HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 08/15/2000 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
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Project
Number Project Name Page
1. South 272nd/2771h Street Corridor Project - Phase I 4.
Auburn Way North to Kent-Kangley Road(SR 516)
2. South 196`h/200`h Street Corridor Project 5.
West Valley Highway (SR 181) to East Valley Highway
3. Interurban Trail Crossings Signal Interconnect with West Meeker 6.
Street and E. Smith Street Signal Systems
4. Washington Avenue (SR 181) HOV Lanes Project 7.
James Street to Green River Bridge
5. Pacific Highway South (SR 99) HOV Lanes -Phase I 8.
Kent-Des Moines Road (SR 516) to South 252'd Street
6. Canyon Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Project 9.
Alvord Avenue to 97`h Pl. South
7. West Meeker Street Widening Project- Phase 1 10.
Washington Avenue (SR 181) to 64th Avenue South
S. Southeast 256`h Street Widening Project- Phase I 11.
116`h Avenue Southeast to 136`h Avenue Southeast
9. South 2121h Street Pavement Rehabilitation Project 12.
Green River Bridge to West Valley Highway (SR 181)
10. 94`h Avenue South at Canyon Drive (SR 516) Traffic Signal System 13.
11. 72nd Avenue South Extension Project 14.
South 196`h Street to South 200`h Street
12. South 2771h Street Corridor Project - Phase II 15.
SR 167 to Auburn Way North
13. Citywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements 16.
14. Citywide Guardrail and Safety Improvements 17.
1
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Project
Number Project Name Page
15. Burlington Northern/Santa Fe Railroad/Union Pacific 18.
Railroad Grade Separation Project
Railroad Crossings at South 2121h Street, James St. and/or
Willis SUSR 516, and South 228`h St.
16, Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance Sidewalk Repair 19.
and Rehabilitation Program Project Citywide
17. Commuter/Shopper Shuttle Bus Project 20.
Downtown
18. James Street at Central Avenue Intersection Improvement Project 21.
19. Pacific Highway South (SR 99) H.O.V. Lanes - Phase II 22.
South 252"d Street to South 272"d Street
20. Military Road at South 272nd Street Intersection Improvement 23.
Project
21. 132"d Avenue Southeast Street at Kent-Kangley Road (SR 516) 24.
Intersection Improvement Project
22. 841h Avenue South Pavement Rehabilitation Project 25.
South 2121h Street to SR 167
23. West Valley Highway at South 277th Street Intersection 26.
Improvement Project
24. South 228th Street Corridor Project- Phase 1 27.
Military Road to 54`h Avenue South
25. 116'h Avenue Southeast Street Widening Project 28.
Southeast 256`h Street to Kent-Kangley Highwav (SR 516)
26. Military Road at Reith Road Intersection Improvement Project 29.
2
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Project
Number Project Name Page
27. Central Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project 30.
Willis Street (SR 516) to the Green River Bridge
28. South 272nd Street Widening - Phase 1 31.
Military Road to 26`h Avenue South
29. Military Road Widening Project- Phase I 32.
Reith Road to Kent-Des Moines Road (SR 516)
30. 132"d Avenue Southeast Widening Project 33.
Southeast 240Y" Street to Southeast 256`" Street
31. South 228th Street Corridor Project- Phase 3 34.
84`h Avenue to Benson (SR 515)
32. 80th Avenue South Widening Project 35.
South 196th Street to South 188th Street
31 South 272nd Street Widening- Phase 2 36.
261h Avenue South to Pacific Highway South (SR 99)
3
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: South 272nd/2771h Street Corridor Project - Phase I
Auburn Way North to Kent-Kangley Road (State Route 516)
DESCRIPTION: Construct a new five-lane roadway from Auburn Way to the Kent-
Kangley Road (State Route 516), via South 277`h Street, Southeast 274`h
Street, and 116`h Avenue Southeast, including a new bridge over the Green
River, and a modification to the traffic signals at the intersections of South
277`h Street and Auburn Way North and at 116`h Avenue Southeast and the
Kent-Kangley Road (State Route 516). Project will include the
construction of full-width paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks,
street lighting, storm drainage, bike paths, landscaping, utilities and
appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering..............$2,900,000
Right of Way Acquisition............$3,200,000
Construction ..............................$24,400,000
TOTAL .....................................$30,500,000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): TPP, City of Kent, LID Funded and much of the project has been
concluded
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: Canyon Drive/SR 516 is infeasible to widen to accommodate either
existing or forecast traffic volumes, based upon existing topographic
constraints through the Mill Creek ravine, and pre-existing development.
Additional constraints are created by the discontinuity in the route of SR
516. Adequate additional east-west capacity to accommodate growth in
the Lake Meridian and Covington areas is only available through
construction of a new arterial roadway. This project provides continuous
arterial from Kent East Hill to SR 167 to Interstate 5.
STP- Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA -Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB -Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB-Transportation Improvement Board,
LID-Local Improvement District
4
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: South 190/2000 Street Corridor Project
West Valley Highway (State Route 181) to East Valley Highway
DESCRIPTION: Construct a new five-lane roadway from West Valley Highway to East
Valley Road, including a new bridge over the Union Pacific and the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad mainlines; widen South
1961h Street between West Valley Highway and 72"d Avenue South;
signalization of the intersection of South 196` Street at East Valley Road;
Widen 80`h Avenue South. Project will include the construction of full-
width paving, bridges, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks, street
lighting, storm drainage, bike paths [from West Valley Highway to the
Interurban Trail], landscaping, utilities and appurtenances. All portions
presently under construction.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering..............$2,500,000
Right of Way Acquisition............$4,700,000
Construction ..............................$25,530,000
TOTAL .....................................$329730,000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): TPP, City of Kent, LID
Funded, Bridge and roadwork under construction
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The South 1801h Street/Carr Road and South 208`h/2121h Street `corridors'
are infeasible to widen to accommodate forecast traffic volumes without
additional east-west capacity, based upon existing development and
topographic constraints. Additional capacity is required to accommodate
existing and continued development in the northern industrial area of the
City. Both South 180`h Street and South 212`h Street have at-grade
crossings for both the UP and BNSF railroads, which hampers east-west
freight mobility. Adequate additional east-west grade-separated capacity
is also required to accommodate growth in the South Renton and Kent
East Hill areas. This project provides the second phase of a continuous
arterial from 140`h Avenue Southeast to Benson Highway, and to
Interstate 5.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality;HES—Hazard Elimination, "1
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP-Arterial Improvement Program [State] J
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
5
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: Interurban Trail Crossings Signal Interconnect at Meeker Street and
E. Smith Street Signal Systems
DESCRIPTION: Interconnect the existing traffic signals at the Interurban Trail crossings at
Meeker Street and Smith Street to the UP crossing signals at said streets.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................S20,000
Right of Way Acquisition.......................S-0-
Construction ...................................$200,000
TOTAL ..........................................$2209000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (E), City of Kent
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This project is required in order to interconnect the existing street signals
with the railroad crossing signals to eliminate any potential traffic backup
issues across the roads.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
6
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: Washington Avenue (State Route 181) High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes
Project
James Street to Green River Bridge
DESCRIPTION: Widen Washington Avenue (State Route 181) to seven lanes (two general
purpose lanes in each direction, one H.O.V. lane in each direction, plus
turn lanes), from Harrison Street to State Route 516 (Kent-Des Moines
Road), and four lanes south to the Green River Bridge, and modify the
existing traffic signal systems at the intersections of Washington Avenue
at West Meeker Street and Kent-Des Moines Road (State Route 516).
Project will include the construction of full-width paving, concrete curbs,
gutters and 10-foot wide sidewalksfbicycle-ways, street lighting, storm
drainage, bike paths, landscaping, utilities and appurtenances.
Improvements from Harrison Street to James are limited to curbs, gutters,
sidewalks and drainage. —
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................$165,000 V
Right of Way Acquisition...............$310,000
Construction ...................................$974,000
TOTAL .......................................$1,449,000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): AIP, City of Kent, LID
Partly Funded, LID Pending
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This project is required for compliance with the City's concurrency
ordinance. It will reduce peak hour single occupant vehicle trips by
encouraging high occupancy vehicle usage. Washington Avenue is a
regionally significant north-south arterial heavily used by commuters for
access from SR 516 and SR 167, to the industrial/commercial land uses
in the Green River Valley.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality;HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
7
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: Pacific Highway South (State Route 99) H.O.V. Lanes - Phase I
Kent-Des Moines Road (State Route 516) to South 252"d Street
DESCRIPTION: Widen Pacific Highway South to provide a pair of High Occupancy
Vehicle (H.O.V.) lanes from the Kent-Des Moines Road (State Route 516)
to South 252"d Street, reconstruct existing sidewalks, provide a ten-foot
wide concrete sidewalkibicycle path, and modify the existing traffic signal
systems at the Kent-Des Moines Road, South 240`h Street, and at South
252"d Street. Project will include paving, concrete curbs, gutters, and 10-
foot wide sidewalks/bicycle-ways, storm drainage systems, utilities,
landscaping, and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................$479,000
Right of Way Acquisition............$1,030,000
Construction ................................$6,530,000
TOTAL .......................................$890399000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (U), TPP, AIP, City of Kent, LID
Funded: Design - 2001; Construction — 200312004
PROJECT
JIJSTIFICATION: This project is required for compliance with the City's concurrency
ordinance. It will reduce peak hour single-occupant vehicle trips by
encouraging high occupancy vehicle usage. Pacific Highway South
(SR 99) is a regionally significant north-south arterial heavily used by
commuters for access from South King county to the employment centers
in South Seattle, and provides alternative access to Interstate 5 and Sea-
Tac airport.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ)Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TiA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
Li'D—Local Improvement District
8
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: Canyon Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Project
Alvord Avenue to 971h Place South
DESCRIPTION: Improve Canyon Drive (State Route 516) by extending the existing
sidewalks along the southerly side of Canyon Drive, between Alvord
Avenue and 971h Avenue South, and widen the pavement along the
southerly side of the roadway to provide a bicycle facility. Project will
include the construction of paving, sidewalks, street lighting, minor storm
drainage, and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................$46,000
Right of Way Acquisition.................$30,000
Construction ...................................$630,000
TOTAL ..........................................$706,000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): City of Kent
Funded
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: Canyon Drive is a City designated bike route and is the key bicycle route
to the east hill area. It will reduce peak hour single-occupant vehicle trips,
by encouraging the use of non-motorized transportation modes.
STP—Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality;HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State] V
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
9
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: West Meeker Street Widening Project- Phase I
Washington Avenue (State Route 181) to 64`h Avenue South
DESCRIPTION: Widen West Meeker Street to provide a five-lane roadway, including four
general-purpose travel lanes, a center left-turn lane, and a bicycle facility,
and modify the existing traffic signal system at the intersections of 64`h
Avenue South and Washington Avenue. Project will include the
construction of full-width paving, concrete curbs, gutters, and 10-foot
wide sidewalks bicycle-ways; street lighting, storm drainage, utilities and
appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................S180,000
Right of Way Acquisition...............S255,000
Construction ................................$1,105,000
TOTAL .......................................S195409000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): AIP, City of Kent, LID
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The level of development along this section of Meeker Street has reached
the point whereby a consistent five-lane roadway section is required to
accommodate through traffic. Existing traffic volumes that exceed
25,000 ADT, west of the intersection of Washington Avenue, mandate a
five-lane section to accommodate additional development. Shoulder
improvements consisting of 10-foot wide sidewalks/bicycle-paths are
required to provide safe access for school-age pedestrian's to/from the
new elementary school south of Meeker on 641h Avenue South, and
maintain this street as a primary bicycle route.
STP—Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
_ (E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
10
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: Southeast 2561h Street Widening Project- Phase I
1161h Avenue Southeast to 1361h Avenue Southeast
DESCRIPTION: Widen Southeast 2561h Street to provide a three-lane roadway, including
two general-purpose travel lanes, a center left-turn lane, plus additional
turn lanes at key intersections, and a bicycle facility. Modify the existing
traffic signal systems at the intersections of 116`h Avenue Southeast, 124`
Avenue Southeast and 132nd Avenue Southeast. Widen cross-streets to
construct curb returns at the proper locations at same intersections.
Project will include the construction of full-width paving, concrete curbs,
gutters, and 10-foot wide sidewalks/bicycle-ways; street lighting, storm
drainage utilities and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................$555,000
Right of Way Acquisition...............$360,000
Construction ................................$5,165,000
'J
TOTAL .......................................$690809000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): TPP, City of Kent,
Funded& under construction.
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The level of development in the Lake Meridian and Meridian Country
Club areas of the City of Kent, the City of Covington, and nearby areas
within King Co. has reached the point whereby a consistent three-lane
roadway section is required to provide safe left-turn access into the
adjoining properties, and accommodate past development in the area.
Further, shoulder improvements: concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalks and
bicycle-ways, are required to provide control of roadway drainage and
prevent impacts to adjacent property owners, and to provide safe access
for school-age pedestrians and cyclists, and general access needs to the
area surrounding the Meridian Elementary School.
STP- Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA -Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB-Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB-Transportation Improvement Board,
LID-Local Improvement District
11
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: South 212" Street Pavement Rehabilitation Project
Green River Bridge to West Valley Highway (State Route 181)
DESCRIPTION: Remove and rehabilitate the existing roadway pavement to add additional
service life to the asphalt roadway, between the Green River Bridge and
the West Valley Highway (State Route 181). This project will include the
removal and the replacement of the upper two inches of the existing
asphalt pavement in the curb lanes in both directions; and a full-width
asphalt pavement overlay of the entire roadway. This project will also
include the selective replacement of catch basin inlets and driveway
approach aprons, and sections of concrete curbs and gutters.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................$44,000
Right of Way Acquisition.......................S-0-
Construction ...................................$625,000
TOTAL ..........................................$6699000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (U), City of Kent
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The existing asphalt pavement along this section of South 212`h Street is
exhibiting signs of distress, as demonstrated by "alligatoring",
longitudinal cracking, and cracking of the concrete curbs and gutters. The
end of the service life of this roadway has been reached, requiring the
reconstruction of the pavement to extend the service life of the roadway,
and to prevent further degradation
STP-Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA -Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB -Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB-Transportation Improvement Board,
LID-Local Improvement District
12
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM �-
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: 94"' Avenue South at Canyon Drive (SR 516) Traffic Signal System
DESCRIPTION: Install a multi-purpose traffic signalization system at the intersection of
94`h Avenue South at Canyon Drive (SR 516). Project will include
pavement widening of 941h Avenue South from South 248`h Street to
Canyon Drive (SR 516), construction of curbs, gutters and concrete
sidewalks, bicycle-ways, retaining walls/rockeries, construction of a turn
island at the intersection of Canyon Drive, and constructing a safety
improvement in the form of a right-turn deceleration lane on westbound
Canyon Drive. Along the northerly side of Canyon Drive, reconstruct the
existing curbs and walkways to meet current City Standards.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................$50,000
Right of Way Acquisition.................$70,000
Construction ...................................$550,000
TOTAL ..........................................$6709000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): AIP, City of Kent, Mitigation Agreements, LID
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The level of development activity in this area has reached the stage, and
the combination of travel speeds and traffic volumes along Canyon Drive
have reached the levels, whereby a traffic signalization system is
appropriate to provide safe access into the local residential areas bounded
by 94`h Avenue South, 104`h Avenue South, and Southeast 240`h
Street/James Street. Further, signal improvements are required to provide
safe access for pedestrians to/from the METRO bus routes along the
Canyon Drive.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ)Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality;HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
13
CITY OF KENT
f SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPRO VEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: 72"d Avenue South Extension Project
South 1961h Street to South 2001h Street
DESCRIPTION: Construct a new four-lane roadway from South 1961h Street to South 200`h
Street. Project will include the construction of full-width paving, concrete
curbs, gutters, and sidewalks; street lighting, crossing of Mill Creek, storm
drainage, landscaping, utilities and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................S155,000
Right of Way Acquisition...............S670,000
Construction ...................................$565,000
TOTAL .......................................$1,3909000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): City of Kent, LID
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: Continued development in the northern Kent industrial area, and high
levels of congestion along West Valley Highway, between South 180th
Street and South 196`h Street Corridor, mandate additional north-south
arterial capacity. Provides some relief for South 180`h Street, South 196`h
Street, and South 2121h Street intersections along West Valley Highway.
Provides improved access to South 196`h Street Corridor from industrial
development along 72nd Avenue South.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality;HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB —Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
14
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001
PROJECT: South 277`h Street Corridor Project - Phase II
SR 167 to Auburn Way North
DESCRIPTION: Study, design and construct the widening of South 2771h Street from three
lanes to five lanes, including grade separation at the UPRR and BNSF rail
crossings, utility improvements (water, sewer, and storm) two-way left-
turn lane and accommodations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities from
SR 167 to Auburn Way. This includes modifications to the traffic signals
at the intersections of South 277`h Street and Auburn Way North/East
Valley Highway. The project will include the construction of full-width
paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks, street lighting, storm
drainage, landscaping, utilities and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering..............$5,400,000
Right of Way Acquisition............$5,000,000
Construction ..............................$28,900,000
TOTAL ....................................$ 3993009000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): TPP, LID, City of Auburn, King County, WSDOT, ISTEA,
TEA21, TIB, FMSIB, Port of Seattle, Port of Tacoma, BNSF, and
UPRR.
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This project will improve safety and mobility on an existing east-west
corridor, provides multi-modal facilities, and ensures that the link will
satisfy concurrency in the near future. Furthermore, it is a project
involving and benefiting the Cities of Auburn and Kent, as well as King
County and WSDOT. It is not feasible to widen alternate routes to
accommodate either existing or forecast traffic volumes to the Kent East
Hill. This project provides continuous arterial from Kent East Hill to SR
167 to Interstate 5. The project cost reflects estimated increases and may
not exactly match the corresponding Auburn TIP item.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
15
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001 - 2006
PROJECT: Citywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
DESCRIPTION: Make miscellaneous improvements to the City's Bicycle Route and
Pedestrian system. Potential projects include improvements to 100`h
Avenue Southeast north of James Street, Southeast 2481h Street east of 94`h
Avenue South, and 152nd Way Southeast, north of Southeast 272"0 Street.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................$50,000
Right of Way Acquisition.......................S-0-
Construction ...................................$550,000
TOTAL ..........................................$6009000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (E), City of Kent
Funded, Ongoing
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This project complies with the City's CTR [Commute Trip Reduction]
Ordinance and the City Comprehensive Plan. This project helps to
reduce peak hour single-occupant vehicle trips, encourage the use of non-
motorized transportation modes, and provide safe routes for school-age
pedestrians and cyclists.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
_ (E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,ALP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB —Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
16
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001 - 2006
PROJECT: Citywide Guardrail and Safety Improvements
DESCRIPTION: Make miscellaneous guardrail improvements each year to enhance
motorist safety. Candidate projects include the westerly shoulder at the
intersection of 94`h Avenue/South 222nd Street, Frager Road, 100`h Avenue
Southeast (near the 22600 block), West Valley Road (north of the 27200
block). Upgrade existing guardrail end-treatments as mandated by State
and Federal regulations.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................$15,000
Right of Way Acquisition.......................$-0-
Construction ...................................$170,000
TOTAL ..........................................$1859000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (E), HES, City of Kent
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This project is mandated by compliance with Federal and State
regulations, and the requirement to eliminate potentially hazardous
roadway conditions.
STP—Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP-Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB —Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
17
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001 - 2006
PROJECT: Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad/Union Pacific Railroad Grade
Separation Project
South 212`h Street, James Street and/or Willis Street/SR 516, and South
2281h Street
DESCRIPTION: Construct grade separations of both the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railroad's and Union Pacific Railroad's mainline tracks at South 212`h
Street, and at either James Street or Willis Street/State Route 516, and at
South 2281h Street. Project will support the increased number of trains
through the City resulting from the re-opening of the BNSF Railroad's
Stampede Pass line and increased activity through the Ports of Seattle and
Tacoma, as well as the commuter rail operations of the RTA. Project will
ultimately include the construction of bridge structures, full-width paving,
concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks; street lighting, utilities and
appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering............$15,000,000
Right of Way Acquisition............$9,000,000
Construction ..............................$60,000,000
TOTAL .....................................$8490009000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): P.E.: City of Kent, State, FMSIB
Construction: STP (U), State, City of Kent, FMSIB
Burlington Northem/Santa Fe Railroad and Union
Pacific/Southern Pacific Railroad
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The level of freight and passenger rail traffic on both the UP/SP and
BNSF Railroads' mainlines is dramatically increasing as a consequence
of positive economic conditions in the Puget Sound area and the
approved RTA plan. East-west freight and commuter mobility in the
Green River Valley will soon reach a point of being significantly
impacted by continued private development competing with the increased
rail traffic - also created by private development activities and regional
trade. Grade-separations are required to mitigate past and future
development and increased rail traffic to maintain east-west mobility.
STP- Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA -Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB-Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB-Transportation Improvement Board,
LID-Local Improvement District
18
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001 - 2006
PROJECT: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance Sidewalk Repair
and Rehabilitation Program Project
DESCRIPTION: Reconstruct and repair existing sidewalks and pedestrian ramps, and
install new hard-surfaced sidewalks to implement the requirements of the
Federal Government's Americans with Disabilities Act. This project will
include an inventory of the City's sidewalk/walkway facilities, and
identification and correction of existing deficiencies. This project will
also include the construction of concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks;
minor storm drainage, and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................$185,000
Right of Way Acquisition.......................$-0-
Construction ................................$1,665,000
TOTAL .......................................$1,850,000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): City of Kent
Funded, Project on-going
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This project is mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act, (ADA).
It repairs existing sidewalks, replaces deficient/substandard and/or
missing wheelchair/pedestrian raMpS, and brings same into compliance
with the adopted Federal standards.
STP—Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U)Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ)Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality:HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA—Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB —Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond (State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
19
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2001 - 2006
PROJECT: Commuter/Shopper Shuttle Bus Project
DESCRIPTION: Continue to provide enhanced transit service in the Downtown Kent
business area through the use of a fixed-route shuttle service, with
demand-responsive routing capabilities. Service route points will include
King County Metro Park Ride, South King County Regional Justice
Center, and Kent City Hall, as well as local shopping and medical
facilities.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.........................$-0-
Right of Way Acquisition.......................$-0-
Operations ......................................$140,000
TOTAL ..........................................$1409000
*City share, which is equivalent to the lost fare box revenue that the county could have collected
were not the city wanting a free service, (based on 6 years operating cost with 3% inflation).
FUNDING SOURCE (S): King County, City of Kent
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The Shopper Shuttle provides mobility and independence to many of the
city's seniors as well as school children and other citizens with limited
mobility options. The service addresses a significant transit market that
may not be able to use the county's more traditional routes, and helps the
city meet its road safety and transportation demand management goals.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality;HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,ALP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB —Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
20
F
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2002
PROJECT: James Street at Central Avenue Intersection Improvement Project
DESCRIPTION: Widen the easterly leg of James Street at Central Avenue intersection to
provide an exclusive right-turn lane for westbound traffic on James Street,
and construct a second south-bound to east-bound left turn pocket. Project
will also modify the existing traffic signalization system. Project will
include the construction of paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks;
street lighting; storm drainage facilities; utilities and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................$75,000
Right of Way Acquisition...............$100,000
Construction ...................................$425,000
TOTAL ..........................................$600,000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): AIP, City of Kent
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This intersection is heavily impacted by traffic coming off and headed to
the Kent East Hill. Project will support improved access into the
Downtown area and the increased traffic generated by the changes in
land-use in the Downtown area.
