum setback plus the addition of a building setback. Mr. Gill stated that the wetlands would need to be delineated by a qualified wetland biologist prior to setting actual setback requirements. Mr. Gill stated that the City enforces storm water detention requirements defined as the Soosette Creek standards. He stated that these standards would not allow the runoff rate from a development to exceed 70% of what preexisting run off rates were for a two-year storm, a 25-year storm and up to 100 year events. He stated that engineers would analyze existing runoff conditions on the site based on geology, drainage characteristics and vegetation. Mr. Gill stated that based on Public Works department calculations, the developer would have to provide adequate water detention ponds as well as employ methods to provide treatment of the storm water before it is released into the open drainage course and affecting Soosette Creek. He stated that the use of wet ponds or biofiltration swells could be utilized. Mr. Gill stated that the developer will be required to complete an engineering analyze from a minimum distance of a quarter mile down stream from the storm water's natural outlet from the site. Mr. Gill stated that the South Ridge developer would be reconstructing the South Ridge drainage system after obtaining hydraulic project approval from the State of Washington and obtaining improvement permits through the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. He stated that the South Ridge developer is required to obtain a 404 permit through the Corp of Engineers as some of the wetlands on that site is categorized as jurisdictional and controlled by the Corp of Engineers which involves a lengthy regulatory process. Mr. Gill stated that roadway improvements on Southeast 282 would include the area fronting the South Ridge Development with curbs, gutters and sidewalks on both sides of the street. Mr. Gill stated that the off site road improvements will reach 132nd. He stated that the road width will be increased to a minimum of 24 feet and the shoulder will be widened by six feet minimum to provide �.- a walking area. Mi. Giii stated that the typical connection costs that property owners would be assessed for hooking up to city water or sewer system ranges from S 10,000 to S 12,000 per household. He explained that Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 8 the cost of reconstructing an on-site septic system (specifically the mound or pump type systems required by the Health Department) can run as high as $15,000 and require extensive maintenance. Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Jon Johnson SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Ron Harmon acknowledged staff s diligence and expertise in presenting their recommendation. He stated that he does not support staff s recommendation to allow SF-6, Single Family, six units per acre, but that 4.5 units per acre is better suited for this site based on existing wetlands on the site. Terry Zimmerman stated that although the extensive wetland areas will challenge how lots are placed on this site, she supports staff s recommendation for SF-6 and stated that the City of Kent is mandated to develop buildable land within the City's boundaries per the Growth Management Act. Sharon Woodford stated that by understanding how the South Ridge development is progressing, she believes that the City will diligently monitor development of this site and voiced her support of staffs recommendation. David Malik stated that he is confident that the City of Kent's Public Works Department will work to protect the river and surrounding land by providing for adequate storm water drainage, retention and safeguarding water quality as well as acknowledging the surrounding neighbors rights. Mr. Malik voiced support for staff s recommendation. Brad Bell stated that upon his recommendation, the applicant, Mr. Clasen, took the initiative to minimize the concern of his neighbors by speaking with them. He voiced his assurance that Mr. Clasen, a 50 year Kent resident, would continue to work with his neighbors in the development of this site. Mr. Bell stated that Public Works has worked closely with addressing the neighbors concerns and voiced his approval of staff s recommendation. Steve Dowell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to approve CPA-99-3 (C)/CPZ-99-3 Clasen Amendment as recommended by the Staff. Motion CARRIED. CPA-99-3 (F)/CPZ-99-6 TOLLES/FOX/BRAUN AMENDMENT Planner Diana Nelson said that the proposed site is located at southeast 244th west and east of 108'". She stated that the site consists of four tax parcels approximately 9.12 acres in size north of 244'. The site is currently zoned Single Family Residential, 3 units per acre, with a land use designation of SF-3. Ms. Nelson stated that three single family residences as well as accessory buildings occupy this property. Ms. Nelson stated that wetland areas exist on the property. She stated that the applicant has requesting leaving the first row of houses designated as SF-3 with the remainder of the parcel retained as low density multifamily. She stated that the applicant is looking to retain the SR-3 zoning on a portion of property on the north side of 244th, with a proposed zoning of MR-D, Multifamily Residential Duplex zone on a 120 foot strip of property located directly north of that portion of property. Ms. Nelson stated that the zoning requested for the remainder of the property is MR-G, Low Density �. Multifamily that allows stacked multifamily residential housing apartments. Ms. Nelson stated that retaining the duplex zone allows for development of two-unit attached duplexes on individual lots. Ms. Nelson stated that the majority of the area to the north of the site is zoned CC, Community Commercial with a mini-warehouse located east of the vacant wetlands area. Ms. Nelson stated that Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 9 the property located near the northeast comer of this site is zoned medium density multifamily residential and is developed with multifamily apartments. She stated that property located to the south and east of the site are single family residential, 3 units per acre with a land use designation of SF-3. Ms. Nelson stated that this proposal leaves a narrow strip of property, one lot wide directly to the west, which would remain SR-3. She stated that adjacent to this strip of land, the property is zoned as Community Commercial/Mixed Use. She stated that the property has one single family dwelling unit on it with conditional use approval for mini warehouse storage on all but the first 200 feet of property along 244" Street. Ms. Nelson said that existing zoning would allow for development of 30 single-family units with no changes to the current zoning or comp plan designation. Ms. Nelson stated that rezoning this property from SR-3 to a MR-D and MR-G zone would allow development of two additional single family residences in the two lots along 244th and development of 10 duplexes in the MR-D zoning area. Ms. Nelson stated that the remainder of the property could be developed with 107 multifamily apartment units for a potential increase of 99 dwelling units above what current zoning would allow. Ms. Nelson stated that it might not be possible to construct all of those units due to the wetlands and parking requirements. She stated that multifamily housing is more likely to meet the density allowances however, as they can stack units and are not required to meet the standards for individual lot requirements. Ms. Nelson said that the property abuts commercial and multifamily zones on the north side but on the other three sides you are abutting single family residential zones and uses. She stated that MR-D zone is intended to function as a buffer between the single-family residential units along the road and the multifamily units within an area 120 feet wide. Ms. Nelson stated that this portion of property would only provide enough room for construction of one row of duplexes with minimal buffering. Ms. Nelson stated that staff believes that the proposal does not allow for a very cohesive or easily managed zoning pattern. Ms. Nelson stated that the applicants based this zoning proposal on the assumption that 108' Street would not be continued on through to 244th. She stated that Public Works staff has informed planning staff, that 108ch will eventually be completed and if this property were developed, roadway improvements would be required from the developer. Ms. Nelson stated that 108th Street has a 30-foot right-of-way and would require that an additional 30"of right-of-way be dedicated as part of any development in this area. Ms. Nelson stated that when 108' is put through, it will be considered a residential collector like southeast 244`h Ms. Nelson stated that several wetlands exist on this property which would likely require a 50-foot buffer which would be determined upon completion of wetland delineation. She stated that although staff recognizes that higher density single family residential or townhouse development may be appropriate in this area, they feel that this proposal results in small fragmented zones not compatible with efficient management of City development. Ms. Nelson stated that staff recommends denial of this proposal but offered the Board consideration of alternate proposals such as SR-6 or SR-8 zoning. She stated that SR-6 or SR-8 would allow for a higher density single family development a:.d SR-8 could allow for a rezone to townhouse zoning in a subsequent year. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 10 ", Ms. Nelson stated that if the Board considers the alternatives, Staff recommends that all parcels dividing single family residential with community commercial be rezoned for consistency as part of this proposal. Ms. Nelson stated that if the Board chose the alternative proposal, a public notice would need to be mailed to the additional property owners impacted by this proposal and an additional public hearing would be required beyond the November 29 meeting. Sharon Woodford MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED to open the Public Hearing. MOTION carried. Rachel Neilsen, 10824 SE 244 St., stated that their residence is located east of the proposed site and looked at the potential for subdividing when they purchased their 1.3 acres four months ago. She stated that when City sewer is made available in the area, that they would consider hooking into the system as a positive selling point. Ms. Neilsen stated that she would not oppose development of single family homes in this area but voiced her opposition to development of multifamily in the narrow strip of property behind her property. She stated that development of apartments would generate high volumes of vehicular travel through their private neighborhood. Ms. Neilsen spoke at length on traffic impacts in the area and voiced her opposition to this proposal. Mike and Jackie Marchetka, 10615 SE 2441"St., stated that high volumes of water run under 244 ' Street and cross the Bruan's property each year. He stated that he has resided in his quiet neighborhood since 1981. Mr. Marchetka stated that he does not oppose development and would like ^� to see only single family development occur as too many apartment complexes already surround them and the area is rapidly increasing with commercial uses. Mr. Marchetka stated that the applicant, Mr. Bruan does not maintain properties that he develops and therefore has no respect for him. Mrs. Marchetka stated that Mr. Bruan's developments are typically rentals and voiced her concern that if these properties are not maintained, the rat population would increase and wildlife, which abounds in the area, would diminish. She questioned if the developer would be required to replace trees that are destroyed as a result of development. She stated that documented wetlands exist on the Brewer Plat behind their property that begins approximately 600 feet off of 244' and crosses the Bruan property. Mrs. Marchetka stated that the property is wet nearly 12 months of the year from the stream on the property that buffers their property. Mrs. Marchetka voiced her concerns with increased vehicular traffic with the addition of 99 units of development. Gena Lovell, 24428 109th Place SE stated that her street dead ends at the water park that the City of Kent put in three years ago. Ms. Lovell stated that she is primarily concerned that if this area were developed with apartments that her street would be used as the primary access to the park for the residents from the development. She stated that an increase in littering of beer bottles and other refuse would occur as a result of teenagers using the park for their partying grounds and children walking through the area to Sequoia and Daniel Elementary School. Ms. Lovell stated that wetland issues and the protection of wildlife in the area need to be addressed. She stated that accepting this proposal would alter the character and tranquility of their neighborhood. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page I Ms. Lovell spoke at length on traffic concerns including the increase in congestion at the major intersections that would occur as a result of development. Ms. Lovell requested that this property remain single family, three units per acre. Robert Lovell,24428 109" Place submitted a petition for the record as Exhibit 7. He stated that the petition has the signature of fifteen residents opposing this proposal and requesting that the current zoning of three houses per acre be retained. Mr. Lovell stated that traffic,wetlands and compromising quality of life are major issues for concern. He spoke at length on traffic concerns. Mr. Lovell stated that the wetlands needs to be defined more accurately as existing apartments have been engulfed by water and therefore, a detention wall has been erected to prevent water from flowing into the lower apartments. He stated that the majority of the property is wet and that a tributary that flows into Garrison Creek becomes a salmon-bearing stream further down in the Valley. Mr. Lovell stated that development of an additional 99 units would damage the surreal quality of life in this area, increase traffic and cause dangers for the children who play along 244' Mr. Lovell voiced opposition to the proposal. Sandra VanNieuwenhuise, 10625 SE 244th St. stated that she concurs with the neighbor's statements. She stated that she purchased her home September 1 and loves the peaceful tranquility of the area, which would diminish if apartments were, developed as well as lower the value of her home. r^ Ms. VanNieuwenhuise stated that her children attend Daniel Elementary where she works and that the school is fully staffed and already have more children in attendance then the school's capacity can handle adequately. She stated that development would highly impact Daniel Elementary as well as Sequoia Junior High. Darryl VanNieuwenhuise, 10625 SE 2441" St., stated that his children walk down 244" Street each day to and from school with no sidewalks. He voiced concern with the high volume of traffic that could be generated as a result of the development of apartments in the area. Brad Bell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to note that additional signatures could be added to the submitted petition. MOTION carried. Robert Thorpe, 705 2"a Avenue, Seattle, `VA 98104 stated that he is a certified planner with Planners and Landscape Architects. He stated that he prepared a packet of materials, which he would present to staff. He stated that their firm was approached by the property owners to evaluate the property. Mr. Thorpe offered a third alternative for the proposed site that combines the desires of staff and what the neighbors have requested. He stated that the SR-3 zoning is an important transition to this neighborhood in order to protect development east of this site. Mr. Thorpe said that there is an existing storm water and sanitary sewer in this area. He stated that the wetlands are based on inventory provided by a wetland biologist and compared to the City's wetlands map, therefore, the information before the Board should be reasonably accurate. Mr. Thorpe read a letter for the record from Marathon Senior la ing Services as Exhibit 18. He stated that Marathon Senior Living Services is completing construction on the Arbor Village Assisted Living Center located at 240" and 1 16ihan' is interested in pursuing related adult senior housing for the more Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 12 -� independent residents in our area. Mr. Thorpe stated that their goal would be to develop for sale, condominium housing duplexes with a six-point configuration and with a density of 12 to 18 units per acre on the proposed site. Mr. Thorpe stated that his staff feels that 108'h Street could provide a route for senior citizens to walk to shopping,parking and the transit system. He stated that an access road could be developed to direct traffic to 108`h from the senior housing project. Mr. Thorpe stated that a landscape buffer exists with an open area to preserve trees and the drainage swale that runs through the property and that this proposal is compatible with the City's comprehensive plan and is located within the City's growth management area. Mr. Thorpe stated that there is a demand for senior housing as indicated in Marathon's request and stated that their staff believes SR-3 to be appropriate for this area. Mr. Thorpe indicated that his staff has held discussions with the City's senior planning staff to assist them in determining what development would be appropriate for the proposed site. He stated that discussion covered the history of the area as well as what requirements would be necessary to develop senior housing while protecting the neighborhood through mitigation measures. Michael Robinson, 10635 SE 244'h St., Kent, WA stated that his property is across from the proposed development. He stated that water runs across his property over ten months of the year into a culvert on the northwest comer of his property and down into the northwest portion of the site proposed for zoning changes and pools in the horse pastime proposed for development. He stated that _ ^� further development could cause the water to continue to back up and flow back on to his property. Mr. Robinson voiced his concern over the increased traffic congestion in the area and stated that he would like to see zoning remain SF-3. Mike Houston, 10805 SE 244th St., Kent, WA stated that he resides across from the proposed site and indicated that apartments exist on adjoining properties as well as commercial properties which consists of mini storage facilities which are relatively quiet. Mr. Houston stated that trees and wetlands substantially buffer the apartment complex mentioned earlier. He stated that the remainder of the neighborhood is a basically rural farming community with horses and cattle. Mr. Houston stated that he would like to see this area remain the same so as not to diminish quality of life or property values. Laurie Houston, 10805 SE 244th St., Kent, WA concurred with Mr. Houston's statement concerning property valuation. She stated that if duplexes or condominiums were developed in this area, there would be a significant change in neighborhood compatibility and character. She stated that homeowners would find it difficult to sell their properties. Robert Bray, 10604 SE 244th St., Kent, WA stated that completing 108`h Street would draw traffic through their neighborhood and create safety risks. He voiced concern with drainage issues concerning the creek that runs through the property. He stated that he opposes this proposal and voiced his discord with the applicant, Mr. Braun. Noelle Rogerson, 10637 SE 244'h St., Kent, WA stated that it is her understanding that the City of Kent has a new zoning policy that allows for development of townhomes and questioned if a comprehensive plan was in place for where townhomes could be built. Ms. Rogerson said that she would like to see the proposed site remain residential. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 13 Jim Fox, 12622 Old Snohomish Monroe Rd,Snohomish, WA stated that his grandfather purchased the Fox property in 1912. He stated that his folks had endeavored to develop this property in the sixties and had platted out 7,200 square foot lots and a path road off of 108'". Mr. Fox stated that the plat was never filed and his folks sold two lots. Mr. Fox stated that his proposal did not include completing 108' Street and offered to meet with the neighbors over their concerns. Mr. Fox felt that if the site was developed off of 108' with traffic funneled to a stop light at 240'", traffic concerns could be eliminated. Mr. Fox said that if senior housing were developed on this site, the residents could walk to community facilities, they could be provided with affordable housing that would be an asset to the neighborhood. Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to close the Public Hearing. Motion CARRIED. Diana Nelson stated that the wetlands map provided by the applicant differs somewhat from the City's inventory of wetlands. She stated that the City's wetland inventory was completed ten years ago and is only an inventory. Ms. Nelson stated that this property would require wetland delineation by a wetland biologist, which would be reviewed by the City's experts. Ms. Nelson said that the inventory does not imply that additional wetlands do not exist and indicated that the applicant's report simply reveals what he has currently identified. Ms. Nelson reiterated that no site-specific plan is proposed at this time and when a plan is submitted, the developer will be required to provide storm water drainage as part of that project. Ms. Nelson stated that if a multifamily project were developed on this site, a multifamily design review would be required as part of the development process, whereas staff would look at building design, site layout and buffering. Ms. Nelson said that senior living facilities can be developed on single family zoned property as a conditional use and if the proposed use of this property is for the development of senior living facilities, a rezone is not required. Ms. Nelson stated that the applicant would have to go through a Hearing Examiner hearing with a public notification sent to the surrounding neighbors as part of the conditional use application process. Ms. Nelson spoke at length on the zoning options that the applicant could pursue, including the MR-T zone, which allows for development of townhome type units with a density of 16 units per acre. Ms. Nelson stated that the City Council is encouraging the connectivity of streets within the City, and discouraging cul-de-sac street designs. She stated that not connecting 108" Street could be contrary to what the City is attempting to accomplish with connectivity of neighborhoods. Gary Gill stated that the City took possession of the East Hill Community Well in the 1980's and rebuilt the water system throughout that area. He stated that it is his understanding that the aquifer is a deep well that goes down several hundred feet and based on the geology of this area, the soils are not very permeable. Mr. Gill stated that approximately four to six feet underground, glacially compacted soils exist that inhibits water from infiltrating quickly. He stated that development should not impact the public water supply as it is fed from aquifers that stretch out over many miles. Mr. Gill stated that the City Council is currently enlisting Ptiblic Works. Planning and oth_r City departments in reviewing road standards. He stated that connectivity is encouraged. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 14 Mr. Gill stated that 244" Street is classified as a residential collector street. He stated that as the mini storage and the short plats on the south side of the street develop, the developers would be required to construct street improvements along their frontages. Mr. Gill stated that eventually the road would be 36 feet in width from curb to curb with sidewalks and provisions for two through lanes with a center turn lane. Mr. Gill stated that the concerns voiced over 108' Street with increased vehicular traffic through the residential neighborhoods are an ongoing problem throughout the city. Mr. Gill said that the City has a Neighborhood Traffic Control Program managed by Joe Mitchell which works with neighborhood groups in an effort to analyze methods for slowing traffic down. He stated that the City is being encouraged to revise our construction standards to provide measures to slow traffic down on streets that are being constructed. Mr. Gill stated that if 108' Street were to be completed, the roadway would be designed with provisions that would discourage vehicular cut through and speeding. He stated that it is necessary to provide alternatives for exiting neighborhoods. Mr. Gill stated that many times, residents could bypass congested intersections. Mr. Gill stated that 104th and 244th would likely have traffic signals erected in the future. Mr.Gill stated that with developments on the West Side of the Benson Highway, Public Works has been required to execute agreements for participating in erecting a signal at that intersection in the future. Mr. Gill stated that the Public Works Department is working with the Kent School District in developing a better sidewalk system, which would protect the neighborhood children walking to and from school. Steve Dowell stated that he does not believe that the issues concerning this proposal have been adequately addressed and therefore supports staffs recommendation to deny this amendment. Jon Johnson concurred with Mr. Dowell and stated that he feels this area is not ready for the type of development proposed at this time and stated that even though commercial development exists to the north, this site is more conducive to single family development. Mr. Johnson stated that he supports staffs recommendation to deny this amendment. Ms. Zimmerman expressed her appreciation to the citizens in expressing their feelings about their neighborhood. She stated that she would like the seller and developer to do more specific planning for this property utilizing the input from the neighbors. Ms. Zimmerman stated that the proposal for this site was not specific. She stated that the Board needs a specific recommendation on the table, in order to form an appropriate recommendation to be sent on to the City Council. Ms. Zimmerman stated that she supports staff s recommendation to deny this amendment. Sharon Woodford stated that she concurs with the Board members and supports staffs recommendation to deny this amendment. Ron Harmon stated that he supports staffs recommendation to deny this amendment and was encouraged by the citizen input. .y Sharon Woodford MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to accept staffs recommendation to deny the applicant's proposal on CPA-99-3(F)/CPZ-99-6 Tolles/Fox/Bruan Amendment, Motion CARRIED t unanimously. f Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 15 #CPA-99-3(H)/CPZ-99-8 FLOWER COURT AMENDMENT Planner Kevin O'Neill stated that the property is located at the southeast corner of 102nd Avenue and SE 236th Street and consists of approximately 2.5 acres. He stated that the parcel is currently designated in the Comprehensive Plan as mixed use and is zoned Community Commercial. Mr. O'Neill stated that the site is located within the mixed-use overlay, which allows residential development only in conjunction with commercial development. Mr. O'Neill defined the zoning on the surrounding properties that abut this site. Mr. O'Neill stated that this parcel was placed in the Mixed Use Overlay because it is a transition area between commercial development to the east and residential development to the south,north and west. Mr. O'Neill stated that the applicant was primarily looking at creating a development that conforms to existing mixed use regulations and combines residential and commercial uses. Mr. O'Neill stated that the only way that mixed use development could occur on this site is if 25 percent of the floor area is used for commercial purposes. He stated that the applicants feel that this site is not conducive to commercial development, as they do not have direct frontage to 104'Avenue SE. Mr. O'Neill stated that the applicant is requesting a comp plan designation of low-density multifamily and a zoning designation of MR-T 16,new townhouse zoning adopted by the City Council two months ago. Mr. O'Neill stated that the 2.5-acre parcel would allow for full build out of approximately 40- townhouse condominium style units under the proposed MR-T16 zoning. He stated that no significant environmental constraints appear on this property and that Garrison Creek is located north of the site and does not directly abut this parcel. Mr. O'Neill stated that one of the issues in developing this parcel for any use would be traffic access. He stated that 102nd Street is open and in speaking with the Public Works Department, it could be advisable to open a segment of 236' Street upon development of this parcel. Mr. O'Neill stated that typically residential zoning creates less traffic impacts than commercial zoning as retail development particularly generates a higher volume of trips per square foot then residential development. Mr. O'Neill stated that this proposal would actually generate less trip traffic to the site than the existing zoning would allow. Mr. O'Neill stated that staff recommends approval of this application. Ron Harmon spoke at length on concerns with the traffic patterns through that area and the need for sidewalks to alleviate safety concerns for the children. Gary (fill stated that the Public Works Department Traffic Division has noted the concerns regarding the narrow strip of 102nd Street as it approaches 240'or James Street. He stated that the City typically requires frontage improvements along the entire property, which will include curb gutters, sidewalks and half-street improvements. Mr. Gill stated that in the case of 236th, the City would require both frontage and off site improvements all the way to the Benson Highway. Mr. Gill spoke at length on road improvements and right-of-way requirements as they relate to development of this site. Ron Harmon stated that he supports staffs recommendation for approval of this amendment. Steve Dowell MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED to omen the Public Hearing. Mniion CARRIED. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 22, 1999 Page 16 Ron Fernley, 923 Powell Avenue, stated that he is associated with the applicant, Pacific West Development. He spoke at length on traffic issues in connection to development of this site. Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to close the Public Hearing. MOTION carried. Terry Zimmerman stated that she believes this property is well suited for MR-T zoning and supported staff s recommendation to approve this amendment. Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to accept staffs recommendation to approve CPA-99-3(H)/CPZ-99-8 Flower Court Amendment. MOTION carried unanimously. #ZCA-99-2 BILLBOARD REGULATIONS AMENDMENT Diana Nelson said that the billboard amendment was removed from the last City Council agenda due to I-695 budget related issues. She stated that this item would be rescheduled as a City Council agenda item in January 2000. Ms. Nelson stated that Councilman Yingling has made an alternative proposal to the original recommendation. She stated that this proposal would allow existing billboard structures to have a 300 square feet surface area per side versus the 300 square feet surface area per structure that is currently allowed and that all billboards can convert to tri vision on both sides. Ms. Nelson stated that billboards could be relocated anywhere in the city or at least not limited to placement only in the M-1 through M-3 zones. She stated that even if billboards were limited to M-1 "1 through M-3, the arterials would not be protected as two of the new corridors partially run through the M-1 through M-3 zones. Ms. Nelson stated that the new proposal would expand the billboard square footage over what is currently allowed and in staff s opinion would be a step backward. Ms. Nelson stated that a public hearing has not occurred on the proposed changes to this amendment. She stated that she mentioned this to the City's legal department and the City Attorney, Roger Lubovich has not conclusively responded as to whether or not a new public hearing will be necessary. Ms. Nelson stated that the newly proposed amendment has significantly changed from what the original public hearing was held on and would recommend a new public hearing, preferably at the City Council level. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James P. Harris Sea�retary CITY OF ) rnvtcT� Jim White, Mayor. Planning Department (153) 856-54541FAX(153)856-6454 James P. Harris, Planning Director CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (253) 856-5454 STAFF REPORT NOVEMBER 29, 1999 MEMO TO: RON HARMON, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: MATTHEWS JACKSON, PLANNER/GIS COORDINATOR SUBJECT: 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS NOVEMBER 29, 1999 HEARING ♦ #CPA-99-3(A)/CPZ-99-1 CAIRNES AMENDMENT ♦ #CPA-99-3(D)/CPZ-99-4 PACIFIC INDUSTRIES AMENDMENT ♦ #CPA-99-3(G) FORTUNATO AMENDMENT ♦ #CPA-99-3(I)/CPZ-99-9 MERIDIAN ASSOCIATES AMENDMENT INTRODUCTION In April, 1995, the Kent City Council adopted the Kent Comprehensive Plan, which was prepared and adopted under the provisions of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA requires that comprehensive plans combine land use, transportation, capital facilities, and other elements in a way, which is both internally consistent and consistent with plans from other jurisdictions in the region. The GMA also requires that a city's development regulations implement and be consistent with the plan. The GMA establishes procedures for the amendment of plans, and stipulates that plans can only be amended once a year unless an emergency is declared which requires immediate action. Pursuant to the provisions in the GMA, the City Council adopted an ordinance (Ordinance #3237) outlining procedures for the amendment of the City's plan. These procedures are now outlined in Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code. The City's procedures ordinance established September 1 of each calendar year as the deadline for applications to be submitted to the Planning Department for proposed amendments to the plan. r^ 1_204th AVE.SO.. /KENT.WASHINGTON 99032-Si95/TELEPHONE (253�856-5200 Subject: #CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 2 -, 1999 AMENDMENTS As of September 1st of this year, the Planning Department received ten (10) applications for amendments to the comprehensive plan. Nine applications were initiated by private property owners, and one application was initiated by the City of Kent. One application was returned to the applicant because it was determined to be outside of the existing Kent City Limits and premature for any land use or zoning changes. The proposed amendments are summarized below: 1. #CPA-99-3(A)/CPZ-99-1 CAIRNES AMENDMENT - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 1 unit per acre to Single Family Residential 3 units per acre for the property located at 14845 SE 2641' Street. 2. #CPA-99-3(B)/CPZ-99-2 TNS CONDO AMENDMENT - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 8 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at 25835 116' Avenue SE. 3. #CPA-99-3(C)/CPZ-99-3 CLASEN AMENDMENT -A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for the property located at 13602 SE 282nd Street.. 4. #CPA-99-3(D)/CPZ-994 PACIFIC INDUSTRIES AMENDMENT - A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 1 unit per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for the property located at 24039 146'Place SE. "1 5. #CPA-99-3(E)/CPZ-99-5 LOTTO/TOPPANO NURSERY AMENDMENT - Denied/Returned-Not in the City. 6. #CPA-99-3(F)/CPZ-99-6 TOLLES/FOX/BRAUN AMENDMENT-A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at SE 244' Street at 108d' Avenue SE. 7. #CPA-99-3(G) FORTUNATO AMENDMENT-A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 3 units per acre to Single Family Residential 6 units per acre for the property located at 27842 and 27854 132nd Avenue SE 8. #CPA-99-3(I)/CPZ-99-8 FLOWER COURT AMENDMENT -A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Mixed Use Limited Multifamily to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located at the se corner of 102nd Avenue SE and SE 236" Street. 9. #CPA-99-3(1)/CPZ-99-9 MERIDIAN ASSOCIATES AMENDMENT-A change to the Land Use Plan Map from Single Family Residential 8 units per acre to Low Density Multifamily Residential for the property located in the 27000 block of 132' Avenue SE. 10. #CPA-99-3(.n KENT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT AMENDMENT .., Amendments to the Capital Facilities Element. (Kent Finance Department) Subject: #CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 3 It should be noted that any proposed changes to the Land Use Plan Map will be reviewed concurrently with corresponding amendments to the zoning map except for the proposed Fortunato amendment where the applicant chose to not seek a rezone of the subject property at this time. 1999 Hearing Process At the recommendation of the Land Use and Planning Board, staff has separated the proposals into two sets to be heard at separate hearings. At the November 22, 1999 hearing, staff presented items numbered #CPA-99-3(B), #CPA-99-3(C), #CPA-99-3(F), #CPA-99-3(H), and CPA-99-3(J). At the November 29, 1999 hearing, staff will present items numbered #CPA-99-3(A), #CPA-99- 3(D), #CPA-99-3(G), and #CPA-99-3(I). Maps were prepared, and are attached, for each area, which will be affected by the proposed changes to the Land Use Plan Map and zoning map (Attachment A). Each proposed amendment will be analyzed and staffs recommendation will be noted. STANDARDS OF REVIEW Section 12.02.050 of the Kent City Code outlines the standards of review, which must be used by staff and the City Council in analyzing any proposed comprehensive plan amendments. Proposed amendments are to be examined based on the following criteria: 1. The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare; r 2. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan,or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the plan that warrant an amendment to the plan; and 3. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the comprehensive plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities elements of the plan: The proposed plan amendments have been analyzed based on these criteria. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Proposal A- #CPA-99-3(A)/CPZ-99-1 Change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning for property located at 14845 SE 264th (Cairnes Amendment) Applicant: Andrew and Carol Caimes Existing Plan Designation: SF-1, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 1 unit/acre SF-3, Single Family 3 units per acres Existing Zoning: SR-I, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 1 unit/acre SR-2 or SR-3 Subject: #CPA-99-3 (A-!) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 4 '1 Background The subject property consists of one tax lot that is approximately 1.18 acres in size. The property is located at the intersection SE 264' Street and the Soos Creek Trail. The site is located approximately 300 feet west of 148' Avenue SE. The subject property was annexed to the City in 1996 as part of the Meridian annexation. The property currently contains one single-family residential unit. The site is generally flat and appears to contain no wetlands. The property is surrounded to the north and west by low-density single-family residential uses. King County owns the parcels to the south and southeast of the site as part of Soos Creek Park. The surrounding parcels are all designated as SF-1 and zoned SR-1. Parcels to the west of 148' Avenue SE are designated as SF-6 and zoned SR-4.5. Previous to annexation, the subject property and surrounding properties were designated as Urban Separator in the King County comprehensive plan. The applicants are requesting a zoning designation of either SR-2 or SR-3; they wish to develop the property with an additional single-family lot. Analysis The area surrounding the subject property is characterized with low-density residential development and open space uses. The Soos Creek trail,which is part of a King County regional park, is located immediately to the east of the site. A parking lot for the park is located to the south of the site. There are three single-family residential lots located to the west of the site, all of which abut 148' � Avenue SE. The lot sizes of these parcels are all approximately 29,000 square feet. There are other single-family lots in the adjoining area which ranges in size from 32,000 square feet to well over an acre. As mentioned, all of the surrounding parcels to the east of 148'Avenue SE are zoned SR-1; the SR-1 zoning district allows 1 dwelling unit per acre, while the minimum lot size is 34,700 square feet. The SR-2 zoning district allows 2.18 dwelling units per acre, and a required minimum lot size of 16,000 square feet. The SR-3 zoning district allows 3.63 dwelling units per acre,with a required minimum lot size of 9,600 square feet. Access to the subject property is from SE 264' Street. This street is currently not built to the standard of a residential street. If the proposed application was approved and the property was divided into an additional lot, it is likely that the applicant would be required to participate in the costs of improving SE 264 Street at some point in the future. A short plat was recently approved to the east of the subject property, which created one lot, and the applicants in that case were required to financially participate in additional street improvements. As mentioned, when the King County comprehensive plan was adopted in 1994, the subject properties, and surrounding properties, were designated as Urban Separator. The zoning for the property was R-1, 1 unit per acre. The King County comprehensive plan also contains several policies pertaining to urban separators. Generally, the King County plan defines urban separators as low density areas within the urban growth area that create open space corridors and provide a visual contrast, or buffer, to continuous development between cities. It appears that urban separator designations were applied generally to undeveloped and underdeveloped parcels located near existing open space corridors or near environmentally sensitive areas. ,.1 Subject: ) om#CPA-99-3 (A-J Comprehensive Plan Amendments P November 29, 1999 Page 5 In addition, the King County Countywide Planning Policies, which were initially adopted in 1992 and amended in 1994, contains the following policy with regard to urban separators. LU-27. Urban separators are low density areas or areas of little development within the Urban Growth Area. Urban separators shall be defined as permanent low density lands which protect adjacent resource lands, Waal areas, and environmentally sensitive areas and create open space corridors within and between urban areas which provide environmental, visual, recreational and wildlife benefits. Designated urban separators shall not be redesignated in the future (within the 20-year planning cycle) to other urban uses or higher densities. The maintenance of these urban separators is a regional as well as a local concern. Therefore, no modification should be made to the development regulations governing these areas without King County review and concurrence. At the time that the Kent Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995, no urban separator areas were located within Kent's city limits. The City's comprehensive plan does not contain goals and policies that specifically address urban separators. When the Meridian annexation occurred in 1996, properties that were within the urban separator designation were annexed to the City. When the zoning for the Meridian annexation area was approved, some of these urban separator areas were given higher single-family zoning densities, while others remained low density. The general area in question is appropriate for low-density residential development. It is located at the eastern edge of the city, is served by an underdeveloped roadway, and is directly adjacent to a trail and major regional park. The applicants state that the proposed amendments would allow for the creation of one additional lot, and that the subsequent division of the parcel would create two lots of roughly one-half acre in size. The applicants state that these subsequent lots would be roughly equivalent to the sizes of the adjoining lots to the west. A zoning designation of SR-2 would allow one additional lot to be created on the property. A zoning designation of SR-3 would allow additional three lots to be created on the property. Recommendation The subject property is located in an area that should remain low density, given its location adjacent to the Soos Creek Park and trail system. The creek and the open space along the creek do function as an effective open space buffer and urban separator, as outlined in the King County comprehensive plan and countywide planning policies. The applicants have requested either SR-2 or SR-3 zoning, both of which would be consistent with a comprehensive plan designation of SF-3. SR-3 zoning would not be appropriate for the site,in that it would create the potential for lots that are smaller than adjoining lots; also, the current condition of SE 264'Street would not support much more in the way of additional trips. A zoning designation of SR-2 would allow only one additional lot to be created. Since the property is currently 51,778 square feet, presumably two lots on the site would average approximately 26,000 square feet. This is roughly equivalent to the existing lot sizes of the three lots to the west, which range from 28,000 to 29,500 square feet. These lot sizes do not conform to the minimum lot size in the SR-1 zone, which is 34,500 square feet. Therefore, it appears that a change of zoning to SR-2, by creating potential for only one additional lot, will result in development which is compatible with the surrounding area, will not unduly burden the �, transportation network, and will preserve the low density nature of the area. Therefore, staff Subject: #CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 6 recommends that the proposed change to SF-3 and SR-2 be approved. It should be noted that staff would not recommend a zoning of SR-3 on the site. The application in question only considers the applicants' property. As noted, the three parcels to the west of the subject property are also designated as SF-1 and SR-1. One option for the Board's and Council's consideration is to redesignate those three parcels to SF-3 as well. Staff would not propose any zoning change, since the property owners have not requested a change; also, as noted, SR-2 zoning on these properties would not create any additional development capacity. By redesignating these three parcels, it would link all of these parcels together under the same plan designation, instead of giving the subject property its own, separate designation. Proposal D - #CPA-99-3(D)/CPZ-994 A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for property located at 24039 146th Place SE (Pacific Industries Amendment) Applicant: Pacific Industries, Inc. Existing Plan Designation: SF-1, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 1 unit/acre SF-6, Single] Family 6 units/acre Existing Zoning: SR-1, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 1 unit/acre SR-6, Single Family 6.05 units/acre Background The subject site consists of one parcel that is approximately 8.6 acres in size. The site is located at 24039 146'Place SE, and also abuts SE 240'Street. The property was annexed to the City in 1997 as part of the Meridian Valley annexation. . The parcel currently contains one single-family residential unit. The northern and eastern portions of the site are constrained by steep slopes. The parcel is surrounded by single-family residential development at varying densities. The Loe Estates subdivision is located to the west and south of the subject property, and is zoned SR-4.5. The parcels to the northwest and east of the parcel are fairly large—these parcels are zoned SR-1. King County owns the parcels to the north across SE 240' Street as part of Soos Creek Park. Previous to annexation, the subject parcel was designated as Urban Separator in the King County comprehensive plan, and zoned R-1 in the county. Soos Creek is located approximately 500 feet to the east of the property. The applicant seeks to subdivide the property into single-family lots at 6 units per acre. Analysis This parcel is located at the eastern edge of the city limits. The Soos Creek Park and trail system is located to the north and east of the property. There are very large lots (in excess of one acre) to the northwest and east of the property. As mentioned, to the west and south is a large subdivision, which was recorded by King County in 1992. Lot sizes in this plat appear to average approximately Subject: >#CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 7 r. 10,000 square feet. The zoning under which this plat was approved in King County was S-R 9600, which is now the equivalent of the County's R-4 zoning. At the time this plat was approved, a road (146" Avenue SE) was planned and developed leading to the southern portion of the subject property. Access to the subject property is available from this road to the south (which is currently barricaded)or from an easement which extends south form SE 240' Street. This easement serves the subject property and three other parcels, and was established when these lots were created by a short plat in the 1970s. As mentioned, the subject property was designated as Urban Separator in the King County Comprehensive Plan and zoned R-1 prior to annexation to the City of Kent. As discussed earlier in the staff report with regard to Proposal A, the King County plan defines urban separators as low density areas within the urban growth area that create open space corridors and provide a visual contrast, or buffer, to continuous development between cities. Also, as discussed previously in the staff report, the King County Countywide Planning Policies contains a policy relating to urban separators, defining them as permanent low density lands which protect adjacent resource lands, rural areas, and environmentally sensitive areas.. At the time that the Kent Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995, no urban separator areas were located within Kent's city limits. The City's comprehensive plan does not contain goals and policies that specifically address urban separators. When the Meridian Valley annexation occurred in 1997, properties that were within the urban separator designation were annexed to the City. When the zoning for the Meridian Valley annexation area was approved, some of these urban separator areas to the west of the subject property were given higher single-family zoning densities, while others, including the site, remained low density. Although there are no specific policies in the City's comprehensive plan pertaining to urban separators, there are a number of policies that relate to single-family development and environmentally sensitive areas. These include the following: Policy LU-8.1 —Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to accommodate both city and county housing 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-20 — Protect and enhance environmentally sensitive areas via the adoption of City regulations and programs which encourage well-designed land use patterns such as clustering and planned unit development. Use such land use patterns to concentrate higher urban land use densities and intensity of uses in specified areas in order to preserve natural features such as large wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and forests. Goal H-1 — Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide variety 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. This parcel is at the edge between urban development to the west and south and open space corridors (urban separators) to the north and east. The lot itself reflects this, in that the northern and eastern Subject: i#CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 8 portion of the lot is constrained with steep slopes. These slopes, along with the continuation of SE 240' which leads into 148' Avenue SE and the Soos Creek corridor to the north and east, creates a natural urban separator which should be maintained. Even under higher density zoning, however, this northern portion of the lot would not be able to be developed due to its environmental constraints. The southern and western portions of the property are not environmentally constrained, and would appear to support higher density development. The fact that a road was created by the Loe Estates plat which leads to the subject property seems to indicate that King County contemplated that future development would occur on the property. While the applicants have requested SR-6 zoning, this appears to be not in keeping with the surrounding parcels, which were developed at approximately 4 units per acre, and are now zoned SR-4.5. SR-4.5 zoning would be more appropriate for this parcel than SR-6. Recommendation Staff recommends that the proposed plan designation change from SF-1 to SF-6 be approved. Staff recommends that the zoning of the parcel be changed from SR-1 to SR-4.5, as opposed to the request of SR-6 made by the applicant. Proposal G- #CPA-99-3(G) A change in Land Use Plan Map for the property located at 27842 and 27854 132s° Avenue SE (Fortunato Amendment) Applicant: Phillip Fortunato and Suzanne Faulks "1 Existing Plan Designation: SF-3, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 3 units/acre SF-6, Single Family 6 units/acre Existing Zoning: SR-3, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 3.63 units/acre. SR-6, Single Family 6.05 Units/Acre Background The subject property consists of two tax parcels and is approximately 6.75 acres in size. The site is located along 132'Avenue SE, south of SE 278°i Street. The subject property has a current land use designation of SF-3, Single Family Residential, with a maximum density of 3 units per acre. The applicants are requesting a land use designation of SF-6, Single Family Residential,with a maximum density of six units per acre in