STP—Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond[State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
21
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2002
PROJECT: Pacific Highway South (State Route 99) H.O.V. Lanes - Phase II
South 252nd Street to South 272"d Street (Southerly City Limits)
DESCRIPTION: Widen Pacific Highway South to provide a pair of High Occupancy
Vehicle lanes from South 252"d Street to South 272"d Street, construct 10-
foot wide sidewalks/bicycle-ways, and modify the existing traffic signal
systems at the Fred Meyer Shopping Center, South 260`h Street, and South
272"d Street. Project will include paving, concrete curbs, gutters, and 10-
foot wide sidewalks/bicycle-ways, storm drainage systems, utilities,
landscaping, and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................$410,000
Right of Way Acquisition...............$820,000
Construction ................................$5,460,000
TOTAL .......................................$6,6909000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (U), TPP, AIP, City of Kent, LID
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This project is required for compliance with the City's Concurrency
Ordinance and the City Comprehensive Plan. The project will reduce
peak hour single-occupant vehicle trips by encouraging high occupancy
vehicle usage. Pacific Highway South (SR 99) is a regionally significant
north-south arterial heavily used by commuters for access from South
King County to the employment centers in South Seattle, and provides
alternative access to Interstate 5 from airport.
STP- Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements. (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA -Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB -Freight Mobility Strategic.Investment Bond [State], TIB-Transportation Improvement Board,
LID-Local Improvement District
22
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2002
PROJECT: Military Road at South 272"d Street Intersection Improvement
Project
DESCRIPTION: Widen South 272"d Street and Military Road to extend the existing left-
turn pockets on the west and north legs of the intersection. Widen the
north leg of the intersection to extend the existing southbound left turn and
add a right-turn lane at the intersection of South 272"d Street. Project will
also include the construction of paving, concrete curbs and gutters, paved
shoulders, street lighting, storm drainage, utilities and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering...................$77,000
Right of Way Acquisition...............$103,000
Construction ...................................$590,000
TOTAL ..........................................$770,000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (E), HES, AIP, City of Kent, LID
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The traffic volumes at this intersection have reached the point whereby an
extension of the existing right-turn and left-turn lanes are required to
mitigate the congestion at the intersection and to accommodate additional
development in the Green River Valley. Further, shoulder improvements
are required to provide control of roadway drainage and prevent impacts
to adjacent property owners.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
23
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2003
PROJECT: 132"d Avenue Southeast Street at Kent-Kangley Road (State Route
516) Intersection Improvement Project
DESCRIPTION: Widen the north leg of the 132"d Avenue Southeast at South 272"d Street
(Kent — Kangley) intersection to provide an exclusive right-turn lane for
southbound traffic on 132"d Avenue. Project will also modify the existing
traffic signalization system. Project will include the reconstruction of
paving, concrete curbs, gutters and 10-foot wide sidewalks/bicycle-ways;
street lighting; storm drainage facilities; utilities and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.....................$5,000
Right of Way Acquisition.................$25,000
Construction ...................................$100,000
TOTAL ..........................................S1309000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): City of Kent, AIP, STP (U)
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: This intersection is heavily impacted by traffic coming down 132"d and
supports throughput to the 272"d Corridor. The corner turning
improvement will tie into the Curb and Gutter improvements at the
nearby shopping center. The project will support improved access onto
the cross-valley corridor and with Kent East Hill shopping.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB —Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
24
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2003
PROJECT: 841h Avenue South (Central/E.V.H.) Pavement Rehabilitation Project
South 2121h Street to State Route 167
DESCRIPTION: Remove and rehabilitate the existing roadway pavement to add additional
service life to the roadway between South 2121h Street and State Route
167. This project will include the removal and replacement of the existing
pavement in the curb lanes in both directions, and a full-width asphalt
concrete overlay of the entire roadway; and will also include the selective
replacement of catch basin inlets and driveway approach aprons, and curbs
and gutters.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................$140,000
Right of Way Acquisition.......................$-0-
Construction ...................................$570,000
TOTAL ..........................................$7109000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (U), City of Kent
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The existing paving along this section of 84`h Avenue South is showing
signs of structural distress, as demonstrated by "alligatoring",
longitudinal cracking, and cracking of the curbs and gutters. In addition
to the pavement distress, an inverted crown section occurs at the former
curb line along many of the sections of the street. This inverted crown
section results in the ponding of stormwater in the street along the seam
line, which increases the failure rate of the roadway pavement.
STP— Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U)Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality;HES—Hazard Elimination,
TIA —Transportation Improvement Account,ALP-Arterial Improvement Program [State]
FMSIB—Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB—Transportation Improvement Board,
LID—Local Improvement District
25
CITY OF KENT
SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
YEAR: 2006
PROJECT: South 272nd Street Widening Project- Phase 2
261h Avenue South to Pacific Highway
DESCRIPTION: Widen South 272nd Street to add one additional southbound left turn lane
and one southbound through lane from 28`h Avenue South to Pacific
Highway. Project will also include the construction of paved shoulders,
street lighting, storm drainage, utilities and appurtenances.
PROJECT COST: Preliminary Engineering.................$125,000
Right of Way Acquisition.................$70,000
Construction ...................................$555,000
TOTAL ..........................................$6807000
FUNDING SOURCE (S): STP (E), City of Kent, TIB
PROJECT
JUSTIFICATION: The traffic volumes at this intersection have reached the point whereby
addition of an exclusive left turn and an additional through lane are
required to mitigate the congestion at the intersection and to prevent
backups between Pacific Highway and I-5 and to provide access to the
site of the proposed southside Park and Ride lot. Further, this project .
coordinates with county improvements on the south leg of the
intersection. Shoulder improvements are also required to provide control
of roadway drainage and prevent impacts to adjacent property owners.
STP- Surface Transportation Program [Federal], (U) Urban, (BR) Bridge Replacement,
(E) Enhancements, (CMAQ) Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality; HES-Hazard Elimination, "1
TIA -Transportation Improvement Account,AIP- Arterial Improvement Program [State] u
FMSIB-Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Bond [State], TIB-Transportation Improvement Board,
LID-Local Improvement District
36
CONSENT CALENDAR
6 . City Council Action:
n
Councilmember (� moves, Councilmember D-t
seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through L be approved.
Discussion
Action
6A. Approval of Minutes .
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
August 1, 2000 .
6B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through July 31 and
paid on July 31 after auditing by the Operations Committee on
August 1, 2000 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
7/31/00 238224-238474 $2 , 501, 606 . 53
7/31/00 238475-238903 2 , 973 , 210 .28
$5, 474, 816 . 81
Approval of checks issued for payroll for July 16 through
July 31 and paid on August 4, 2000 :
Date Check Numbers Amount
8/4/00 Checks 245589-245963 $ 304 , 744 . 39
8/4/00 Advices 98424-99097 930 , 515 . 37
$1, 235, 259 . 75
Council Agenda
Item No. 6 A-B
Kent, Washington
August 1, 2000
The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order
at 5 : 00 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Orr. Present : Councilmembers
Amodt , Clark, Epperly, Woods and Yingling, Chief Administrative
Officer McFall, City Attorney Lubovich, Police Chief Crawford,
Fire Chief Angelo, Public Works Director Wickstrom, Planning
Manager Satterstrom, Finance Director Miller, and Parks Director
Hodgson. Councilmember Brotherton was excused from the meeting.
Approximately 40 people were in attendance .
CHANGES TO Orr added Item J to the Consent Calendar and
THE AGENDA Employee of the Month to Public Communications .
Yingling added Item B to Other Business .
At the request of Martin Plys, Item A was added to
Continued Communications .
PUBLIC Emvlovee of the Month. Mayor Pro Tem Orr
COMMUNICATIONS announced that Jan Burley and Carol Ryckman of
the Resource Center have been chosen as August
Employees of the Month. She noted that they make
an exceptional team, and balance each other
beautifully to ensure that the Resource Center
runs smoothly. Each was presented with an
Employee of the Month plaque . Facility Manager
Cheryl Fraser said that both Jan and Carol are
well-respected by their co-workers, are extremely
resourceful, and are very hard workers . She added
that they are courteous, accurate and informative
to callers .
Kent/Yanazhou Students. Finance Director Miller
introduced Kent students Colby Wolfley and Kali
Drake who have just returned from three weeks in
Yangzhou, and Chinese students Li Pingting and Fu
Fei who hosted them in China . Li Pingting and Fu
Fei expressed appreciation for this opportunity to
live in Kent and learn different customs . Wolfley
and Drake outlined what they had seen and learned
in China, expressed thanks to the City and the
Sister City Association, and suggested a teacher
exchange in the future. Orr thanked the returning
students and welcomed the visitors .
1
Kent City Council Minutes August 1, 2000
PUBLIC Kent Meridian Grand 2000 Reunion. Orr read a
COMMUNICATIONS proclamation noting that education brings
friendships and memories that last a lifetime and
that Kent has a nationally acclaimed school
district . She announced that the Mayor has
proclaimed August 19, 2000, KM Grand Reunion
2000 Day and encouraged all citizens to support
this celebration honoring Kent ' s rich heritage of
education and nationally acclaimed school system.
Patty Wood and Susan Stroomer accepted the pro-
clamation and thanked everyone for their support .
National Night Out. Judy Mauhl, Community
Services Specialist with the Police Department,
noted that 35 events are planned this year and
provided Councilmembers with National Night Out
caps . Clark and Orr told of Block Watch and crime
prevention experiences in their neighborhoods and
encouraged those interested in forming a Block
Watch to contact the Police Department .
Introduction of Appointees. Orr introduced
Pamela R. Roberts, the Mayor ' s appointee to the
Human Services Commission.
CONSENT WOODS MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through
CALENDAR J be approved. Clark seconded and the motion
carried.
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6A)
Approval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of
the regular Council meeting of July 18 , 2000 .
TRANSPORTATION (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6C)
Six Year Transportation Improvement Program. SET
August 15th as the Public Hearing date for the Six
Year Transportation Improvement Program, as
recommended by the Public Works Committee .
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6D)
196th/East Valley Highway Condemnation Ordinance.
ADOPTION of Ordinance No. 3520 which provides the
authority to commence eminent domain proceedings
on portions of two properties located generally
east of the intersection of South 196th Street
2
Kent City Council Minutes August 1, 2000
COMMUNITY Repair Program and the rehabilitation of
DEVELOPMENT Titusville Station is proposed. Public Service
BLOCK GRANT funding is on-going for agencies that provide
health care, food and transitional housing for
victims of Domestic Violence . Part of the
allocation also includes funding for planning and
administration costs of the program.
The Parks Committee has recommended that the
proposed Year 2001 Community Development Block
Grant Program, including the contingency plan, be
accepted and that the Mayor be authorized to
execute the appropriate contracts, as adopted.
Carolyn Sundvall, CDBG Coordinator, outlined the
program. Orr opened the public hearing. There
were no comments from the audience, and WOODS
MOVED to close the public hearing. Clark seconded
and the motion carried. WOODS MOVED that the
proposed Year 2001 Community Development Block
Grant Program, including the contingency plan, be
accepted and adopted, and that the Mayor be
authorized to execute the appropriate contracts .
Yingling seconded and the motion carried.
CITY PROPERTY (CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS - ITEM 11A)
(ADDED ITEM)
Property at 12525 S.E. 248th. Martin Plys, 3004
S . 256th, stated that the City of Kent purchased
two parcels of land at 12525 S .E. 248th Street
from Columbia Greenhouse, and asked whether
Columbia Greenhouse is using the 10, 000 gallon
diesel tank which the City built on the property.
He noted that Columbia Greenhouse had the old
underground tanks removed at their own expense.
McFall explained that the City purchased the pro-
perty for future use as a maintenance facility,
that the facility is now being designed, and that
an agreement whereby the tanks were removed at the
expense of the seller was a part of the negotia-
tions . He added that the City provided for a
10 , 000 gallon storage tank, which is being used by
Columbia Nursery at this time, as part of the
negotiations as well . He offered to meet with
4
Kent City Council Minutes August 1 , 2000
CITY PROPERTY Plys and provide more detailed information if so
desired.
PARKS & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6F)
COMMUNITY King County Work Summer Training Grant for
SERVICES Specialized Recreation. ACCEPT the $19, 200 grant
from King County Community Services for the
Specialized Recreation Summer Work Program and
amend the budget, as recommended by the Parks
Committee.
The King County Community Services Division
awarded the Kent Parks and Recreation Specialized
Recreation Division funds for staff, supplies and
related expenses to jointly operate an integrated
learning project this summer.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6G)
King County Landmarks And Heritage Grant for Neely
House. ACCEPT the King County 2000 Cultural
Facilities Program Landmarks and Heritage
Commission grant for $38, 000 to support the
restoration of the Neely Soames Home and Garden
and amend the budget, as recommended by the Parks
Committee .
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6H)
Reclamation Art Project at Turnkey Park. ACCEPT
the proposed art project for Turnkey Park, as
recommended by the Parks Committee .
As part of the approved Millennium Public Art
Project, members of the Kent Police Youth Public
Art Project and members of the Kent Police Youth
Board will work with artist Tina Hoggatt to design
and fabricate public artworks for the park. The
total project cost is $17, 825 . The City' s Art
Fund will contribute $1000 to the project and the
remaining funds will come from community grants .
CIVIC & (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7A)
PERFORMING Civic and Performing Arts Center, Appointment of
ART CENTER Conmtittees. Participation in the King County
Voters ' Pamphlet for an election authorizing the
sale of $14 million of long-term General
5
Kent City Council Minutes August 1, 2000
CIVIC & Obligation voter-approved bonds for a Civic and
PERFORMING Performing Arts Center requires Council appoint-
ART CENTER ment of two committees of three members each to
prepare for and against statements on the initia-
tive for the voters, pamphlet . Mayor Pro Tem Orr
recommended that Don Campbell, Patricia Curran and
Dale Smith serve on the committee for approval ,
and that Ted Kogita, Martin Plys and Joe Rubio
serve on the committee for rejection. WOODS MOVED
for approval of the individuals recommended by
Orr. Clark seconded. Orr informed the committee
for rejection that an additional name was sub-
mitted and that they may want to contact that
person. She also pointed out that the name of the
committee spokesperson must be submitted to the
City Clerk, and that information on preparing and
taping their presentations is available . The
motion then carried.
COUNCIL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6J)
Excused Absence. APPROVAL of an excused
absence from tonight ' s meeting for Councilmember
Brotherton, as he is unable to attend.
APPOINTMENT (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6I)
Human Services Commission Appointment.
CONFIRMATION of the Mayor ' s appointment of
Ms . Pamela R. Roberts to serve as a member of the
Kent Human Services Commission. Ms . Roberts is a
Kent resident and is employed by Chesterfield
Health Services. She belongs to the Totem
Council of Girl Scouts of America, is an ordained
missionary, is financial administrator and also
serves on the Board of Trustees of her church.
She received her BA in Public Administration in
1992 and her MBA in March of this year.
Ms . Roberts will fill the User of Services
category and will replace Stephanie Howell, who
resigned. Her term will continue until 1/l/03 .
FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6B)
Approval of Bills . APPROVAL of payment of
the bills received through June 15 and paid on
6
Kent City Council Minutes August 1, 2000
FINANCE June 15 , after auditing by the Operations
Committee on July 18, 2000 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
6/15/00 236132-216413 $ 757, 972 . 46
6/15/00 236414-236839 1 , 355 , 389 . 56
$2 , 113 , 362 . 02
APPROVAL of payment of the bills received through
June 30 and paid on June 30 , after auditing by the
Operations Committee on July 5, 2000 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
6/30/00 236840-237112 $ 868, 517 .43
6/30/00 237113-237582 2 , 193 , 867 . 25
$3 , 062 , 384 . 68
APPROVAL of payment of the bills received through
July 14 and paid on July 14 , after auditing by the
Operations Committee on July 18, 2000 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
7/14/00 237583-237854 $ 767, 583 . 21
7/14/00 237855-238223 749, 578 . 93
$1, 517, 162 . 14
Approval of checks issued for payroll for July 1
through July 15 , and paid on July 20 , 2000 :
Date Check Numbers Amount
7/20/00 Checks 245217-245588 $ 307 , 637 . 67
7/20/00 Advices 97799-98423 955 , 035 . 51
$1 , 262 , 673 . 18
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 7B)
(ADDED ITEM)
r1
Pre_pavment for City Property, LID 351. Finance
Director Miller explained that the assessment for
three City-owned properties within LID 351 is
7
Kent City Council Minutes August 1, 2000
FINANCE $306, 409 .20 and that there are two payment
options . She recommended prepaying the assessment
using CIP excess sales tax revenue rather than
making yearly payments for 15 years . She added
that prepaying would save approximately $6, 000 in
interest . YINGLING MOVED to budget and prepay the
City' s LID 351 assessment of $306, 409 . 20 using CIP
excess sales tax revenue . Clark seconded and the
motion carried.
REPORTS Council President. Orr thanked the Operations
Committee for their cooperation regarding
tonight ' s five o ' clock meeting and the Police
Department for their escort to the National Night
Out activities.
Public Works. Clark noted that the Committee will
meet at 5 : 00 p.m. on August 7 and 21 .
Planning Committee. Clark noted that the
Committee will meet at 4 : 00 p.m. on August 21 .
Parks Committee. Woods announced that the Parks
Committee will not meet this month.
Administrative Reports. McFall announced that
Neighborhood Traffic Control Manager Joe Mitchell
has accepted the position as Permit Center
Manager. He also reminded Councilmembers of the
Executive Session on negotiations for property
acquisition.
EXECUTIVE At 5 :45 p.m. the meeting recessed to Executive
SESSION Session for approximately twenty minutes . The
meeting reconvened at 6 : 15 P .M.
ADJOURNMENT WOODS MOVED to adjourn at 6 : 15 p.m. Epperly
seconded and the motion carried.
Brenda Jaco r, CMC
City Clerk
8
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION PROGRAM GRANT - ACCEPT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance of education grant funds and
authorization to establish a budget .
The Kent Drinking Driver Task Force has been notified of grant
funding through the Washington Department of Community, Trade
and Economic Development . The Law Enforcement Education
Partnership (LEEP) grant is in the amount of $27, 063 effective
July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2001 . Existing program funding
will be used for the required match.
Funding will be used to continue to support the "Game of Life"
youth conference and follow-up projects sponsored on school
campuses and neighborhoods throughout South King County.
During 2000, 32 teams completed 41 projects impacting almost
19, 000 youth.
3 . EXHIBITS: Forms
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety 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
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6C
•
--� KENT
WAIHINGTOM Mayor Jim White
POLICE DEPARTMENT Chief Ed Crawford
220 4°Ave S
Kent, WA 980:2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Public Safety Committee
Connie Eppedy, Chair
Sandy Amodt
Tom Brotherton
cc: Judy Woods, Task Force Chair
Chief Ed Crawford
Captain Dave Everett
Lt Glenn Woods
Lt Bruce Weissich
FROM: Nancy Mathews, Coordinator
Kent Drinking Driver Task Force
SUBJECT: Approval of Grant
DATE: July 6, 2000
The 'Kent Drinking Driver Task Force has been notified of grant funding through the
Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development. The Law
Enforcement Education Partnership (LEEP) grant is in the amount of $27,063 effective
July 1 , 2000 through June 30, 2001 . Existing program funding will be used for the
required match.
Funding will be used to continued to support the "Game of Life" youth conference and
follow-up projects sponsored on school campuses and neighborhoods throughout South
King County. During 2000, 32 teams completed 41 projects impacting almost 19,000
youth.
The Drinking Driver Task Force requests authorization to accept the grant funds and
establish a budget.
ydeep2000
DEPARTMENT OF COMMU;`M, TRADE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
-AND ECONONT UC DEVELOPMENT FOILM 1
APPLICATION FACE SHEET
2000- 2002
la7.111 00=Title: 5. Progxam Period:
Jaw Enforcement Education Parmershiv Prolzram 711/00 to 6/30/02
lb. Contracting Agent: 6. Funding Authority:
Kent Police Department State of Washington
Department of Community,Trade
lc. Mailing Address: and Economic Development
Drinking Driver Task Force/Kent PD
220 Ln Soutn 7. Service Arcs (by city/county)
Kent, WA yo 3 (if parmal county describe
boundries of service area)
South King County (Renton, Kent, Tukwila,
1d. Contact Person: Dr. Deborah Ranniger auourn, niani ,tie, recerai way , =numc ,aw
Tetepnone: t�o31 ago-ooas & Tanoma School Districts )
2. Tax identification No. 91-600125d
8. Leaslanve Districts: a 1 h• c r D a r t o r: 5 t n,
Bars Code: .33.33.186 i1th, 30th, 31St, 3ro, /Ln , 41ST, -
t. C TEA No.: 84.186 9. Or,an=anon Fiscal :'ear:
2000 to 2002
1n. PURPOSE: To o rovide funds to ors ^izations ;or law enforcement and education partnersaivs inteadea to croviae
suos-ance abuse education and violence prevennon services to Washington school children. Services are
mme=4 to reduce the incidence of alcohol, tobacco, and other c-u, abuse and vioience.
i 1. OPOSED COMPETITIVE BUDGET
2000 2001 2001-2002
Federal Match Federal ✓fate:.
Salaries 55, 589 I ;z9 9z=
Benefits
Contracted Services 11,400 3,500 11 ,365 3, 700
Goods and Services 15, 350 11 ,d25 1"11385 1 ,525
Travei 'o0 2— f i 5o %56
Training � 2 ,500
Equipment .. _ ,-.
12. GRAND TOTAL 30,000 38,448 30,000 04,252
3.ES LTvtA=Eti EivDrM-RES (Do not include Match):
Jul 0 Oct 800 Jan 11000 Apr 2,500
Aug 500 Nov 1,500 Feb 2 ,500 May 2,.r00
Sep ��� Dec Mar -•St Jun b 0=
TOTAL 2000-2001: 30,000
Jul 0 Oct 800 Jan 11 00C Apr 2,500
Aug :)Uu Nov L'OU0 Feb 2,500 May 2,500
Sep —�a Dec 000 Mar 2,500 Jun 6 ,700
TOTAL 2001-2002: 30,000
14. GRAND TOTAL FMERAI 'rL'i,MT 60,000
9
'ert Police Department ABSTRAQ7 LEEP Application: Form 4
-he Game of Life: Attitudes & Choices involves teams of junior and senior high students, law
enforcement, educators, parents, and community volunteers in a year-long skill building series that
romotes community bonding, mentoring and youth implementation of activities supporting drug-free
:hoices, healthy beliefs, non-violence and positive decisions. The project features a three-day skill
;uilding conference followed by team planning and implementation of school/community-based projects to
educe risk factors and enhance protective factors
molementina Agencv, Financial Structure & Community Partners The Game of Life is sponsored by
_'I,e Kent Police Department and receives funding from the City general fund, a youth-dedicated utility tax,
;rants, �Iscal support from each participating school, in-kind contributions, donations of goods and
:rofessional services and community volunteers. Local, regional and statewide agency support is
-ccumented in Form 6. Youth Planning Board members represent a broad cross-section of the South King
_aunty population. Junior and senior high teams participate in the conference and implement follow-up
events. The program manager, Dr Debbie Ranniger, is devoted solely to this project. She recruits and
supervises an extensive volunteer commitment of youth, professional facilitators, adult team mentors,
arents, teachers, school administrators, and key leaders.
sta'plished Need This project addresses the risk factors identified by the South King County Community
letviork. Research data supports the need for long term programs that provide social and psychclocical
upport to adolescents. The strength of this model lies in its foam for improving community bonding,
--mmitment to school and Increased student (leadership) in prevention activities. Follow-Up activities
:rovlde StUdentS +Vlth the opportunity to reinforce skills learned at the conference, as they shale
.nowiedge with peers, family members and the community at-farce. The Game of Life program has the
:apacty to address risk and protective factors unique to each community it serves. The project links
font line" educators, parents, law enforcement, business and community leaders with youth.
•Iission/Coals/Cbiectives Specific coals of the projects (listed on Form 8) include youth leadership, skill
wilding and community involvement, alono with increased parental, school and law enforcement
--articipaticn in community prevention efforts which support and encourage appropriate choices and
.ehawcr of our youth. The Game of Life maintains a well-structured, yet flexible approach to prevention
.v -eassessinc orcoram content based on current data. Inclusions of the eicht school districts maximizes
Ccurces fleecec to train youth leaders ana provide skills to tams to strengthen protective factors
:—sic
nea to meet the risks identified by youth as unique to each neighborhood campus.
C=ivities Regional Youth Planning Board (diverse regional, ethnic, social/economic)
Youth-driven specific learning objectives
Youth leadership role in skill building series
Mentors to include parents, teachers, law enforcement, senior citizens
Team building and logic model planning
Resource development
Documentation of project activities
Complete effectiveness measurements and evaluations
;udeet Awarded LE_P funds will be used to continue and strengthen the existing model. Essential
:rogram elements to be funded include Youth Board leadership training, contracted services for
:onference meals and professional presenters, and financial support to every participating school for
ollow-up activities.
valuation The project includes both process and outcome evaluations. Process evaluations include
-nonitoring attendance and participation in all project activities. Outcome evaluation includes pre and/or
3ost-event surveys by project participants; focus groups of youth and adult attendees to measure
Derceptions, security personnel progress reports, and collection of archival measures including school
iistrict sanction reports, crime statistics and student performance. Key leaders from each community Will
:e interviewed to measure awareness of opportunity, assessment of activity and to address improved
:ommunication, commitment, resource/funding and collaboration strategies.
ent Police Department ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY LEEP Aoc lication: Form 5-1
'roanizational Structure The City of Kent, Washington is a municipal corporation and is exempt from
3x as defined under Title 26 IRC 501 (c) (1). All budgeting, billing and accounting activity are executed
i accordance with State of Washington auditing practices.
-,
nde: ..ie supervision and direction of the Police Chief, Community Education Unit Lieutenant and Drinking
river Task Force Coordinator, project administration is provided by Public Education Sbecialist, Dr.
ebbie Ranniger. (see attached organization chart and staff resume) Contractual agreement(s) will be
=viewed and approved as to form by the respective legal and financial agents, submitted to the City
ouncil, School Board or governing body for concurrence, and forwarded to the Department of
ommunity, Trade and Economic Development.
Fiscal Responsibility Program funding, including wages and benefits for an .875 F-FE (35 hours per
week) is included in the current City budget. Hard match funds include an ATOD grant from Public
Health through 6/30/01, and a LEEP grant which expires 6/30/00. Additional community donations
averaging more than 520,000 over a year are raised in the form of cash, fees, mini-grants, goods
and services, in-kind contributions, volunteer labor, vendor discounts and other operating supplies,
services and incentives. LEEP funds provide professional honorariums and services, teacher
stipends and other services and supplies required to support the Youth Board, to implement the 3-
day event and support the 35+ campus activities subsequent to the conference.
Protect Desicn and Manacement The Game of Life is sponsored by the Kent Polic_ Department
through the auspices of the Kent Drinking Driver Task Force, established in 1983, and governed by
a mayor-appointed volunteer Steering Committee. Direction for the workshop series is carnet out
by a Youth Planning Board and supported by parents and professionals. Community involvement s
ensurea by means of extensive volunteer recruitment to several program elements (see Form 5).
rganizaticnal Communication. Ccoceratien and Coordination The project is designed to be inclusive of
outh and aduits with divergent views, and to reduce barriers to participation by scheduling event
am , implementation, follow-up and evaluation focus groups curing after school hours. it is an
utstaiicine conduit between service providers and the Identified needs of our youth. Review of proposed
ib-conzracts and project elements by :key acministrators encourages buy-in and establishes the event as
means to reach diverse target issues as defined by the respective elected 'bodies.
.egional collaborations have intecrated community needs assessments and identified common
:racegies to decrease duplication of effort and enhance the region's capacity to respond to youth issues.
xcansion of the award-winning Kent strategy (in its 13`" year) to include all eight South King Chanty
=nooI districts was giver, preference over replication in eac,I community.
Phased Implementation and Achievements to Date
Phase 1: 1983 - 1995 (Pre LEEP Grant Funding) The peiice department wished to increase
safety and reduce the fear of crime and violence for youth and for the community. It was a shared
goal to involve the community in youth partnerships that would elicit and engage youth
participation in community enhancing issues and activities. Each participating agency had a vested
interest in increasing opportunities for involvement and positive outcomes in school work and social
skills for youth who have been underser✓ed, youth who are at-risk and all young people. During
this initial program development stage, invitations were extended beyond Kent secondary schools
to three neighboring school districts, private schools, homeschoolers and youth organizations. KSD
security personnel received mentor training in preparation for team leadership the following year.
Phase 2: 1996 - 1997 (LEEP Award to Kent Police) Kent Community Mobilization Prevention
Team completed a comprehensive data collection of risk factors unique to the Kent community.
Risk factors were prioritized by key leaders and novice community volunteers alike. A needs
,sessment resulted in the identification of protective factor strategies. As the twenty-three
,:anticipating teams were completing campus follow-up projects, the South King County Community
Network was integrating the community needs assessments completed by each of the eight South
King County School Districts. The Game of Life was identified as a promising approach to meet
common identified strategies and maximize resources dedicated to ,youth. This program model was
ant Police Department ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY LEEP Application: Form 5-2
flexible enough to be customized for each distinct neighborhood school. In August 1997, the
Youth Conference Board received an award from Lt Gov Brad Owen recognizing the 10`'
annual event as an exemplary community commitment to youth-initiated prevention.
Phase 3: 1997 - 1998 (2Id Year LEEP Award) The Youth Planning Board advanced
expansion plans to invite all junior/senior high schools within the eight school district Community
Network boundary area. Community coalitions stepped up to make it possible through use of
loaned executives to educate and elicit key leaders' and superintendents' support in the expanded
service areas. Thirty-five team attended representing junior and senior high school in each of the
eight identified districts (Kent, Federal Way, Highline, Renton, Tukwila, Tahoma, Auburn and
Enumclaw.) LEEP grant funding of 3250 to $500 was offered to each attending team for
community follow-up activities. Collaborative funding sources were identified for participating PEP
teams and on-going skill building and leadership training was offered to youth planning board
members and PEP teams. The "End of Conference Report" was provided to collaborators; The
DDTF Steering Committee reviewed the 1998-2000 LEEP request to assure compliance with
established coals and objectives. The Youth Board resumed meeting and was recognized by
Mayor Jim White and Chief Ed Crawford at a spring award ceremony.
Phase 4: 1998 - 2000 LEEP Grant Fundina Youth Board membership was expanded, with all
signing a piedge to remain drug, alcohol and tobacco-free. Several training and team-building
activities preceded discussion on the '98 conference agenda. Youth selected workshop topics and
pecan to garner resource commitment. A district staff facilitator was identified for each of the
eight districts. Individual planning meeting were held in order to maintain/augment awareness,
participation, support, documentation and evaluation. Team leaders received a pre-Conference
orlentat;on of program objectives to strengthen campus follow-uo activities.
Phase 5: 200C - 2002 LEEP Application New and Expanded Activity
• Produce promgtlonal video to use a marketing toci to South King Count`/ key leaders;
• use video to Garner lone-term financial support from neighboring jurisdictions/agencies;
• expand youth 'board from 12 to 30 youth representing the geocraDhlC and ethnic
diversity of the region; supervision will be provided by 5 adult/parent volunteers and 2
paid staff;
• build sc;lool district liaison relationships by holding bi-annual planning meetings;
• provide training and mentoring to prepare the youth as conference presenters;
• identify team building activities, such as Safe Ride Home and the Millennium Project to
implement as Youth Board follow-up projects augmenting conference planning activities;
• honor the achievements of "retiring" Youth Board members with an annual recognition
ceremony and welcome (initiate) new members and their families;
• produce and distribute area-wide a youth created non-violence poster; parents and
families will be invited to join the mayor and council in recognition; and
• attend Fall SAr i yE conference in Yakima and present youth conference as a promising
approach project.
tachments: T
i) Organization Chart
_) Resume and Job Description for Program Manager
3} Letter of Support, '.King County Community Organizing orooram
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: VALLEY NARCOTICS ENFORCEMENT TEAM GRANT - ACCEPT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance of the Valley Narcotics
Enforcement Team grant and establishment of the July 1, 2000
thru June 30, 2001 budget .
The grant for the multi-jurisdictional narcotics task force
(VNET) is administered by the Washington State Community Trade
and Economic Development (CTED) , via a grant from the U.S .
Department of Justice. The grant funding is in its 13th year,
and is in the amount of $257, 840 . In addition, each City that
participates in the task force contributes $54, 500 for the
2000/2001 budget year which begins July 1, 2000 and runs
through June 30, 2001 . These funds assist with salaries,
equipment, and office expenses. The total budget will be
$565, 500, with $218, 000 coming from city matching funds, and
$89, 660 from the established seizure fund account .
3 . EXHIBITS: None
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff & Public Safety Committee 7/25/00 (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $54 , 500 per City/Total $218 , 000
SOURCE OF FUNDS: General Funds
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6D
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: LOCAL DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS EQUIPMENT GRANT -
AUTHORIZE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance of the equipment received
from King County Office of Emergency Management, as provided by
the Local Domestic Preparedness Equipment Support Program
Project, and authorization for the Mayor to sign both the
Certification and Assurances Document and the Distribution
Agreement .
King County was awarded $300 , 000 by the U. S . Department of
Justice under the State and Local Domestic Preparedness
Equipment Support Program Project . The purpose of the grant
funding was to purchase and distribute a limited amount of
personal protective, chemical, biological and radiological
detection and decontamination equipment to some local response
agencies . King County Office of Emergency Management has been
designated Grant Manager for this project . The equipment that
is provided to our agency is considered part of the mutual aid
resources available under the mutual aid agreements already in
place among fire, EMS, hazardous materials service providers
and law enforcement . While this equipment does not fully
address the needs, it is a beginning.
3 . EXHIBITS: Letter from Shadric T. Burcham, Grant
Administrator; list of distributed equipment; Certification and
Assurances document; and Distribution Agreement
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Chief Angelo and Public Safety Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
S . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6E
King county
Office of Emergency Management
Emergen(v Management Division
Department of
Information and Administrative Services
7300 Perimeter Road South,Room 128
Seattle,WA 98108-3W
(206)296-3830
June 23, 2000
The Honorable Jim White
Mayor
City of Kent
220 4`h Avenue South
Kent. Washington 98032
Dear Sir:
On December 21. 1999 King County was awarded S300.000.00 by the U.S. Department of
Justice under the State and Local Domestic Preparedness Equipment Support Program Project.
King County Office of Emergency Management (OEM), has been designated Grant Manager
for this project, and has been working closely with the response community to effectively make
use of this resource. The purpose of the grant funding was to purchase and distribute personal
protective. chemical, biological, and radiological detection. and decontamination equipment to
local response agencies. This equipment will provide law enforcement, fire and emergency
medical services with the proper equipment to respond to terrorist incidents involving Weapons
of Mass Destruction (WMD). Realistically. successful response to a terrorist incident may
require mutual aid resources from all WMD equipment recipient agencies in King County.
This equipment is considered part of the mutual aid resources available under the mutual aid
agreements already in place among law enforcement, fire, EMS, and hazardous materials
service providers.
King County is pleased to distribute the items described in the enclosed list to your jurisdiction.
The decisions on WMD equipment types and distribution were made by a multi-disciplinary
team composed of representatives of King County's police and fire chiefs associations,
hazardous materials response team providers, emergency medical services (EMS), and the
Seattle Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI). Population, geography, potential
targets and hazardous materials response capabilities were included in the decision making
process.
As a recipient of federal funding, King County made certain assurances to the U.S. Department
of Justice in the grant application. Some of the assurances must flow down to your jurisdiction
as well. Specifically. non-discrimination and lobbying requirements require certifications by
VE^,
1LT ,r,1`. il_.
sub-recipients of the funding under this grant. The required certifications are enclosed with this
letter (pages 4-5).
The federal funding also places property management responsibility on King County and its
subrecipients. A copy of the minimum requirements for property management is also included
with this letter (Attachment 1).
Finally, King County is acting as a pass through agency for the purchase and distribution of the
equipment purchased with the grant funds. Once the equipment is delivered to your jurisdiction
or agency, it becomes your responsibility for maintenance and storage. Although Congress has
appropriated significant funding for this type of equipment, this grant does not mandate that
your jurisdiction, purchase replacement equipment. Enclosed is a document (page )) that lists
the equipment that will be transferred to your jurisdiction.
Where documents require signatures, (pages 5 and 7), please sign and return to me at King
County OEM, 7300 Perimeter Road South, Seattle. WA 98108-3848. Thank you for your
attention to these details. Please call me at 206-205-8106 if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Shadric T. Burcham
Grant Administrator
Attachment
cc: Norm Angelo, Chief, Kent Fire Department
Name of Jurisdiction or Agency: City of Kent_
Contact Person: Chief Norm Angelo
WMD 99 EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTED
FROM
KING COUNTY
TO
(City of Kent)
EQUIPMENT QUANTITY
Level A Suits 4 ea.
Savox In-Suit Communications System 4 ea.
Photo-Ionization Detector (PPM) 1 ea.
Photo-Ionization Detector (PPB) 1 ea.
Sampling Kit 1 ea.
CDS Dragger Chemical Detection Kit Tubes 2 ea.
CMS Dragger Chemical Detection Kit 1 ea.
CMS Extra Chips (5) 5 ea.
CMS Training Chips 6 ea.
MPG Dosimeters w/alarm 4 ea.
CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES
As a sub-recipient of equipment purchased with federal funds under the STATE AND LOCAL �-
DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS EQUIPMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM project, Award V
Number 2000-TE-CX-0003, (City of Kent) makes the following certifications and assurances:
1. OMNIBUS CRIME CONTROL AND SAFE STREETS ACT OF 1968: It will
comply with the applicable provisions of Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968, as amended, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act,
or the Victims of Crime Act, as appropriate; the provisions of the current edition of the
Office of Justice Programs Financial and Administrative Guide for Grants, M7100.1:
and all other applicable Federal laws, orders, circulars, or regulations.
2. CIVIL RIGHTS: It will comply with the nondiscrimination requirements of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. as amended, 42 USC 3789(d), or
Victims of Crime Act (as appropriate); Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; Subtitle A. Title
II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (1990); Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975. Department of Justice Non-
Discrimination Regulations, 28 CFR Part 42. Subparts C,D, E. and G. and Department
of Justice regulations on disability discrimination, 28 CFR Part 35 and Part 39.
3. LOBBYING: (Required for funding over S100,000) As required by Section 1352 of
the U.S. Code, and implemented at 28 CFR Part 69. for persons entering into a grant or
cooperative agreement over S100,000, as defined at 28 CFR Part 69, the applicant
certifies that:
(a) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on
behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to
influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an
officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in
connection with the making of any Federal grant, the entering into of any
cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or
modification of any Federal grant or cooperative agreement;
(b) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will
be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of
Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this
Federal grant or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and
submit Standard Form— LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities," in
accordance with its instructions.
4
(c) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be
included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including
subgrants, contracts under grants and cooperative agreements, and subcontracts)
and that all sub-recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
Authorized Signature
Title
City of Kent
Date
5
DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
This Contract is entered into by KING COUNTY (County) and City of Kent(Agency), whose
address is 220" 4`h Avenue South, Kent WA 98032. The County is undertaking certain
activities related to the STATE AND LOCAL DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS EQUIPMENT
SUPPORT PROGRAM Project as funded by the U.S. Department of Justice under Grant
Award Number 2000-TE-CX-0003. Under the terms and conditions of Grant Award Number
2000-TE-CX-0003, the County will be distributing specialized emergency response equipment
to the City of Kent. The distribution of the equipment is subject to the following terms and
conditions.
1. The Equipment delivered to Agency is as described in the enclosed attachment.
2. The Equipment delivered to Agency is accepted 'as is" by the Agency with the
understanding that King County disclaims all warranties for the delivered equipment.
Should the equipment not perform as specified by the vendor, King County will provide
all warranty repair information to Agency.
3. The Agency is responsible for all training related to the proper use, care and
maintenance of the delivered equipment.
4. The County assumes no responsibility for the use, care or maintenance of the delivered
equipment by Agency. Agency shall protect, defend, indemnify and save harmless the
County, its officers, employees and agents from any and all costs, claims,judgments
and/or awards of damages, arising out of or in any way resulting from the negligent acts
or omissions of the Agency, its officers, employees, and/or agents. The Agency agrees
that its obligations under this subparagraph extend to any claim. demand, and/or cause
of action brought by or on behalf of any of its employees, or agents. For this purpose,
the Agency, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, as respects the County only, any
immunity that would otherwise be available against such claims under the Industrial
Insurance provisions of Title 51 RCW. In the event the County incurs attorney fees
and/or costs in the defense of claims, for damages within the scope of this section, such
fees and costs shall be recoverable from the Agency. In addition County shall be
entitled to recover from the Agency, fees, and costs incurred to enforce the provisions of
this section.
Claims shall include, but not be limited to, assertions that the use or transfer of any
software, book, document, report, film, tape, or sound reproduction or material of any
kind, delivered hereunder, constitutes an infringement of any copyright, patent,
trademark, trade name, and/or otherwise results in unfair trade practice.
J
6
1. Agency shall comply with the equipment management requirements of Grant Award
Number 2000-TE-CX-0003, (Attachment 1 pages 49-50 of US Department of Justice
"Financial Guide" Part III, Chapter 6 dated April, 1996) copy attached an incorporated
by reference as if fully stated herein.
Authorized Signature Authorized Signature
Title Title
City of Kent (Agency) King County
i
Date Date
7
(2) The recipient or subrecipient shall also make equipment available for use
on other projects or programs currently or previously supported by the
Federal government, providing such use does not interfere with the work
on the projects or programs for which it was originally acquired. First
preference for other use shall be given to other programs or projects
supported by the awarding agency. User fees should be considered and
treated as program income to the project, if appropriate.
(3) Notwithstanding program income, the recipient or subrecipient shall not
use equipment acquired with funds to provide services for a fee to compete
unfairly with private companies that provide equivalent services, unless
specifically permitted or contemplated by Federal statute.
(4) When acquiring replacement equipment, recipients or subrecipients may
use the equipment to be replaced as a trade-in or sell the equipment and
use the proceeds to offset the cost of the replacement equipment subject to
the written approval of the awarding agency.
3. Management.
a. A State shall manage equipment acquired under an award by the State, in
accordance with State laws and procedures.
b. Other government recipient and subrecipient procedures for managing.equipment
(including replacement),whether acquired in whole or in part with project funds,
will, at a minimum, meet the following requirements:
(1) Property records must be maintained which include:
(a) Description of the property;
(b) Serial number or other identification number;
(c) Source of the property;
(d) Identification of who holds the title;
(e) Acquisition date;
(f) Cost of the property;
(g) Percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the property;
(h) Location of property;
(i) Use and condition of the property; and
0) Disposition data including the date of disposal and sale price.
April 1996: Part III: Chapter 6 49
(2) A physical" inventory of the property must be taken and the results
reconciled with the property records at least once every two years.
(3) A control system must exist to ensure adequate safeguards to prevent:
(a) Loss;
(b) Damage; or
(c) Theft of the property.
Any loss, damage, or theft shall be investigated by the recipient and
subrecipient, as appropriate.
(4) Adequate maintenance procedures must exist to keep the property in good
condition.
(5) If the recipient or subrecipient is authorized or required to sell the
property,proper sales procedures must be established to ensure the highest
possible return.
4. Disposition.
a. A State recipient shall dispose of its equipment acquired under the award in
accordance with State laws and procedures.
b. Other government recipients and subrecipients shall dispose of the equipment
when original or replacement equipment acquired under the award or subaward
is no longer needed for the original project or program or for other activities
currently or previously supported by a Federal agency. Disposition of the
equipment will be made as follows:
(1) Items with a current per unit fair market value of less than$5,000 may be
retained, sold, or otherwise disposed of with no further obligation to the
awarding agency.
(2) Items with a current per unit fair market value in excess of$5,000 may be
retained or sold and the awarding agency shall have a right to an amount
calculated by multiplying the current market value or proceeds from sale
by the awarding agency's share of the equipment. Seller is also eligible for
sale costs.
(3) In cases where a recipient or subrecipient fails to take appropriate
disposition actions, the awarding agency may direct the recipient or
subrecipient to take other disposition actions.
_..i OVA D Trr_ .7; so
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: FINANCE/HR/PAYROLL SOFTWARE PURCHASE - APPROVE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorize the Mayor to sign contracts
with J.D. Edwards, Vertex, Optio, and Oracle for the purchase
of Finance/HR/Payroll and Project Management software suites,
related software products and implementation services, subject
to City Attorney approval of contract documents, as recommended
by the Operations Committee .
The need for a new Finance/HR/Payroll system was identified as
key element of the Technology Plan. Current systems do not
provide automated support for some key City functions .
The City issued a comprehensive Request for Proposals in July
1999 . Four-day detailed software demonstrations took place
beginning in October 1999 . J.D. Edwards was selected as the
vendor of choice and contract negotiations began in March 2000 .
Presentations regarding the selection process were made to
Council in a March 2000 workshop. This item was presented to
the Operations Committee August 1, 2000 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff summary documents and powerpoint slides from
Workshop presentation to Council
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff & Operations Committee 8/1/00 (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
S . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $3 , 045, 909
SOURCE OF FUNDS : Technology Plan
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6F
� KENT
ADMINISTRATION
Date: July 24, 2000
To: Council Operations Committee
From: Brent McFall,Chief Administrative Officer
Re: FinancelHR/Payroll System and related Staffing
I would like to recommend that the City move forward with the purchase of a
Finance/HR/Payroll system and associated staffing allocations at this time.