order to "make it more consistent with surrounding zoning." The applicants are not asking for a change in zoning at this time. Properties located to the west of the subject property have a land use designation of SF-6 and zoning of SR-6. Properties immediately adjacent to the site have a land use designation of SF-3 and a zoning of SR-3, however,properties near the site to north and east have a land use designation of SF-6 and zoning of SR-6. To the south of the subject property the area has a land use designation of SF-1 and a zoning of SR-1. There has been a substantial amount of recent and proposed platting .1 activity in the vicinity under the SF-6 land use designation and SR-6 zoning Subject: #CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 9 Analysis The current zoning of this property could potentially allow 24 single family dwellings at a density of 3.71 units per acre and SR-3 zoning. If this comprehensive plan amendment were approved, the property could be rezoned up to a SR-6 designation. Under SR-6 zoning, this property could potentially yield approximately 40 units. There appears to be a small creek located on the northeast comer of the property. With the inclusion of creek setbacks, road construction, and stormwater detention, it may not be likely that this property would reach its highest potential for new residential units. If this request for a change in land use designation is approved, the applicant will not be required to seek an additional Comprehensive Plan Amendment in order to rezone the property to any SR designation with a designation of 6 or less. Any proposed rezone within this range would be considered consistent with existing plans and anticipated within the Comprehensive Plan. Access to the site will be primarily from 132nd Avenue SE. Any future subdivision of this property will require a new residential street constructed to applicable Kent Construction Standards. The current two lots could potential generate two PM peak hour vehicle trips on the Kent Street System. If the site were subdivided under the existing zoning, at a maximum it could generate 24 PM peak hour vehicle trips. With a proposed SF-6 land use designation, and a future rezone to SR-6 zoning, the site could potentially generate 40 PM peak hour vehicle trips. Recommendation The uses surrounding this site are a mixture of single-family residential types. This site abuts an area designated SF-6 on the west side. This site is adequately served by streets, and subsequent development will require additional improvements to the street system. There have been several requests in the last couple of years to change properties from a land use designation of SF-3 to SF-6. Most argue that they are unable to receive the necessary yield of lots to pay for expensive utility and street improvements. This request for a change to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map only. Any subsequent rezone of this property would be heard at the Hearing Examiner and City Council. Based on the criteria for granting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, staff is recommending approval of the applicants' request for a land use designation of SF-6 Proposal I- #CPA-99-3(I)/CPZ-99-9 A change in Land Use Plan Map and zoning map for the property located at the 2700 block of 132e°Avenue SE (Meridian Associates Amendment) Applicant: Mike Reid, Meridian Associates Existing Plan Designation: SF-8, Single Family Proposed Plan Designation: 8 units/acre Low Density Multifamily Existing Zoning: SR-8, Single Family Proposed Zoning: 8.71 units/acre MRT-12, Multifamily Townhouse 12 units/acre Subject: #CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 10 Backeround The subject property consists of three tax parcels and is approximately 6.52 acres in area. The current land use designation is SF-8, Single Family Residential with an eight units per acre maximum density, and zoning is SR-8, Single Family, with 8.71 units per acre. The site is currently vacant and located behind an existing shopping center and Metro Park and Ride. Neighboring land use designations range from Commercial to the south and east, to SF-6 on the west. The subject site is located near the busy intersection of Kent-Kangley Road and 132nd Avenue SE. The City of Kent Wetland Inventory indicates the presence of wetlands on a portion of the site. Additional environmental constraints on the property include creeks or drainages which are part of the Soos Creek Drainage Basin. This branch of Soosette creek will likely have buffers extending up to 100 feet from the ordinary high water mark of the creek. The applicant states that they will be able to provide a development which is more respectful of the environment if they are allowed to do townhome as opposed to a typical single family detached lot subdivision which would require crossing and/or covering the creek. Analysis Access to the site appears to be very difficult. However, the developers of this property also have options on the three lots located on the southeast portion of the development. This would allow improved access to the subject property as well as continued access to the Meridian Plaza Shopping Center. The applicant's had previously received approval of a preliminary plat on the property know ^1 as Pat's Promise. This plat would have its access from the northwest through an existing development, and would require crossing the wetlands and creeks with a residential road. This plat shows a total of 18 lots. Under the new MRT-12 zoning, this site could potentially yield 78 units, however existing site constraints will likely make this impossible. The site plan shows approximately 3.92 acres of buildable land with 34 dwelling units provided. The applicant is proposing an offset duplex type development for this site. They are not required to provide a site plan for this application however, because it is a non-project action. The proposed townhouse development is superior in design for a site with so many environmental constraints. There are several goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan which support this type of development Goal H-4 -Expand home ownership opportunities for all income groups via land use regulations, financial strategies, and the removal of barriers to lending. Policy H-4.1 -Revise zoning and development standards to facilitate small lot sizes, manufactured housing on single-family lots, townhouses, condominiums, clustering, and other options which increase the supply ofaffordable home ownership opportunities Goal LU-20 — Protect and enhance environmentally sensitive areas via the adoption of City regulations and programs which encourage well-designed land use patterns such as clustering and planned unit development. Use such land use patterns to concentrate higher urban land use densities and intensity of uses in specified areas in order to preserve natural features such as large ,..,y wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and forests Subject: #CPA-99-3 (A-J) Comprehensive Plan Amendments November 29, 1999 Page 11 Recommendation This proposed amendment appears to be consistent with the standards of review outlined in the Kent City Code pertaining to comprehensive plan amendments. The proposed townhouse type development would be much more responsive to existing environmental concerns. Adequate access can be provided from Kent Kangley Road with the inclusion of the 3 lots which the applicant states they have an option. This access would not have to come through existing neighborhoods, which in this situation is more desireable. This site is located adjacent to many services and transportation opportunities. Staff is recommending that this property be changed to Low Density Multifamily Residential on the land use plan map and MRT-12 on the zoning map. CONCLUSION In summary,the staff recommendations for the set of four proposed plan amendments are as follows: Proposal A - Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated SF-3 in the comprehensive plan and SR-2 on the zoning map. Proposal D - Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Single Family Residential 6 (SF-6) in the comprehensive plan and SR4.5 on the zoning map Proposal G- Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Single Family Residential 6 (SF-6) in the Comprehensive plan. Proposal I- Recommend that the applicant's property be redesignated Low Density Multifamily in the comprehensive plan and MRT-12 on the zoning map. If you have any questions prior to the November 29th public hearing,please contact me at(253) 856- 5441. Wpm I P:I P UBLICI CPA994 MM4.doc Enc: Attachment A cc: James P.Hams,Planning Director Fred Satterstrom,Planning Manager Kevin O'Neill,Senior Planner Diana Nelson,Planner Mayene Miller,Finance Director _.,�,� ,'I�a^r', ,' .�; �1+-�--R1 ' � I� pp'�' � i•. Cam" r � i r / 13 r , C� ' p N m G) z, Cb ✓ U f (At {� •��' r< Cyr it 'S ------------- r , ® U > D _.. y s � C cn z FL O 70 m CD z N ;n z � W > 6J a -- -+auk' .. y -p }(s `v., i .�•�. i =iS5.nUaAVPU7PL ti �.I fl i a to J + ® e I r cn -{ m n � to O _ Z ,n n _ � rn z 3cn C=Z m CA �J GG7 Cn aA u A 00-1 lb MP so ® � � D D CD MZ 7S Cl) C: Z Q C() m Cn ® Et= em mq r ca � 6 gal -4 Eg jdw F , CD CI) Q O � f i m ° N CD m z 07 ✓' a. J flobAVS so a .. o ® •o ® A 1C Cl1 ® n D K w , Km 3 Nm � (Dzo a O D z r' �- mz p czD cn rn o tin W � U) 0 U) _ D m i I I (10 �I� I Cl) � D N m m OD ° z O D a �• r- m z z C j- z > m y to —� W O 0 N to N G CD m CITY OF i White, NIai,or, Planning Department (153) 856-54541FAX(153) 856-6454 James P. Harris,Planning Director LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Public Hearing November 29 1999 The meeting of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order by Chair Ron Harmon at 7:20 p.m. on Monday, November 29, 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 Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Brad Bell Matthews Jackson, Planner/GIS Steve Dowell Diana Nelson, Planner Jon Johnson Justin Osemene, Asst. City Attorney David Malik Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary Sharon Woodford LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT/EXCUSED Terry Zimmerman, Vice Chair APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of November 22nd has been moved to the January 24 public hearing for approval. ADDED ITEMS TO THE AGENDA None COMMUNICATIONS None NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS Planning Director, James Harris announced that a tentative continuance hearing is set for Monday, December 13 concerning #CPA-99-3 (J) The City of Kent Finance Department's capital improvement program amendment. 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OVERVIEW Planner, Matthews Jackson explained the procedural process for reviewing and hearing comprehensive plan applications. He stated that the applications are reviewed citywide and staff bases their recommendations on the following three standards of review criteria: ♦ that the amendments do not result in development that would adversely affect public health, safety and general welfare, and r , ♦ that the amendments are based on new information at the time of adoption or on circumstances that may have changed since the adoption of the comprehensive plan that warrant amendment. and 11041h,AVG. SO.. /KENT. WASHINGTON 9803:-S895/TELEPHONE �253i 856-5200 Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 2 ♦ that the amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the comprehensive plan and will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities elements of the plan. Mr. Jackson stated that staff anticipates sending the amendments to City Council in January, 2000 with the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendations for final review and decision. #CPA-99-3 (A)/CPZ-99-1 CAIRNES AMENDMENT Planner Diana Nelson spoke in the absence of Kevin O'Neill. She stated that the subject property consists of one tax lot approximately 1.18 acres in size located at 14845 SE 264th at the intersection of 264th and the Soos Creek trail, approximately 300 feet west of 148th Avenue Southeast. Ms. Nelson stated that the existing comp plan designation for the parcel is SF-I, Single Family, one unit per acre with a proposed comp plan designation of SF-3, Single Family, three units per acre. Ms. Nelson stated that the existing zoning is SR-1, Single Family, one unit per acre with a proposed zoning change to either SR-2 or SR-3; both of which are consistent with the comp plan designation of SF-3. Ms. Nelson stated that the site currently contains one single-family residential dwelling unit and is generally flat with no wetlands. She stated that the property is surrounded to the north and west by low-density single family residential uses and that King County owns parcels to the south and southeast of the site as part of Soos Creek Park. Ms. Nelson stated that the surrounding parcels are designated SF-1 and zoned SR-1 with parcels to the west of 148th Avenue Southeast designated as SF-6 and zoned SR-4.5. Ms. Nelson stated that the Soos Creek (� trail is located immediately east of the site with a parking lot for the park located south of the site. Ms. Nelson said that there are three single family residences located west of the site which abut 148th Avenue Southeast. Ms. Nelson stated that access to the subject property is from Southeast 264th Street, which is not currently built to residential standards. She stated that if this application is approved and the property divided into an additional lot, the applicant would be required to participate in the cost of improving 264th Street. Ms. Nelson stated that an urban separator designated this property in King County's Comprehensive Plan (adopted in 1994), prior to annexation by the City of Kent. Ms. Nelson stated that the zoning for the parcel was R-1, one unit per acre. She stated that King County's Comprehensive Plan contains several policies defining urban separators as "low-density areas within the urban growth area that create open space corridors and provide visual contrast or buffer to continuous development between cities. " Ms. Nelson stated that urban separator designations were generally applied to undeveloped land or underdeveloped parcels located near existing open space corridors or environmentally sensitive areas. Ms. Nelson stated that at the time of adoption of Kent's Comprehensive Plan in 1995, there were no designated urban separator areas within Kent's city limits; therefore, the City's comprehensive plan does not include goals or policies specifically addressing urban separators. Ms. Nelson stated that properties with urban separator designations were annexed into the City at the time of the Meridian Annexation in 1996. She stated that when zoning for that area was improved some of the urban separator areas were given higher single family zoning designations while others remained at low- ., density. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 3 Ms. Nelson stated that the proposed site is appropriate for low-density residential and that a zoning designation of SR-2 would allow for one additional lot to be created resulting in two lots approximately one half acre in size per lot. Ms. Nelson stated that the creek as well as the open space along the creek function as an affective buffer and urban separator. She stated that SR-3 zoning would allow three additional lots to be created resulting in lots smaller than the existing adjoining lots. Ms. Nelson stated that the lot sizes of the proposed parcels are approximately 29,000 square feet in size and there are other single family lots in the adjoining area that vary in size from 32,000 square feet to over one acre. Ms. Nelson stated that since the property is 51,778 square feet in size, two lots would average approximately 26,000 square feet each equivalent to existing surrounding lots to the west ranging from 28,000 to 29,500 square feet. She stated that these lot sizes do not conform to the current SR-1 zone with a minimum lot size of 34,500 square feet. Ms. Nelson stated that changing zoning to SR-2 would result in development compatible with the surrounding area which would not unduly burden the transportation network and would continue to preserve the low density nature of the area. Ms. Nelson stated that staff recommends a SF-3 designation and a rezone to SR-2,not SR-3 as requested by the applicant. Ms. Nelson stated that the application only considers the applicant's property. However, there are three parcels to the west of the subject property that are also designated SF-I and SR-I which do not currently meet the minimum lot size requirements for that zone and offered the option to the Board to consider changing the comp plan designation on those three parcels as well to SF-3. Ms. Nelson stated that if the Board chose to pursue the aforementioned option, staff recommends that an additional hearing be held with a public notice sent to the effected property owners, allowing them the opportunity to be involved in the process. Ms. Nelson said that since the property owners have not requested a zone change at this time, staff does not propose a zone change at this time. She stated that by changing only the comp plan designation the entire area's designation would remain similar, giving a more consistent look to the comp plan map. Sharon Woodford MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED to open the public hearing. MOTION carried. Carol Cairnes, 14845 SE 264th St., Kent, WA stated that as the applicant she is requesting dividing her property into two parcels to remain consistent with the half acre parcels abutting her property. Joe Miles, 24639 156th Avenue, Kent, WA stated that he is the President of Friends of Soos Creek Park, a nonprofit corporation committed to the enhancement of Soos Creek Park. He submitted a report for the record as Exhibit #I. Mr. Miles stated that the corporation's primary objection to both the Caimes and Pacific Industries amendment relate to increasing density in the urban separator that serves as an open space buffer to Soos Creek and the Soos Creek trail. Mr. Miles stated that in 1990 the State Legislature passed the Growth Management Act (GMA) and subsequently amended the GMA in 1991 requiring adoption of County wide planning policies. Mr. Miles stated that the King County Council adopted the County wide planning policies in 1992, which were �- subsequently ratified by the City of Kent. Mr. Miles read, for the record, from a significant countywide land use policy LU-27 relating to urban separators. Mr. Miles emphasized critical portions of the policy relating to urban separators as "permanent low density lands which protect adjacent resource lands, rural areas and enviromnentally sensitive Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 4 areas... "Mr. Miles stated that in 1994 the King County Comprehensive Plan designated this area as urban separators and in 1995 the zoning within that urban separator was designated as one unit per acre. Mr. Miles stated that the intent of the urban separator is to buffer Soos Creek and the Soos Creek Trail from higher density. Mr. Miles said that he refutes the section of the staff report stating that "nothing in the City's comprehensive plan relates to urban separators. Mr. Miles said that Soos Creek is a valuable fisheries resource, utilized by several salmon species including Chinook and that Soos Creek Trail is designated as a regional trail serving a large community and several jurisdictions. Mr. Miles stated that subsequent to this proposed amendment both the Meridian and Meridian Valley Annexations annexed parts of this urban separator. He stated that the City of Kent should strictly adhere to the County wide planning policy LU-27 to not redesignate the property to a higher density for the twenty year planning cycle. Mr. Miles said that the City of Kent should receive approval and concurrence from King County prior to modification of the development regulations. Mr. Miles voiced concern over road standard impacts that could result from rezoning the Caimes property. He stated that 264th Street is a dead end street serving over four homes with no emergency turn around and consists of gravel with no drainage controls, no detention, no water quality treatment nor a conveyance system. Mr. Miles stated that the intersection of 148th and 264th has limited site distance to the north for southbound traffic movement and that actual site distance standards should be 490 feet. Mr. Miles stated that it appears that only 300 feet is available at this intersection. Mr. Miles stated that the Caimes two-lot short plat would probably not be subject to drainage review or to 1 full improvements of this roadway as the property consists of less than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface. Mr. Miles stated that there is a sentence in the City of Kent's comprehensive plan that states `the City is incorporating the Soos Creek Land Use Map which is one unit per acre on an interim basis until an interlocal agreement is reached between the City and King County regarding growth targets for the area. " He questioned if the interlocal agreement was ever established. Mr. Miles said that the Kent City Code Section 12.02050 states that there are three standards by which amendments are reviewed. Mr. Miles said that the second standard is based upon new information not available at the time of the comprehensive plan's adoption or where circumstances have changed since the adoption of the plan. Mr. Miles questioned what new information and change in circumstances since 1995 would warrant an increase in density. Mr. Miles stated that he recommends denial of the Caimes amendment as the proposed rezone is not compatible and suggested retaining the current zoning of one dwelling unit per acre. Marc Imlay, 24625 148th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he is treasurer of the Friends of Soos Creek Park and said that his main concern is that the park and trail be protected. He voiced concern that approval of this amendment could function as a precedent for increasing zoning density in this sensitive area. Faith Wilson, 15011 SE 264th St., Kent, WA said that she has resided in the area 27 years. Ms. Wilson questioned how the City of Kent would address needed road improvements as the roadway in the area of the Caimes driveway tends to settle and sink. Ms. Wilson questioned if the Caimes would continue to use "1 their well or hook into city water and voiced concern over the aquifer's capability to handle additional houses. Ms. Wilson stated that she opposes a rezone. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 5 Bob Nelson, 24048 156th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he is a member of the Covington Planning Commission. He said that his testimony expresses his personal feelings and was not representative of the City of Covington, the Planning Commission or any staff member of the City or elected official. Mr. Nelson stated that the county wide planning policies include a consistency requirement and these comprehensive plan amendments would intrude into that urban separator which was set up to specifically discourage the encroachment of housing directly up to the edge of the trail or stream. Mr. Nelson stated that King County's zoning of one unit per acre should be retained and voiced opposition to this property being rezoned to two or three units per acre. Mr. Nelson encouraged the Board to consider that if this rezone is approved, this could set precedence for future infringement into sensitive areas. Mr. Nelson stated that he believes this amendment is inconsistent with the County wide planning policies and with the Growth Management Act and urged the Board to reject this amendment. Brad Bell MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion CARRIED. City Engineer Mr. Gill stated that although SE 264th is a public right-of-way, it is a gravel roadway and therefore not maintained. He stated that the road currently serves four residences as a private access driveway for their homes. Mr. Gill stated that in conjunction with any future development the roadway would have to be improved with asphalt to a specific width per City standards. Mr. Gill stated that the road improvements would likely trigger requirements for storm water detention and treatment. He stated that as this site is located in a sensitive area and in close proximity to Soos Creek, City staff would analysis the site from an environmental perspective. Mr. Gill stated that the City could require treatment and detention even if the property does not exceeds the five thousand square foot size requirement as set by Cities standards. Mr. Gill stated that this property is serviced by King County Water District #111 jurisdiction. Mr. Gill stated that he believed the property owner would be able to use their private well system as long as the well met current standards. Mr. Gill stated, however, that the property owner would need to work in conjunction with King County Health Department, State Department of Ecology and the local water purveyor to determine the viability of the well. Planner Diana Nelson quoted extensively from King County's Land Use Policy 27 on urban separators. She stated that the urban separators seem to be at the center of the controversy regarding this amendment. She said that a portion of the policy states that "maintenance of these urban separators is a regional as well as a local concern. Therefore, no modification shall be made to the development regulations governing these areas without King County review and concurrence. " Ms. Nelson spoke at length on the City of Kent's Comprehensive Plan's definition of higher and urban densities. She stated that a considerable amount of development has taken place in this general area since 1995 and when an applicant requests additional density, staff looks at what would be considered appropriate for the area based on the nature of the land and what has occurred in the surrounding areas. Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom said that an interlocal agreement concerning growth targets did not exist between King County and the City of Kent and stated that an agreement existed for the processing and disposition of building permits. 11^ Mr. Satterstrom stated that the City of Kent completed a capacity analysis and looked at existing zoning as an attempt to ascertain a growth target at the time the Meridian Annexation took place. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 6 ^1 Mr. Satterstrom stated that the Urban Separator policies were not a concern to City of Kent at the time Kent adopted their own comprehensive plan as the Meridian area was not annexed at that time. He stated that urban separators become an issue as the City begins to annex territory east of the City of Kent. Mr. Satterstrom urged the Board to move staff s recommendation on to the City Council, as the City's legal department is currently analyzing what would occur if Planning staff decided to move ahead with an action that would oppose the County wide planning policy. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the City does not have an established urban separator definition established. Mr. Satterstrom stated that from the City of Kent's perspective, low density is defined as three units or less and the Growth Hearings Board would stipulate that a.density of four units or less per acre is not considered dense enough for urban development. Mr. Satterstrom stated that although staffs recommendation of two units per acre is an increase in the existing density, it is not out of character with the development adjacent to the west of the site. Steve Dowell MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Steve Dowell stated that he recognizes the sensitive nature of this property and voiced concern that the density of development would be greater than this parcel of land could accommodate. He voiced opposition to this amendment as it could adversely affect public health, safety and general welfare. Brad Bell concurred with Mr. Dowell in opposing this amendment. Jon Johnson stated that approval of this amendment infringes upon the urban separators and voiced his ., opposition. Sharon Woodford concurred with the other Board members in voicing her opposition. Chair Ron Harmon concurred with the Board members to deny this amendment. Steve Dowell MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to deny Staff s recommendation to approve CPA-99-3 (A)/CPZ-99-1 Cairnes Amendment on the basis that it would adversely affect public health, safety and general welfare. Motion carried unanimously. #CPA-99-3 (D)/CPZ-994 PACIFIC INDUSTRIES. INC. AMENDMENT Diana Nelson said that the proposed site is located at 24039 146th Place Southeast on the eastern edge of the City abutting Southeast 240th Street. She stated that the site consists of one-parcel 8.6 acres in size. Ms. Nelson stated that the existing plan designation is SF-I, single family, one unit per acre and the proposed plan designation is SF-6, single family, six units per acre. Ms. Nelson stated that existing zoning is SR-1, single family, one unit per acre and the proposed zoning is SR-6, single family, 6.05 units per acre. She said that the parcel currently contains one single-family residential unit and has steep slopes on the north and eastern portions of the parcel. Ms. Nelson stated that single family residential development exists in varying densities surrounding the property. She stated that the Loe Estates Subdivision, home to the Ridgefield and Ridgecrest development is located to the west and south of the subject property and is zoned SR-4.5. Ms. Nelson stated that the subdivision was platted in 1992 under King County with an average lot size of 10,000 square feet. Ms. Nelson stated that at the time of platting, King County zoning was SR-9600, which equates to the County's current R-4 zoning. She stated that at the time the plat was approved 146th Avenue Southeast was developed leading to the southern portion of the site. Ms. Nelson stated that access to the subject property is available from the road to the south and from an easement extending south from Southeast 240th. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 7 Ms. Nelson stated that parcels to the northwest and east of the property are over an acre in size and zoned SR-1. She stated that King County owns the parcels to the north across Southeast 240th as part of Sees Creek Park and that the park is located approximately 500 feet to the east of the property and the trail system is north and east of the site. Ms. Nelson said that prior to annexation, the property was designated as an urban separator in the King County Comp Plan and zoned R-1. She stated that King County defines urban separators as "low-density areas within urban growth areas that create open space corridors and provide visual contrasts or buffers to continuos development between cities". Ms. Nelson stated that one on the County's comp plan policies defines urban separators as permanent low- density lands, which protect adjacent resource lands, rural areas and environmentally sensitive areas. Ms. Nelson stated that the steep slopes on the land are not suitable for development and are part of the reason why this has been designated as an urban separator. She stated that at the time the Kent Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995, there were no urban separator lands within city limits and this area only came into the City in 1997 with the Meridian Valley Annexation, at which time, those urban separator lands were annexed to the City. Ms. Nelson spoke at length on Kent's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policy 8.1, referring to densities within the potential annexation areas as well as Goal LU-20 that referred to the protection and enhancement of environmentally sensitive areas. Ms.Nelson stated that this parcel is located at the edge of urban development to the west and south and open r-. space corridors along the creek. She stated that there is a natural urban separator of steep slopes located along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site. Ms. Nelson stated that both the south and western portions of the property are not environmentally constrained and would appear to support higher density development. While the applicants have requested SR-6 zoning, staff does not feel that this is compliant with the surrounding property densities and that four units per acre or SR-4.5 is a more appropriate density. Therefore, staff recommends that the proposed plan designation be changed from SF-1 to SF-6 and that the zoning on the property be changed from SR-I to SR-4.5 in lieu of the SR-6 zoning as requested by the applicant. Ms. Nelson stated that a survey has not been completed to determine how much of the acreage consists of steep slopes and it appears that two-thirds of the property is level enough for residential development. Ms. Nelson stated that there is not an abutting road connection to the west and the easement to the north is too dangerous to be considered as a viable access point for the property. She concurred with Ron Harmon that the only viable access to the site would be directly through the neighborhood to the south. Jon Johnson MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED to open the public hearing. Motion carried. Denny Holt, 1215 S Central, #211, Kent,WA submitted a map for the record as Exhibit#2. He stated that he represents Pacific Industries. Mr. Holt stated that the geography and topography of the property does not lend itself to a development of 6 units per acre. Mr. Holt stated that Mr. Miles points are well taken relative to urban separators, the history of the GMA and the goals and objectives of preserving the park and open space along the creek. Mr. Holt stated that the urban separator issue should be discussed further between the City Council and the County. Mr. Holt continued to speak at length on what defines urban separators. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 8 Mr. Holt stated that the proponents for this amendment concur with staff that urban densities should be considered as four units per acre to adequately support urban services. He stated that although the proposed site consists of 8.6 acres, potential development consists of 25 lots, which equates to 3 units per acre. Mr. Holt stated that he is aware that adequate access would need to be determined for the site. John Carlson, 24322 147th Ave SE, Kent, WA said he is the President of the Loe Estates Homeowners Organization representing the Ridgefield and Ridgecrest development located south of the proposed site. Mr. Carlson stated that the homeowners felt that they had not been given a long enough notification time prior to the public hearing. He stated that there are 123 residences in their development of which 54 received notification who reside within the 300-foot radius of the proposed zone change. Mr. Carlson stated that the recipients had only three business days to put together their presentation due to the holidays. Mr. Carlson spoke at length on safety issues connected with increased vehicular traffic as well as ingress and egress through his community. He stated that if the proposed site were to be developed with 25 homes, this could equate to between 250 and 300 more vehicular trips in and out of their existing neighborhood per day. Mr. Carlson voiced concerns over environmental hazards including drainage issues and the loss of natural vegetation and animal habitat. Mr. Carlson stated that the homeowners association desire more time to work on their opposition of this proposal and further said that the association collected 90%of residential signatures in the form of a petition requesting continuation of the hearing at a later date. Charles Olson, 14533 SE 243rd Place, Kent, WA stated that he resides in the community next to the proposed site. He stated that 146th Place was developed in anticipation of the possible extension of the Ridgefield neighborhood into that proposed area. Mr. Olson voiced his concern over potential safety hazards with increased traffic in the area. Mr. Olson stated that the proposed property functions as a catch basin during the spring and fall and said that if development occurs, this would necessitate containing and rerouting the water. Joe Miles, 24639 156th Ave SE, Kent, WA reiterated that his prior testimony regarding urban separators applies to this issue as well. Mr. Miles submitted a letter for the record as Exhibit #3. He stated that as President of Soos Creek Park, he is committed to its enhancement and protection. Mr. Miles stated that he opposes the Pacific Properties Amendment primarily due to the urban separator issue and the specific impacts associated with development of those properties. Mr. Miles felt that staff was reinterpreting the County wide planning policy LU-27 in order to accommodate higher density development whereas the policy clearly says "...shall not be redesignated for higher density. " Mr. Miles stated that this policy is a regional issue that should be considered at the county level. Mr. Miles stated that the purpose of the urban separator is to protect the Soos Creek Trail (designated as a regional trail) and Soos Creek, which contains the salmonid species including the Chinook salmon. Mr. Miles stated that since an interlocal agreement was never established, this would indicate that existing zoning should remain the same. Mr. Miles said that there are safety concerns connected with Southeast 240th providing access to both the existing neighborhood as well as generating additional traffic for a proposed new development site. He stated that Southeast 240th has limited sight distance and in event of an emergency, a single entrance could block accessibility to the community. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 9 ram' Mr. Miles spoke at length on impacts associated with drainage issues and zoning compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Miles reiterated that a condition for approving amendments must indicate that new information has been made available and that circumstances have changed. He stated that the listing of Chinook salmon as endangered and the addition of the urban separator might warrant lower densities. Mr. Miles recommended that this amendment be denied. Marc Imlay, 24625 148th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he concurs with Mr. Miles testimony and said that he is uncomfortable with what he perceives as Planning staffs inclination to redefine density as it suites their needs in order to allow for more development. He voiced his concern over development infringing into the urban separator area. Gregory Cox, 24308 147th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he concurs with the previous opponents' testimonies. He stated that his property backs up directly to the drainage area of the applicant's site and he observes the field retaining water during spring and fall. Mr. Cox stated that the water slowly drains off, over the course of two or three days, by running through a drainage easement located on the back of his and his neighbor's property. Mr. Cox stated that a significant wildlife populace resides in the area including red-tailed hawks, tree frogs, blue herons, ducks, deer and coyotes. Mr. Cox stressed his recommendation for denial. Catherine Skinner,24048146th Place, Kent, WA stated that their property is located at the bottom of the hill with water draining across their property into a drainage conduit in the Ridgefield Development. She stated that water stands year round on her property and vegetative growth would support this. Ms. Skinner stated that King County designated the hillside as erosion sensitive and a land slide area which should not be developed and stated that development of one home per acre would be reasonable. She said that she concurred with Mr. Miles testimony. Ken Dickel, 14612 SE 243rd Place, Kent, WA stated that his biggest concern is with drainage issues. He stated that he has observed water pooling in three locations on the proposed site that cascades down into his property. He stated that water runs into the drainage system on his property all winter long Mr. Dickel stated that with an increase in density, the level of the land would have to be raised in order to develop this property, creating a land mass differential that would add additional drainage flow problems. Doug Spencer, 14515 SE 247th St., Kent, WA stated that he concurs with the previous speakers and opposes this amendment. He stated that as a resident of King County for 45 years, he has seen the implementation of the GMA as a tool to inhibit destructive developmental growth within the community. Cathy Tillotson, 24231 146th Ave SE, Kent,WA stated that her property is located on 146th and believes that her property would be greatly impacted with the possible development of 25 homes. She stated that as traffic travels into the neighborhood on her street, the increased trips would create safety hazards. Ms. Tillotson stated that she would like to see this amendment denied. Bob Nelson, 24048 156th Ave SE, Kent, WA restated his position that he does not represent the City of r" Covington, their staff, Planning Commission or elected officials. Mr. Nelson stated that his main objective to development is infringement into the urban separator, therefore, he does not %want an increase in zoning. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 10 Mr. Nelson spoke at length on urban separator issues and voiced his belief that the King County planning policies has specific requirements in place that would not allow for incremental deterioration of urban separator. John Sluys,24122 145th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he lives in Ridgecrest, which borders the subject property to the west. Mr. Sluys submitted photos of the site along with petitions from the neighbors for the record as Exhibit #4. He stated that they refer to the subject property as the Lakes as it is usually flooded over during the year. Mr. Sluys referred to the GMA in speaking to steep slopes on the subject property. He said that Section 4.4 of the Comprehensive Growth Plan Inventory of Critical Areas specifically states that "the Growth Management Act requires cities to inventory, designate and protect through development regulations, all critical area and resource lands. " Mr. Sluys stated that these critical areas are further defined to "include geologically hazardous areas such as steep slopes. " Mr. Sluys stated that he found it interesting that a recommendation was made to increase the zoning. He stated that he received his public notice on the morning of December 20, a Saturday morning. He stated that only 50 homes received notification in a neighborhood where every home would be impacted by this request and felt that the notification time was inadequate, as there were only 9 days notice of which only 3 days were business days due to the holidays. Mr. Sluys stated that public notice boards should be positioned on sites where accessibility is readily available to the public. Bill and Mary Ann Solomon, 24606 145th Place SE, Kent, WA voiced opposition to increasing density. Mr. Solomon stated that he is director of his home owners association and voiced concern that as density increases on the subject property located in close proximity to his neighborhood, that the residents may wish to use their neighborhood's playground. Mr. Solomon stated that he would not be opposed to inviting others to use some of their facilities but felt that in fairness to his community, the new residential development should set up their own association as well as be required to establish their own playground area. He stated that the homeowner's in his community pay for the privilege of having this amenity. Vidya Shastri, 24134 145th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he resides in Ridgecrest and concurs with the previous speakers' testimonies. He stated that he moved into this neighborhood as it exemplified a rural setting with its proximity to Soos Creek as well as being set back from the main road. Mr. Shastri stated that increasing density would intensify traffic hazards in the area of 240th and 144th. Debbie Elkan, 24533 148th Lane SE, Kent, WA stated that the road leading to her home has flooded from drainage flowing down hill from Ridgefield through a pipeline in the hillside. She stated that no drainage easement exists through her property and that her driveway washed out with a portion of her property flooding over and washing down into the neighbor's property. Ms. Elkan stated that developing additional 25 homes is going to negatively impact the existing drainage problem. She stated that she purchased her home with its 1.5-acre parcel for the rural beauty that exists within the current zoning. Lowell Hess, 14425 SE 240th, Kent, WA stated that he is not opposed to development of this property and questioned if any space was dedicated for play ground areas. Scott Herder, 24157 145th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he is a resident in the cul-de-sac near the site. He stated concern over safety and traffic issues at the school bus stops as well as near the playground Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 11 located on 145'. He stated that 18 youth under the age of 10 reside in his development and that vehicular traffic does not heed the posted 25-mile per hour speed limit. He concurs with the other speakers' testimonies and opposes this amendment. Walt Kuehlthau, 24116 145th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that he observes six bodies of water setting on the proposed site from early fall to late spring. He stated that he concurs with the prior speakers' testimonies and said that he felt betrayed by City staff. Mr. Kuehlthau said that he was pleased when his subdivision was annexed into the City of Kent two years ago. He said that he attended every-planning meeting and it was his understanding that the zoning would not change. Mr. Kuehlthau said that as he recalled at the time of annexation, in questioning Mr. O'Neill, he was informed that the adjoining property would remain zoned one house per acre due to the slope being undevelopable as well as the slope being designated as a buffer zone. Mr. Kuehlthau questioned what information has changed in two years for staff to consider higher density. He stated that he is not opposed to developing the area with one unit per acre but opposes clustered housing on small lots of 6,000 to 7,200 square feet. Joe Harmon, 24022 146th Place SE, Kent, WA stated that his property is located directly east of the proposed property and voiced his opposition to this application. He stated that he shares the use of a well with three other residents located on his property near the boundary with owners to the south. He voiced concern with water run off possibly contaminating the well. Mr. Harmon stated that he is concerned with the increase in traffic and the safety issues that would arise with having only a single access point to the new development through their community. Mr. Harmon questioned how wetland issues would be mitigated. He stated that two major lakes form on the proposed site, one through a dam created by an existing road with a small culvert. David Leipham, 24110 145th Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that it was his understanding during the annexation process two years ago, due to the steep slopes part of the proposed site is not buildable. He stated that he understood that a single parcel of land could not be zoned with two differing zones. Mr. Leipham stated that 156' Street fronts his home and questioned if the road was barricaded only until further development occurs. Mr. Leipham questioned how an easement access from the north would effect 240`h. Joe Singh, 18124 Riviera Place, Normandy Park, WA stated that he is the owner of Pacific Industries. He stated that Joe Miles is a Senior Engineer with King County DDS who has worked on numerous plats including many of his own properties over the last ten years. Mr. Singh questioned the urban separator definition and if urban separators were established by King County or the Legislative branch of Government. Mr. Singh spoke at length on his interpretation of the Growth Management Act to enable developers to build on property within an established boundary that provides the community with fire, police, roadway, schools and park services. �- Mr. Singh spoke at length on water retention system criteria and stated that he has complied with the standards set by both King County and other applicable government agencies to meet the rules and regulations of the Service Water Management Act with his developments. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 12 Mr. Singh stated that he has been in the development business for forty years and believes that his developments improve the economic status of the community and provides employment for the construction industry. Mr. Singh stated that he is requesting a zoning of 3.5 units per acre and due to constraints on the property will not be able to develop the site at that level. Mr. Singh spoke at length on the neighboring communities concerns with traffic and health issues. Sharon Woodford MOVED and Jon Johnson SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Planner Diana Nelson spoke at length on urban separator concerns. She addressed the conflict between the City of Kent Land Use Policy 8.1 regarding densities and King County's policy on urban separators in connection with zoning. Ms. Nelson stated that the City of Kent has a "Sensitive Areas Ordinance" which does not prohibit development on the entire parcel, only on those portions of the slope that fall within sensitive area guidelines. She stated that staff believes that the upland portion of flat to rolling hills on the site is appropriate for development and considers the area along the creek and the roadway to provide adequate urban separators. Ms. Nelson stated that Staff prefers not to split zoning on property. She stated that the applicant is asking for rezoning on the entire parcel with the knowledge that at least a third of the property is not developable at the requested density and that the remaining property can not be developed at a density of 6.05 units per acre. Ms. Nelson stated that the applicant wishes to develop the property at 3.5 units per acre but is requesting a higher density of 6.05 units per acre to allow for an appropriate number of lots to meet the cost of improving the land. She stated that the City of Kent does not have a clustering ordinance. Ms. Nelson deferred to City Engineer Gary Gill to speak to the issue of water detention and retention requirements. Ms. Nelson stated that a requirement does not exist for the construction of a playground as part of a development. She stated that the City Parks Department can require that a subdivision pay fees for City parks development and maintenance, or if the Parks Department request development of a park, they can require a donation of a portion of land in lieu of fees for construction of a park. Ms, Nelson stated that the City is in compliance with State and local regulations in noticing property owners within the 300-foot radius within the proper time frame. She concurred with the property owners that perhaps the City should consider a longer notification period to allow for public preparedness. Ms. Nelson stated that the City Council or Planning Board would need to initiate this issue, as a number of sections within the City Code would have to be amended. Ms. Nelson stated that City regulations do not specify where a public notice board must be positioned on a proposed site but allows the City to require an applicant to post more than one board on a large site. City Engineer Gary Gill stated that Soos Creek Sewer and Water District and King County Water District I 1 I serve property in the area of the proposed site. He stated that adequate utilities exist for extension to . the proposed site. Mr. Gill stated that the City of Kent would require a public street extension into the proposed site. Mr. Gill said that the City will look at access from the standpoint of what King County's intent was when they Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 13 provided stub streets in that area. Mr. Gill stated that no access would be allowed onto 240'h as that area is steep and does not allow for adequate site distance. Mr.Gill stated that 146' St. is a dead-end street with a type three barricade that would allow the County to continue development of the street for further development. He stated that this roadway would provide the most logical and safest grade for primary access to the site and that a secondary access would be to extend 145" Mr. Gill said that Kent's City Council has requested that the Public Works Department re-evaluate Kent's road standards, which includes connectivity within neighborhoods. Mr. Gill stated that the City of Kent would like to discourage construction of cul-de-sacs. He stated that by providing alternative routes through a site, a safer environment is provided for police and fire vehicles as well as give the residents alternate ways to access and exit their neighborhood. Mr. Gill stated that the City has established a Neighborhood Traffic Control Program, as they are sensitive to public safety issues. He stated that residents of the site's adjoining neighborhoods have worked with the Public Works Departments on speeding issues and heavy traffic volume within their residential areas and encouraged them to continue to work with Public Works to explore methods of reducing traffic on their residential streets. Mr. Gill stated that the City would participate with the neighbors by conducting speed studies and accident surveys. Mr. Gill stated that 144" is the main access road into the site and was constructed as part of Loe Estates Subdivision under King County's jurisdiction. He stated that the road was intended to extend through to the south and provide a connection to Southeast 256'Street. Mr. Gill stated that the required road extension was appealed by the developer through the King County Hearing Examiner and Council. The County upheld the decision to require that the road be extended although the extension never occurred and the City of Kent favors extension of this road as a means to provide a safe alternative route that would move traffic away from highly congested intersections. Mr. Gill stated that in the interim time since the appeal occurred, the property was annexed to the City of Kent and the road continuation is a legal issue that is being analyzed by the City of Kent's Law Department. Mr. Gill stated that the Public Works will consider slope stability, erosion and require that the developer conduct a geotechnical investigation and report to identify soil types, slope stability issues and what methods should be implemented to manage development on that site. Mr. Gill stated that Public Works considers this property as a highly hazardous area in that they would apply their strictest standards for storm water treatment and detention. Mr. Gill stated that typically there would be a required setback distance of 75 feet from the top of the steep slope, which would be left in its native vegetation as an undisturbed slope. He stated that storm water would be collected and detained or retained and that each home would be required to install down spout infiltration systems so that a majority of the storm water will flow into the ground to help recharge the normal ground water in that area. Mr. Gill stated that residual water flow not percolating into the ground would be collected and conveyed through a detention system and then moved off site. Mr. Gill stated that the developer would be required to complete a downstream analysis to look at how storm water flows currently drain off the property. Mr. Gill encouraged the neighbors to work with Public Works in identifying where drainage problems exist. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 14 Mr. Gill stated that Public Works would typically require a developer to tight line storm water down to the point where it is not running off of the erosive hillside and then provide water treatment prior to discharge into Big Soos Creek. Mr. Gill spoke at length regarding the existing site distance problems associated with 144" and 240'. He stated that the site distance standards were established utilizing the American Association for State Highway and Transportation Officials Recommendations for Roadway and Geometric Design. Mr. Gill stated that as stated by the City Attorney's office, the road standards were predominately developed around roadways built in Arizona and southern California consisting of flatlands with infinite room for good visibility. Mr. Gill stated that as a condition of development, the developer and his engineer would be required to work with both the County Health Department and other regulatory agencies to assure that there would not be negative impacts on adjacent well sites. Mr. Dowell stated that the Planning Department must comply with the State's Growth Management Act that stipulates limiting growth to areas within Kent's city limits where public facilities exist and encourages increased density in these areas while allowing for green space. Mr. Dowell stated that it seems the urban boundary issues have not been satisfied and thus recommended denial of this amendment. Sharon Woodford stated that water run off and retention from the steep slope on the subject property is of concern to her. She stated that only one access point into this proposed site would increase traffic safety concerns. Ms. Woodford stated that this property should be developed one unit per acre and voiced her > opposition to this amendment. Mr. Bell noted that one speaker had implied that Planner, Kevin O'Neill had changed his land use position of two years ago at the time this property was annexed into the City of Kent. Mr. Bell said that he has worked with the Planning Department staff over several years and has never dealt with a more intelligent, credible, open, honest and helpful group of people, which have the difficult task of determining appropriate use of land within the city. Mr. Bell stated that he would not advocate increases in density and is concerned with urban separators. He stated that he opposes staff s recommendation of increasing density. Mr. Johnson stated that he opposes staffs recommendation due to drainage and water displacement problems as well as public safety issues due to road configurations with possible development of 8 units per acre. Mr. Johnson stated that the public notice time lines and the locations for posting public notice boards need to be revisited in the future with a recommendation presented to the City Council from the Board. Mr. Harmon stated that he concurs with Jon Johnson with regard to increasing the notification time lines and perhaps to increase the 300' radius for public notification. Mr. Harmon encouraged the Public Works Department to actively pursue a solution with the Legal Department regarding completion of 144" St. Mr. Harmon stated that he votes to deny this application. Brad Bell MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED to deny staffs recommendation of approval for#CPA- 99-3 (D)/CPZ-99-4 Pacific Industries Inc. Amendment. Motion carried unanimously. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 15 #CPA-99-3 (G) FORTUNATO AMENDMENT Planner Matt Jackson stated that this application is to request only a comp plan amendment change with no rezone requested at this time. Mr. Jackson submitted a letter from Mr. Kent L. Gilleland for the record as Exhibit#4. He stated that the letter indicates that Mr. Gilleland is not opposed to Mr. Fortunato developing his land under the current three units per acre zoning but opposes double density in this area. Therefore, he is opposed to this amendment request. Mr. Jackson stated that Mr. Fortunato is requesting to change the land use plan map on property located at 27842 and 27854 132nd Avenue SE with the two lots consisting of approximately 6.75 acres. He stated that the current land use designation is SF-3, single family residential and the applicant is requesting a change to SF-6, single family residential, six units per acre. Mr. Jackson stated that this request is an attempt to better utilize this property in accordance with the existing neighborhood. Mr. Jackson stated that a portion of a creek flows through the northeastern comer of the property and buffers will be required. Mr. Jackson stated that access is provided to the site from 132nd Avenue and City of Kent construction standards require that an additional residential street be provided for access. Mr. Jackson stated that any development would be required to meet City of Kent construction standards for on site storm water detention. Mr. Jackson stated that by requesting only a land use change at this time, Mr. Fortunato can return to the Planning Department at a later date, with the comp plan change already in place. Mr. Fortunato could than apply for a rezone to SR-6, to be heard before the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Jackson said that if the property were developed under current zoning, approximately 24 p.m. peak hour trips would be generated based on the potential for 24 lots. He stated that under the proposed land use change, with a maximum density of six units per acre, this would create the potential for 40 p.m. peak hour trips based on 40 lots. Mr. Jackson stated that the creek on the northeast comer of the lot limits lot density. Mr. Jackson stated that property west of the site has an existing SF-6 designation and surrounding property in the general vicinity of the site is designated SF-3. Mr. Jackson stated that property north and east of the site is designated SF-6. He stated that staff recommends approval of this amendment as the request does not pose any health, safety or welfare issues and is consistent with existing zoning and land use in the area. Jon Johnson MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to open the public hearing. Motion carried. Mr. Jackson stated that he represents the applicant Mr. Fortunato who was unable to attend the hearing due to illness in his family. Planning Director explained that the comprehensive plan amendment process does not dictate that an applicant must apply for both a comp plan and zoning change simultaneously. Mr. Harris stated that an applicant must first request a comp plan change, then can request a zoning change through the Hearing Examiner at a later date. Mr. Harris stated that usually applicants apply for a comp plan and zoning change at the same time in order to expedite the planning process. Brad Bell MOVED and Jon Johnson SECONDED to open the public hearing. Motion carried. }Michael Leonard, 13321 SE 278th, Kent, R'A stated that his property lies to the north towards the east end of the applicant's property and that he has lived there for 11 years. He stated that he opposes the Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 16 amendment due to increased safety concerns associated with the influx of higher volumes of traffic that would be generated. Mr. Leonard stated that with the development of homes, the potential of vandalism to his property would increase and he voiced concern over the ecosystem of the creek being compromised and possibly depleting the Coho salmon habitat. Emily Leonard, 13321 SE 278th St., Kent, WA stated that she has resided in the area for 11 years and chose the location for its rural country environment and peacefulness. Mrs. Leonard stated that she is concerned about the wildlife and the salmon habitat, which could potentially be destroyed. She voiced concern over increases in traffic volume with existing developments already underway and that vehicular traffic will cut through their neighborhood so as not to have to wait for the light at Kent Kangley and 132nd. Mrs. Leonard stated that development of 16 houses per acre is excessive and would over burden the land. Leonard Juhnke, 13511 SE 278th,Kent,WA stated that Soos Creek runs through a comer of the proposed site and questioned the viability of implementing only 100 foot setbacks due to the salmon returning to the creek for the first time in 12 years. He stated that if the property were to be rezoned to SR-6, homes would have to be constructed on small lots to compensate for any impacts to Soos Creek. Mr. Juhnke stated that zoning should remain as it is currently so as not to jeopardize the salmon population and in order to protect the creek. Mr. Juhnke stated that he concurs with Mr. and Mrs. Leonard's testimony regarding traffic impacts. Mr. Juhnke questioned if the City plans to improve 132nd with four lanes. Mr. Juhnke stated that with the rezoning of property, taxes increase and questioned if the City of Kent or the developer would absorb some of the cost for needed road improvements with the increase in vehicular traffic due to development. Brad Bell MOVED and Jon Johnson SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Mr. Jackson stated that Staff supports SR-6, as this designation is a typical suburban type density. Mr. Bell said he sees no way to stop development in this area and with the understanding that the neighbors concerns would be addressed before the Hearing Examiner when the applicant applies for a rezone, he fully supports staff s recommendation of SF-6. Jon Johnson stated that he is opposed to Staffs recommendation of SF-6 as it seems more consistent to retain the SF-3 designation for this site as surrounding zoning is SF-3 except for land to the west. Brad Bell MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to accept staffs recommendation to change the land use designation to SF-6 for CPA-99-G the Fortunato Amendment. The motion was denied 3 to 2 with Jon Johnson, Steve Dowell and Ron Harmon opposed. #CPA-99-3 (I)/CPZ-99-9 Meridian Associates Amendment Matt Jackson stated that this is a request by Mike Reid with Meridian and Associates to change the existing land use designation from SF-8, single family residential, 8 units per acre to a low-density multifamily designation; in order to rezone the property from SR-8 to our new MR-T, Multifamily Townhouse at 12 units per acre. Mr. Jackson stated that the property consists of three lots approximately 6.5 acres in size and is located behind the Lake Meridian Plaza with the Metro Park and Ride lot located on 132nd abutting the back side of the property. Mr. Jackson stated that a branch of Soosette Creek runs through the proposed property, with a wetland feature covering a third of the property on the western portion. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 17 Mr. Jackson stated that the applicant proposes providing primary access off of Kent Kangley Road into the eastern portion of the site, avoiding the existing neighborhood and encroachment to the sensitive areas as well as provide the area with a townhouse, nonstacked unit type condominium development. Mr. Jackson stated although this is a nonproject action, the applicant is going to present illustrations of the type of projects they have developed and present what type of development they intend to build on this site. Mr. Jackson stated that under the existing MR-T zoning with the existing 6.5 acres, approximately 73 units could be constructed on the proposed site. However, the site plans shown to Planning staff indicates only 3.92 buildable acres which would allow for less density than the developers proposed 34 duplex type dwellings. Mr. Jackson stated that the Public Works department disapproves of the access point from Kent Kangley to this property. He stated that an easement exists behind Lake Meridian Plaza, which is owned by the applicant. Mr. Jackson stated that the applicant is proposing a couple of office complexes with the option of using the three lots on the south side of the proposed site for access and further development. Mr. Jackson stated that several goals and policies of the City of Kent's Comprehensive Plan encourages the City to provide denser development near existing infrastructure and services which this development would provide. Mr. Jackson stated that staff is investigating ways to protect the sensitive areas while achieving a density that is urban in nature in this area. Mr. Jackson stated that this would be achieved through buffering and preservation of th6se areas. Mr. Jackson stated that Staff feels with the use of the City's construction standards and zoning regulations, development on this site this will not create a burden to the health, safety and welfare of the City. Mr. Jackson stated that staff recommends approval of a change to low-density multifamily on the land use map and a zoning of MR-T at 12 units per acre density. Mr. Dowell questioned if a change could occur in the MR-T12 zoning whereas apartments would be constructed in lieu of condominiums. Mr. Harris stated that the City Council carefully crafted the MR-T Townhouse zone specifically for condominium type development and believes the Council would be adamant in upholding their decision. Mr. Harris stated that it has been the Council's vision to provide more owner occupied, higher density development. Steve Dowell MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to open the public hearing. Motion carried. Michael Reid, 10522 132nd Ave N.E., Kirkland, WA stated that he is the applicant's agent and has sat through two weeks of hearings observing the Board members. Mr. Reid stated that with each issue considered by the Board over the last two weeks, efforts have been made to protect the environment and preserve the sensitive areas in this town. He stated that the Board has sought to make strong conscientious decisions in their recommendations on the comp plan amendments in a manner that would improve the community while promoting quality residential development. ,"Mr. Reid stated that a subdivision application has been submitted to the City for this property. Mr. Reid stated that we listened to the neighbors and attempted to accommodate what They wanted in their community. Mr. Reid stated that this property is severely constrained by surrounding commercial development, access issues, sensitive areas and artificial sensitive areas created by a flood control dam. Mr. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 18 Reid pointed out that there is only one appropriate access to this property through the northwest neighborhood along 128' and 268' Street. Mr. Reid spoke at length on traffic, access and sensitive area concerns and the means by which they are trying to rectify these conditions. Mr. Reid stated that north of the Lake Meridian Shopping Center there is four square blocks with the northern most block owned by the applicant which is zoned commercial. He stated that William and Ava Cary, whom we have entered into an agreement with to purchase those three blocks, own the next three blocks. Mr. Reid stated that curb cuts exist on all the commercial properties abutting the western side of the shopping center and that each one of those properties carries a thirty-foot easement for ingress/egress and right-of-way. Mr. Reid stated that in developing this site they have elected to develop a private road utilizing the availability of existing easements and accesses in order to create a community sensitive to its environment and surrounding neighbors. Mr. Reid said that as this is a nonproject specific action and that the site plans displayed are representative of what could be accomplished by combining development of a small commercial office complex with a clustered townhouse development. Mr. Reid illustrated at length potential site plan alternatives. Mr. Reid submitted Site Plan#1 as Exhibit#5 and Site Plan#2 as Exhibit#6 and additionally submitted a copy of the easement that the property adjoins for the record as Exhibit #7. Mr. Reid indicated that the original owner of the proposed site, sold the adjoining property to the to the shopping center with the understanding that access would be allowed to his site from the property sold to the shopping center. Mr. Reid stated that he believes this proposal achieves what the City Code is attempting to accomplish by protecting the environment, to cluster housing, listen to our neighborhood and create a buffer between our development and the residential neighborhoods to the northwest. Mr. Reid stated that he would appreciate the Board's support of this proposal. James Parrick, 12718 SE 268th, Kent, WA stated that he owns lots 1 and 2 of Meridian Meadows and has lived there for 30 years along with eight other residents. He stated that several neighbors have spoken with Mr. Reid over traffic concerns and Mr. Reid has acknowledged their concerns. He stated that the streets are narrow with no sidewalks and there are many children and walkers in this area. Mr. Patrick stated that Kent Kangley off of 127" is particularly dangerous. Mr. Parrick questioned if the developer will be able to obtain access to the site off of Kent Kangley. He stated that he has observed numerous accidents on the stretch of road from 124" to 132nd. Mr. Patrick stated that further development would increase vehicular traffic on the roads and compromise the living style within their community. Mr. Patrick stated that he opposes this amendment. Patrick McBride, 1804 136th Place NE, Bellevue, WA stated that he is the architect for the project and is aware that at this time, there is no specific action associated with this comp plan amendment and rezone. Mr. McBride showed formats for a duplex layout as well as commercial office buildings which would be constructed as two story, wood scale walk ups that would illustrated the image and character of the architecture of the homes, residences and commercial office space within the community. Mr. McBride indicated that a component of the site plan aligns the development to the south to 128" Place in order to align the intersection with the public street on the south. Mr. McBride stated that this alignment Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 19 r-� has been evaluated in the event that a street signal is erected in this area in the future which would provide safer turning movements in either direction along Kent Kangley. Mr. McBride stated that the general concept in planning development of duplexes on this site is that they are more single family in character which is consistent with the City of Kent's zoning criteria and comp plan requirements. He stated that the second alternative for a planned development consists of clustered side by side town homes, two stories in character, within a three or fourplex format. Mr. McBride stated that this would leave the central area of the site available for developing into a natural village green using storm drainage components while preserving the open space and sensitive areas. George Nickle, 1615 143rd Place SE,Mill Creek,WA stated that he is part of the partnership that acquired this property in 1973. He stated that he sold a portion of his property to the Lake Meridian Shopping Center in 1988. Mr. Nickle stated that part of the sales agreement allowed him to have access on the west side of that property on an easement with three curb cuts (one curb cut on each of the three lots on 129th Street) also known as the Cary property. Mr. Nickle stated that the option is available for purchasing the three south lots. Ms. Woodford stated that she was concerned that if the Board was to approve this amendment and the developer did not acquire the three south lots then access to the site would pose a severe problem. Mr. Nickle concurred but felt that the access issues would be rectified. Paula Egbert,26705 132nd Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that her property directly adjoins the proposed site and said that she,was not publicly notified of this potential development. She stated that she favors development but felt that the Board needs to consider the wetland issues as the portion of the site that abuts her property is considered Class Two wetlands. Ms. Egbert stated that she is concerned that development of this site will push those wetlands onto her property and would like assurance that this would not occur. Ms. Egbert stated that subdivisions are being developed on property to the north of this site where water flow was effected due to disregard by the developers. Ms. Egbert said that she actively farms her property and would like assurance that adequate fencing would be erected to protect her livestock from dogs that would be brought into the area as a result of development. Ms. Egbert stated that the existing park and ride lot is not easily accessible, as it requires a left turn onto Kent Kangley against the traffic and another left turn at the light. Garry Stewart, 26620 127th Ave SE, Kent,WA stated that he was concerned that access to the site would necessitate crossing the creek if the developer does not obtain the three lots that would allow access off of Kent Kangley. Mr. Stewart stated that he is not in favor of approving this amendment due to major traffic concerns. Mr. Stewart noted that the publics notice time lines seem to be too short. Brad Bell MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Ron Harmon asked staff if the Board could receive assurance that the property owner would obtain the three parcels for accessing the site through Kent Kangley, if this amendment were approved. Mr. Jackson stated that the Public Works department has the right to require access from a specific location ram. through existing construction standards or SEPA that allows staff to mitigate for potential impacts beyond our existing standards. Sharon Woodford questioned if the City of Kent can require fencing to protect Ms. Egbert's property from new development. Mr. Jackson concurred. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes November 29, 1999 Page 20 Mr.Gill stated that in support of this proposal, the property owners hold an existing easement across the property to the east with a thirty-foot private easement along the western property line of the Lake Meridian Shopping Center. Mr. Gill stated that Public Works department's main concern is that the location of the existing curb cut does not contain good site distance. He stated that access would be improved if the curb cut could be realigned further west with 128' Street and if a traffic signal could be installed. Mr. Gill said that Public Works is working with the State Department of Transportation in looking at possibly restricting turning movements in the 128' Street area due to high incidents of accidents. Mr. Gill stated that providing a signalized intersection at 128'that functions in coordination with the signal at 132nd Street could provide an additional safe walking route for crossing Kent Kangley. Mr. Gill stated that access to the site through 268th Street would negatively impact the wetlands and salmonid stream. Mr. Gill stated that the developers would be required to obtain a fisheries permit, a hydraulic project approval from state fisheries and possibly Corp of Engineers approval. Mr. Gill stated that the developers will strive to avoid impacting these wetlands and the stream as indicated by providing access through Kent Kangley. Steve Dowell spoke at length on issues concerning road alignment and safe access to the site. During deliberations, the Board members mutually concurred to support staff s recommendation for approval of the amendment. Chair Ron Harmdn MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to recommend approval of#CPA-99-3 (I)/CPZ-99-9 Meridian Associates Amendment as supported by staff. Motion carried unanimously. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chair Harmon opened the meeting for nominations. Steve Dowell NOMINATED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED a motion to appoint Ron Harmon to the position of Vice Chair. Ron Harmon accepted. Steve Dowell NOMINATED and Brad Bell SECONDED a motion to appoint Jon Johnson to the position of Chairman. Jon Johnson accepted. Steve Dowell MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED a motion for a unanimous ballot for the positions of Chair and Vice Chair. Motion Carried. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, James P,'Harris r\ Secretary CITY OF �SV LS tpvjcTx Jim White, Mayor Planning Department (153) 856-54541FAX(153) 856-6454 James P. Harris, Planning Director STAFF REPORT January 24, 2000 TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: MAY MILLER, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: 6 YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) 2000 THRU 2005 The attached documents are a draft of our capital spending, or CIP, for the next six years. The budget for the capital portion of 2000 has been adopted by the City Council into the 2000 Annual Budget at the December 14, 1999 meeting, but the plan for years 2001 to 2005 is included as a "plan', not an actual budget. The six-year plan will become part of the proposed amendment to the Capital Facility Element of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. A public hearing on the capital facility plan was held on August P, 1999 and will be held again on January 24, 2000. Departments have prepared and prioritized requests for projects in their areas of responsibility, using their knowledge of the Growth Management Act and the City's comprehensive plan adopted policies. Each request covers capital costs for the next six years, as well as suggested funding sources. In addition, each request explains the project's background, consistency with the City's comprehensive plan and/or departmental plans, and the impacts if not funded. Every year, departments review each project to determine priority, cost, need and timing, updating or adding projects as necessary. Administration, using Council Target Issues and City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Policies, presents a balanced CIP that addresses Growth Management Act requirements for transportation, utilities and capital facilities. Administration projects available funding necessary to support the six-year CIP. Balancing is always difficult as the requests and desires always exceed the available sources of funds. Creativity is required in the timing of projects, as well as finding other sources of funding, such as grants or shared revenues. _'_04th AVE.SO.. /KENT.WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (253)856-5200 6 Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) January 24, 2000 Page 2 '1 The passage of Initiative 695 in November 1999 created definite revenue shortfalls in the transportation corridor and arterial projects. While the Kent portion of 272"d was already funded. the Auburn and King County portions were planning to use Referendum 49 monies, now eliminated by Initiative 695. The 228`h corridor and the Pacific Highway arterial will be the biggest challenge to Kent with the loss of Referendum 49 funding. They are still included in this plan but funding is uncertain. If the legislature is not able to resolve transportation funding losses, the projects will need to be rescheduled or revised in the next update. Our plan is to review the policy statements and levels of service during the first half of 2000. Any changes will then be incorporated in next year's Comprehensive Plan amendment. -Briefly, the following sections and highlights are: Summary Section: The summary section contains pie charts of the total capital revenue sources and expenditures proposed for 2000 — 2005. You will notice the variety of funding sources, totaling $175,922 million over the next six years. Forty-five percent of the revenues fund transportation and utility projects, with the balance for parks, public safety and general government facilities. A detailed summary page captures all sources and uses for the next six-year period. Summary pages follow for each area of responsibility. These pages include all sources of 1 funding, such as voted or councilmanic bonds, grants, LID's etc. Asterisks indicate bond-funded projects. Detail Fund Section: This section breaks projects out by City funding sources and does not include grants, LID's or outside funding, but does include bonds. Bond projects are highlighted. Detailed supporting pages are also available for each project and will be published in the Capital Improvement Plan later this year. Each project also identifies future operating costs for the next six years. As projects are completed, annual operating costs are added to the budget. The Street Fund contains an overall summary, which splits into three separate categories: Unrestricted, Arterial and Utility and is primarily funded by fuel taxes, utility taxes and vehicle license fees. The Capital Improvement Fund is funded by a one-quarter percent sales tax and a one-quarter percent Real Estate Excise Tax, and includes ongoing and future debt payments, as well as $400,000 per year for vehicle replacement needs for the Fire Department. Annual funding is also provided for major repair and maintenance projects for Facilities and Parks, as well as land acquisition. 2000 also includes continued support for the performance measurement program. The majority of public safety, general government and parks projects relate to planned "� 6 Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) January 24, 2000 Page 3 councilmanic and voted bond issues in 2001 and 2002. The timing and scope of these projects will be reviewed in the 2000 update. The 2"d quarter percent real estate excise tax passed by Council became effective on November 1, 1998. Use of these funds is for park improvements and park development. Park land acquisition is not included in the second quarter percent real estate tax as that is not allowed but is included in the first quarter percent real estate tax or capital improvement funds. Water, sewer and storm drainage revenues are used specifically for projects in each area and reflect the latest adopted rates. Water revenues are required to fund capacity projects such as a portion of the debt service on the City's $28,000,000 portion of the Tacoma Intertie project. The combined Sewerage Fund shows a decline in fund balance in 2000. This is due to capital projects expensed in 2000 that are funded with proceeds received and included in the 1999 budget. The next two sections split the sewer and drainage portions. Bond Issues: Included are a summary schedule of planned councilmanic, voted and revenue bond issues and the City's bond capacity as of December 31, 1999. However, Council must approve all bond issues, with voted issues needing the further approval of the citizens. Also included are graphs showing future debt payments. Summary: In summary, the CIP is currently balanced and provides capital for transportation, utilities, public safety, parks and general government facilities. However, the transportation area, as well as the inventory and levels of service, will be updated and/or revised as part of the major comprehensive plan update planned for 2000. Any questions or comments are welcome. Please call me at (253) 856-5260. 6 Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) January 24, 2000 Page 4 Table of Contents Summary Section: Capital Source of Funding 2 Capital Use of Funding 3 Capital Improvement Project Summary 4 Detail Fund Section: Transportation Source of Funding 5 Transportation Use of Funds Graph 6 Transportation Details 7 Capital Improvement Fund Source of Funds Graph 9 Capital Improvement Plan Use of Funds Graph 10 Capital Improvement Fund Detail 11 2"d Quarter Percent Real Estate Excise Tax 12 Capital Improvement Fund 2000 Budget 13 Water Fund Sources and Uses 15 Sewerage Fund Sources and Uses 16 Bond Issues: Future Debt Capacity 18 Future Bond Issues 19 Outstanding Long Tenn Debt as of 12/31/99 20 Net Councilmanic Debt Payment Graph 22 Street Fund Debt Payment Graph 23 Water Fund Debt Payment Graph 24 Sewerage Fund Debt Payment Graph 25 I City of Kent, Washington 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvement Program Draft CITY OF INVICTA Mayor Jim White January 18, 2000 k Table of Contents ^• Summary Section: Capital Source of Funding 2 Capital Use of Funding 3 Capital Improvement Project Summary 4 Detail Fund Section: Transportation Source of Funding 5 Transportation Use of Funds Graph 6 Transportation Details 7 Capital Improvement Fund Source of Funds Graph 9 Capital Improvement Plan Use of Funds Graph 10 Capital Improvement Fund Detail 11 2" Quarter Percent Real Estate Excise Tax 12 Capital Improvement Fund 2000 Budget 13 Water Fund Sources and Uses 15 Sewerage Fund Sources and Uses 16 Bond Issues: Future Debt Capacity 18 Future Bond Issues 19 Outstanding Long Term Debt as of 12/31/99 20 Net Councilmanic Debt Payment Graph 22 Street Fund Debt Payment Graph 23 Water Fund Debt Payment Graph 24 Sewerage Fund Debt Payment Graph 25 '"1 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvement Program Sources of Funding Amounts in 000's CIP Fund Donations $18,318 $7,863 Grants $12,435 Voted Bonds $33,000 Utilities $35,115 Councilmanic Bonds $34,067 Existing Tacoma Intertie Other Sources Funds $9,687 $7,174 Street Fund $18,263 FUNDING SOURCES 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total CIP Fund 3,153 3,533 2,839 2,877 2,942 2,974 18,318 Grants 2,157 4,190 4,673 500 215 700 12,435 Existing Tacoma Intertie Funds 8,200 1,487 9,687 Utility Funds 9,611 4,492 4,480 5,874 5,832 4,826 35,115 Street Fund 4,341 3,492 2,797 2,914 2,659 2,060 18,263 Other Sources 1,165 147 2,106 935 513 2,308 7,174 Councilmanic Bonds 4,949 10,773 18,345 34,067 Voted Bonds 7,500 25,500 33,000 T� Donations/Contributions 7,520 273 70 7,863 Total 48,596 53,887 35,310 13,100 12,161 12,868 175.922 2 2000-2005 Capital Improvement Program Uses of Funds Amounts in 000's i Utilities Transportation $44,802 $35,0389 250 20/o Public Safety $29,079 17% General Government $31,419 18% Parks and Recreation $35,283 20% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Transportation 8,857 5,967 8,190 3,608 4,840 3,927 35,389 Public Safety 693 26,066 571 576 583 590 29,079 Parks and Recreation 18,094 4,210 3,549 2,835 2,050 4,495 35,233 General Government 3,141 11,665 13,903 901 912 897 31,419 Utilities 17,811 5,979 4,480 5,874 5,832 4,826 44,802 Total 48,596 53,887 30,693 13,794 14,217 14,735 175,5""� 0 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT SUMMARY AMOUNTS IN 000's 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Recommerrd Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Totals FUNDING SOURCES CIP Funds 2.120 1,758 1.774 1,777 1.795 1,787 11,020 Real Estate Fsdsa Tax-2nd Otr Percent 1,024 1.775 1,065 1.100 1,147 1,187 7,298 Youth/Teen Fund 190 190 Grants 2,157 4,190 4,673 500 215 700 12,435 Land Account 750 750 Water Utility 2.751 297 2,109 2,621 1,564 1.947 11,209 Existing Tacoma Interile Funds 8,200 1.487 9.687 Sewer Utility, 1.281 291 303 315 327 340 2,457 Drainage Utility 5,579 3,904 2,068 2,938 3,921 2.639 21,049 Street Fund 4.341 3,492 2,797 2,914 2,659 2,060 18,263 LID 275 735 1.010 Mitigation Payments 100 100 Councilmanic Bonds 4.90 10.773 18,345 34.067 Voted Bonds 7,500 7.500 Voted-Public Safety Bonds 25,500 25,500 Donations/Contributions 7,5M 273 70 7,863 Fee-in-Ueu 80 80 Altemative Funding Sources-Parks 47 1291 935 513 2.308 5.094 TOTALSOURCES 48.646 53,887 35.310 13,100 12.161 12,868 175,972 CAPITAL PROJECTS TRANSPORTATION Corridors 2,142 728 694 2.056 2,366 8,026 Arterials 3.340 2,542 5,598 790 1,133 133 13,536 Intersection Improvements 900 1,750 250 250 3.150 Other Improvements 2435 1,875 1,884 1,874 1,401 1.428 10,677 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION 8,8 7 5,967 8,190 3,608 4,840 3.927 35,389 PUBLIC SAFETY - Poliee 51 15.050 50 50 50 50 15.301 Fire 642 11,016 521 526 533 540 13.778 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY 693 26,056 571 576 583 590 29,079 PARKS AND RECREATION - Land Acquisition 700 350 425 300 100 2.100 3,975 Capacity Projects 16,984 3245 2,417 2.055 1,217 2,092 28.010 Non-Capacity Projects 410 615 707 480 733 303 3.248 TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION 18,094 4,210 3,549 2,835 , 2,050 4.495 35233 GENERAL GOVERNMENT - Facilities 2,571 11215 13,453 451 462 447 28.599 Other 570 450 450 450 450 450 2.820 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT 3.141 11,665 13,903 901 912 $97 31.419 UTILITIES Water 10.931 1.784 2.109 2.621 1,584 1,847 20.896 Sanitary Sewers 1,201 291 303 315 327 340 2.857 Storm Drainage _ _ 5,579 3,9W 2,068 2,938 3,921 2,639 21,049 TOTAL UTILITIES 17,811 5,979 4,480 5,874 5,832 4,826 44.802 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 48,506 53,887 30,693 13,794 14217 14,735 175,922 CHANGE IN BALANCE 50 4.617 (694) (2,056) (1,867) 50 BEGINNING BALANCE 50 5o 4,667 3,973 1,917 l'^ ENDING BALANCE 50 50 4.667 3,973 1.917 50 Transportation 2000 - 20005 Capital Improvement Program Sources of Funding Amounts in 000's Motor vehicle Grants$7,722 Registation Fee 22% $3,786 Total Street Fund $18,263 52% Fuel Tax $10,446 Councilmanic Bonds $8,294 23% Other Street y1 Fund $4,031 Mitigation Payments LID $100 $1,010 3% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Total Street Fund 4,341 3,492 2,797 2,914 2,659 2,060 18,263 Grants 1,292 2,375 3,930 125 7,722 Councilmanic Bond! 2,949 5,345 8,294 LID 275 735 1,010 Mitigation Payments 100 100 Total 8,857 5,967 12,807 2,914 2,784 2,060 35,389 ^r Transportation 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvement Program Uses of Funds Amounts in 000's Other Improvements Corridors $10,677 $8,026 30% 23% Intersection Improvements $3,150 9% Arterials $13,536 38% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Total Corridors 2,182 - 728 694 2,056 2.366 8,026 Total Arterials 3,340 2,542 5,598 790 1,133 133 13,536 Total Intersection Improvements 900 1,750 250 250 - 3,150 Total Other Improvements 2,435 1,675 1,864 1,874 1.401 1,428 10,677 Total 8,857 5.967 8,190 3,608 4,840 3,927 35,389 L 8 "1 TRANSPORTATION 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMOUNT IN 000's 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total SOURCES OF FUNDS Street Fund 4,341 3,492 2,797 2,914 2,659 2.060 18,263 Grants 1,292 2,375 3.930 125 7,722 Councilmanic Bonds 2,949 5,345 8,294 LID 275 735 1,010 Mitigation Payments 100 100 TOTAL SOURCES 8.857 5,967 12,807 2,914 2,784 2,060 35,389 USES OF FUNDS - Corridors - 196th Corridor-middle leg 1,572 • 1,572 272nd Corridor 610 • 610 228th Corridor-West Corridor 728 694 2,056 1,867 5,346 228th Corridor-East Corridor 499 499 Total Corridors 2,182 - 728 694 2,056 2,366 8,026 Arterials - 212th Street Pavement Rehabilitation 650 650 SE 256th Street Improvements-116th-132nd 767 767 West Meeker Street Widening WVH-64th Avenu 1,400 1,400 72nd Avenue 198th-194th Block 390 390 72nd Avenue 196th-200th 650 650 84th Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation 500 500 West Meeker Street Widening-Phase 1 1,909 657 2,566 Pacific Highway South HOV Lanes-Phase II 4,665 4,665 a Military Road Improvements 150 150 ' Central Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation 500 Silo 116th Ave Imp(256th to KK)(SR516) Soo 500 240th Street Improvements 133 133 133 133 133 133 798 Total Arterials 3,340 2,542 5,598 - 790 1,133 133 13,536 Intersection Improvements 132nd Ave&272nd Sir(SR 516)Intersection Imp 550 560 132nd Ave Improvements(240th-244th) 250 250 Military&Reith Road Intersection Improvement 450 450 Kent DesMoines/MeekedReith Road Intersection 275 275 94th Ave @ Canyon Drive(SR516)Traffic Signal 400 400 West Valley Highway&277M Intersection Improvement 250 250 Military Road&272nd Intersection Improvement 650 650 Miscellaneous Intersection Signalization 75 250 325 Total Intersection Improvements 900 1.750 - 250 250 - 3,150 7 TRANSPORTATION 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMOUNT IN 000's 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Other Improvements Miscellaneous Asphalt Overlays 460 478 497 517 538 560 3.050 Slurry Seal Program 50 50 50 75 75 75 375 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Installation 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800 Street Lighting Wiring Upgrades 60 60 Traffic Signal Controller Cabinet Replacements 55 40 40 135 Neighborhood Traffic Control 75 75 75 75 75 75 450 Traffic Signal Energy Conservation 25 25 50 City Wide Guardrail&Safety Improvement 30 30 30 30 30 30 180 Bike Paths 100 100 100 100 100 100 600 BNSF&UP RR&Arterial Grade Separation Projt 105 500 500 1.105 Commuter Shuttle Bus 45 45 45 45 45 45 270 Street Tree Maintenance Program 128 126 129 132 136 139 790 Street Striping Program 79 81 83 85 87 89 504 Pavement Rating Survey 15 15 15 15 15 15 90 Technology Plan 100 100 200 M&0 Facility Design 250 250 Lincoln Avenue(Smith St-James Strset) 150 150 Canyon Drive Pedestrian&Bicycle Facility 458 458 Comprehensive Plan Update 75 75 70W2nd Ave(S.228th-S.220th) 75 75 Freight Mobility Study 10 10 Total Other Improvements 2.459 1,675 1,864 1,874 1,401 1,42 10,677 �~ TOTAL USES 8,857 5,967 8,190 3,608 4,840 3,927 35,389 CHANGE IN BALANCE - - 4,617 (694) (2,056) (1,867) - BEGINNING BALANCE - - - 4.617 3,923 1,867 ENDING BALANCE - - 4,617 3,923 1,867 - Funded with Councilmanic Bonds 8 City of Kent 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvement Fund Sources of Funds Amounts in 000's ,, •,', �,i'•{ i'nl'�;4"11Y "'I;"i r'!.�Irl '..:� .7al.r Sales Tax $29,447 ;;y1, 4•�"}M�I' 1i�i•1'<ri}Y,�w,+E lYp �r� I+Td 79% 4.y r "F V+M1y{ Ir Fu'K 141V ' ', M1„'C.,;,+•s„ r�wti� ,P�',;, .P ,, Real Estate Excise Tax - 1st Y' 1aPl,•:."F"'rf,7"�I�i,��l,aq. l,'',�riti6lw•l'","i,.YJ Ix a. Qtr Percent of $7 630 r, ��9Nmi l+i�l Yi`A"'eyh'�iry.n•`4 J ,k '' #7, 20% rfil.�Yy7ie� { . i,,y'�{•" "5„#iMY,+xJ,�',K^ '"Y"61 Y!y'�'�.,;aJJ���'.nhR!!'ymC. ', E "••i .,;",y'';�wu""X',I�'�a�, ..�r� Interest $329 1% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 Total Sales Tax 4,624 4,791 4,964 5,143 5,329 5,521 30;372 5% of CIP Sales Tax Revenue to General Fund" (925) (925) Real Estate Excise Tax- 1st Qtr Percent 994 1,250 1,287 1,326 1,366 1,407 7,830 Interest 160 59 36 52 22 329 Total 4,853 6,100 6,287 6,521 6,717 6,928 37,406 ••Reduce Sales Tax Revenue allocated to CIP Fund from 25%to 20% City of Kent 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvement Fund Uses of Funds Amounts in 000's Public Safety Parks and $3,579 Recreation 9% (excluding 2nd Qtr Percent) -0i Nil "ale„'• �r General Government S ,,,sk�4 r.;, ,�,�.;�� �C• �•��, mmen nr�'��n.'n�"iiY�?rI�M1'4�,, ,n", "r:'�i�.'r ''bli'm° �# 'i ii'• q "SC•���i��"���i ^".,Ni•i" '4�i r,+�, ,,li 1IM r�''.n^, n"Xd'I�"�m.r Debt and °Wix"` ;4" rr ' a 6 n ': Information 12 Operating " "' Services Expenditures $1,800 $27,981 5% 71% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Debt and Operating Expenditures 3,846 4,177 4,318 5,481 5,481 4,678 27,961 Net Available for Capital Projects 1,007 1,922 1,969 1,040 1,236 2,250 9,425 Public Safety 693 566 571 576 583 590 3,579 Parks and Recreation (excluding REET projects) 325 330 330 330 330 330 1,975 General Government 841 592 603 601 612 597 3,846 Information Services 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800 Total 7,012 7,888 8,091 8,328 8,542 8,745 48,607 10 <Ir ri s.Lmaon.W CIPINZ• ucn1,19,00 CITY OF KENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 2000.2005 FORECAST AMOUNTS IN 000•s 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Revenues Sales Tax 4,624 4,791 4,964 5,143 5,329 5,521 30,372 5%of CIP Sales Tax Revenue to General Fund- (925) (925) Real Estate Excise Tax-1st Otr Percent 994 1,250 1,287 1,326 1,366 1,407 7,630 Interest 160 59 38 55 27 7 345 Total Revenues 4,853 6,100 6,289 6,524 6,722 6,935 37,422 Expenditures Capital Projects AnaWPerfonnance Measures 104 106 109 111 114 116 S60 Debt Service 1992-1996 Parks Debt 1,130 1,126 1,000 995 994 454 5,699 1992.1993 Refunding Debt 683 678 597 595 591 162 3,306 CIP Portion of 1999 LTGO 1,593 1,592 1,592 1,590 1,591 1,590 9,548 1999 LTGO-E.H.Maint Land(25%) 50 50 50 50 50 50 300 Centennial Building Debt 286 335 473 473 473 639 2,679 Centennial RemodWSU Generators-proposed 170 171 170 171 170 852 Performing Ant Land-proposed(less Lodging Tax portion) 120 120 120 120 120 600 Valley Corn-proposed 206 206 206 206 824 Campus Expansion/Renovation-proposed 639 639 639 1,917 Municipal Court-proposed 254 254 254 762 East Hill Maint Facility-(25%)-proposed 278 278 278 834 Total Expenditures 3,846 4,177 4,318 5,481 5,481 4.678 27.981 Net Available for Capital Projects 1,007 1.922 1,971 1,043 1,241 2,257 9,441 Capital Protects Reguested Public Safety-Fire 242 116 121 126 133 140 "')78 Public Safety-Fire Equipment Replacement Reserve 400 400 400 400 400 400 2,400 Public Safety-Police 51 50 50 50 50 50 301 Parks and Recreation(excluding REET projects) 325 300 300 300 300 300 1,825 General Government-Facilities 571 442 453 451 462 447 2,826 Information Services-Computer Support 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800 General Government-Other 270 150 150 150 150 150 1,020 Total Capital Projects 2,159 1,758 1,774 1,777 1,795 1,787 11,050 Increase(Decrease)in Fund Balance (1,152) 164 197 (734) (554) 470 _ (1,609) Beginning Fund Balance 1,620 468 632 829 95 (459) Ending Fund Balance 468 632 829 95 (459) 11 Reduce Sales Tax Revenue allocated to CIP Fund from 25%to 20% 11 CITY OF KENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND•2ND QUARTER PERCENT 2000.2006 FORECAST AMOUNT IN 000's 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total SOURCES OF FUNDS REET-2ndQtrPercent 994 1,030 1,067 1,106 1,146 1,187 6,530 USES OF FUNDS Commons Playfield Renovations 40 40 East Hill Youth Sports Facility#2 Development 30 175 1,100 1,305 Chestnut Ridge Development 700 700 132nd Street Park Development 50 450 500 Resource Center Parking 93 93 S.272nd St. Neighborhood Park Acquisition 11 100 111 Green River Corridor 10 15 25 Lake Meridian Park Improvements 100 210 310 Valley Floor Athletic Complex Acq. & Dev. 20 50 820 1,187 2,077 East Hill Youth Sports Facility#1 Development 50 50 950 1,050 Soccer Field Renovation-Russell Road 75 75 Van Doren's Park Improvements - Lake Fenwick Park Development 50 50 Clark Lake Development 147 30 177 Mill Creek/Earthworks Improvements - Kent Commons Racquetball Court Repairs 30 30 Parks Planner 80 60 Parks Planner (60) (60) Project Manager 54 54 Project Manager (54) (54) Riverwaik/Riverview Park Development 12 12 TOTAL USES OF FUNDS 1,024 1,032 1,065 1,100 1,147 1,187 6,555 BALANCE (30) (2) 2 6 (1) - (25) ,2 OOReauests vs.4dooted.xls 2nd Qt CFP(CIP Fund) 1/19/00 CITY OF KENT CURRENT BUDGET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND as of November 30,1999 1898 11188 Adjustments 1999 2000 Actual Ad(Budget Fav(Unfav) Est Actual Preliminary REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCIAL SOURCES Saws Tax 4.319,938 4,588,744 (54,555) • 4,504,193 4.640,860 Sala Tax-Nonrecurring events 589.456 200,000 (21,298)' 178,704 83,334 5%CIP Fund Sales Tax Revenue to General Fund" (924,838) Real Estate Emu Tax 1,363,109 955.1041 618.513 • 1.573,618 993,598 Real Estate Excise Tax-2nd Quarter Percent 226,677 1,005,106 568.513 • 1,573.618 993.596 Real Estate Excise Tax-Slate 135,446 134,039 134.039 Interest 250,178 75.000 78,514 153,602 160,183 Closed Project$ 754 TOTAL FINANCIAL SOURCES 6,886.588 6,823,958 1,293,728 8.117,774 5.846,711 EXPENORURES(TRANSFERS) Debt Service Existing Debt 1,842,703 1.843,521 1,843.521 1,813,174 Saturday Market Bldg Debt 552.364 Golf Course Debt 140,000 140.000 140,000 Fire Station 75 Debt 200,000 100,000 100,000 1 Technology Plan 1,296,397 633,680 662,717 1,592,979 E.H.Mainl Land(25%) 50,000 Centennial Bldg Dann (171,000) 171,000 256.000 Capital Projects Coordinator 63.743 70,822 70.822 62,103 Budget Analyst-Performance Measures 6.890 (10,310) 17,000 17,000 Transfer to Fund 520-Annexation Start Up Costs 62,319 Transfer to Equipment Rental -new vehicles 250,515 204.900 204.900 Transfer to Information Services-computers,printers,etc. le8,555 414,597 414.597 300,000 PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECTS Reserve for Fire Vehicles 400,000 400,000 400.000 400,000 SCSA/HEPA Mask Fit Test Machine 12,000 Fire-Breathing Apparatus and Cytinder Replacements 28.000 70,000 70,000 70,000 SCBA Bottles IS-1 fir replacements) S.000.. Fire-Emergency Coordination Center Equipment 90,000 90.000 90.0c , Fire-Replacement Radio Equipment 61,000 61,000 64,000 Fire-Vehicle and Equipment for Fire positions 72,275 72,275 Fire-Miscellaneous Equipment-De6brillators 59,100 59.100 Corrections-Space Needs Study 25.000 25,000 Police-Detective Vehicle 27.000 27,000 28.000 Police-CAD and ACCESS System Printers 25,000 25,000 Police-Patrol Vehicles-Fund Enhancement 30,000 30,000 Police-Reverse 911 45.000 45.000 Pursuit Intervention Program 25,000 25,000 Police-Vehicle and Equipment for New Officers 46,044 45,044 Police-Miscellaneous Equipment 91,280 36,700 38,700 25,000 PARKS DEPARTMENT PROJECTS Park Master Plans 98.520 115.000 115,000 Risk Reduction 6 Park Improvements 6,541 123,409 123.409 125,000 Signage 20,000 32.000 32,000 Grant Matching 150,000 150.000 160,000 50,000 Playground Safety 20,000 40,000 40,000 15,000 Salt Air Hills Park Development 202,000 202,000 Kenbidge Park 20.721 1.591 1,591 Performing Arts Center 50,000 90,000 90,000 90.000 Neely House Furniture/Renovations 15,000 15.000 Land Acquisition 100.000 100,000 Tennis Court Re-Surfacing 30,000 30,000 Trails/Parking Improvements 25.000 25,000 Archived/Engineering Services 36,000 35.000 Miscellaneous Equipment 72,988 72,968 15,000 Golf Capital Buyout 270.000 270,000 Other Projects 1,072.738 40.000 40,000 PARKS PROJECTS-REEF Parks Planner 60,000 Parks Planner-Reimbursement from Projects (60,00,qL, Project Manager 54,0 Project Manager-Reimbursement from Project (54,0(,_ Resource Center Parking Lot 15.000 15,000 93,000 rJ rAV 1101�cis PIO'M CITY OF KENT CURRENT BUDGET ANALYSIS AND FORECAST CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND as of November 30,19" • 1998 1999 AdJwtmsMs 19" 2000 Actual Ad)Budget Fav(UMav) Est Actual Preliminary Neely House Renovations 45,000 45,000 East Hill Park Expansion Development 533,000 633.000 Old Fishing Hob Improvements 8,206 9.206 Commons Mayfield Renovations 10,000 10,000 40,000 East Hill Youth Sports Facility 02 Development 35,000 36,000 30.000 Chestnut Ridge Development 122.000 122,000 700,000 132nd Street Park Development 20,000 20,000 50,000 Lake Meridian Park Improvements 15.000 15,000 West Faniviek Park-Handball Courts 195,000 195,000 Garrison Crook Park Improvements 50,000 50,000 East Hill Youth Sports Facility N1 Development 50,000 So.272nd Street Neighborhood Park Development 11.000 Item Commons Racquetball Repair 30.000 Valley Floor Athbtie Complex Acq.S Dev. 20,000 Mise 1999 Improvements 18,794 18,794 GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL PROJECTS Telecommuting Equipment 240,000 Gen Govt Facilities RepIMtC 110,000 110,000 100,000 Van for Permit Center Const Inspector 41,700 Miscellaneous Furniture 75,000 105,450 105.450 20.000 Computertrad Maintenance Management Software 4,738 30.000 30,000 Sooicoat Parking Lots 30,000 53,000 53,000 55.000 Safety Restraints 56,000 32.000 32,000 HVAC Repairs and Controls Installations 90,262 85,000 65,000 65,000 Golf Complex Upgrades 45,000 45,000 75,000 ADA Modifications 10,000 10.000 15,000 Exhaust Extraction Systems 50,000 58,000 Architectural Services-Park Nursery Property 25,000 25.000 35,000 Floor Covering Replacements 79,000 79,000 83.000 Facility Painting 79,000 79,000 83.000 Y Roof Repairs 75,000 75,000 40.000 Corrections Renovation-Holding Celle/Lights/Fire Panel 45,000 45.000 Training Center Tenant Improvements(Police) 15.000 15.000 Police HO Tenant Improvements 75.000 75,000 Radio Repair Stop/Equipment 48,000 65,000 65,000 Downtown Gateway Projects 58,000 58,000 Performance Measures-Citizen Survey 20,000 20,000 20,000 Performance Measures-Program Start 30,000 30,D00 10,000 Industrial Land Study 25,000 25,000 Citywide Organizational Study 100,000 100.000 Convention Center Study 30,0D0 30.000 Traffic Study 30.000 30,000 Development Rights Acquisition 50,000 50,000 10,000 Equipment Set-up-LID Billing Technician 10,475 10.475 Furniture and Set-up for Help Desk 90,000 90,000 Van for Permit Center Comet Inspector 23,000 Update Subdivision Code a Street Standards 23,294 Comprehensive 5 Year Plan Update 23,778 Other Profecis 425.853 114,900 114.900 160,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES(TRANSFERS) 6.246.652 9.022.859 452.370 8.570,489 8,974,328 INCREASE(DECREASE)IN FUND BALANCE 838,938 (2.198,901) 1,746,098 (452.715) (1,127.617) BEGINNING FUND BALANCE REST-2nd Quarter Percent 200,D00 26.677 226,677 800,295 Capital Improvements 2,348.333 834,375 Undesignated Unreserved 1,936,074 2.339.646 8,687 1,144.936 TOTAL BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 1.936,074 2.539.646 35,364 2,575,010 2.579,606 ENDING FUND BALANCE REST-2nd Owner Percent 226,677 155,105 647,072 802,177 771.773 Designated for Capital Expenditures 891.710 634,375 634,375 691.223 Designated for Additional Debl Service 914,639 118,740 (116,740) y Undesignated Unreserved 542,034 (611.475) 1,815,012 1 003 537 (11.008) TOTAL ENDING FUND BALANCE 2,575,010 296,745 2,143,344 2,440,089 1,451.989 • Denotes change from last month. 