This system purchase and implementation was one of the central components of the
Technology Plan for 1998 —2000. It is essential that we replace the dated systems that we
are using today so that we can position the City to operate more efficiently and also so that we
can more effectively manage growth.
We have assembled an excellent staff team to work on this project They have been working
very hard in the selection process as well as planning for implementation. They have studied
the successes and failures of other similar projects in other jurisdictions, and I believe that we
are as well positioned as possible to avoid the problems that others have had.
Total commitment of management is also present for this project The department directors
most closely associated with the project (May Miller, Marty Mulholland and Sue Viseth) and I
are committed to seeing this project through to successful completion.
We are fortunate as well to have had interest earning on our bond proceeds which will allow us
to have funds to carry the project through implementation. This funding will reduce pressure
on the General Fund as we move forward with the project
It is my pleasure to recommend to you that you vote to authorize the mayor to enter into
contracts as provided for in your proposed motion. This is a major step forward for the City of
Kent, and we are anxious to get started with implementation.
KENT
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
Date: July 22,2000
To: Council Operations Committee 1^ /
From: Marty Mulholland, Director of Information Technology ! I " r �(
Re: Finance/HR/Payroll System and related Staffing
Background
As part of the Technology Plan, a number of business systems were identified for replacement
including the Finance, Human Resources and Payroll systems. The current systems are near
the end of their Irfe cycle and do not provide automated support for some key City functions.
The importance of this system decision to the City cannot be understated. This set of systems
will form the base operational systems of the entire City for the next 10 years. We will be using
these systems to manage and control hundreds of millions of dollars of budget dollars each
year, and to process payroll and benefits for members of 10 bargaining units. We'll at last be
utilizing a more modem and easier-to-use system with full support services. Our employee
population will more readily be able to access and analyze information, make decisions, and
provide better financial analyses to all of you.
I am confident that this is the best decision for these systems that we can make for the City.
We have been rigorous in this process from beginning to end. We have had some successes
in our contract negotiations in order to control costs and maximize accountability on the part of
our vendor partners. We are eager to move forward with this very important project.
Process Summary
You may recall that we presented information to Council about this project during a workshop
in March 2000. The following is a summary of the information shared at that time, with an
update of our most recent project activities.
• Comprehensive RFP released July 30, 1999 to fifty-one vendors
• Twenty-seven vendors attended pre-proposal conference August 16, 1999
• City received fifteen RFP responses representing ten software packages August 27, 1999
• The top four vendors, Bi-Tech, J.D. Edwards, Ross and SAP were provided with detailed
demonstration scripts and each vendor was scheduled for four full days of demonstrations
during October and November 1999. Over thirty-five City staff participated in the
demonstrations. Ross was removed from consideration after the demonstrations.
• Extensive reference checks took place for the top 3 vendors, along with five site visits for
the top 2 vendors.
• In late December 2000, the Project Steering Committee agreed to move forward with J.D.
Edwards as the vendor of choice. More reference checking was completed in addition to
a visit to J.D. Edwards headquarters in Denver, Colorado. In February a two day planning
session was conducted to gain a better understanding of the implementation
requirements.
• Face-to-face contract negotiations began in March 2000. Through a long and arduous
negotiation process, the City and J.D. Edwards agreement has progressed sufficiently for
us to seek Council authorization for this purchase.
• Also since March 2000,we have been working on internal planning and processes so that
many key decisions and strategies have been developed prior to the arrival of our
consultants. Some of these decision processes, such as account number design, have
taken other agencies months to complete. We are attempting to work through as many of
these process decisions as is possible prior to system training.
Project Timelines
We have several systems to implement on an estimated timeline as follows:
• General Ledger, Accounts Payable, Budget, Budget Development and Job Cost — 9
months after contract execution
• HR/Payroll—16 months after contract execution
• Purchasing, Fixed Assets,Accounts Receivable—18 months after contract execution
Budoet (Excluding Staffing)
In our presentation to you in March 2000, we estimated project costs including hardware,
database, software, and implementation services, to be approximately$3,200,000. Based on
our current figures, with a budget breakdown below, the costs are estimated at $3,045,909.
Each budget element listed below includes an appropriate contingency amount.
TUDEP o e&Co -I:nen1
Software licenses $808,288
Training, Implementation Assistance, and $1,949,945
Conversion Assistance
Hardware $190,000
Maintenance Costs $97,676.18
Project Budget (excluding staff) $3,045,909
Please note that project expenses to date have been held down to only$47,000. The above
budget will be funded from the Technology Plan.
Good News-Technology Plan Interest Income—Apply to Extend Project Staffing
We have some good news with regard to bond interest income. Because the City has not
spent the Technology Plan funds as rapidly as originally projected,the bond interest income on
those funds is approximately $875,000. This bond interest income must be spent in areas
directly related to the Technology Plan.
We therefore propose to utilize these funds to supplement the project staffing and extend
project salaries as follows, using the interest income identified above.
1. Additional positions and funding covered through mid-2002: Add 1 FTE for Information
Technology for technical programming support, 1.3 FTEs to E.S. to assist with recruiting
and benefits system development and backfill current employees, and to add one FTE for
Payroll which would spend half-time on the project and half-time assisting with existing
payroll workload.
2
2. Extend project staffing costs for existing staff through the Technical plan budget through
mid-2002.
As we talked to many JDE project teams one of the things we learned was the importance of
allowing key existing personnel to participate in the project. The recommendation was to find
funds to pay for backfill costs so that these key personnel could contribute to the new system
while still allowing key City work to be done. With regard to the added positions, we
discovered that it would be far more cost-effective to hire some of the skills to do the work
above in-house, rather than to pay for contract employees to do the same work.
Attachments:
1. Council Workshop Powerpoint Slides—March 21,2000
2. Council Workshop Presentation Report—March 21,2000
Motion—Notes:
In the motion below you'll notice that several contract components are involved. The vast
majority of software and services will be purchased from JDE. Vertex is a separate vendor
that works with the JDE software to perform tax calculations. Optio is a separate vendor and
their software is used to design and distribute forms and reports. Oracle is the database
vendor.
T�
Motions
• Move to authorize the Mayor to sign contracts with J.D. Edwards, Vertex, Optio, and
Oracle for the purchase of Finance, HR, Payroll and Project Management software suites,
related software products and implementation services, subject to City Attorney approval
of contract documents.
• Move to add $875,000 of Technology Plan bond interest income to the Technology Plan
budget to fund 3.3 positions and extend existing project salaries as specified above.
3
/A J
.ram �;;:'':��•:J:�::�:;:5; � OO � J j
U
ry
n`lyy�Yit
•
i?,?!✓�iiiii3;
U
.�. U
y
_
• :.ii:.. c<: ?E Via:�::; � O y .:>
EEO
cz
to
ct
L �.:< L.
fl
CA
Cot
W/
N U O ct
ct
C
7 r' >1
'G
tD
/� h
�I
� r
00CL
U
cn
L V]
ai c
L
>,
r::+`.�•<i`vi:: J
r_ U ::'2li�'' .n :a::x:: cn
a E o
+u:.L;::.�: •gyp C{... a:�a::#`;:•;•..;: «.� DC Q� Q� +..1
U
O
w O
U
C CC$ O O
N� N
c3
U
Rk
i
O
� 1 1
C� U O
- a O
_c�
I
Update:
Finance/HR/Payroll System
Selection
Presentation to Council
March 21, 2000
Marty Mulholland, Director of Information Services
Sue Lester, ERP Project Manager
Today's Messages
• Key decision for the city
• Rigorous selection process
• Up-to-the-minute project status
i
Finance/HR/Payroll Today
Annual Finance Annual HR Statistics Annual Payroll
Statistics - -750 regular employees Statistics
- -f100 million operating - -310 temporary - 24 pay period
budget employees - -850 paychecksitime
- -$130 million projects budget - 10 bargaining units/ sheets per pay period
- -300 capital projects employee groups - -1300 W-2s
- -190 grants - -6,000 Job applications - -210 different
- -8,000 vendors - -80 recruitments deductions
-100 new hires -80 different es of
- Over 4,500 fixed assets - - types
- Over 36,000 vendor invoices earnings
- Over 15,000 purchase orders
Finance Functions HR Functions Payroll Functions
- General Ledger - Employee Master - Employee Payroll
- Accounts Payable - Benefits Data
- Applicant Tracking - Leave Management
Budget - Position Control - Time Entry
- Accounts Receivable - Performance Evaluations - Earnings
- Purchasing - Classif7catlon'Compensadon - Deductions
- Projects and Grants - Training - Processing I
- Rxed Assets - Risk Management Calculations
- Employee Relations - Payroll History
- Revenue Recelpting - Reporting
Note: Functions in yellow and italics are currently not automated
r
Selection Process
RFP RFP Short Top
Preparation Process List Vendor
- Extensive - Sent to 51 - BI-Tech,JD Edwards, -JO Edwards is the
market research organizations Ross,SAP top vendor
- Meetings with - Encouraged tier 1 - 4 days of scripted - Conducted
vendors and tier 2 vendors to demonstrations for extensive,in-depth
- 74 city staff bid each vendor research
interviewed,all - 27 vendors at pre- - Over 35 city staff - Visited vendor
departments proposal conference participated in headquarters
- Current - 15 RFP responses demonstrations,scored - Conducted two day
business received representing vendors and provided planning session
processes defined 10 software feedback - Began contract
-Defined key packages' - Ross removed from discussions
objectives - 24 city staff consideration after - SAP and BI-Tech
- 182 page RFP involved in scoring demos still options
written -Top 4 vendors - extensive reference
selected based on checks
scores - 5 site visits to public
sector customers
'Software packages bid: Agresso,BI-Tech,Eden,JD Edwards,
Lawson Software,Oracle,PeopleSof,Ross,SAP,SCT
Why JD Edwards?
Top 7 Reasons
7 - Lower training costs compared to other products
6 - Improve decision making
5 - Improve flexibility
4 - Improve efficiency
3 - Improve responsiveness
2 - Improve accountability
1 -A good long term investment
I
Technology Plan
millions Budget Review
$12.8
$10.0
$6.8 S
Expenditures to Date Estimated Estimated
fi
Project Activities
Now �:C�Ontra �Implemeffl�atlon ��Aftation
- Contract - Software - Project team training
negotiations - Software - Software - Operations mode
- Project budget maintenance configuration and - O g support
- Training - Implementation testing of users
- ProProject staffing r New software
I 9 services - Conversion of data releases
- Infrastructure - Hardware - Report and interface
requirements development - Regulatory
- Chart of Accounts -Presented to - Redesign business changes to software
- Reporting needs - Ongoing training
Po 9 council for processes - Implement
- Interface approval - Design training
requirements program
additional features
9
- Test scripts - City staff training
- Data conventions - "Go live"
Summary
• The City needs new finance/HR/payroll systems
• These systems are very important to the city
• We have conducted a thorough, comprehensive
selection process
• We have funding to support the project
• We will be coming back to council when contract
negotiations are complete
4
City of Kent Information Services Department
FinancelH l
System Selection Project
Prepared for City Council Workshop
March 21 , 2000
By Marty Mulholland, Director of Information Services, and
Sue Lester, ERP Project Manager
We are looking forward to the opportunity to meet with you to give you an update
on this very important project. Please note that the purpose of this presentation is
to provide you with background information on the project. We are not yet
prepared to make an official purchase recommendation, but anticipate doing so
within the next few months.
Please note: In the industry Finance/HR/Payroll systems are often referred to as
"ERP Systems"for Enterprise Resource Planning systems. The term implies that
these systems touch every aspect of our agency, which will certainly be true for
the City. This system will include purchasing, timekeeping, and benefits
management modules, along with many other sub-systems that will be key tools
for moving forward in the new century!
In January Council President Orr asked Council member Tom Brotherton to serve
as a Council Liaison for this project. We have provided Tom with extensive
materials from this project and have met with him a few times. We appreciate his
interest in participating in this project and providing a Council perspective.
Thanks
I
Introduction
In April 1998 the Kent City Council accepted the City's Technology Plan. At the time of the
Plan Presentation to Council, we identified a number of systems to be replaced. We were
particularly concerned about the City's Finance/Payroll/HR Systems for a number of
reasons:
a. The Finance/Payroll software vendor declared their software to not be Year 2000
compliant, refused to provide the City with a system support contract, and
b. The City's Finance/Payroll system was considerably dated, had never been extended
to offer any amount of much-needed Human Resources functionality, and
c. The City's Flexible Benefits System,written by a third party, was also removed from a
system support contract and its Year 2000 status was uncertain.
For those reasons, the City's Technology Plan included funding to replace the existing
Finance/Payroll system and Flexible Benefits system. The lack of support mechanisms
and Year 2000 compliance was of great concern, especially since a solid system selection
and implementation project typically takes 2 — 3 years. We did not want to select and
implement such a key set of systems on an"emergency"basis.
As it turned out,we took on several efforts to resolve the status of these systems:
a. We successfully negotiated an interim support contract with a state agency called the
Center for Information Services (CIS) for the Finance/Payroll systems. The contract
hinged upon the City's agreement to test for Y21K. The agreement will only remain in
effect as long as the CIS is supporting other agencies running the same software.
b. We successfully tested the Finance/Payroll system for Year 2000. This was a long
and arduous process. We experienced many glitches and identified a few Year 2000
bugs,which were repaired by CIS prior to the Millennium Rollover weekend.
c. We also tested the Flexible Benefits system for Year 2000, and its interface to our
Payroll system. This too was an arduous process, and in the end we hired a contract
programmer to work on this project for several months.
d. We launched the Finance/HR/Payroll system selection project.
Desired System Functions:
The ideal system for the City of Kent would support the following functions:
Finance
• General Ledger
• Accounts Payable
• Budget
• Accounts Receivable'
• Purchasing'
• Projects and Grants'
Fixed Assets'
• Revenue Receipting`
Employee Services
• Employee Master
• Benefits
• Applicant Tracking'
• Position Control'
• Performance Evaluations'
• Classification/Compensation'
• Training"
• Risk Management'
• Employee Relations'
Payroll
• General
• Leave Management
• Time Entry
• Earnings
• Deductions
• Processing/Calculations
• Payroll History
• Reporting
functions not currently automated at the City
Background of the ERP Systems Market
The software market for ERP software systems is large and complex. It is helpful to be
aware of this market when going through a project of this nature.
The software industry refers to the major ERP system players as'Tier 1"vendors. These
software vendors support multi-national companies for Finance, Payroll,and HR. Some of
the vendors in this category include Oracle, Peoplesoft, and SAP. Top tier vendors
typically have the following characteristics:
• Substantial product offering/More complex systems setup
• Newer technology/Larger research and development teams
• Relatively less experience with public sector
• Often software is purchased from the software vendor, but the system is implemented
with the assistance of an Implementation vendor. Selection of this vendor can be as
important as the selection of the software.
Other software vendors are categorized as 'Tier 2" or sometimes 'Tier 3" players
depending on their size and role in the market. Some of the vendors in this category
include Bi-tech, Eden, HTE, Ross, and SCT. Characteristics of vendors in the Tier 2/3
category are as follows:
• More experience with public sector accounting
• Smaller research and development teams / Less sophisticated technology and/or
longer migration to new technology
• System is purchased from and implemented by the software vendor
• Product offering may be lacking some components
2
Please keep in mind that all of the above statements are general in nature; there is
substantial variation from one vendor to the next.
Kent's Strategy, Key Objectives
Often agencies decide ahead of time that they are going to select either Tier 1 or Tier 2
vendors.
We decided that our strategy would be an open one. We encouraged all vendors to
participate in our systems project. We indicated that we were aware of the different
market segments, were aware of the differences among the players, and would be willing
to select a Tier 1 vendor if that was the best option for the City of Kent.
Key Project Objectives
1. Vendor will have a proven track record for both software use and implementation
services for public sector organizations similar in size and complexity to the City of
Kent.
2. Vendor will be dedicated to ongoing development of and support for the proposed
solution(s).
3. Vendor will provide a solution for retirement reporting as defined by the Washington
State Department of Retirement Systems, as well as other Washington State
financial accounting and reporting requirements.
4. Proposed software will support government fund accounting, including the ability to
distribute costs directly to fund and sub-fund through payroll,accounts payable,
purchasing and journal entries.
5. Proposed software solution will be compatible with the City's technical environment.
6. Proposed software solution will have strong query, data extraction, drilldown and
reporting features.
7. Proposed software solution will allow distribution of functions out to the users
including, but not limited to, timekeeping, budget development, purchasing and
accounts receivable.
8. Proposed software solution will support a complex benefits model,with self-
enrollment features for employees.
9. Proposed software solution will provide a single point of entry for Human Resources
and Payroll data.
10. Proposed software solution is integrated to minimize interface requirements.
11. Proposed software solution will have the ability to deliver rich functionality and
usability.
Summary of Project Activities
1. Developed city requirements by interviewing staff.
2. Documented current business processes.
3. Performed research on products available.
4. Wrote a comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFP).
5. The RFP was released to vendors on July 30, 1999.
6. The City received 15 responses to the RFP.
7. The RFP responses were scored by city staff and references were checked.
8. Top four vendors were announced on September 16, 1999. They were
• J.D. Edwards,
3
• SAP,
• Bi-Tech, and
• Ross.
9. Each vendor spent four days demonstrating their product to city staff using detailed
demonstration scripts prepared by the project team. Over 35 city staff participated in
the demonstrations from October 12, 1999 through November 5, 1999 and
provided feedback to the project team.
10. On November 10,1999 the project steering committee removed Ross from
consideration.
11. Additional reference checking was performed.
12. Project team members visited reference sites during December 1999 and at the end
of February 2000:
• City of Phoenix,AZ; City of Victoria, TX and King County for SAP
• City of Culver City, CA and the City of Fort Collins,CO for JD Edwards.
13. The project steering committee made a decision on December 27, 1999 to move
ahead focusing on JD Edwards as the top vendor but not removing SAP or Bi-Tech
from official consideration.
14. Project planning and preparation continues. We met with representatives from JD
Edwards and from AMX, the proposed implementation vendor, on February 3rd and
4d', 2000 to create project scope documents which will be used to determine final
costs. These documents will also be key exhibits in the final contract.
JD Edwards
JD Edwards has been referred to as a'Tier 1 Y2"player in the industry. Their new product
is called OneWorid, and their prior product line was called World. The World product was
extensive and was highly regarded in the industry, but it was not competitive across all �^
computing platforms. OneWorld is truly a multi-platform product, and it is our belief that JD I
Edwards is now being seen as a Tier 1 player.
Washington State Public Sector Implementations of JD Edwards
• Kitsap County
• Puget Sound Transit
• King County Library System
Other Public Sector Implementations of JD Edwards
• Fort Collins, CO
• Culver City, CA
• Huntington Beach, CA
• Santa Monica, CA
• Oceanside, CA
• Moreno Valley, CA
• Douglas County, CO
• Orlando, FL
• Danbury, CT
• Washtenaw County, MI
• Sheboygan County,WI
• Outagamie County,WI
• Utah Transit Authority
4
Report on JD Edwards prepared for Fort Collins, CO
The source of the following is a 1997 report from an independent consulting fine called
TMG to the City of Fort Collins,Colorado as Fort Collins was evaluating vendors and
products for their Finance/HR/Payroll systems. TMG used a variety of industry expert
sources to prepare their report.
• Founded in 1977 J.D. Edwards is a privately held corporation that has been in
business for 20 years. As a privately held company it maintains a low-profile while
successfully developing and implementing its Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
product suite. Industry analysts note that while the company is ahead of its
competitors in many areas it does not adequately market or sell itself and its
accomplishments. As a result, in spite of its numerous strengths it has recognized a
slower growth rate than its competitors.
• Historically the high-end market serving very large enterprises has been dominated by
SAP,and PeopleSoft and to a lessor extent Oracle and Baan. The middle market has
many players with J.D. Edwards identified as a middle market leader.
• Within the middle market J.D. Edwards net revenues in 1996 totaled $478 million
which were greater than two of its high-end market competitors including PeopleSoft
at$450 million. In fact J.D. Edwards is the third largest enterprise application vendor
behind SAP and Oracle.
• J.D. Edwards provides a multi-tiered architecture with a data base server, an
applications server, a web server, and the desktop client.The architecture has
received excellent architectural and performance reviews.
• The J.D. Edwards solution is totally web-enabled allowing the deployment of Java
based applications across the Internet.
• The J.D. Edwards product suite utilizes a fully integrated and complete technology
infrastructure from the application,to the middleware,to the utilities. This means that
the City will receive a total upgrade of all solution components with every new release
of the product.
• The J.D. Edwards product is fully integrated across all subsystems from the Financials
to HR/Payroll. This is visible in drill downs, and the seamless navigation across
subsystems.
• The J.D. Edwards software features cross-validation rules within its subsystems. This
means that entries created in AP or AR,for example,will always be valid before
posting is made to the General Ledger.
• From a technology perspective the J.D. Edwards solution wins hands down. The use
of a multi-tiered architecture, an object oriented design,fully web-enabled, and a fully
integrated product design place this solution at the top of the list. Industry material
was very positive across the board with J.D. Edwards.
• J.D. Edwards provides world class administrative and financial systems with the
majority of their installations across their complete suite of products, including HR/
Payroll.
• J.D. Edwards provides best practices for specific industries including the public sector
and has embedded them into the product.
• Almost 90%of companies using J.D. Edwards would recommend their software
package, this compares to an industry average of 69%. They appear to be a well
managed company with excellent products and a loyal and happy customer base.
• Industry analysts recommend considering J.D. Edwards if you are:
> A medium sized organization;
> Looking for a complete integrated product suite(the industry term is ERP,
Enterprise Resource Planning);
> Wanting to move to client/server,
> In one of their primary target markets which includes public sector.
5
Budget
The budget for the Finance/HR/Payroll (ERP System) project will come from many areas
of the Technology Plan. My plan is to create a special project budget line item after the
purchase takes place. The special project budget will draw from a variety of areas of the
Technology Plan, including Business Systems(software).
Following is some information related to the proposals we received. We received 15
responses to our RFP and proposal costs varied substantially:
Initial costs for the 15 proposing vendors, including software purchase, installation, and
first year service costs ranged from $994,504 to$5,268,901. When we added in operating
costs for years two through five, the five year project costs (exclusive of hardware and
database licensing) ranged from $1,148,723 to$6,093,245.
Initial costs for the top 4 vendors ranged from $994,504 to $2,391,864. Five year project
costs for these vendors ranged from $1,423,991 to$2,938,518.
Please regard these figures as preliminary indicator of project costs in terms of software
and implementation costs. We are heavily engaged in contract negotiation and cost
review at this time. My estimate for FULL project costs, including hardware, database,
software and implementation is in the range of $3,200,000. This will include the initial
project costs but not the ongoing support costs for beyond the implementation phase.
Our overall Technology Plan budget was $12.8 million. Our balance as of May 14, 2000
was$6.01 million. This project has always been expected to be the single most expensive
project for the 1998—2000 Technology Plan. T
Summary
After a comprehensive system requirements and selection process,JD Edwards has
emerged as the vendor of choice for the City of Kent s Finance/HR/Payroll system.
We look forward to providing you with other details of this project along with more details
as to why JD Edwards is the vendor of choice, and a discussion of the project status at the
moment.
I
6
- Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: FINANCE/HR/PAYROLL STAFFING BUDGET - APPROVE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: To approve the addition of $875, 000 of
Technology Plan bond interest income to the Technology Plan
budget to fund 3 . 3 positions and to extend existing project
salaries as presented in the July 22nd memorandum issued by the
Information Technology Department Director, and as recommended
by the Operations Committee.
The need for a new Finance/HR/Payroll system was identified as
key element of the Technology Plan.
After a thorough selection process and an intense contract
negotiation process, the City is ready to begin implementation
of these key systems. J.D. Edwards is the primary vendor for
software and implementation services . Payroll expenses for key
City staff members working on the project have been charged to
the Technology Plan. Because the City has not spent Technology
funds as quickly as projected, approximately 1 million dollars
has been earned in bond interest income .
As part of the detailed project planning, timelines for
implementing the systems above have extended into 2002 , which
is beyond the original Technology Plan funding timeline . In
this motion, we propose to use $875 , 000 of the Technology Plan
bond interest income to fund 3 . 3 positions and extend existing
staff project salaries through mid-2002 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff summary documents and powerpoint slides from
Workshop presentation to Council
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff & Operations Committee 8/1/00 (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES X
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $875, 000
SOURCE OF FUNDS : Technology Plan Bond Interest Income
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6G
`•� KENT
ADMINISTRATION
Date: July 24,2000
To: Council Operations Committee
From: Brent McFall,Chief Administrative Officer
Re: Finance/HR/Payroll System and related Staffing
I would like to recommend that the City move forward with the purchase of a
Finance/HR/Payroll system and associated staffing allocations at this time.
This system purchase and implementation was one of the central components of the
Technology Plan for 1998 —2000. It is essential that we replace the dated systems that we
are using today so that we can position the City to operate more efficiently and also so that we
can more effectively manage growth.
We have assembled an excellent staff team to work on this project They have been working
very hard in the selection process as well as planning for implementation. They have studied
the successes and failures of other similar projects in other jurisdictions, and I believe that we
are as well positioned as possible to avoid the problems that others have had.
Total commitment of management is also present for this project The department directors
most closely associated with the project (May Miller, Marty Mulholland and Sue viseth) and I
are committed to seeing this project through to successful completion.
We are fortunate as well to have had interest eaming on our bond proceeds which will allow us
to have funds to carry the project through implementation. This funding will reduce pressure
on the General Fund as we move forward with the project
It is my pleasure to recommend to you that you vote to authorize the mayor to enter into
contracts as provided for in your proposed motion. This is a major step forward for the City of
Kent, and we are anxious to get started with implementation.
KE0 T
WA9NINGIGN
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
Date: July 22,2000
To: Council Operations Committee I^ /
From: Marty Mulholland, Director of Information Technology r �(
Re: Finance/HR/Payroll System and related Staffing
Background
As part of the Technology Plan, a number of business systems were identified for replacement
including the Finance, Human Resources and Payroll systems. The current systems are near
the end of their life cycle and do not provide automated support for some key City functions.
The importance of this system decision to the City cannot be understated. This set of systems
will form the base operational systems of the entire City for the next 10 years. We will be using
these systems to manage and control hundreds of millions of dollars of budget dollars each
year, and to process payroll and benefits for members of 10 bargaining units. We'll at last be
utilizing a more modem and easier-to-use system with full support services. Our employee
population will more readily be able to access and analyze information, make decisions, and
provide better financial analyses to all of you.
1 am confident that this is the best decision for these systems that we can make for the City.
We have been rigorous in this process from beginning to end. We have had some successes
in our contract negotiations in order to control costs and maximize accountability on the part of
our vendor partners. We are eager to move forward with this very important project.
Process Summary
You may recall that we presented information to Council about this project during a workshop
in March 2000. The following is a summary of the information shared at that time, with an
update of our most recent project activities.
• Comprehensive RFP released July 30, 1999 to fifty-one vendors
• Twenty-seven vendors attended pre-proposal conference August 16, 1999
• City received fifteen RFP responses representing ten software packages August 27, 1999
• The top four vendors, Bi-Tech, J.D. Edwards, Ross and SAP were provided with detailed
demonstration scripts and each vendor was scheduled for four full days of demonstrations
during October and November 1999. Over thirty-five City staff participated in the
demonstrations. Ross was removed from consideration after the demonstrations.
• Extensive reference checks took place for the top 3 vendors, along with five site visits for
the top 2 vendors.
• In late December 2000, the Project Steering Committee agreed to move forward with J.D.
Edwards as the vendor of choice. More reference checking was completed in addition to
a visit to J.D. Edwards headquarters in Denver, Colorado. In February a two day planning
session was conducted to gain a better understanding of the implementation
requirements.
f
• Face-to-face contract negotiations began in March 2000. Through a long and arduous
negotiation process, the City and J.D. Edwards agreement has progressed sufficiently for
us to seek Council authorization for this purchase.
• Also since March 2000, we have been working on internal planning and processes so that
many key decisions and strategies have been developed prior to the arrival of our
consultants. Some of these decision processes, such as account number design, have
taken other agencies months to complete. We are attempting to work through as many of
these process decisions as is possible prior to system training.
Proiect Timelines
We have several systems to implement on an estimated timeline as follows:
• General Ledger, Accounts Payable, Budget, Budget Development and Job Cost — 9
months after contract execution
• HR/Payroll—16 months after contract execution
• Purchasing, Fixed Assets, Accounts Receivable—18 months after contract execution
Budget (Excluding Staffing)
In our presentation to you in March 2000, we estimated project costs including hardware,
database, software, and implementation services,to be approximately$3,200,000. Based on
our current figures, with a budget breakdown below, the costs are estimated at $3,045,909.
Each budget element listed below includes an appropriate contingency amount.
Software licenses $808,288
Training, Implementation Assistance, and $1,949,945
Conversion Assistance
Hardware $190,000
Maintenance Costs $97,676.18
Project Budget (excluding staff $3,045,909
Please note that project expenses to date have been held down to only$47,000. The above
budget will be funded from the Technology Plan.
Good News-Technology Plan Interest Income—Apply to Extend Project Staffing
We have some good news with regard to bond interest income. Because the City has not
spent the Technology Plan funds as rapidly as originally projected,the bond interest income on
those funds is approximately $875,000. This bond interest income must be spent in areas
directly related to the Technology Plan.
We therefore propose to utilize these funds to supplement the project staffing and extend
project salaries as follows, using the interest income identified above.
1. Additional positions and funding covered through mid-2002: Add 1 FTE for Information
Technology for technical programming support, 1.3 FTEs to E.S. to assist with recruiting
and benefits system development and backfill current employees, and to add one FTE for
Payroll which would spend half-time on the project and half-time assisting with existing
payroll workload.
2
2. Extend project staffing costs for existing staff through the Technical plan budget through
mid-2002.
As we talked to many JDE project teams one of the things we learned was the importance of
allowing key existing personnel to participate in the project. The recommendation was to find
funds to pay for backf ill costs so that these key personnel could contribute to the new system
while still allowing key City work to be done. With regard to the added positions, we
discovered that it would be far more cost-effective to hire some of the skills to do the work
above in-house, rather than to pay for contract employees to do the same work.
Attachments:
1. Council Workshop Powerpoint Slides—March 21, 2000
2. Council Workshop Presentation Report—March 21,2000
Motion—Notes:
In the motion below you'll notice that several contract components are involved. The vast
majority of software and services will be purchased from JDE. Vertex is a separate vendor
that works with the JDE software to perform tax calculations. Optio is a separate vendor and
their software is used to design and distribute forms and reports. Oracle is the database
vendor.
Motions
• Move to authorize the Mayor to sign contracts with J.D. Edwards, Vertex, Optfo, and
Oracle for the purchase of Finance, HR, Payroll and Project Management software suites,
related software products and implementation services, subject to City Attorney approval
of contract documents.
• Move to add $875,000 of Technology Plan bond interest income to the Technology Plan
budget to fund 3.3 positions and extend existing project salaries as specified above.
3
�•I /�.��
L
A, v
W/
E"r -• � Za.
y
^y '.:;Zvi?T � Q:j\:i�:l\:tiY`1}`.:'•i O W �i /�
•1�1 Qr i SEi? i3'ii i :.iii ::.::: ,: ?� C-'
oS.S.
NOIR
Oil
cz
O C GC
A C U 1.Ow bo
�1 'a�'�i' `• M F. [1r
o to ; ggc O. O
\\.*'A _y: Q. /J / ::y:i':^. v,`.:j� W �y ��I O p C/J
O `Q'Cie RRcn
to
C�.: N A::.+:r`. S >Qa,,�' v " }.•�r y U
CQ ... . ::x:<;.. .k.
C� b
rn
Ocu
t`A.4t:ik> ::i . \..�..a:�!L2: 1 O U ftS
�•/ :ft^c::..:i:`.". -, oho O, =
Ow
CD CC
CIO
rA
CIO
cn
LZ
In
� � 1
;<; *,
Update:
Finance/HR/Payroll System
Selection
Presentation to Council
March 21, 2000
Marty Mulholland, Director of Information Services
Sue Lester, ERP Project Manager
Today's Messages
• Key decision for the city
• Rigorous selection process
• Up-to-the-minute project status
i
Finance/HR/Payroll Today
Annual Finance Annual HR Statistics Annual Payroll
Statistics - -750 regular employees Statistics
- -$100 million operating - -310 temporary - 24 pay period
budget employees - -850 paychecksttime
- -$130 million projects budget - 10 bargaining units/ sheets per pay period
- -300 capital projects employee groups - -1300 W-2s
- -190 grants - -BAOO job applications - -210 different
- -8,000 vendors - -80 recruitments deductions
- Over 4,500 fixed assets - -100 new hires - -80 different types of
- Over 36,000 vendor invoices earnings
- Over 15,000 purchase orders
Finance Functions HR Functions Payroll Functions
- General Ledger - Employee Master - Employee Payroll
- Accounts Payable - Benefits Data
- Budget - Applicant Tracking - Leave Management
g - Position Control - Time Entry
- Accounts Receivable - Performance Evaluations - Earnings
- Purchasing - ClassMcaffoNCompensatfon - Deductions
- Projects and Grants - Training - Processing i
- Fixed Assets - Risk Management Calculations
- Employee Relations - Payroll History
- Revenue Receipting - Reporting
Note: Functions In yellow and italics are currently not automated
Selection Process
RFP RFP Short Top
Preparation Process List Vendor
- Extensive - Sent to 51 - BI-Tech,JD Edwards, -JD Edwards is the
market research organizations Ross,SAP top vendor
- Meetings with - Encouraged tier 1 - 4 days of scripted - Conducted
vendors and tier 2 vendors to demonstrations for extensive,in-depth
- 74 city staff bid each vendor research
interviewed,all - 27 vendors at pre- - Over 35 city staff - Visited vendor
departments proposal conference participated in headquarters
- Current - 15 RFP responses demonstrations,scored - Conducted two day
business received representing vendors and provided planning session
processes defined 10 software feedback - Began contract
-Defined key packages' - Ross removed from discussions
objectives - 24 city staff consideration after - SAP and BI-Tech
- 182 page RFP involved In scoring demos still options
written -Top 4 vendors - extensive reference
selected based on checks
scores - 5 site visits to public
sector customers
'Software packages bid: Agresso,BI-Tech,Eden,JD Edwards,
Lawson Software,Oracle,PeopleSoft,Ross,SAP,SCT -
Why JD Edwards?
Top 7 Reasons
7 - Lower training costs compared to other products
6 - Improve decision making
5 - Improve flexibility
4 - Improve efficiency
3 - Improve responsiveness
2 - Improve accountability
1 -A good long term investment
Technology Plan
millions Budget Review
$12.8
$10.0
$6.8
Expenditures to Date Estimated Estimated
3
Project Activities
LNow �Con�tmcts Implementation After
Implementation
- Contract - Software - Project team training _ Operations mode
negotiations - Software - Software - On-going support
- Project budget maintenance configuration and of users
- Training - Implementation testing
- Project staffing services - Conversion of data releases
Now software
- Infrastructure r
Hardware - Report and Interface _ Regulatory
requirements development
changes to software
- Chart of Accounts -Presented to - Redesign business
- Reporting needs - Ongoing training
Po 9 council for processes
- Interface approval - Design training - Implement
requirements program additional features
- Test scripts - City staff training
- Data conversions - "Go live'
Summary
• The City needs new finance/HR/payroll systems
• These systems are very important to the city
• We have conducted a thorough, comprehensive
selection process
• We have funding to support the project
• We will be coming back to council when contract
negotiations are complete
4
City of Kent Information Services Department
FinammiHWayrnll
System Selection P
Prepared for City Council Workshop
March 219 2"
By Marty Mulholland, Director of Information Services, and /
Sue Lester, ERP Project Manager
We are looking forward to the opportunity to meet with you to give you an update
on this very important project. Please note that the purpose of this presentation is
to provide you with background information on the project. We are not yet
prepared to make an official purchase recommendation, but anticipate doing so
within the next few months.
Please note: In the industry Finance/HR/Payroll systems are often referred to as
"ERP Systems"for Enterprise Resource Planning systems. The term implies that
these systems touch every aspect of our agency, which will certainly be true for
the City. This system will include purchasing, timekeeping, and benefits
management modules, along with many other sub-systems that will be key tools
for moving forward in the new century!
In January Council President Orr asked Council member Tom Brotherton to serve
as a Council Liaison for this project. We have provided Tom with extensive
materials from this project and have met with him a few times. We appreciate his
interest in participating in this project and providing a Council perspective.
Thanks
Introduction
In April 1998 the Kent City Council accepted the Ci y's Technology Plan. At the time of the
Plan Presentation to Council, we identified a number of systems to be replaced. We were
particularly concerned about the City's Finance/Payroll/HR Systems for a number of
reasons:
a. The Finance/Payroll software vendor declared their software to not be Year 2000
compliant, refused to provide the City with a system support contract, and
b. The City's Finance/Payroll system was considerably dated, had never been extended
to offer any amount of much-needed Human Resources functionality, and
c. The City's Flexible Benefits System,written by a third party,was also removed from a
system support contract and its Year 2000 status was uncertain.
For those reasons, the City's Technology Plan included funding to replace the existing
Finance/Payroll system and Flexible Benefits system. The lack of support mechanisms
and Year 2000 compliance was of great concern,especially since a solid system selection
and implementation project typically takes 2 — 3 years. We did not want to select and
implement such a key set of systems on an"emergency'basis.
As it turned out,we took on several efforts to resolve the status of these systems:
a. We successfully negotiated an interim support contract with a state agency called the
Center for Information Services (CIS) for the Finance/Payroll systems. The contract
hinged upon the City's agreement to test for Y2K. The agreement will only remain in
effect as long as the CIS is supporting other agencies running the same software.
b. We successfully tested the Finance/Payroll system for Year 2000. This was a long
and arduous process. We experienced many glitches and identified a few Year 2000
bugs,which were repaired by CIS prior to the Millennium Rollover weekend.
c. We also tested the Flexible Benefits system for Year 2000, and its interface to our
Payroll system. This too was an arduous process, and in the end we hired a contract
programmer to work on this project for several months.
d. We launched the Finance/HR/Payroll system selection project.
Desired System Functions:
The ideal system for the City of Kent would support the following functions:
Finance
• General Ledger
• Accounts Payable
• Budget
• Accounts Receivable'
Purchasing'
• Projects and Grants'
0 Fixed Assets'
Revenue Receipting'
1
Employee Services
• Employee Master
• Benefits
• Applicant Tracking'
• Position Control`
• Performance Evaluations'
• Classification/Compensation'
• Training'
• Risk Management'
• Employee Relations'
Payroll
• General
• Leave Management
• Time Entry
• Earnings
• Deductions
• Processing/Calculations
• Payroll History
• Reporting
functions not currently automated at the City
Background of the ERP Systems Market
The software market for ERP software systems is large and complex. It is helpful to be
aware of this market when going through a project of this nature.
The software industry refers to the major ERP system players as'Tier 1"vendors. These
software vendors support multi-national companies for Finance, Payroll,and HR. Some of
the vendors in this category include Oracle, Peoplesoft, and SAP. Top tier vendors
typically have the following characteristics:
• Substantial product offering/More complex systems setup
• Newer technology/Larger research and development teams
• Relatively less experience with public sector
• Often software is purchased from the software vendor, but the system is implemented
with the assistance of an Implementation vendor. Selection of this vendor can be as
important as the selection of the software.
Other software vendors are categorized as 'Tier 2" or sometimes 'Tier 3" players
depending on their size and role in the market. Some of the vendors in this category
include Bi-tech, Eden, HTE, Ross, and SCT. Characteristics of vendors in the Tier 2/3
category are as follows:
• More experience with public sector accounting
• Smaller research and development teams / Less sophisticated technology and/or
longer migration to new technology
• System is purchased from and implemented by the software vendor
• Product offering may be lacking some components
2
Please keep in mind that all of the above statements are general in nature; there is
substantial variation from one vendor to the next.
Kent's Strategy, Key Objectives
Often agencies decide ahead of time that they are going to select either Tier 1 or Tier 2
vendors.
We decided that our strategy would be an open one. We encouraged all vendors to
participate in our systems project. We indicated that we were aware of the different
market segments,were aware of the differences among the players, and would be willing
to select a Tier 1 vendor if that was the best option for the City of Kent.
Key Pmiect Objectives
1. Vendor will have a proven track record for both software use and implementation
services for public sector organizations similar in size and complexity to the City of
Kent.
2. Vendor will be dedicated to ongoing development of and support for the proposed
solution(s).
3. Vendor will provide a solution for retirement reporting as defined by the Washington
State Department of Retirement Systems, as well as other Washington State
financial accounting and reporting requirements.
4. Proposed software will support government fund accounting, including the ability to
distribute costs directly to fund and sub-fund through payroll,accounts payable,
purchasing and journal entries.
5. Proposed software solution will be compatible with the City's technical environment.
6. Proposed software solution will have strong query, data extraction,drilldown and
reporting features.
7. Proposed software solution will allow distribution of functions out to the users
including, but not limited to, timekeeping, budget development, purchasing and
accounts receivable.
8. Proposed software solution will support a complex benefits model,with self-
enrollment features for employees.
9. Proposed software solution will provide a single point of entry for Human Resources
and Payroll data.
10. Proposed software solution is integrated to minimize interface requirements.
11. Proposed software solution will have the ability to deliver rich functionality and
usability.
Summary of Project Activities
1. Developed city requirements by interviewing staff.
2. Documented current business processes.
3. Performed research on products available.
4. Wrote a comprehensive Request for Proposals(RFP).
5. The RFP was released to vendors on July 30,1999.
6. The City received 15 responses to the RFP.
7. The RFP responses were scored by city staff and references were checked.
8. Top four vendors were announced on September 16, 1999. They were
• J.D. Edwards,
3
• SAP,
• Bi-Tech,and
• Ross.
9. Each vendor spent four days demonstrating their product to city staff using detailed
demonstration scripts prepared by the project team. Over 35 city staff participated in
the demonstrations from October 12, 1999 through November 5, 1999 and
provided feedback to the project team.
10. On November 10, 1999 the project steering committee removed Ross from
consideration.
11. Additional reference checking was performed.
12. Project team members visited reference sites during December 1999 and at the end
of February 2000:
• City of Phoenix,AZ; City of Victoria,TX and King County for SAP
• City of Culver City, CA and the City of Fort Collins,CO for JD Edwards.
13. The project steering committee made a decision on December 27, 1999 to move
ahead focusing on JD Edwards as the top vendor but not removing SAP or Bi-Tech
from official consideration.
14. Project planning and preparation continues. We met with representatives from JD
Edwards and from AMX,the proposed implementation vendor, on February 3Id and
4"',2000 to create project scope documents which will be used to determine final
costs. These documents will also be key exhibits in the final contract.
JD Edwards
JD Edwards has been referred to as a'Tier 1 Yz"player in the industry. Their new product
is called OneWorld, and their prior product line was called World. The World product was
extensive and was highly regarded in the industry, but it was not competitive across all
computing platforms. OneWorld is truly a multi-platform product,and it is our belief that JD
Edwards is now being seen as a Tier 1 player.
Washington State Public Sector Implementations of JD Edwards
• Kitsap County
• Puget Sound Transit
• King County Library System
Other Public Sector Implementations of JD Edwards
• Fort Collins, CO
• Culver City, CA
• Huntington Beach, CA
• Santa Monica, CA
• Oceanside, CA
• Moreno Valley,CA
• Douglas County, CO
• Orlando, FL
• Danbury, CT
• Washtenaw County, MI
• Sheboygan County, WI
• Outagamie County, WI
• Utah Transit Authority
4
-� Report on JD Edwards prepared for Fort Collins, CO
The source of the following is a 1997 report from an independent consulting firm called
TMG to the City of Fort Collins,Colorado as Fort Collins was evaluating vendors and
products for their Finance/HR/Payroll systems. TMG used a variety of industry expert
sources to prepare their report.
• Founded in 1977 J.D. Edwards is a privately held corporation that has been in
business for 20 years. As a privately held company it maintains a low-profile while
successfully developing and implementing its Enterprise Resource Planning(ERP)
product suite. Industry analysts note that while the company is ahead of its
competitors in many areas it does not adequately market or sell itself and its
accomplishments. As a result, in spite of its numerous strengths it has recognized a
slower growth rate than its competitors.
• Historically the high-end market serving very large enterprises has been dominated by
SAP, and PeopleSoft and to a lessor extent Oracle and Baan. The middle market has
many players with J.D. Edwards identified as a middle market leader.
• Within the middle market J.D. Edwards net revenues in 1996 totaled$478 million
which were greater than two of its high-end market competitors including PeopleSoft
at$450 million. In fact J.D. Edwards is the third largest enterprise application vendor
behind SAP and Oracle.
• J.D. Edwards provides a multi-tiered architecture with a data base server, an
applications server, a web server, and the desktop client.The architecture has
received excellent architectural and performance reviews.
• The J.D. Edwards solution is totally web-enabled allowing the deployment of Java
based applications across the Internet.
• The J.D. Edwards product suite utilizes a fully integrated and complete technology
infrastructure from the application,to the middleware,to the utilities. This means that
the City will receive a total upgrade of all solution components with every new release
of the product.
• The J.D. Edwards product is fully integrated across all subsystems from the Financials
to HR/Payroll. This is visible in drill downs,and the seamless navigation across
subsystems.
• The J.D. Edwards software features cross-validation rules within its subsystems. This
means that entries created in AP or AR,for example,will always be valid before
posting is made to the General Ledger.
• From a technology perspective the J.D. Edwards solution wins hands down. The use
of a multi-tiered architecture,an object oriented design,fully web-enabled,and a fully
integrated product design place this solution at the top of the list. Industry material
was very positive across the board with J.D. Edwards.