1-Fire Station a75 final payment of approximately$1.6 million is be funded with cdunalmanic bonds and was paid in June.1999. Debt service principal payments would begin in 2000. ^Qeduce Sales Tax Revenue allocated to CIP Fund from 25%to 20% 1� ('v 15011 cis 19 V'M WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION 2000-2005 PRELIMINARY FORECAST (AMOUNTS IN 000-s) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Operating Revenue Existing Saks Revenue INCLUDES RATE INCREASE 7,074 7,191 7,309 7,403 7,498 7,594 44,069 Miscellaneous Revenue 69 71 72 73 74 75 434 Rate Increase 1,5W 3.169 3,222 3,263 3,305 3,347 17,870 Total Operating Revenue 8,706 10,431 10,603 10,739 10,877 11,016 62,373 Total Operating Expenses 5,248 5,493 5,710 5,915 6,127 6.347 34,836 Operating Income(Loss) 3,460 4.939 4,893 4,824 4,750 4,670 27,537 Other Financial Sources Interest Income 1,200 750 S00 300 300 300 3,350 System Development Fees 272 325 325 325 325 325 1,897 Miscellaneous Revenue 73 73 73 73 73 73 438 Total Other Financial Sources 1,545 1,148 898 698 698 698 5,685 Net Available for Expenditures 5,005 6,087 5,791 5,522 5,448 5,367 33,221 Expenditures Debt Service-Existing 1,290 1.293 1,233 237 238 23 4,314 Debt Service'99 Issue E.H. Maint Land 63 63 63 63 63 e3 378 Debt Service-E.H. MaintFaciltty-proposed 229 229 229 229 916 Debt Service-Tacoma Pipeline 459 719 1,258 1,298 1,312 5,046 Debt Service-proposed 215 215 215 645 Total Expenditures 1,353 1,815 2,244 2,002 2,043 1.842 11,299 Net Available for Capital Projects 3.652 4,272 3.547 3,520 3.405 3.525 21,3"1 Proceeds from Long-Term Debt 2,550 2.5. - Total Available for Capital Projects 3,652 4,272 6,097 3,520 3,405 3.525 24,472 Capital Project Requests Pump Station#5(Improvements) 115 115 Pump Station#3(Replacement) 300 75 375 Endangered Species Act Study 200 200 Water Reservoirs Seismic Upgrades(7locations) 100 100 Impoundment Project(124th-11Sthf268th-304th) 600 SW 1,250 1.500 4,150 Alternative Supplemental Supply 500 500 Miscellaneous Water Improvements 286 297 309 321 334 347 1.894 Corrosion Control 350 350 East Hill Reservoir 1,050 1,500 2,550 Update of Kent's Water Comprehensive Plan 75 75 City-wide Technology Plan 500 500 Design of M&O Facility 400 400 Total Capital Project Requests Z751 297 2,109 2,621 1,584 1,847 11,209 Revenue over(under)Expenditures 901 3,975 3,988 899 1,821 1,678 13,263 Beginning Working Capital 2,027 2,928 6,903 10,891 11,791 13.612 48,152 # Ending Working Capital 2,928 6.903 10.891 11.791 13,612 15,290 61,415 Debt Service Coverage: Operating Income(Loss) 3,460 4,939 4,893 4,824 4,750 4.670 27,537 Non Operating Income 1,545 1,148 898 698 698 Bell 5,685 Total Available for Debt Service 5,005 6,087 5,791 5,522 5,448 5,367 33,2Z Debt Service 1,353 1,815 2,244 2,002 2,043 1,842 \� f Debt Service Ratio(must be at least 1.25 par CAFR) 3.70 3.35 Z58 Z76 2.67 Z91 2002-2003 Portions of projects funded with revenue bond proceeds Working Capital has not been reduced to redact interim 5nancing for Performing Arts Center 15 SEWERAGE FUND �^ 2000-2005 PRELEW3NARY FORECAST (AMOUNTS IN 000's) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Operating Revenue Sewer Sala 13,240 14,025 14,817 15,333 15,825 16,316 89,556 Drainage Sala 8,163 8,298 9,435 8,542 8,652 8.763 50,853 Total Operating Revenue 21,403 22,323 23,252 23,975 24,477 25,079 140,409 Operating Expenses Sewer 11,580 12,392 13,214 13,769 14,302 14,837 80,092 Drainage 3,579 3,971 4,019 4,159 4,304 4,454 24,384 Total Operating Expenses 15,159 16,262 17,232 17,927 18,605 19,290 104,476 Operating Income(Low) Sewer 1,660 1,633 1,603 1,564 1,523 1,479 9,464 Drainage 4,594 4,427 4,416 4,383 4,349 4,309 26,469 Total Operating Income(Loss) 6,244 6,061 6,020 5,948 5,872 5,789 35.933 Other Financial Sources Miscellaneous Revenue 67 67 67 67 67 67 402 Interest Income 970 870 970 970 870 870 5,221 Total Other Financial Sources 937 937 937 937 937 937 5,623 Net Available for Expenditures 7,181 6,998 6,957 6,885 6,909 6,726 41,556 �i Expenditures Debt Service-Existing 1,734 1,735 1,728 1,724 1,727 1,716 10,364 Debt Service'99 LTGO-ER Maint Facility Land 96 96 96 96 96 96 576 Debt Service-1999 Revenue Bonds-estimate 550 550 550 550 550 550 3,300 Debt Service-Maint Facility-proposed 354 354 354 354 1,416 Total Expenditures 2,380 2,381 2,728 2,724 2,727 2,716 15,656 Net Available for Capital Projects 4,801 4,617 4,229 4,161 4,082 4,010 25,900 Capital Project Requests Sanitary Sewer East ILII Interceptor 750 750 Miscellaneous Sewer Lines 291 291 303 315 327 340 1,857 City-wide Technology Plan 230 250 Total Sanitary Sewer 1,281 291 303 315 327 340 2,857 Stormwater Management Mill Creek Flood and Erosion Control Facilities 900 320 1,220 Outfall Treatment 676 900 1,576 Sons Creek Basin Improvements 512 592 528 1,669 2,710 1,900 7,911 Miscellaneous Drainage Improvements 358 632 658 684 711 739 3,792 City-wide Technology Plan 483 483 West Valley Highway Raising 925 925 Endangered Species Act Study 200 200 Design of M&O Facility 250 250 16 SEWERAGE FUND 2000-2005 PRELDONARY FORECAST (AMOUNTS W 000's) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Drainage Improvements w/Road Improvements 196th Condor-middle leg 500 500 SE 256th Street(116th-138th) 910 910 West Meeker Widening(W VH-64th) 175 175 132nd Ave S&272nd Sued 150 150 Road&Railroad Separation 582 582 72nd Avenue(196th-194th) 100 100 Military&Reith Intersection 100 100 94th Ave S&Canyon Dr Traffic Signal 250 250 W VH&277th Interaction 100 100 Military Rd&272nd Intersection 100 100 Pacific Highway South HOV-Phase 11 585 585 116th Ave Improvements(256th-Kent Kangley) 500 500 72nd Avenue(196th-200th) 300 300 Washington Ave Widening 350 350 Total Stormwater Management 5,579 4,204 1,769 2,939 3,921 Z639 21,049 Total Capital Project Requests 6,960 4,495 2,071 3,253 4,248 2,979 23,906 Total Revenues Over(Under)Capital Projects (2,059) 122 2,158 908 (166) 1,031 1,994 Begriming working Capital 4,381 7,322 2,444 4,602 5,510 5,344 Ending Worldng Capital Reserved 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Unreserved 1,322 1,444 3,602 4,510 4,344 5,375_ • Ending Working Capital 2,322 2,444 4,602 5,510 5,344 6,375 ' 1999 Ending Working Capital includes S3,251 of 1999 proceeds expensed(for capital projects)in 2000 17 — � � ■ � f ■ r (q < / \ � 2 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ BBB � fE © 222 # \ i § § | ( 7kkkk2kkK § E | Cd ERR ■ ; ; m � ■ � ! ! ! ! ! ■ < ! � ! k £ ■ $ 2 | ! ) � -orgf k ( $ t � ; ; R � Ra � R | S § kAkk $ | § � k ` E ƒ u S0 - ) _� ■ ! k � \ / \ § § \ \ / � f Qkkkk « C6v \ t \ kki � e — © ■ � ) on ; k � \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / wi16w; � 7 18 � �- § § # § § ° § Ekk § \ \ . § § K ¥ d § § § § kkm0 k K K § § 2 $ ( t / § k � § § ) § « >. ) � ) ) . E ) ( ! ) ! ) % j E { . . kf0 w ' ■ ` � � [ ■ ! ® $ � 2 ; | � 2 � / z ) IL 7 5 J ` � . , ° A . � lBAktAk § iA o . § 2 , § ; ; ■ ■ ■ , ; ; » ! � � lSooAoo £ Ao 2CL { � a 19 CITY OF KENT OUTSTANDING LONG TERM DEBT December 31,1999 Redemption Issuance Maturity Interest Payment. Original Amount Outstanding Date Date Rate Date Amount To Date Amount GO BONDS 3 CONTRACTS Voted Senior Housing' 1990 2000 6.4/10.0 12/1 2.105,000 1,7751000 330.000 G.O.Refunding 1980,86,9 1993 2009 2.75/5.6 12/1 Total Issue 14,085,000 Fire Apparatus 1.84% 259,164 55,016 204,148 Public Safety 64.63% 9,103,136 1,932.437 7,170,699 Senior Housing 33.53% 4,722,701 1,002,547 3,720,154 Total Voted 16,190,000 4,765,000 11.425,000 Councllmanic G.O. Refunding 1985,86.8 1992 2007 3.25/6.6 12/1 TotalIssue 10,575,000 Golf 23.80% 2,516,850 952,000 1,564,850 Corrections 15.60% 1,649,700 624,000 1,025,700 Senior Center 33.20% 3,510,900 1,328,000 2,182,900 Library 23.40% 2.474,550 936,000 1,538,550 Street 1.20% 126.900 48,000 78,900 Lake Fenwick 2.80% 296.100 112,000 184.100 I G.O.Refunding 1978,89 1993 2004 2.75/5.2 211 . rote/lssue $765,000 Parks 5.90% 163,135 81,715 81.420 Street Fund 16.20% 447,930 224,370 223,560 Public Safety 25.70% 710,605 355.945 354,660 Street 52.20% 1,443.330 722,970 720,360 G.O. Parks,Street 1996 2026 3.915.75 6/1 5,595.000 695,000 4,900,000 18,935,000 6,080.000 12,855,000 G.O.Golf/Refunding 1988 1995 2010 5.25M.25 12/1 5,420,000 600.000 4.820.000 G.O.Centennial 1996 2026 3.97/7.13 611 12,310,000 340,000 11,970.000 G.O.Sewerage 1996 2026 3.915.75 611 8,340.000 780.000 7,560.000 G.0.1999 1999 2019 4.0/5.0 1211 Total Issue 21,203,000 Telsphone/Computer 32.62% 6,918,000 0 6,918,000 Back Up Generators 3.40% 720,000 0 720,000 Shops East Hill Mtc 13.20% 2,800,000 0 2,300.000 Remodels 9.91% 2,101,000 0 2.101.000 Par 3Irrigation 1.18% 250,000 0 250,000 Russell Road Irrigation 0.87% 195,000 0 185,000 Fire Station 75 10.71% 2.272,000 0 2,272,000 Downtown Gateways 2.81% 596,000 0 596,000 Police/Corrections 12.57% 2,666,000 0 2.666,000 Municipal Court 1.65% - 350,000 0 350.000 Street 256th St Imp 9.43% 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 20 debt scheduleb.xls 1118/00 CITY OF KENT OUTSTANDING LONG TERM DEBT ^"1 December 31,1999 Redemption Issuance Maturity Interest Payment Original Amount Outstanding Date Date Rate Date Amount To Date Amount GO BONDS&CONTRACTS cont. Trust Fund Loan-Sewer 1996 2016 4.8 2/1 &8/1 1.572,646 121,193 1.451,453 Trust Fund Loan-Water 1986&1989 7/1 400,000 248,298 151.702 Trust Fund Loan-Sewer 1987&1988 711 355,000 205,526 149.474 Total Councilmanic 68,190,646 8,375.017 59.815,630 TOTAL G.O.BONDS&CONTRACTS 64.380,646 13,140,017 71,240,630 >r� SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDINOTES LID 327 1989 2009 7.5f7.85 7115 2,296.074 1,536,074 760.000 LID 328/334 1990 2002&12 6.4f7.7 all 1,697,303 1.062,303 635,000 LID 330 1990 2007 6.3f7.625 911 4,033,732 3,358,732 675,000 LID 331/335 1991 2003 5.25/6.75 3/1 1,543,980 1,363,980 180,000 LID 336 1991 2008 5.25/7.15 10/1 1,888,078 1.123,078 765,000 LID 333/37/38 1993 2005 3.515.9 4/1 397,413 327.413 70,000 LID 342 Note R-1 1994 2004 5.17 1011 57,989 43,423 14.566 LID 344 Note R-1 1994 2004 5.17 1011 66,097 53,661 12,436 LID 345 1996 2008 4.25/5.6 1211 781,625 306,625 475.000 LID 346 1995 2005 4.0/5.4 11/1 518,162 293.162 225,000 � LID 347148 1998 2015 4.3/5.6 9/1 942,617 67,617 875,000 TOTAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDSINOTES 14.223,070 9,536,068 4,687,002 TOTAL GOVERNMENTAL BONDS&CONTRACTS 98,603,716 22.676,084 75,927,632 REVENUE BONDS&LOANS Water Revenue Retundinq 1995 2004 4.014.6 12/1 7.790,000 4,000,000 3,790,000 Total Water Bonds 7,790,000 4,000,000 3,790,000 Sewerage 1993 2013 2.5/5.5 11/1 8,690,000 2,160,000 6,530,000 Tod/Sewerage Bonds 8,690.000 2,160,000 6,530,000 TOTAL REVENUE BONDS AND LOANS 16,480,000 6,160,000 10,320,000 TOTAL OUTSTANDING LONG TERM DEBT 115,093,716 28,836,084 86,247,632 'Balance after partial refunding. Original Issue-$6,700,000 due 2009. i debt scheduleb.xls 1/18/00 21 Long Term Debt Payments General Obligation Debt Service 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 i 500,000 0 00 OL Ob` O{p 00 �O 1ti ti� tib 10 ti0 y0 ti0 �O ,`O y0 �O ,ti0 y0 �O �O ti0 Original Outstanding Issued Maturity Amount 12/31/99 • GO Refunding 1985, 86, 87 1992 2007 10,575,000 6,575,000 • GO Refunding 1978, 89 1993 2004 2,765,000 1,380,000 • GO Parks/Street 1996 2016 5,595,000 4,900,000 GO Centennial 1996 2026 12,310,000 11,970,000 GO 1999 Bonds 1999 2019 21,205,000 21,205,000 Debt service payments include principal and interest and are net of contributions from the Street Fund and Enterprise Funds. ' Refunding projects were for Public Safety,Street and Parks projects. ^�np� ^=nr;bnanic Debt for'nO CFO.- i _. 22 I Outstanding Long Term Debt Street Fund Debt Service 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 ■Arterial ❑Utility ■Unrestricted Original Outstanding Issued Maturity Amount 12/31/99 GO Refunding 1985, 86, 87 1992 2007 126,900 78,900 GO Refunding 1978, 89 1993 2004 1,891,260 943,920 GO Street 1996 2016 1,745,000 1,585,000 GO Street 1999 2019 3,086,267 3,086,267 2000dW COwwdMaw Debt tot"W i.rr.=4;WW 23 CITY OF KENT Water Fund Debt Service 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 I 200,000 i 0 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 ■Revenue Bonds ■Notes/Contracts ❑Non-Voted GO Bonds Original Outstanding Issued MaturiUt Amount 12/31/99 Revenue Water Revenue Refunding 1995 2004 7,790,000 3,790,000 Notes/Conuacts Trust Fund Loan-Water 1986.89 2006 400,000 151,702 r� Non-Voted GO Bonds 1999 2019 534,807 534,807 2000cfp/Debt graph Water.xls1/19/00 24 CITY OF KENT Sewerage Fund Long Term Debt Service 2.0000 1.8000 1.6000 1.4000 c 1.2000 1.0000 0.8000 .. 0.6000 0.4000 0.2000 0.0000 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 2027 ®Non-Voted ■Revenue ❑Notes/Contracts Original Outstanding Issued Maturity Amount 12/31/99 Non-Voted G.O. Sewerage 1996 2026 8,340,000 7,560,000 G.0. 1999 1999 2018 829,294 829,294 Revenue Sewerage 1993 2013 8,690,000 6,530,000 Notes/Contracts Trust Fund Loan - Sewer 1996 2016 1,572,646 1,451,453 Trust Fund Loan - Sewer 1987,89 2007 355,000 149,474 2000cfp/Debt Graph Sewerage.xlsl/19/00 _ L.7 ^ITY OF vJim White, Mayor Planning Department (153) 856-54541FAX(153) 856-6454 James P. Hams,Planning Director LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Public Hearing January 24, 2000 The meeting of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order by Chair Jon Johnson at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, January 24, 2000 in Council Chambers of Kent City Hall. LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS PRESENT Jon Johnson Chair Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Ron Harmon, Vice Chair May Miller, Director of Finance Brad Bell Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary Steve Dowell David Malik Sharon Woodford Terry Zimmerman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to approve the minutes of November 23 and 29, 1999. Motion carried. Ron Harmon commended staff for the succinct and accurate interpretation of the November meetings. ADDED ITEMS TO THE AGENDA Ron Harmon requested an update to #ZCA-99-2 Billboard Amendment. COMMUNICATIONS Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom stated that the joint Public Works/Planning Committee will be divided into two committees beginning February 2000 He stated that the new Planning Committee will meet the first Monday of each month at 5:00 p.m. NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS None #CPA-99-3 (J) CITY OF KENT FINANCE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Finance Director May Miller explained the history behind the development of the year 2000 to 2005 Capital Improvement Program portion of the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that the Growth Management Act was adopted in Washington State mainly to insure that the City would plan for future growth. Ms. Miller stated that the City's Comprehensive Plan must include capital planning for all City departments concurrently for a six year period and stated that the City is required to show funding accountability. 'r Ms. Miller stated that the City's six-year budget is $175,922,000., which equates to $29,000,000. per year for all City functions. Ms. Miller stated that funding for the City is provided through the following sources: CIP Fund, Grants, Water Fund, Utility Fund, Sewer Fund and Drainage fund. 220 4th AVE.SO., /KENT.WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (253)856-5200 Land Use and Planning Board Minutes January 24, 2000 Page 2 Ms. Miller stated that money is set aside for the Tacoma Inner Tie. She stated that dedicated gas tax and registration fees are used for funding street improvements. Ms. Miller stated that the City utilizes Council Manic bonds and voted bonds which allows citizens to vote on whether they want a project to proceed. Ms. Miller said that if a project is voted in, it generates tax money and that additional revenue is generated through donations for construction of major projects such as the Performing Arts Center. Ms. Miller stated that Utility Funds account for about 25%of the budget, Transportation 20%, Public Safety 17%,Parks 20% and General Government 18% and said that the general government portion is primarily debt services for the City. Ms. Miller spoke at length on how transportation budget funds are employed and explained that these funds are primarily dedicated money. Ms. Miller described both the City's Arterial and the Corridor projects of 196th, 272/277th and 228th Street. Ms. Miller stated that funding is used for intersection improvements, asphalt overlays, sidewalk rehabilitation, shopper's shuttle and street tree maintenance. Ms. Miller described some of the City's Capital Improvement projects and how these funds are divided for expenditure and that the these funds are primarily used to clear up the City's approximately 71 percent debt ratio on existing parks, City facilities remodels and the City's computer system. She stated that a portion of the funds goes towards public safety and land purchases for future parks. Ms. Miller spoke Ms. Miller spoke at length on how General Government funds are used and explained how funds are appropriated through bonded projects. She deferred to the list of future bond issues and stated that these types of projects are defined as long term projects. Ms. Miller described the City's long term, future Public Safety bonds. Ms. Miller spoke at length on the City's debt issues and anticipated pay off dates. Ms. Miller stated that the sewer and drainage fund are combined by ordinance and the revenue generated from these funds is pledged to help one another. Board member Ron Harmon spoke at length on the City's corridor projects, as well as their affect on SR- 167. He questioned when the projects were scheduled for construction and completion. Ms. Miller described the corridor projects at length and explained that completion of these projects is contingent upon funding availability. Mr. Harmon questioned if the notification time lines have been rectified in order to reach surrounding property owners near the corridor projects and spoke on his concerns regarding how funds will be acquired by the City for acquisition of property along the corridor projects. Mr.Satterstrom stated that he would contact Mr. Harmon after consulting with the Public Works Department. Ms. Miller stated that this amendment is scheduled to go to City Council February 15. She stated that the Planning Department will prepare a major update to the Comprehensive Plan next year, which will include the City's inventory,Parks Department and Finance Department. Ms. Miller stated that the City has grown considerably through annexations and that the City's levels of service will need to be evaluated based on this growth. Steve Dowell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to open the public heating. Motion Carried. As there , was no public testimony Steve Dowell MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes January 24, 2000 Page 3 Steve Dowell MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to send#CPA-99-3 (J) City of Kent Capital Facilities Amendment to City Council without a recommendation. Motion Carried. #ZCA-2000-1 SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN MULTIFAMILY ZONES Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom stated that this proposed zoning code amendment would increase the density of single family development on areas that are zoned for multiple family dwellings and that this item had been covered at the January 10 workshop. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the density for single family development is 5,000 square feet in all of the City's multifamily districts. He stated that this proposal utilizes development regulations, which apply to SR-8, Single-Family Residential/8 units per acre, which equates to the old R1-5000 zoning district. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the density of multiple family districts is increasing in the following zoning districts: MR-D/12 units per acre,MR-G/16 units per acre, MR-M/23 units per acre and the MR-H/43 units per acre. He stated that the City established a new zoning district of MR-T/12 or 16 units per acre with density increasing in those districts as well. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the standard for single family density remains at SR-8, which allows for a minimum lot size of 4000 square feet. Mr. Satterstrom stated that an acre consists of 43,560 square feet and when divided by 5000 square feet equates to 8.71 units per acre which is the maximum permitted density for single family development in multifamily zones. Mr. Satterstrom stated that staff recommends retaining a 4000 square foot minimum lot size per acre in multifamily zoning districts which equates to a maximum permitted density of 10.9 units per acre. Mr. Satterstrom stated that staff evaluated other jurisdictions design controls in single family development and discovered that the few controls that prevailed were primarily in cluster or attached planned unit developments and that Kent has not implemented design controls in single family residential zones. Mr. Satterstrom stated that it is staffs believe that with the density controls, minimum lot size and impervious surface restrictions would tend to preserve a compatible, open quality within single family developments. Mr. Satterstrom extended an apology to the Board, as he had not had opportunity to follow through with contacting the two individuals interested in this amendment in a time frame that would allow them to attend the hearing. He stated that one of the individuals was not interested in single family development in multifamily zones but rather interested in developing an SR-6 plat on office zoned property. Mr. Satterstrom stated that he would like this code amendment to be carried over to the February 28 meeting of the Land Use and Planning Board. Mr. Satterstrom stated that in single family zones 20 percent of the available acreage must be dedicated for roads and storm water retention areas. He stated that generally a maximum build out density of 8.71 units per acre is attainable after subtracting the 20 percent dedication ratio. Mr. Satterstrom stated that in the areas where interest has been expressed for development of single family homes, much of the right-of-way has already been dedicated and that storm water can be retained with an underground vault system so that detention ponds are not always necessary. ^ Ms. Zimmerman stated that she visited the Rainier Valley development of New Holly in Seattle. Ms. Zimmerman stated that in traveling to this development she observed some residential developments that consisted of single family homes two or three stories in height with small building tbotprints. She stated that although these homes were fairly close to each other, there was shared open space that imparted a sense of distance from the neighbors. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes January 24, 2000 Page 4 �a Ms. Zimmerman stated that the New Holly development consists of a mix of low-income apartment rentals, large single family rentals placed too close to each other(presenting a crowded feeling) and single family homes for ownership. Ms. Zimmerman stated that she supports the developer's desire to build single family homes in multifamily zones and would favor the 4000 square foot lot size. She stated that plats should be evaluated closely in relation to the size of units developed on property in order to mitigate any negative impacts on the community. Steve Dowell MOVED and Brad Bell SECONDED to open the public hearing. As there was no public testimony Brad Bell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Ron Harmon MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to table #ZCA-2000-1 Single Family Development in Multifamily Zones and carry it forward to the Land Use and Planning Board meeting of February 28. Motion carried five to two with Sharon Woodford and Brad Bell opposed. ADDEDITEM #ZCA-99-2 BILLBOARD REGULATIONS AMENDMENT Fred Satterstrom stated that the City Council has elected to hold a public hearing on billboards at their February 1 meeting. He stated that the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation was brought before the City Council at their January 18 workshop. He stated that billboard discussions covered alternate approaches for regulating billboards and that the Council packet held two proposals attributed to two of the Council members and one proposal based on the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation. Mr. Satterstrom said that Council did not approve the Land Use and Planning Board's initial recommendation as well as a second modified alternative. The third proposal incorporated some major changes, which differed dramatically from the Board's recommendation. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the most crucial change in the proposal is that it does not discourage relocation of billboards. He stated that the proposal allows for tri-vision (three sided rotational) billboards as well as double faced billboards on a stationary board with the potential for tri-visional use on both sides of the board. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the original billboard issue was initiated in an attempt to protect the corridors. However, with the new proposal, corridors will not be exempt from billboard relocation. ADJOURNMENT Brad Bell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to close the meeting. Motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ( J P. Hams ecretary Kent City Council Meeting /1 I Date: February 15, 2000 1 . SUBJECT: Centennial Building Custodial Work 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: In December 1999, City Council rejected bids to provide custodial services for the Centennial Center, questioning why it is the only City facility not maintained and cleaned by City Staff. Staff was asked to compare costs for having outside contractors provide custodial services, versus having it done by City employees . The Parks Committee recommends City staff provide the custodial services for the Centennial Center and adjust the facilities budget by $22, 610 . 00 to provide the necessary staffing levels for custodial services . 3 . EXHIBITS: Overview of comparable custodial costs 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff, Parks Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . ) 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: YES X NO 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: ACCEPT $22, 610 . 00 SOURCE OF FUND: Operating Budget Transfer 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Move to have City employees provide the Centennial Center custodial services, and adjust the facilities budget by $22, 610 . 00 to provide the necessary staffing levels for custodial services . 8 . Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. Centennial Center Custodial Outsource verses In-house Cost Analysis This analysis assumes using 20.2 man hours daily or 5,252 man hours annually using prevailing wage in King County for Contractor. Cost difference is $4,422. CONTRACTOR CITY Hourly wage $11.89 Hourly wage $19.49 Basic Cleaning Basic Cleaning 5,252 hours = $62,447 5252 hours = $101,341 Additional Cleaning Additional Cleaning Carpet extraction 61,370 sq ft Carnet extraction 61,370 sq ft Annual Cost $29,873 Annual Cost $0 Vinyl Flooring 3,313 soft Vinyl Flooring 3,313 sq ft Annual Cost $1,888 Annual Cost $0 RR Ceramic Tiles 1,523 sq ft RR Ceramic Tiles 1,523 so ft Annual Cost $366 Annual Cost $0 Interior Window Cleaning Interior Window Cleaninq Annual Cost$1550 Annual Cost$621 Total Cost Additional Cleaning Total Cost Additional Cleaning $32,127 $621 Extra time Spent Administering contract Cost for Equipment $5,000 100 hours annually @ $24.16/hr Amortized over 5 years $2,416 $1,000 Annual Cost of Cleaning Annual Cost of Cleaning $98,540 $1029962 REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF A. COUNCIL PRESIDENTMa � � B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE /�rGc� GA 7 .4- C. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE ��a� 3 —04 S Z y �F Tuao D. PUBLIC WORKS Ct C ,/L E. PLANNING COMMITTEE F. PARKS COMMITTEE G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES January 4, 2000 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Judy Woods, Sandy Amodt, Tim Clark STAFF PRESENT: Brent McFall, May Miller, John Hodgson, Roger Lubovich, Marty Mulholland, Dena Laurent, Dea Drake, Tom Vetsch, Jackie Bicknell PUBLIC PRESENT: Joe Rubio, Ted Kogita The meeting was called to order by Chair Judy Woods at 3:32 PM. Item 6, Pacific Gateway Business Park Land Dedication Agreement was dropped from the agenda as it had been previously heard before the January 3, 2000 Public Works/Planning Committee. Approval of Minutes of December 7, 1999 Committee Member Sandy Amodt moved to approve the December 7, 1999 Operations Committee minutes. The motion was seconded by Tim Clark and carried 3-0. Approval of the Combined Check-Detail Vouchers dated December 15 and December 31, 1999 Tim Clark moved to approve the vouchers dated December 15, 1999 and the vouchers dated December 31, 1999. The motion was seconded by Sandy Amodt and carried 3-0. IAC Land Acquisition Grant for East Hill Youth Sports Complex—Accept and Amend Budget Parks Director John Hodgson said the City had been a recipient of$152,881 in grant funding from the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC) for acquisition of 10.19 acres of undeveloped land known as the Snow Property. The site at 132n and 248`h Streets was purchased in 1998 and the grant allows for reimbursement of the purchase money. The sports complex will have soccer fields and a playground area with restrooms and a concession stand. Tim Clark moved to recommend acceptance of theS152,883 grant from IAC and amend the Land Acquisition budget to purchase 10.19 acres located on the East Hill at 132nd and 2481h for future development of a youth sports complex. Sandy Amodt seconded the motion and it passed 3-0. 2000 Kent Reporter Contract Government Affairs Manager Dena Laurent said the annual contract amount of$54,720 to do a one page newsletter in the Kent Reporter is included in the 2000 budget. The November 1999 Citizens Survey showed a majority of people in the distribution area read the Kent Reporter, which is issued once a month. Before the City moved to the Kent Reporter, it was doing a quarterly newsletter which cost about the same, but with lower readership. The current newsletter is a very economical tool and goes out more times a year. Additional costs of$3,240 for in-house graphics are included in the total annual cost of$57,960. Sandy Amodt moved to recommend approval of the 2000 Kent Reporter Contract for production and distribution of the City's community newsletter, Kent Connections in the amount no to exceed $54,720. The motion was seconded by Tim Clark and carried 3-0. Operations Committee Minutes, 1/4/00 2 Replacement Copier Multimedia Manager Dea Drake said the contract for two copiers in the Print Shop expired December 31, 1999. The proposal is to extend the contract on one of the copiers, the Xerox 5100, for another year. The second copier has not performed well and the vendor has not supported the machine so staff would like to replace that copier with a digitally connected copier/printer which will then become the primary copy machine. Costs are based on a volume of 100,000 copies per month and will be approximately $29,000 per year. Final costs will vary depending on copier volumes. Tim Clark moved to authorize the two year rental of the Xerox DC265 copier from Xerox under the State of Washington Office of Procurement Contract#05899. The motion was seconded by Sandy Amodt and carried 3-0. Note of Appreciation to Marty Mulholland Chair Judy Woods asked Information Services Director Marty Mulholland to come to the table and offered her appreciation to the fine job Ms. Mulholland and her staff did to prepare the City for Y2K. Tim Clark commended Ms. Mulholland for stepping up to the plate when some of the vendors wouldn't honor their contracts, and addressing the situation under a tight time crunch. It was a matter of concern for the City and a complex issue to work through, as well as a significant investment from City resources. Marty Mulholland said staff will watch things carefully for the first month, but right now everything is delightfully quiet and consistent with the whole industry. There was a lot of hard work from all the Departments. Many went through detailed lists, checked serial numbers, contacted vendors, and wrote letters in addition to the efforts made by IS. The meeting was adjourned at 3:57 PM. Jackie Bicknell City Council Secretary "1 l PARKS COMMITTEE MINUTES January 18, 2000 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Judy Woods, Rico Yingling, Connie Epperly STAFF PRESENT: John Hodgson, Lori Flemm, Tom Brotherton, Jackie Bicknell The meeting was called to order by Chair Judy Woods at 4:35 PM. Approval of Minutes of October 19, 1999 Committee Member Connie Epperly moved to approve the minutes of October 19, 1999. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Rico Yingling and carried 3-0. Surplus Kennebeck Avenue Open Space Lori Flemm, Parks Planning and Development Supervisor, said that adjacent property owners had offered to purchase City-owned open space property on Kennebeck Avenue. There has never been any recorded easement across the City's property for a driveway to the adjacent house and the property is undeveloped except for the gravel driveway. The City could sell the property and still retain the rights for future public purposes such as utilities and road widenting. If an easement was granted, the City would maintain all of the property except the driveway which would be maintained by the adjacent homeowner. Kronisch Park Easement to US West Lori Flemm said US West had requested an additional easement adjacent to the existing easement for placement of a cabinet located on the existing sidewalk which would block access through the park. US West would pay S15 per square foot for the easement and would relocate the sidewalk so it could be used by kids going to school. US West would also make other miscellaneous improvements to the park. Rico Yingling moved to approve the easement and miscellaneous improvements to Kronisch Park and accept the $1,500 from US West, amending the Land Acquisition Budget. The motion was seconded by Connie Epperly and carried 3-0. Year 2000 Grant Application Approval & Summary of Grants Received in 1999 Lori Flemm said the list of grant applications includes all the possibilities to submit, but all may not be submitted. Ms. Flemm briefly described the 13 projects listed: Campus Park Tree Removal and Replacement—Department of Natural Resources Urban Forestry Grant; Canterbury Park Acquisition and Phase 1 Development—1AC, local parks grant; East Hill Youth Sports Complex #1 —three grants: Mariner's, King County Youth Sports Facility Grant, and IAC — local parks; Neely House—King County Landmarks Grant; Commons Play Equipment— Community Development Block Grant; Clark Lake Park Acquisition—two grants: IAC —local parks and King County Conservation Futures; Lake Fenwick Boating—IAC, boating grant; 132nd St. Park Development—IAC, local parks grant; Green river Disabled Fishing Access/Tract C — three grants: JAC —water access, Department of Natural Resources Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account, and Department of Ecology—Coastal Zone Management Grant. T ?arks Cori nittee, :;i3/00 Parks Director John Hodsgon pointed out the grant application successes in 1999 which totaled $497,890 in money received. Ms. Flemm added that the whole Parks Department staff helps in writing the grant applications and mentioned especially the success achieved by Parks Planner Perry Brooks in 1999. Comp Plan Schedule/Process John Hodgson said the Parks Department is updating the five year City of Kent Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan which identifies the need for improvement to existing parks, and acquisition and development of new parks. The Department must have a Comp Plan in order to apply for grants with IAC. The Comp Plan is critical to knowing what the community wants and the process is more successful if the public participates. Surveys are taken of current Park and recreational facility users to see if those facilities are adequate. Telephone surveys are done, mailings are sent to neighborhood associations and the Audubon Society, and presentations are given by staff. Lori Flemm said the Comp Plan updates existing facilities by looking at the level of service and population change estimates for the next five years. The community is asked what it wants in added facilities such as swings, trails, community centers, events, etc. Mr. Hodgson said one of the biggest issues the Department faces is the lack of parking. The meeting was adjourned at 5:17 PM. Jackie Bicknell City Council Secretary " I PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES January 25, 2000 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Connie Epperly, Sandy Amodt, (Tom Brotherton was absent) STAFF PRESENT: Mary Ann Kem, Chuck Miller, Debra Leroy, Dave Everett, Pat Fitzpatrick, Jackie Bicknell The meeting was called to order by Chair Connie Epperly at 5:00 PM. Approval of Minutes of November 9, 1999 Committee Member Sandy Amodt moved to approve the minutes of November 9, 1999. The motion was seconded by Chair Connie Epperly and passed 2-0. Funding Allocations Estimates for Calendar Year 2000 Police Department Administrative Services Support Manager Mary Ann Kern said that the Police Department had received notice from the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development of the funding allocations to the City of Kent for 2000. Although the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax will no longer be available because of passage of Initiative 695, 43.5% of the money comes from the State General Funds which was not affected by I-695. The Innovative Law Enforcement Strategy Program will receive $14,375, the At-Risk Child/Child Abuse Response Program will receive $20,892, and the Domestic Violence Reduction and Counseling Program will receive S20,853 for a total of$56,120. Staff will be working with the Finance Department to set up appropriate budgets for the Police Department, Parks Department, and Planning Department. National Institute of Justice Grant for Multi-Tasking Inventory Police Captain Dave Everett said the Department had applied for the exact same grant for multi- tasking inventory last year, but it was rejected. The Department reapplied for the grant of $270,000, and has teamed with the University of Washington Psychology Department, a private psychologist, and 13 other police agencies in the state fo do an inventory of multi-tasking skills currently done by employed police officers. A system will be worked out to measure quality. A significant part of probationary failures are due to an inability of officers to do several things at once such as driving, talking on the radio, figuring out operational procedures, etc. It costs around S190,000 to train a Police Officer through the eleventh month. There is a one year probationary period and many officers are lost at the end of that time. Everything possible is done to make the officers successful and the Department works diligently up to the very edge of the probationary year. It's hard on the agency and on the individual, and it sets things back 18 months as it takes 6 months to get someone hired and through the academy, and then 12 months probation to find out if that person will make it. Sandy Amodt asked if the process would help measure applicants for their multi-tasking capability. Captain Everett said it would if the thesis Public Safety Committee, 1/25/00 2 is correct. The grant is a research grant and part of the thesis is whether or not multi-tasking can be taught as a specific agenda. The grant will allow travel, research, computer work, and inventorying. There will be a minimal commitment from the City of staff time for the actual inventory. There's no financial commitment or commitment to a long-term position. The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 PM. Jackie Bicknell City Council Secretary ''1 PUBLIC WORKS/PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES December 13, 1999 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Tim Clark, Tom Brotherton, Rico Yingling STAFF PRESENT: Don Wickstrom, Sandy Amodt,Roger Lubovich, Jackie Bicknell PUBLIC PRESENT: Judie Main, George Smith, Kristine Smith, Harumi Inari, Grace Anderson, Mayra Holley, Gary Holley,Phil Davidson,Adrienne Lindblad,Mel Kleweno,Bob Hendricks, Heinz Loller, Gary Joseph, Marjorie Joseph, The meeting was called to order by Chair Tim Clark at 7:04 PM. Public Hearing_for LID 351 Mr. Clark gave instructions for the public hearing process on the formation of LID 351 and stated that the purpose of the hearing was to afford persons owning property within the proposed Local Improvement District 351,'or affected by it, an opportunity to address the Council. If the LID is formed, there will be a future hearing dealing with specific amounts of final assessments against particular properties. Protests against individual final assessments would be made at that time. Persons owning property within the LID would be entitled by law to file written protest with the City Clerk no later than 30 days from the date of the passage of the ordinance creating the LID. Certain Environmental Mitigation Agreements waive the right to protest the formation of the LID. ,. Public Works Director Don Wickstrom said the question before council is whether the LID should be formed or not. The LID 351 formation is for construction of the South 277`h Corridor Project. Mr. Wickstrom showed pictures depicting the stage of construction of the road which is scheduled to open in February, 2000, and presented a map showing the properties involved in the LID that have signed or executed an Environmental Mitigation Agreement. The total cost of the project is $30.2 million. LID 351 is about 24% of the cost or$7.2 million. There's a mixture of industriaUcommercial and residential properties involved in the LID that are paying about 2% of the total project cost or 7% of the LID. The city is contributing $14.5 million dollars to the project and a grant was received from the State Transportation Improvement Board for$6.4 million. About $2.1 million of the Environmental Mitigation Agreements have been pre-paid. Mr. Wickstrom gave a history of the project which came into being in1984 when the first Transportation Comprehensive Plan was developed and adopted. The City has a long history of requiring developments to mitigate their traffic impacts on the City's system. As development has occurred, the City has required either hard improvements that would mitigate the impact, or has executed Environmental Mitigation Agreements where the developer agrees to pay towards one of the corridor projects to mitigate impact. Developers were given the option of either mitigating the impact on the entire City system or executing an agreement. The City's committed share of the funding was at least 50% and it wasn't known where the money would come from or whether or not the projects would be built. In order to ensure that the development community would pay Public Works/Planning Committee, 12/13/99 Page 2 its obligation at the time the project was built, the City developed the agreements. The theory was that these projects would result in a major improvement in the transportation system and major relief in congestion. Under the Growth Management Act, the City had to establish levels of service and attempt to maintain them. If the levels of service weren't met, new development could not build. Developments had to participate in order to get building permits. There was no choice to build without either executing Environmental Mitigation Agreements or mitigating traffic impacts on the system at the time of development. Consultant Steve Dijulio of Foster, Pepper, & Shefelman, said this hearing was not on individual property assessments but only on the formation of Local Improvement District 351 for the construction of the 277`h Corridor Project. The process that is followed by the City of Kent is similar to the process that is followed by all communities. There is an initial public hearing on formation. Following that hearing there will be a recommendation to the City Council and if the City Council chooses, an ordinance creating the LID will be adopted. At some point following the creation of the LID there will be additional public notice mailed to the individual properties to the addresses shown on the King County property records, as well as published notice of the hearing on the final assessment roll. The notice will include the amount of assessment that the property is subject to and will also give the time and the date for the hearing and the process for filing protests. The City Council or committee of the Council will gather to hear protests regarding the assessments and then will rule as a Board of Equalization on any challenge. That process is months away and will probably be in early Spring of the year 2000. Chair Tim Clark opened the meeting to public comment. Judie Main, 254102 62"d Ave, Kent, as representative of the 625 unit Signature Pointe Apartment complex in Kent, said the apartment community supports the formation of the LID to fund the corridor projects. George Smith, 9505 S 241", asked if there were properties that: would be participating in the LID that are not being brought in via an EMA agreement. Mr. Smith said the normal LID process uses adjacency to justify inclusion, and questioned whether in the present situation there were properties adjacent to the project and whether the boundary was meaningful. He asked what was done with the funds already collected. The EMA agreement says that the City will be paid regardless of whether or not the LID is formed. He recommended not forming the LID, but to stick strictly with the EMA agreements. Don Wickstrom responded to Mr. Smith's questions by saying the only properties involved in the LID are those with Environmental Mitigation Agreements. There were prepaid property assessments adjacent to the corridor from those that chose to pay their assessments prior to development. The total project is $30,230,000 and the City has used all the money received thus far to implement the project which has been in process since 1990 with construction actually starting in 1993. If the LID does not go forward then all the money is immediately due and payable in full. For a lot of businesses and perhaps Public Works/Planning Committee, 12/13/99 Page 3 residents, this is a significant dollar amount. The LID mainly gives the opportunity to pay over a 15 year time period, with a relatively reasonable interest rate, or to pay the money at any time during the 15 year period. It's up to the individual owner whether to pay the assessment now or wait and pay during the 15 year period. In regards to adjacency, part of the project is in Auburn and two parts west of the river is in King County. Kent does not have authority to form an LID in Auburn and King County's land is all agricultural land. The only part of the project that's in the City is the part from the river to 108`h in Hillside. There aren't any benefiting properties from 108`h to Kent-Kangley. Some of the fronting properties along 116`h are ones that have prepaid. As future properties develop, they will participate through a direct payment to the project. The City hired an appraiser to evaluate the properties and the assessments. His determination was that developed properties are not subject to EMA's and are not benefited, and undeveloped properties at this point are not benefited. As properties develop, they will be subject to EMA agreements and will contribute funds towards the project on a cash basis. They won't have the opportunity for the LID payment plan. The benefit to the existing properties that signed the agreement was that they would not be developed if they did not sign the agreement. By signing the agreement, they were allowed to develop prior to the project being completed and in some cases 10 years before they would normally have been able to develop had the project not gone forward. Mayra Holley, 11230 SE 2441h St, Kent, strongly opposed having the residents who live �- in the surrounding area pay for the expansion of the road. She stated that she already pays taxes to have roads fixed and things done in the community, and contributes to society. If the City doesn't have the money to build something, they shouldn't build it, but should plan according to a given budget. Ms. Holley said her property is not reflective of her family's actual income and they cannot afford to pay the assessed amount. Adrienne Lindblad, 26321 97`h Ave. S., Kent, commented that a year ago citizens expressed concerns because they were very surprised and caught off guard by the way the EMA's were handled and written up. The root of the problem was that single family homeowners were unaware that they had any obligation of payment when they purchased their property, and what started out as $1,000 grew to in excess of$1600. If an individual had just moved on the property in the last six months, he/she has the burden of paying the whole amount. The way the title discloses the information is not adequate. Ms. Lindblad, who sat on the Transportation Mitigation Task Force formed by Council to look into transportation funding alternatives, said there were several recommendations from the Task Force, who also unanimously agreed that the disclosure was very inadequate. She was concerned that the same process is still being used and that there is still a disclosure issue. Also, the City Council had not responded to citizens' concerns from a year ago. The citizens had asked for a remedy. Ms. Lindblad stated that if there is no remedy, Council has the obligation to say so, whether in a letter or an informational meeting. Public Works/Planning Committee, 12/13/99 Page 4 Ms. Lindblad said the latest information she had received says the assessed value can exceed the special benefit, and she asked when the special benefit was attached to the land. If it was attached at the time the developer signed the EMA, the money was potentially already in the assessed value of the land. Many homeowners feel that they've already paid the amount and the developer, by being allowed to develop the land, was allowed to have a value assessed property. By signing the EMA, the developer didn't have to pay the associated cost, but was able to collect the value on the land based upon that assessment being already attached to it. Now the City has come back and asked the homeowners to pay again. Steve Dijulio said a fundamental rule is that the assessment cannot exceed the special benefit. Arguments and protests can be staged at the public hearing next spring for any property owner who feels the assessment exceeds the special benefit. The notice that homeowners received regarding this hearing identified a preliminary assessment. A final assessment can differ from the preliminary assessment, but in this case, City staff is not recommending that the preliminary assessment change, so it can be anticipated that when the notice of the hearing on a final assessment role is received, the amount identified will be the same as identified in the preliminary notice. At that point, the amount could be protested and the point argued that the project does not contribute special benefit to the property. The special benefit measurement takes place by a formula of what the value of the property is with and without the improvement. Without the improvement, the property would be undeveloped and essentially raw land. Tim Clark asked for the status on the issue of City control over how the EMA's are recorded through the county records process. Don Wickstrom said that title reports will vary from title company to title company. Some give explicit detail and some just reference the recording number of the document. One of the recommendations of the Task Force is to change the title of the document so it would draw the attention of anyone reading it. The recommendations of the task force will go to Council Committee in January. Once staff has the Task Force recommendation from the Council, then the changes would be implemented. Mel Kleweno, representative to the property owners at 555 W Smith and 655 W Smith St., said their property was developed in 1986 and there was no special benefit to that particular piece of property from the project. Mr. Kleweno didn't believe the property should be within the LID as they had just finished paying the last assessment of a 15 year Smith Street LID which agreement was signed in order to receive a building permit. Mr. Kleweno objected to the formation of the LID as currently constituted, specifically for the property he represents, because they have already paid for the citizenry as a group. He questioned where the fees would go for those who own property and apply for a building permit after the LID is formed and the assessment rolls are confirmed. Don Wickstrom responded that a lot of properties have multiple LID's depending on what improvements were necessary for the property. Smith Street was a two lane road with a sidewalk on one side and a partial sidewalk on the other. It went to Lincoln Public Works/Planning Committee, 12/13/99 Page 5 Avenue and ended. It is now a fully improved street with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street lights which are frontage improvements. The EMA relates to offsite transportation mitigation relating to the property owner's impacts off site of the property throughout the City's transportation system. The money for new developments goes into reducing the City's $14.5 million share of the project. Marjorie Joseph, 26417 126`h PI SE, said it sounds like the City of Kent and the developers have known about the project for quite some time. As a new homeowner who had just found out about the project, she has been asked to pay an assessment of over $1,600 to a property that was just purchased for$250,000. She questioned why the matter wasn't brought to her attention earlier. A brief paragraph in her purchasing contract mentioned that this could happen, but it should have been well spelled out for citizens that they could be assessed. Ms. Joseph said she doesn't have an extra$1,600 nor does she want to pay for a road she will never use. Had she known about the assessment at the time of the purchase of her home, she would have had a choice to look somewhere else. Tom Brotherton moved to conclude the hearing. It was seconded by Rico Yingling and carried 3-0. Tom Brotherton moved to recommend to the full Council adoption of the proposed ordinance establishing formation of LID 351 for the 277`h Corridor Project. Rico Yingling seconded the motion and it carried 3-0. The meeting was adjourned. REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS A. EXECUTIVE SESSION