• J.D. Edwards provides world class administrative and financial systems with the
majority of their installations across their complete suite of products, including HR!
Payroll.
• J.D. Edwards provides best practices for specific industries including the public sector
and has embedded them into the product.
• Almost 90%of companies using J.D. Edwards would recommend their software
package,this compares to an industry average of 69%. They appear to be a well
managed company with excellent products and a loyal and happy customer base.
• Industry analysts recommend considering J.D. Edwards if you are:
> A medium sized organization;
> Looking for a complete integrated product suite(the industry term is ERP,
Enterprise Resource Planning);
Wanting to move to client/server;
> In one of their primary target markets which includes public sector.
5
Budget
The budget for the Finance/HR/Payroll (ERP System) project will come from many areas
of the Technology Plan. My plan is to create a special project budget line item after the
purchase takes place. The special project budget will draw from a variety of areas of the
Technology Plan, including Business Systems (software).
Following is some information related to the proposals we received. We received 15
responses to our RFP and proposal costs varied substantially:
Initial costs for the 15 proposing vendors, including software purchase, installation, and
first year service costs ranged from $994,504 to$5,268,901. When we added in operating
costs for years two through five, the five year project costs (exclusive of hardware and
database licensing)ranged from $1,148,723 to$6,093,245.
Initial costs for the top 4 vendors ranged from $994,504 to $2,391,864. Five year project
costs for these vendors ranged from$1,423,991 to$2,938,518.
Please regard these figures as preliminary indicator of project costs in terms of software
and implementation costs. We are heavily engaged in contract negotiation and cost
review at this time. My estimate for FULL project costs, including hardware, database,
software and implementation is in the range of $3,200,000. This will include the initial
project costs but not the ongoing support costs for beyond the implementation phase.
Our overall Technology Plan budget was $12.8 million. Our balance as of May 14, 2000
was$6.01 million. This project has always been expected to be the single most expensive
project for the 1998—2000 Technology Plan.
Summary
After a comprehensive system requirements and selection process,JD Edwards has
emerged as the vendor of choice for the City of Kent's Finance/HR/Payroll system.
We look forward to providing you with other details of this project along with more details
as to why JD Edwards is the vendor of choice,and a discussion of the project status at the
moment.
6
Wyk
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: 2000 LTGO BOND ISSUE - APPROVE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Operations
Committee, authorization to : (1) proceed with the issuance of
Councilmanic Bonds of $11, 220, 000, plus bond issuance costs;
(2) establish and/or amend the necessary budgets for the
projects, debt issuance costs, and debt service as outlined;
and (3) proceed with bond projects with intent to reimburse
with bond proceeds .
The proceeds are to fund projects falling into two main
categories : Land and Buildings, Tenant/Space and Major Capital
Improvements, and Fire Equipment as outlined on the following
pages . It is important to note that the debt service will not
require any new taxes . The debt service payments are already
budgeted using existing sales, hotel/motel , and excise taxes.
The City' s high credit rating and, therefore, favorable
interest rates, will allow the City to provide cost effective
funding for several major projects, while keeping financing
costs at a minimum. The Operations Committee recommended
approval at their August 1, 2000 meeting.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from May Miller, Finance Director
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES X
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6H
Is
•
KEN T
WASHINGTON
DATE: July 26, 2000
TO: Mayor White and City Councilmembers
FINANCE
May Miller FROM: May Miller, Finance Director
Director C
Phone: 253-856-5260 SUBJECT: Proceed with 2000 LTGO Bond Issue \
Fax: 253-856-6255
220 Fourth Ave. S. We are requesting authorization to proceed with our planned 2000 Councilmanic
Kent, WA 98032-5895 bond issue. We had been waiting to confirm that the Light Rail Parking Garage
Project was ready to go and that Sound Transit had their portion approved. The
agreement has been reached with Sound Transit. The first payment is due at the
time of permit issuance later this year. Sound Transit will build and own the
garage, and will be responsible for the maintenance and operating costs.
The bonds had been planned for$1 1,449,000 plus issuance and we are requesting
that this be reduced to $11,220,000 plus issuance costs.
We are requesting some adjustments to the project. We are not requesting
additional corridor bonds at this time but will be utilizing previously issued
corridor bonds and reallocating some corridor projects. Instead,we would like to
add two additional items:
First, we will need approximately$1,000,000 to complete the land purchase
needed for the planned police headquarters. The original budget was developed
several years ago and both additional acreage due to a more refined space study
and the cost of land in downtown Kent are responsible for the needed funds.
Second, we would like to add $1,140,000 to replace two fully equipped engine/aid
apparatus that were rejected and returned to the vendor in the first quarter of 2000.
Our Legal Department will be working to recover funds but this could take quite a
while and we must proceed to replace these apparatus. We have examined leasing
or lease/purchase options but it is more cost effective at this time to bond at the
lower interest rate. We will continue to explore the lease and other options as we
replace other pieces of fire equipment. Any recovery of funds would be placed in
our ongoing replacement fund to offset future replacement. This unexpected return
of apparatus was not planned and exceeds replacement funds available.
The final two items are the issuance of bonds for the Performing Arts/Civic Center
land as approved by Council on April 20, 1999. This will provide the $2,215,780
needed to repay the Water Fund for their short-term loan, which includes
approximately $170,000 interest due as well as provide funds to purchase the final
piece of land. Lodging tax has and will be used to offset a portion of the Interest
and Debt Service payments.
The final piece is $2,586,000, primarily for the Centennial remodel for the Permit Center and the other
Centennial relocation such as moving Planning to the third floor. This also includes $1,400,000 for the
back up generator project including the additional costs that were approved by Council February 1, 2000.
The process to plan, review and finally authorize the issuance of councilmanic bonds has several steps.
Council has been exposed to and approved most of the proposed projects through the Capital
Improvement Program and annual budget processes. Most projects have already been approved by
Council with intent to bond. The step today is to get the approval to proceed with bond issuance. Pulling
all the pieces together into one issue will save debt issuance costs. The next step, expected to go to the
Operations Committee September 5 and to Council on September 19, is to finalize the bond sizing,
including interest rates, issuance costs and bond sale contracts. Once this is completed, we would receive
the bond proceeds in October 2000.
We recommend issuing bonds totaling $11,220,000, plus bond issuance costs. The proceeds are to fund
projects falling into two main categories: land and Buildings, Tenant/Space and Major Capital
improvements,and Fire Equipment as outlined on the attached pages.
It is important to note that the debt service will not require any new taxes. The debt service payments are
already budgeted using existing sales, hotel/motel, and excise taxes. The City's high credit rating and,
therefore, favorable interest rates, will allow the City to provide cost effective funding for several major
projects, while keeping financing costs at a minimum. I am available anytime at 856-5260 or at the
Operations Committee meeting to discuss the process and current market conditions, as well as answer
any questions.
COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Proceed with the issuance of Councilmanic Bonds of$1 1.220,000 plus bond issuance costs.
2. Establish and/or amend the necessary budgets for the projects, debt issuance costs and debt service
as outlined.
3. Authorization to proceed with bond projects with intent to reimburse with bond proceeds.
U.Ilois's RIes0000Q000 LTGO Bond Issue.dm
City of Kent
2000 LTGO Bond Issue Summary
as of July 25, 2000
Original Total 2000
Proposal Adjustment Bonds Required
Parking Garage 4,000,000 (1) 4,000,000
Performing Arts/Civic Center Land 2,500,000 (2) 2,500,000
Street Corridor Projects 2,949,000 (2,949,000) (3) -0-
Facilities Remodel & Back-up Generators 2,000,000 580,000 (4) 2,580,000
Subtotal-previously approved projects 11,449,000 (2,369,000) 9,080,000
Police Headquarters- Land 1,000,000 (5) 1,000,000
Replace two Fire Engine/Aid Trucks 1,140,000 (6) 1,140,000
Subtotal-additional projects - 2,140,000 2,140,000
Total 2000 Bond Issues Required 11,"9,000 (229,000) 11,220,000
(1) City's share of Light Rail parking garage authorized by Council on May 5, 1998.
(2) Land purchase and intent to bond approved by Council on April 20, 1999. Bond proceeds will be used to reimburse Water
Fund$2,215,780, which includes$170,000 interest, and purchase additional required land. Debt service will be partially
paid by Lodging Tax revenue.
(3) New bonds for corridor projects will not be required at this time as we can utilize previous bond proceeds and other project
reallocations.
(4) Remodel costs are primarily for the Permit Center in the Centennial Building and include other Centennial relocations and
City Hall back-fill. The primary increase is for additional generator costs as approved by Council on February 1, 2000.
(5) Additional funds needed to complete the purchase of Police Headquarters land in downtown area.
(6) Fund two fully-equipped Fire engine/aid apparatuses to replace those rejected and returned to the vendor in the first
quarter of 2000.
City of Kent
Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2000
Preliminary Financing Schedule
July 24, 2000
July Augu l September CeMber
a a { 7 I
1 1 e { 10 11 17 7 1 i e 1 { 0 { 1 a 11 @ 1a u
p 11 /7 10 1/ 17 1 11 I1! iM 11 N a 1S to A N A a 1,11a t{ T 7t 7+ a a a/ a a a ,7 td_. tl 4.1.* a a a 12 7! a, a of n a a a b 3t r al 'j 9 : 'D a a a0 a a „
Date 'Tits&• ReSPSIT111biliQ15.`
7124 Distribute Proposed Financing Schedule LB
7/27 Distribute Structural Project Description to FP&S and to PC City and LB
911 Operations Committee Meeting City
Authorization to Proceed
814 Distribute Draft Bond Ordinance FP&S
9110 Distribute Draft POS PC
8115 City Council Meeting City
8/16 Revise POS PC
911 Distribute Revised POS and Legal Docs to Rating Agencies and City and LB
Bond Insurers
915 Operators Committee Meeting;Review Draft Bond Ordinance and City
Bond Purchase Contract
9/9 Finalize,Print and Distribute POS LB
9/14 Receive Ratings and Bond Insurance Commitments City and LB
9/18 Price and Market Bonds LB
9/18-9119 Finalize Purchase Contract and Legal Docs LB and FP&S
9119 City Council Meeting All
• Consider and Adopt Bond Ordinance
Consider and execute Purchase Contract
9/20-9/24 Finalize and Distribute Final Official Statement PC;All
10/10 Closing and Delivery of Proceeds and Bonds All
Key
City - City of Kent(Jrsuer)
FP&S - Foster Pepper& Shefelman(Bond Counsel)
LB Lehman Brothers (Underwriter)
PC - Perkins Coie(Underwriter's Counsel)
�/�
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: SOOS CREEK EASEMENT - AUTHORIZE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, authorization for the Mayor to sign the Soos Creek
Water & Sewer Easement agreement for the purpose of a sanitary
sewer installation for the Tahoma School District .
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
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 7, 2000
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom
SUBJECT: Soos Creel: — Easement Agreement
We are in receipt of an easement agreement from Soos Creek Water and Sewer
District. They are requesting this easement from the City for the purpose of a
sanitary sewer installation for the Tahoma School District. The City owned property
that said easement is requested on is part of the City's Clark Springs watershed
property, which is located near Kent Kangley Highway and Summit Landsburg Road.
The sewer facilities and the new school are located down stream of our water intake
facilities and as such will not have any impact on our water source.
MOTION: Recommend authorization for the Mayor to sign the easement
agreement with Soos CreekWater S: Sewer District.
NInzo-2
/ . z
09
r
N LLA
4I to 4 i QG
4Ac.
322.;S±
KEN7 of
,p
52
`b�hoh
•„ h2
J
u � b
� a
1 H
I w
l
+ 3 2
W �N
U
� j 1
y
T.
c� I K�u� ✓�C�eY �1zo R Q.r.z�t2s.o+ Nam$.7
ASSESSOR'S MAP
SEE 688 MAP
18-741
A B D E
S[� Sp�15,'; �� Q SE 2)DTH
251 ST ST 1 St rbrx
4A '04r z
r
4 6� .
CFDgR — SF sF ass o
<
SE 239�
r 9 s a ?1 a
Si SF NON ST �
.,A z sr r
I14 �r NMI Si s v i E 2ND
Z 1 I IY 15100 1 20
2uTH—
22 sc ^:.en�i~" S cl; pt
+sere ti� 23;J`��CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE
S
�31
' s
R SE W
a -
WW
i I 2r5TH nna SE x6soo SUMII LANDS
L ERfJESS
4 Isl- � I"Y le lV ,^. 9� e,9. SE 256TH Si ,
rSE 258TM Sr NDSBU0.G r� 5[258T4-
_SE~.MN o[ zl I B SE
SE 260re S' SC_260?r — sn <I r C
." 4 1.� 326i SE oa2x dl i 4UiLL1
25 N N
' SE 27 r ig r rn
s INrw n ". 2Nnr r[ SE 2¢ETH_m—sr�— _ SE 261Tw
5[265iH r[^1f O`.(m .y[F n,___CDW/fR Y 'T40TECT--,q��
ypsawc
NGIEY RD
•
• . "A N� cc• K NT s�,
SE 268TH $T
u., „� � SUS MIT E----
i = a,
QxJ SE 271ST S
C
,aa a :n rt F P E71 ry rS
KENT
DAP1V LL ' E E
G 2761 = $iaxF
s< CQf/iSf �i Z
�JY rlfn 1r ' �JF Ni J I _'
2im0 6E � 2B0 , • 5, � .'I.: ...;-�afaS�`` 6 � RAVENS f A L E
a Hs
ST
Ir' S � •\�9 �' �.
M1I
sEE 748 MAP
�Z"
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: KING COUNTY WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING GRANT -
AUTHORIZE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, authorization for the Mayor to sign the King County
Waste Reduction & Recycling Grant agreement, direct staff to
accept the grant and establish a budget in the amount of
$41, 733 . 00 . This program provides funding to further the
development and/or enhancement of local waste reduction and
recycling projects.
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
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 7, 2000
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wicicstrom D
SUBJECT: IGng County Waste Reduction & Recycling Grant
Interlocal Agreement D29087D
The Public Works Department has received a grant agreement for the IGng County
Waste Reduction &Recycling Grant program. This program provides funding to
further the development and/or enhancement of local waste reduction and recycling
project. Grant funding is available to all IGng County suburban cities that operate
under the IGng County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan.
The total amount of funds available from this grant are $41,733.00.
MOTION: Recommend authorizing the Mayor to sign the grant agreement, direct
staff to accept the grant and establish a budget in the amount of $41,733.00.
NIP2041
CONTRACT # D 29087 D
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
Between
KING COUNTY and the CITY OF KENT
This Interlocal Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement) is executed between King County, a
political subdivision of the State of Washington, and the City of Kent, a municipal corporation of the
State of Washington, hereinafter referred to as "County" and "City" respectively.
This Agreement has been authorized by the legislative body of each party as designated below:
King County Motion No. 10965
City
PREAMBLE
King County and the City of Kent adopted the King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management
Plan, which includes recycling and waste reduction goals. In order to help meet these goals, the King
County Solid Waste Division has established a waste reduction and recycling grant program for the
suburban cities. This program provides funding to further the development and/or enhancement of local
waste reduction and recycling projects.
Grant funding is available to all King County suburban cities that operate under the King County
Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. The City will spend its grant funds to fulfill the terns
and conditions set forth in the scope of work which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by reference. The County expects that any information and/or experience gained through the grant
program by the City will be generously shared with the County and the other suburban cities.
L PURPOSE
The purpose of this Agreement is to define the terns and conditions for funding to be provided to the City
of Kent from the County for waste reduction and recycling programs and/or services as outlined in the
scope of work and budget attached as Exhibit A.
1
II. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES I^�
The responsibilities of the parties to this Agreement shall be as follows:
A. The City
1. Funds provided to the City by the County pursuant to this Agreement shall be used to provide
waste reduction and recycling programs and/or services as outlined in Exhibit A. The total
amount of funds available from this grant shall not exceed $41,733.00.
2. The City will submit quarterly reports to the County in a format specified by the County. These
reports will include: a) a description of each activity accomplished in the previous quarter as
pertains to the scope of work; and b)reimbursement requests with copies of invoices and
statements for each expenditure for which reimbursement is requested.
These reports shall be submitted to the County fifteen days after the end of each calendar quarter:
(1) first quarter reports are due by April 15; (2) second quarter reports are due by July 15;
(3) third quarter reports are due by October 15; and (4) fourth quarter reports are due by
January 15.
3. The City will submit a final report to the County which summarizes the work completed under the
grant program and evaluates the effectiveness of the projects for which grant funds were utilized,
according to the evaluation methods specified in the scope of work. The final report is due within
three months of completion of the project(s) outlined in the scope of work, but no later than
March 31, 2002.
4. The City shall be responsible for following all applicable Federal, State and local laws,
ordinances, rules and regulations in the performance of work described herein. The City assures
that its procedures are consistent with laws relating to public contract bidding procedures, and the
County neither incurs nor assumes any responsibility for the City's bid, award or contracting
process.
5. During the performance of this Agreement, neither the City nor any party subcontracting under the
authority of this Agreement shall discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, nationality,
creed, marital status, sexual orientation, age, or presence of any sensory, mental, or physical
handicap in the employment or application for employment or in the administration or delivery of
or access to services or any other benefits under this Agreement as defined by King County Code,
Chapter 12.16.
6. During the performance of this Agreement, neither the City nor any party subcontracting under the
authority of this Agreement shall engage in unfair employment practices as defined by King
County Code, Chapter 12.18. The City shall comply fully with all applicable federal, state and
local laws, ordinances, executive orders and regulations that prohibit such discrimination. These
laws include, but are not limited to, RCW Chapter 49.60 and Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964.
2
7. The City shall use recycled paper for the production of all printed and photocopied documents
related to the fulfillment of this Agreement. The City shall use both sides of paper sheets for
copying and printing and shall use recycled/recyclable products wherever practical.
8. The City shall maintain accounts of the direct and indirect costs of the programs covered by this
Agreement for a period of at least six years. These accounts shall be subject to inspection, review
or audit by the County and/or by federal or state officials as so authorized by law.
9. The City agrees to credit King County on all printed materials provided by the County which the
City is duplicating for distribution. Either King County's name and logo must appear on King
County materials (including fact sheets, case studies, etc.), or, at a minimum, the City will credit
King County for artwork or text provided by the County as follows: "artwork provided courtesy
of King County Solid Waste Division" and/or"text provided courtesy of King County Solid
Waste Division."
10. The City agrees to submit to the County copies of all written materials which it produces and/or
duplicates for local waste reduction and recycling projects which have been funded through the
waste reduction and recycling grant program. Upon request, the City agrees to provide the County
with a reproducible copy of any such written materials and authorizes the County to duplicate and
distribute any written materials so produced, provided that the County credits the City for the
piece.
11. This project shall be administered by Robyn Bartelt, Conservation Specialist, at City of Kent, 220
Fourth Avenue South, Kent, Washington, 98032, or designee.
The County:
1. The County shall administer funding for the waste reduction and recycling grant program. Funding
is designated by city and is distributed on a per capita basis. The City of Kent's budgeted grant
funds are $41,733.00.
2. Within forty-five (45) days of receiving a request for reimbursement from the City, the County
shall either notify the City of any exceptions to the request which have been identified or shall
process the request for payment. If any exceptions to the request are made, this shall be done by
written notification to the City providing the reason for such exception. The County will not
authorize payment for activities and/or expenditures which are not included in the scope of work
and budget attached as Exhibit A, unless the scope has been amended according to Section V of
this Agreement. King County retains the right to withhold all or partial payment if the City's
report(s) and reimbursement request(s) are incomplete (i.e., do not include proper documentation
of expenditures and/or adequate description of each activity described in the scope of work for
which reimbursement is being requested), and/or are not consistent with the scope of work and
budget attached as Exhibit A.
3. The County agrees to credit the City on all printed materials provided by the City to the County
which the County duplicates for distribution. Either the City's name and logo will appear on such
materials (including fact sheets, case studies, etc.), or, at a minimum, the County will credit the
City for artwork or text provided by the City as follows: "artwork provided courtesy of the City of
Kent" and/or "text provided courtesy of the City of Kent."
3
4. The County retains the right to share the written material(s)produced by the City which have been
funded through this program with other King County cities for them to duplicate and distribute. In
so doing, the County will encourage other cities to credit the City on any pieces that were
produced by the City.
5. The waste reduction and recycling grant program shall be administered by Lyne Morris, Project
Manager, or designee, specified by the King County Solid Waste Division.
III. DURATION OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall become effective on June 27, 2000 and shall terminate on December 31, 2001.
IV. TERMINATION
A. This Agreement may be terminated by King County, in whole or in part, for convenience without
cause prior to the termination date specified in Section III, upon thirty (30) days advance written
notice.
B. This Agreement may be terminated by either party, in whole or in part, for cause prior to the
termination date specified in Section III, upon thirty (30) days advance written notice. Reasons for
termination for cause may include but not be limited to: nonperformance, misuse of funds, and/or
failure to provide grant related reports/invoices as specified in Section II.A.2. and Section II.A.3.
C. If the Agreement is terminated as provided in this section: (1) the County will be liable only for
payment in accordance with the terms of this Agreement for services rendered prior to the effective
date of termination; and (2) the City shall be released from any obligation to provide further services
pursuant to this Agreement.
D. Nothing herein shall limit, waive, or extinguish any right or remedy provided by this Agreement or
law that either party may have in the event that the obligations, terms and conditions set forth in this
Agreement are breached by the other party.
V. AMENDMENTS
This Agreement may be amended only by written agreement of both parties. Funds may be moved
between tasks in the scope of work, attached as Exhibit A, only upon written or verbal request by the
City and written or verbal approval by King County. Such requests will only be approved if the proposed
change(s) is (are) consistent with and/or achieves the goals stated in the scope and falls within the
activities described in the scope.
4
VI. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION
The City shall protect, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, its officers, agents, and employees from
tind against any and all claims, costs, and/or issues whatsoever occurring from actions by the City and/or
its subcontractors pursuant to this Agreement. The City shall defend at its own expense any and all
claims, demands, suits,penalties, losses, damages, or costs of any kind whatsoever (hereinafter "claims")
brought against the County arising out of or incident to the City's execution of, performance of or failure
to perform this Agreement. Claims shall include but not be limited to assertions that the use or transfer of
any software, book, document, report, film, tape, or sound reproduction or material of any kind, delivered
hereunder, constitutes an infringement of any copyright, patent, trademark, trade name, and/or otherwise
results in unfair trade practice.
VII. INSURANCE
A. The City, at its own cost, shall procure by the date of execution of this Agreement and maintain for the
duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property
which may arise from or in connection with performance of work pursuant to this Agreement by the
City, its agents, representatives, employees, and/or subcontractors. The minimum limits of this
insurance shall be $1,000,000 general liability insurance combined single limit per occurrence for
bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. Any deductible or self-insured retentions shall
be the sole responsibility of the City. Such insurance shall cover the County, its officers, officials,
employees, and agents as additional insureds against liability arising out of activities performed by or
on behalf of the City pursuant to this Agreement. A valid Certificate of Insurance is attached to this
Agreement as Exhibit B, unless Section VII.B. applies.
B. If the Agency is a Municipal Corporation or an agency of the State of Washington and is self-insured
for any of the above insurance requirements, a written acknowledgement of self-insurance is attached
to this Agreement as Exhibit B.
VIII. ENTIRE CONTRACT/WAIVER OF DEFAULT
This Agreement is the complete expression of the agreement of the County and City hereto, and any oral
or written representations or understandings not incorporated herein are excluded. Waiver of any default
shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver of breach of any provision of this
Agreement shall not be deemed to be waiver of any other or subsequent breach and shall not be construed
to be a modification of the terms of this Agreement unless stated to be such through written approval by
the County, which shall be attached to the original Agreement.
IX. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE
The County and City recognize that time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
5
X. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement is, for any reason, found to be T
unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining portions.
M. NOTICE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed by each party on the date set forth below:
Citv King County
Accepted for King County Executive
BY
(Title) Director of Natural Resources
Date Date
Pursuant to Pursuant to Motion No. 10965
Approved as to form: Approved as to form:
City Attorney King County Prosecuting Attorney
Date Date
fi
6
EXHIBIT A
Scope of Work and Budget
Mug County Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant Program
A. PROGRAM INFORMATION:
1. City: City of Kent
2. Program Title: King County Waste Reduction and Recycling (WR/R)
Grant Program for the Suburban Cities
3. Program Manager: Robyn Bartelt
Conservation Specialist
4. Address: City of Kent
220 4th Ave. South
Kent, WA 98032-5895
TEL - (253) 856-5549
FAX - (253) 856-6500
Email—rbartelt@ci.kent.wa.us
5. Consultant: Paul Devine
Olympic Environmental Resources
4715 SW Walker Street
Seattle, WA 98116
TEL - (206) 938-8262
FAX - (206) 938-9873
Email —PaulDevine(a.MSN.com
6. Budget: $41,733.00
B. SCOPE OF WORK:
Task 1: Waste Reduction and Recycling Program for Businesses
Background/History: Since 1996, the City of Kent has worked to promote waste reduction,
participation in commercial collection programs for recyclable materials, and the purchase of
recycled products in the Kent commercial sector. The City has distributed brochures, on
recycling service providers, and guides, on buying recycled products, through direct mailings
and door-to-door delivery. The City has also conducted on-site waste consultations with
commercial business owners and managers, produced individual consultation reports, and
t
provided follow-up assistance to City businesses. During the consultations, the City
distributed recycling bags and a variety of different recycling containers/bins.
Goal: The goal of this program is to achieve greater resource efficiency in the City of Kent.
To accomplish this, the City must promote recycling in the Kent business community with
educational materials that contain current information. As City businesses better manage their
waste and recycle more, less recyclable material will end up in the local landfill. This
program will help Kent reach its goal of diverting 65% of the City's waste stream. According
to the City's haulers, the Kent commercial recycling rate at the end of 1999 was a diversion
rate of 50% of the waste stream and 35%participation rate for businesses. The goal of the
program is to increase the diversion rate to between 60-70% and the participation rate to
50%.
Subtask 1a: Guide to Business Recycling
1) Program Description: The City will prepare a Kent Guide to Business Recycling for City
businesses. The City will research and write the guide to describe and promote the variety of
recycling services available to City businesses. In addition to curbside recycling programs,
the guide will contain resources for recycling the "hard to recycle" materials. The guide will
include information on City sponsored, King County, and private sector services, and
recycling drop-off locations. The City will promote the Guide through the City of Kent's
newsletters, event flyers, the Kent Chamber of Commerce, and direct mailings. T
Whenever possible, the City will use language/graphics from the educational materials and
brochures previously developed by King County and/or the other suburban cities.
2) Program Deliverable:
• Produce and distribute approximately 4,500 guides.
3) Program Evaluation: The City will monitor the program by reporting the following:
• Number of guides distributed.
• The estimated change in the amount of material collected by the City's garbage hauler.
• Recycling participation rate and rate of diversion.
Subtask lb: Guide to Buying Recycled Products
1) Program Description: The City will update the existing Kent Guide to Buying Recycled
Products for City businesses. The guide will include information on where City businesses
can purchase recycled content products in the Kent area. The City will promote the Guide
through the City of Kent's newsletters, event flyers, Kent Chamber of Commerce and direct
mailings.
2
Whenever possible, the City will use language/graphics from the educational materials and
brochures previously developed by King County and/or the other suburban cities.
2) Program Deliverable:
• Update, produce and distribute approximately 6,500 guides.
3) Program Evaluation: This program will result in greater recycled product procurement
as City businesses better incorporate recycled products into their purchases. The City will
monitor the program by reporting the following:
• Number of guides distributed.
• Recycling participation rate and diversion rate.
Task 2: Guide to Residential Recycling
a. Background/History: The City of Kent needs to provide recycling alternatives for reuse
and recycling of hard-to-recycle items. While the City provides for curbside collection of
common household recyclable materials, many recyclable or reusable materials are not
collected. These materials can end up in local landfills. In 1997, the City produced a Kent
Guide to Residential Recycling and distributed it to all City households. That guide is
outdated and most phone numbers have changed, including all city phone numbers. As of
January 2001, over 5,000 residents previously annexed to the City, will fall under the solid
waste and recycling service of the City's contracted hauler. The City intends to revise and
update the existing information and add new information on City, King County, private
sector services, and recycling drop-off locations.
b. Goal: The goal of the program is to promote residential alternatives for the reuse and
recycling of hard-to-recycle items. According to the City's haulers, the Kent residential
recycling rate at the end of 1999 was a diversion rate of 65% of the waste stream and 86%
participation rate for the residential sector. The goal of the program is to increase the
diversion rate to between 70-75% and the participation rate to 90%.
c. Program Description: The City will produce and distribute a revised Kent Guide to
Residential Recycling for City residents. The guide is intended for use as a reference guide
and will include waste reduction, re-use, recycling, and recycled product procurement
opportunities for Kent residents. This educational booklet will describe and promote a variety
of recycling opportunities available through the City of Kent, King County and the private
sector. The City will promote the Guide through the City of Kent's newsletters and event
flyers.
Whenever possible, the City will use language/graphics from the educational materials and
brochures previously developed by King County and/or the other suburban cities.
3
d. Program Deliverable:
• Produce and distribute approximately 24,000 guides.
e. Program Evaluation: The City will monitor the program by reporting the following:'
• Number of guides distributed.
• The estimated change in the amount of material collected by the City garbage hauler.
• Recycling participation rate and diversion rate.
C. PROGRAM SCHEDULE:
Task 1: WR/R Program for Businesses
Subtask la: Guide to Business Recycling
• Prepare and distribute Kent Guide to Business Recycling by December 31, 2001.
Subtask 1b: Guide to Buying Recycled Products
• Prepare and distribute Kent Guide to Business Recycling by December 31, 2001.
Task 2: Guide to Residential Recycling
• Prepare and distribute the Kent Guide to Residential Recycling by May 15, 2001.
In the past, some suburban cities have included surveys in similar guides. Since there has been a poor return rate
for these surveys,this method will not be used as an evaluation tool by the City of Kent.
4
D. PROGRAM BUDGET:
The City does not intend to use other sources of grant funding for this program. The budget
below only indicates the use of King County WR/R Grant Program funds.
King County WRR Grant Cost Cost Total
Budget Category Basis Hours
Task 1 a: Kent Guide to Business Recycling
Research and write guide $5,300.00 $54.00 hr. 98.15
Graphic design $1,500.00 $54.00 hr. 27.78
Print guide -4,500 copies $3,000.00 NA 0
Distribute guide $2,500.00 NA 0
Task 1 b: Kent Guide to Buying Recycled Products _
Research and update guide $1,500.00 $54.00 hr. 27.78
Graphic design $300.00 $54.00 hr. 5.56
Print guide -6,500 copies $2,110.00 NA _ 0
Distribute guide $2,900.00 $0.3_3 _8923.08
Task 2: Kent Guide to Residential Recycling _ _
Research and write guide $8,701.00 $54.00 hr. 1 11.13
Graphic design $1,700.00 $54.00 hr._ 31.48
Print guide -24,000 copies $4,500.00 NA 0
Distribute guide $3,500.00 NA 0
Grant Administration
1. Program Management $2,100.00 $54.00 hr. 38.89
2. Project Expenses
Mileage (Miles x .325) $350.00 $ .325 a mile NA
Office Supplies $300.00 NA 0
Miscellaneous/Contingency $1,472.00 NA 0
Total 1-3.00
* Hourly rates for event management and staff are as follows:
Project Manager-$70.00
Event Staff-$55.00
Administrative Staff-$40.00
For budgeting purposes,an average of$54.00 per hour is used.
5
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August , � . 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: S . 218TH/GARRISON CREEK WATERMAIN RELOCATION -
AUTHORIZE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The bid opening for this project will be
held on August 22nd. In order to expedite contract proceedings
on this project, the Public Works Committee recommends that
Council grant to the Mayor, authorization to award the contract
for the S . 218th St . /Garrison Creek Water Main Relocation
project to the lowest, responsive bidder.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director memorandum
(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
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6K
r. Department of Public Works
Memorandum
August 2, 2000
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom
RE: S. 218th St./Garrison Creek Water Main Relocation
The Middle Fork of Garrison Creek has been aggrading for at least the past ten years. The City has
done several maintenance activities in an attempt to preserve the necessary flow capacity of the
creek at S. 218th St. Despite this, the creek bed has continued to increase and is approaching the
bottom of the road bridge. There are two twelve inch water mains on the upstream side of the
bridge which further impede the flow of the creek. When first built, these water mains were over
six feet above the bottom of the creek but now they are right at the creek bed level. A consultant for
the City recently performed an analysis on the flow capacity of the creek at S. 218th St. and found it
to be only a small amount greater than the average annual storm. Any storm greater than this will
overtop the bridge and present the possibility of at the very least closing the road temporarily and at
the most completely washing out the bridge.
As a short term solution to the aggradation problem, the Public Works Department is proposing to
raise the water mains out of the way of the flow under the bridge and install rip rap to protect the
upstream and downstream banks of the bridge approaches. We have obtained a Hydraulic Project
Approval (HPA) from the State Department of Fish and Wildlife and a SEPA emergency exemption
from the City Planning Department. However, in order to be able to bid the project and construct it
before the HPA expires in September, it will be necessary to accelerate the construction bidding
process. The project is scheduled to be advertised on August 10 and 17 with bid opening on August
22. To be able to expedite contract proceedings on this project, we request the City Council grant to
the Mayor authorization to award this project. This will allow the Public Works Department to
process the construction contract and initiate construction prior to the September 5 City Council
Meeting.
There are several aspects to a long term solution to the aggradation in this area. The Public Works
Department has initiated the first in contacting King County and requesting a solution to a severe
erosion problem which has been ongoing and is within their jurisdiction. The erosion is
approximately one mile upstream from the S. 218th St. crossing and has carved a large canyon just
south of S. 216th St. King County has sent a positive response to repairing the problem. Public
Works will also hire a fluvial geomorphologist to analyze the creek bed movement through
Garrison Creek. When the analysis is completed, we will be able to prepare a plan to restore and
revegetate the creek to a stable state.
MOTION: Recommend authorization for the Mayor to award this project.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 2000
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: SYLVIA FINAL PLAT - APPROVE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve the staff ' s recommendation of
approval with conditions of the Sylvia Final Subdivision
#FSU-99-10 (Kiva #9903023) and authorize the Mayor to sign the
final plat mylar.
This final plat application was submitted by Hardeep Singh. The
Hearing Examiner issued the Findings with conditions on the
preliminary plat on March 1, 2000 .
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. 6L
40
711 0 •
KEN ON
W ASHINOTON MEMORANDUM
August 15, 2000
3LANNING SERVICES
-red N.Satterstrom,AICP
Manager
Phone:253-856-5454 TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE AND CITY COUNCIL
Fax:253-856-6454
220 Fourth Ave.S. FROM: FRED N. SATTERSTROM,PLANNING MANAGER
Kent,WA 98032-5895
SUBJECT: SYLVIA FINAL SUBDMSION#FSU-99-10(Kiva#9903023)
On March 1, 2000, the Hearing Examiner issued Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendation with conditions on the Sylvia Final Subdivision(#FSU-99-10), a
.57 acre, 2-lot residential plat. The property is located at 1045X SE 2441' Street.
This 2-lot plat requires City Council approval because it is located within a
previously approved short plat and is being further divided prior to the expiration
of the 5-year limitation.
Staff recommends the City Council approve the Sylvia Final Subdivision (#FSU-
99-10)with the attached conditions and authorize the Mayor to sign the mylar.
FNS/mjp/s:\Permit\Planning\9902331 fsu9810cc.doc
Enclosure
o
Q o w W . 'CI'Oh9L " .56 1 0 ¢ N o=.`� c
Z 3 . f,b . 0 3 _fb,8S.00 N u
d o 0o
OU Uz 1 \ 1ary e� itHl� pia Z /wi+ u a �1 �iN��t n n
mN p�U mN wo U ~n 2 00 .^ r�-J�ZU C
n O Z Z mw- Z ',Z,U Z nm _ N O NOZ v
z N'' O d. °.'.x'� XZ i n- ina �,n NwO aw
oN< f9 Me .SZ W9L pZZ v
I U' 3 .9Z.fS.10Z"i N 7 _9Z.CS.IQ N—� U'
li aE~Z F 3 3 ZO b 1 EL px�� .�¢'y�U Z.
3 m 3 N uo
m T .^� Ow 3 oa w - a z1,.n
W
O
Z. U am .an mm w. O 27 O�
m
p a zfv mN zr v1N < in m } i'o z n,no¢
E" w z � •�z uz x Ul z i,�
-,00 W9Z 3L 8Z9Z_ _—. 6i ,. o o n S i i ): '
C _ 3 _C6,9 O10 N - 3 .9L.SO. 0U
2G z
7 y
'W
L /
H 12iON1
ze K9Z 3..9Z,10.ION B S '3AV H1801
Zle-61tt -, - - — - - — - ---- -Ib'61C1
N �
N N �—
F— F—
O
Qat
6 EL I U t
8000069Z8p 66
Q � �, C-66 dS 1N�3}1
� � � � 1 -LOIN.
J co 1 b 10� v co -LO-1
\ P S Fn [7
C0T w ob
�/J , • <o ��o Z Z6901 3.&MION
N cli
pr
�I - ,89181 3.L4,ZOlON - ��^ ~O z 10-1 q COP
T C%j r m J m
_ .99161 ?I Z
(1100, N ,00'OZL 9.Ld.ZOJON
LLI3 $sy iILI -
y- 31 C,)Q C) f O r'b
0 d b �
0
m
N O Oh02
z zOiZ ,O N_ g (
gg O N -
r3
o bo
bo
�6Zbe'o�N z N
oc � 0; O
J
761ft_d - __ 0061C1
.00 9t9i. 3.L4,90.ION .3.5 DAV H1001
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 2000
Category Other Business
1 . SUBJECT: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN MRD
ZONE ZCA-2000-5 - ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On June 20, 2000 , Mr. Bart Schram sub-
mitted a letter to the City requesting a review of the minimum
lot size in the City' s MR-D (Duplex) zone. This matter was
subsequently discussed by the City Council Planning Committee
and, on July 3 , 2000 the Committee referred the issue to the
Land Use and Planning Board. The Board held a public hearing
on July 24 , 2000 and recommends that the zoning code be amended
to allow duplex development on nonconforming lots in the MR-D
zoning district, subject to certain size limitations .
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo; 7/24/00 staff report with exhibits; LU&PD
minutes of 7/24/00 ; and ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Land Use and Planning Board
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember &W moves, Councilmember seconds
1) to approve/ the Land Use and Planning
Board' s recommendation to amend the Kent Zoning Code to
allow duplex development on certain nonconforming lots in
the MR-D zone)
2) to adopt Ordinance No. 3 5 zI regarding minimum lot size
in MRD zones .
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 7A
KEN T MEMORANDA
w.S N t N O T O N TO: LEONA ORR,COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS
ANNING SERVICES
;d N.Satterstrom,AICP FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON,AICP, SENIOR PLANNER
Manager
SUBJECT: MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN MR-D ZONING DISTRICT
Fax:253-856-6454 454 Phone:253-856- #ZCA-2000-5/Kiva#2002494
220 Fourth Ave.S.
Kent,WA98032-5895 Following their public hearing on July 24, 2000, the Land Use & Planning Board
voted to amend the Kent City Code to allow duplex development on
nonconforming lots of record a minimum 7,200 square feet in size and to establish
a maximum density of 10.89 dwelling units per acre in the MR-D, Duplex
Multifamily Residential zoning district. The Board's recommendation resulted
from a July 3, 2000 request by the City Council Planning Committee to look into
the possibility of decreasing the minimum lot size in the MR-D district without
increasing the allowable density.
The Board specifically recommended approval of Option Two listed in the staff
report which states, "This option would keep the minimum lot size for duplexes at
8,000 square feet and define the maximum density at 10.89 dwelling units per acre,
but it would allow duplexes on nonconforming lots of record as of June 20, 1973
that are a minimum 7,200 square feet in size and that do not meet the minimum lot
width of 80 feet. All other development standards would remain the same."
The City Attorney's Office has drafted an ordinance, included herewith, which
would effectuate the amendment proposed by the Land Use &Planning Board.
CA:S:\Permit\Plan\ZONECODEAMEND\2000\2002494cc.doc
CC: Fred N. Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Tom Brubaker,Acting City Attorney
i
STAFF REPORT
KEN TT July 24, 2000 ,
W A S H I N G T O N
.ANNING SERVICES TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE &
Fred Satterstrom, . PLANNING BOARD
Manager
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON, SENIOR PLANNER
Phone:253-856-5454
Fax:253-856-6454 RE: #ZCA-2000-5 (KJVA#2002494)MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN MRD ZONE
220 Fourth Ave.S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895 On July 3, 2000, the City Council Planning Committee reviewed the issue of minimum lot size
for a duplex in the MR-D, Duplex Multifamily Residential District. The committee voted to
request the Land Use & Planning Board (LU&PD) look into the possibility of decreasing the
minimum lot size in the MR-D district without increasing the allowable density. On July 10,
2000 the Land Use & Planning Board reviewed this matter in workshop and agreed to hold a
public hearing on the proposal on July 24, 2000.
Background:
Kent's Duplex Multifamily zoning district (MR-D) does not specify a maximum allowable
density, but rather specifies a minimum lot size for both a duplex and a single family
development within the MR-D district. The minimum lot size for a duplex is simply twice the
minimum lot size for Kent's highest density single family district (see attached code section).
Given the minimum lot size, the density in the MR-D zoning district in effect becomes 10.89
dwelling units per acre.
The Planning Department received the attached letter from Bart Schram requesting amendment
of the minimum lot size for a duplex development to 7,200 square feet. In the MR-D zoning
district in Kent, there are approximately 107 lots with a lot size less than 8,000 square feet(see
attached maps); there are approximately 29 vacant or redevelopable lots with lot sizes between
7,200 and 8,000 square feet. Using existing development standards, none of these lots would
be allowed a duplex development, even though they are located within a MR-D zoning district.
Furthermore, Kent's zoning code would allow on these lots Accessory Dwelling Units
(ADU's) within or detached from a single-family structure. For purposes of zoning, the
difference between a duplex and a single-family structure with an attached ADU is basically
one of owner occupancy.
Alternatives:
Option One: This option simply would change the minimum lot size for a duplex in the
MR-D and other multifamily residential zoning districts to 7,200 square feet and allow a
minimum lot width of 55 feet (which is the lot width on several lots in the South of Willis
area). All other development standards would remain the same. By doing this, the density in
the MR-D zoning district becomes 12.1 dwelling units per acre.
Option Two: This option would keep the minimum lot size for duplexes at 8,000 square feet
and define the maximum density at 10.89 dwelling units per acre, but it would allow duplexes
on nonconforming lots of record as of June 20, 1973 that are a minimum 7,200 square feet in
size and that do not meet the minimum lot width of 80 feet. All other development standards
would remain the same. 7
Option Three: This option would make no change to the existing code.
Staff Recommendation:
The Planning Department staff recommends Option Two. This option maintains a progression of densities in
the single family and multifamily residential zoning districts, generally follows the City Council Planning
Committee's direction for no gain in density in the MR-D zoning district, and yet provides for infill on
nonconforming lots of record. Providing for infill of lots in the MR-D zoning district that can reasonably
accommodate a duplex development supports the goals and policies of the Kent Comprehensive Plan and
assists Kent in reaching its housing targets.
CA.-pm S:IPermitlPlanIREPOR731200012002494-2000-5.doc
Enc: Letter from Bart Schram
Sec. 15.04.170.Agricultural and Resi Zone Dev.Stds
Maps
Draft,Option Two
cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,Planning Manager
Brent McFall,Chief Administrative Officer
15.04.170. Agricultural and Residential Zone Development Standards.
Zoning Districts
� � V
m u To
Y
:24 # s7 s a .12
m
a1 ar s g ru S m
CL
N� r E E Le
q E E126 $ S'
Vf- f q q m =
k di A2
O
c N D Q. s
a a d' N Co h ern y N t0 = 2
N <7 S 19 a4 4 17 P7 c7 Tr a
4 < N N N N N
SF I Duplex SF Duplex MF SF DupNa MF SF Duplex MF SF Daplax MF SF Duplex MF
ixlmuln 1 1 ilex 3.63 4.52 a.05 0.71 C7/ a.Fi 120 1.i4 16.0 i,is 16 6.74 D IA3 �'d
nslty:dwelling dulac dulac uaac usl ua uslx usla 39:.4 ua1� usl na
.its per acre usl lust duaae
nimum IOl 34,700 t x 34,700 16.D00 9,600 7,600 3,700 4,000 1,000 6,000 4A00 6,000 ,i001 I�a00 8,000 ,5001 4ra06 1,000 1,5001 6000 61000 4SOOI 1,000 t,000 e,SCN
aa:square lest sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft aq ft sq t 14 R sq R SO belt q ft 3—%0 W 14 ft 3,500 40 aq ft Z500 6*4 W ft 1,600 W 4 ft sex
acres,as non w ft am sq tt DG_�1 aq IL pQn1 W R D£rll R(3)
ted (37) 11) (2)
nimum lot soft 60R Soft Soft SOR 50R 40R 40 ft 90It 40 It 60R 10R 40R 00ft 60ft 40R a011 Sot 4011 soft loft 40 it to ft aft
do:feet(4)
lxdtlum site 30% 50% 30% 30% 43% 43% 50% 53% 55% 40% 55% 40% 43Y. 55% 40% 45% 55% 40% 45% 53% 1 40% 45% In 40% 30%
verage: (5) is) 15) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) 15) 15) (5) (5) 15) (5) (5) (5) 15) I5) (s)
rcent of sits
n'unum yard (22)
aulraments:
et
=rontyard 20R 30A 20It loft ION loft ION tOt ION lot 10It ION 20t to ft ION 20t 10it 10ft 20R 10R let 20it 104 10It 20it
(6) M is) Is) (61 (6) is) (6) (6) (6) is), (a) (6) M (4) (a) PI (a) (I) (6)
13) (3) (1) M (1) (I) (a) (a) (a) (1) (2) 41) (6) (1) (1) (4) (4)
is) (9) (9) is) is) ts) (9) (9) (2) (9) (9) (2) (9) (9) is) (9) (9)
fide yard 15R (10) 15R SR aft 5ft 5R sit 5R 5R 5R 5ft (11) 5ft sit (11) 5t SR (It) 5ft 5ft (11) SR SR (11)
Side yard on 20R 20ft 10R 10R 10It Ion to It loft loft 10ft ION 1511 16R loft 15 it loft loft 15ft tot loft l5R loft left tSt
9anking street (9) (9) (9) (9) 19) (9) M M (9) (9) (9) (1) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9)
3f a comer lot
Rear yard 20R 1!R 51t SR Sft SR 5R 5t aft 5R /R 20ft 5ft Ift 20a 5111 9h 20t 5ft aft 20It St I 20it
AddiDonal (121 (13) (12) (14) (14) f14) (141 (14)
setbacksfdista (15) (13) (15) (131 113)
ices between
0ulldings
eight limitation: 23 2 MY 23 2.5 23 25 23 2.3 2.5 12.5tryt 23 2 Myl 3"/ 15 2 aryl 3",1 15 12.5 s1rYl 3 aryl 2.5 aryl 23 aryl 3 stryl -5 iS"4 slryl
storlesfnot to '"I 33 R stystyl aryf SLYatryl st yl aryl 35 R stryl 30 R 30 ft "I 30 t 30 R ttryf 35 R 4o ft 30 R 35 R 40 R "2 f 354 SON
,coed In feel 35R (17) 33ft 35 It 35ft 33ft 33R 30R 3OR 30 It 30 ft 30R 30R
(161 (11)
nimum 40% 40% 40% 50% 60% 70% 75% 75% 79% 73% 70% TO% 73% 70% TO% 75% 70% 75% 70% T3% 70%
1perv)ous (19) (1s) In) (23) (n) 123) (23) (19) f19) (19) 119) 111) (19) 119) (19) (19) (191 (191 (19) (19) (19)
rrface:percent
to parcel
�9a
5ro lot line Ind The provisions In Sections 1S.06.300,310,320,and 330 shelf apply.
ustering (24)
gns The sin rsgutaions o1 Chapter 1106 snail apply.
Istrsat parking The oft-prop pwWng requlwnents of Chapter 1105 shall appy.
andscaping The landscalting requuometrls of Chapter 1107 that appy.
.uWamiy (25) (n1 (211 451 1151
ransition Area
.uld-family (26) (26) (26) M) (161
esign review
Aditional Additonal/landardx Ir spedec usas re cnmaned In Chapter IS.Oa and Chsptr11g9.
tandards t261 120) (?d) (26)
(211 (79) (29)
tl
Bart J Schram
5354h Ave S
Kent,WA 98032
(206) 271-0240
RECEIVED
June 20, 2000 JUN 2 j
N D A
Fred Satterstrom PLANNING
titEr•'
Director, Kent Planing Dept.
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Re: MR-D Zone codes amendment
Dear Mr. Satterstrom:
In reference to my letter to Mayor Jim White requesting guidance through
building permitting process I am now asking your assistance. As you know I have
recently purchased a piece of property in the city of Kent that is zoned MR-D.
Current zoning in the City of Kent, Title 15 Zoning Chapter 15.04 District
Regulations, 15.04.170 Agriculture and Residential Zone Development Standards,
requires a lot of 8000 sq. ft for the building of a duplex. My property is lot 7 in Crows
first Addition to Kent. The lot size in this area is 7200 sq. ft. I intent to use the property
just as adjoining properties are being used. Other than the subject property the entire
block is comprised of 4 and 5-plex buildings on equal lot sizes.
After speaking with both you and Mayor White I would like your assistance in
asking the city Counsel to amending the minimum lot size for a duplex in a MR-D zone
to 7200 sq. ft.
Thank you for your time and consideration, Mr. Saterstrom. Your swift response
is greatly appreciated
Sincerely,
Bart Schram
� N
m° Lo w
a
o
N � 3
U L_ f u L Li
�J
� ❑ CE
..� loTn
o a
.a o
o - em99.
LM �J!
O COEl
MO
OCD El LLI
o
OLLI
J
o �
V�JIN3
L ❑ ❑ �-
.a
C N
C v w
m L
w
IL
O
Ngum
3
❑ o of I U u i i I 1,C31 `b
D (J o 0 ❑ D q0(p� ❑ ❑ RR
0 6 ❑❑ d L3 ❑ 51d Upp
Q
JAVA
O
■� fi a
aw, v
■r D
Q '6 fl c d
_, I Hl
ppd oo V
O ❑
0 3
Y � K.111111�1 !
nea
N
� o O
' 1
u m 0 11■■rf
IN m AT Iif■1 �� ■11 -ll��ir�.r r
lrwf11E ■■ fn u,.�� _ w
V, o G � �a ��c ►
f.
w
3Us •/ f ,.'L■�; VISA11161
Lr[�] TIRE tal■rt PSI utp
� �>�■ril. �nram Ira Q 1
1•VI�.� r.>. - mail lm
n�. Fri nranjimm c/■ ILl 1f
E- Mail WIN
FIN
Fla
, a
rim
'' a ■
�- ■ CAA. '1 ; a1a
---
"11 ���V J L�I�
NONCONFORMING LOTS OF RECORD
KENT CITY CODE—NEW SECTION 15.08.100(E)(2)(a)(4)
OPTION TWO - DRAFT
(Underlined/strike-through text represents change of wording from the single-family
section)
In any district in which duplex dwellings are permitted, a duplex dwelling and customary
accessory buildings may be erected on any single lot of record as of June 20, 1973 with a
minimum area of 7,200 square feet, notwithstanding limitations imposed by other
provisions of this title. Such lot must be in separate ownership and not of continuous
frontage with other lots in the same ownership. This provision shall apply even though
such lot fails to meet the requirements for area or width that are generally applicable in
the district; provided, that yard dimensions and requirements other than those applying to
area or width of the lot shall conform to the regulations for the district in which such lot
is located.
July 24, 2000
S:\Permit\Plan\REPORTS\2000\2002494-2000-5option.doc
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
July 24, 2000
Page 5
r.
• retain the existing five foot side yard setback
• give the developer the option to reduce the side yard set back to no less than three feet with the
following requirements:
include: fire code requirements to place fire hydrants a minimum of three hundred feet in
separation,
require: 1500 gallons per minute fire flow,
provide: for emergency vehicle access, which includes an improved road within 150 feet of all
portions of the exterior first floor.
Motion CARRIED unanimously.
#ZCA-2000-5 MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN MR-D ZONE
Mr. Satterstrom stated that a private applicant who approached the Planning Department about a 7200
square foot lot that had been purchased south of Willis Street generated this request. The south of
Willis area is zoned MR-D, duplex zoning for the most part, requiring an 8000 square foot lot size in
order to be developed. This is an area of Kent that was rezoned MR-D from MR-M ten years ago and
lies within walking distance of downtown. Mr. Satterstrom stated that this area is an older single
family area and is spoken of in Kent's Comprehensive Plan as a good infill area for a slightly higher
density.
Mr. Satterstrom stated that the applicants approached the City Council's Planning Committee and
explained that they wished to redevelop their 7200 square foot lot with a duplex dwelling but that the
lot was short by 800 feet.
Mr. Satterstrom stated that a code amendment would be needed, as a variance only pertains to sideyard
setbacks, front setbacks or other dimensional requirements. He stated that he approached the Council's
Planning Committee who agreed to look at this issue and send it to the Land Use and Planning Board
where it was discussed at the July 10 workshop session.
Mr. Satterstrom stated that most of the south of Willis area is zoned MR-D with lots ranging between
7200 and 8000 square feet with a majority of those lots developed with single family dwellings. He
stated that there are 29 MR-D lots in Kent that would benefit by this amendment.
Mr. Satterstrom stated that in Option I staff looked at reducing the minimum lot size to 7200 square
feet. He stated that staff discovered that the maximum permitted density would change from 10.8 units
per acre to over 12 units per acre.
Mr. Satterstrom stated that Option 2 would retain the minimum lot size of 8000 square feet but allow
duplexes on nonconforming lots of record with a minimum lot size of 7200 square feet. He stated that
lots in the south of Willis area can redevelop with a duplex under this nonconforming clause. Mr.
Satterstrom stated that staff does not recommend Option 3 as it affects no change.
Mr. Satterstrom stated that staff is recommending Option Two which will result in no gain in the
maximum permitted density in the MR-D zone.
Sharon Woodford MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED to open the public hearing. Motion
carried.
U I USERDATAILUPBIM/NUT£51000714mn.doc
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
July 24,2000
Page 6
_ In Hoyt, 22831 92nd Ave S, #P104, Kent, WA stated that we were informed by Planning Staff that
we could apply for a variance early in February so proceeded with completing the application process.
At the time of submittal, I was informed that I could not get a variance for redeveloping the newly
purchased property with a duplex. Mr. Hoyt stated that he supports either Option 1 or 2 and does not
wish to increase density in this area. He stated that he and his partner own just the one lot and intend
to build a duplex as their personal residence.
Bart Schram, 535 4th Avenue South, Kent, WA stated that he is Mr. Hoyt's partner and bought the
lot in order to redevelop it with a duplex as their residence. He stated that he would favor either
Option 1 or 2, as his plans do not include developing a group of lots but rather this single lot. Mr.
Schram stated that none of the lots are significant enough in size where 12.4 units per acre could be
developed in this zone and stated that he is simply requesting an 800 square foot reduction in lot size.
Tom Sharpe, 24254 143rd Ave. SE, Kent, WA stated that currently the MR-D zone requires an 80-
foot lot width, which an 8000 square foot lot allows for. Mr. Sharpe stated that the City of Anacortes
has 7500 square foot lots with setbacks of five and eight feet. He cited this information to illustrate
that reducing lot size is workable and creates more affordable housing.
Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion
carried.
Ms. Zimmerman stated that a gain in density is not a significant matter in this case as lots are scattered
and there is not a chance of grouping several lots together to create an acre. She voiced her support for
tion 1.
Ms. Woodford stated that she does not have a preference between Option 1 or 2 but believes that City
Council would favor Option 2.
Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to accept Option 2 as recommended
by staff which maintains a progression of densities and yet provides for infill development on
nonconforming lots of record. Motion CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT
Terry Zimmerman MOVED and Sharon Woodford SECONDED to close the meeting. Motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
/lil AI14
red N. Satterstrom, AICP
ecretary
U.I USERDATAWPBIMINUTESI000724madoc
I
ORDINANCE NO.
Ili
li AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, amending section 15.04.170 of the
Kent City Code by defining the maximum density of
duplexes at 10.89 dwelling units per acre, but allowing
duplexes on nonconforming lots of record as of June 20,
1973, that are a minimum 7,200 square feet in size and that
do not meet the minimum lot width of 80 feet.
WHEREAS, Kent's duplex multifamily zoning district (MR-D) does not
specify a maximum allowable density, rather it specifies a minimum lot size for both a
duplex and a single family development within the MR-D district; and
WHEREAS, the minimum lot size for a duplex is twice the minimum lot
size for Kent's highest density allowed under the single-family zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, given the minimum lot size, the density in the MR-D zoning
district in effect becomes 10.89 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use and Planning Board held a public hearing on
July 24, 2000, and voted to recommend to the City Council that the minimum lot size for
duplexes be kept at 8,000 square feet and that the maximum density be defined at 10.89
dwelling units per acre. The Land Use and Planning Board further voted to recommend
that duplexes on nonconforming lots of record as of June 20, 1973, that are a minimum
1 Duplex Multifamily Zoning District Density
7,200 square feet in size and that do not meet the minimum lot width of 80 feet, be
allowed. All other development standards would remain the same; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON.
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
f
SECTION 1. Chapter 15.04.170 of the Kent City Code is hereby amended
i
as follows:
Ili
2 Duplex Multifamily Zoning District Density
15.04.170. Agricultural and Residential Zone Development Standards.
Zoning Districts
0
a E
c N V
m tO -K-� E
m Cr ¢ 2!' � o_
m O c o
d
w me ii ri gi ri ri a 1d c E m 2. 3 m ? O y
•'- v
a o� Cr in CO in cn .o C7 z S
< N r? y r4 °4
CD ci� K 2 Cr lL M C lZ of x S
< < co rn rn in rn h .�
SF Dupex SF Duple MF SF Duplex MF SF Dupi a MF SF Duplex MF SF Duplex MF
imum 1 1 2.18 3.63 4.53 6.05 8.71 8.71 egg@ to 12A 16.0 16.0 16.0 16 23.0 23 40.0 40
sity:dwelling dLdw dwac usl usl W usl usl Shtlg6 lilac uy uy duW c uy usl uy
s per acre
imum lot 34,700 In 34,70016,000 9,600 7,600 5,700 4,000 4,000 6,000 none two ,5001 none 3,000 .5001 none 8A00 8,5001 none 8,000 8.5001 none 8.000 8.5001
3:square feet sq ft sq n all ft sq ft sq ft soft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq„ 3,500 all ft 3,500 all ft Z500 ell It1,600 sq Itsq
cres,as ell ft sqn sq ft. sq n ft(3)
,d (27) (1) (2)
;mum lot 6011 60ft soft soft 50n soft 40 It 40n 80ft 40 It 90ft eon 40ft Bon eon 401t 80ft &oft 40ft bon eon 40 ft eon bon
:h:feet(4)
Imum site 30Y. 50% 30% 30% 45% 45% 50% 55% 55%1 40% 55% 40% 43% 55% 40% 43% 55% 40% 45% 11% 40% 41% 55% 40% 501/.
erage: 15) (51 (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) is) 15) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) I5)
:ant of site
mum yard (22)
rirements:
ont yard Zen 30 ft eon loft ton loft loft loft loft loft 10n loft loft 10n loft loft loft loft 20 It loft loft eon loll loft 20 It
(6) (7) (6) (6) (6) Is) (6) (61 (6) (6) (6) (6) (6) (6) (6) (6) (6) (6) (6) 161 II
(8) (a) (a) (a) (8) (8) (a) is) (81 (a) (a) Is) (8) Is) is) (a) (a)
(9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9)
de yard 15 It (10) 15ft 5ft 5n 5n 5ft 5h 5n 5ft 5ft 5ft (11) 5ft 5ft (11) 5ft 5ft (11) 5ft 5n (11) 5ft 5ft (11)
de yard on 20 ft 20 It loft loft loft loft loft loft loft ton, loft 15ft loft loft 15ft loft loft 15 It loft ton 15 ft loft loft 15ft
inking street 19) (9) (9) (9) 19) (9) (9) 191 191 191 (91 (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9)
a comer lot
nar yard 20 ft 15n 5n 5n 5n 5n 5ft 5ft 8n 5fl 8ft 20ft 5ft an 20 ft 5ft Eft 20 ft 5ft 8n 20 ft 5n 8ft 20 ft
7ditional 112) 1131 (12) (14) (14) (14) (14) (14)
.tbacksldista 05) (151 (15) (15) (15)
;as between
rildings
3ht limitation: 15 2 stryl 2.5 2.5 2.5 25 2.5 2.S 23 2.5 stryl 2.5 2"1 13 stryl 2.5 2 stryl 3 stryl 2.5 2.5 stiyl 3 stryl 2.5 stryl 25 stryl 7 stryl 25 2.5 stryl 4 stryl
torieslnot to "1 35 it "I stryl "I stryf stryl stryl stryl 35ft "1 30 It 30 ft stryl 30 It 30 ft stryl 35 It 40 ft 30 n 3511 40 It stryl 35ft 50 ft
eed in feet 35 It (17) 35n 3511 35n 35ft 35ft 30 It 30 ft 30 It 30 It 30 It 30 It
(161 11s)
umum 40% 40% 40% 50% 60% 71% 11% 71% 70% 75% 70% 70% 75% 70% 70% 75% 70% 75% 70% 75% 70%
)ervious (19) (19) (23) (231 (23) (23) (23) (19) (19) 1191 (19) (19) (19) (19) (19) (19) (19) (19) (19) (19) (191
face:percent
oral parcel
a
o lot line and The provisions in Sections 15.09.300,310,320,and 330 shall apply.
staring (24)
is The sign regulations of Chapter 15.06 shall apply.
street parking The on•su parking requiremems of Chapter 15.05 Shall apply.
idscapmg The landscaping requirements of Chapter 15.07 shall apply.
li-family (25) (251 (25) (25) (251
nsition Area
iti-family (26) (26) (26) (261 (26)
:ign review
ditional Additional standards for specific uses an contained in Cha"15.08 and Chapter 15.09.
ndards (20) (20) (28) (281
(21) (29) (29)
3
SECTION 2. Section 15.08.100(E) of the Kent City Code is hereby
amended by adding a new subsection(E)(2)(a)(4) as follows:
i
E. Nonconforming lots.
1. Applicability of restrictions. Regulations applicable to nonconforming lots
are in addition to the regulations applicable to nonconforming uses, structures and signs.
i
and, in the event of conflict, the most restrictive provisions shall apply.
2. Nonconforming lots of record.
i
a. Residential districts.
(1) In any district in which single-family dwellings are
permitted, a single-family dwelling and customary accessory buildings may be erected on
anv single lot of record as of June 20, 1973, notwithstanding limitations imposed by other
i
provisions of this title. Such lot must be in separate ownership and not of continuous
j frontage with other lots in the same ownership. This provision shall apply even though
such lot fails to meet the requirements for area or width that are generally applicable in
the district; provided, that yard dimensions and requirements other than those applying
to area or width of the lot shall conform to the regulations for the district in which such
lot is located.
(2) In all single-family zoning districts, with the exception of
the SR-8 zoning district, if two (2) or more lots or combinations of lots and portions of
lots with continuous frontage in single ownership are of record prior to June 20, 1973, and
if all or part of the lots do not meet the minimum requirements established for lot width
and area, the land involved shall be considered to be an undivided parcel for the purposes
of this title, and no portion of the parcel shall be used or sold in a manner which
diminishes compliance with lot width and area requirements established by this title, nor
shall any division of any parcel be made which creates a lot with width or area below the
requirements stated in this title.
(3) In the SR-8 zoning district, if two (2) or more single-family
zoned lots or combination of lots and portions of lots with continuous frontage in single
4 Duplex Multifamily Zoning District Density
ownership are of record prior to June 20, 1973, and if all or part of the lots do not meet
the following minimum requirements established for lot width, lot area and topography,
III
the land involved shall be considered to be an undivided parcel for the purposes of this
title, and no portion of the parcel shall be used or sold in a manner which diminishes
compliance with lot width and area requirements established by this title, nor shall any
division of any parcel be made which creates a lot with width or area below the
requirements stated in this title.
(a) Minimum lot area: Four thousand six hundred
(4,600) square feet.
(b) Minimum lot width: Forty(40) feet.
(c) Maximum site slope: Fifteen (15) percent.
In any district in which duplex dwellings are permitted, a
duplex dwelling and customary accessory buildings may erected on any single lot of
record as of June 20, 1973 with a minimum area of 7,200 square feet, notwithstanding
limitations imposed by other provisions of this title. Such lot must be in separate
ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same ownership. This
provision shall apply even though such lot fails to meet the requirements for area or width
that are generally applicable in the district, provided, that vard dimensions and
requirements other than those applving to area or width of the lot shall conform to the
regulations for the district in which such lot is located.
b. Other districts. In any other district, permitted building and
structures may be constructed on a nonconforming lot of record, provided site coverage,
yard, landscaping and off-street parking requirements are met. Such lots must be in
separate ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same ownership
prior to June 20, 1973, and if all or part of the lots do not meet the minimum requirements
established for lot width and area, the land involved shall be considered to be an
undivided parcel for the purposes of this title, and no portion of the parcel shall be used
or sold in a manner which diminishes compliance with lot width and area requirements
established by this title, nor shall any division of any parcel be made which creates a lot
5 Duplex Multifamily Zoning District Density .
with width or area below the requirements stated in this title.
SECTION 3. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or
sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall
remain in full force and effect.
I
I
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five (5) days from and after the date of publication as provided by law.
i
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
.APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
6 Duplex Multifamily Zoning District Density
PASSED: day of 2000.
APPROVED: day of 2000.
PUBLISHED: day of , 2000.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed
by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P'Cmf Ordvo mDupkxMultifumlyVrn"doe
7 Duplex Multifamily Zoning District Density
') 'Kent
� City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 2000
Category Bids
1 . SUBJECT: RESOURCE CENTER PARKING LOT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The bid opening for this project was
held on August 9 . Due to time constraints, the bid information
was not available for the Council packets . The Parks Director
will make a recommendation at the Council meeting.
The Parks Director recommends that upon his concurrence, the
Mayor be authorized to award this contract to the most
satisfactory, responsible bidder.
3 . EXHIBITS: the bid tab will be provided at the meeting
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: Engineer' s estimate is $40 , 000
SOURCE OF FUNDS : R.E.E.T.
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
that the Resource Center Parking Lot Project be awarded to
for $
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 8A
Kent City Council Meeting
Date: September 5, 2000
Bids
R9
Revised Sheet
1 . SUBJECT: RESOURCE CENTER PARKING LOT PROJECT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The August 9, bid opening for the Resource
Center Parking Lot Project resulted in 5 bids . LW Sundstrom,
Inc, from Ravensdale, WA was the apparent low bidder.
The Parks Director recommends awarding the Resource Center
Parking Lot Project to LW Sundstrum, Inc. for $49, 609 . 00,
plus WSST.
3 . EXHIBITS: Bid tab attached
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff
2 (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
nth
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: YES NO x
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $49, 609 . 00, plus WSST
SOURCE OF FUNDS: REET
1^ 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
8 . Councilmember kAab moves, Councilmember seconds
that the Resource Center Parking Lot Project be awarded to LW
Sundstrum, Inc . and contract for $49, 609 . 00, plus WSST.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 2000
Category Bids
1 . SUBJECT: 2000 ASPHALT OVERLAYS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The bid opening for this project was
held on August 8th. However due to time constraints, the bid
information is not included in the Council packets . The Public
Works Director will make a recommendation to award at the
August 15th Council meeting.
3 . EXHIBITS•
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc . )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
that the 2000 Asphalt Overlays contract be awarded to
in the bid amount of $
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 8B
AUG-11-2000 15:41 P.02
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 15, 2000
TO: Mayor/Council
FROM: Don Wickstro
RE: 2000 Asphalt Overlays
Bid opening for this project was held on August 8`h with 3 bids received. The low bid was
submitted by Icon Materials, Inc. The Public Works Director recommends awarding the
following schedules on this project to Icon Materials.
Bid Summary
Icon Lakeside Western Engineer's
Materials Industries Asphalt Estimate
Schedule I 58,234.77 61,855.46 78,788.68 60,967.20
Schedule IIA 14,939.45 16,834.45 17,959.96 16,389.40
Schedule IIB 5,823.50 6,780.50 6,989.28 6,548.00
Schedule IIC 2,662.75 3,190.7S 3,632.92 3,097.00
_ Schedule IID 6,307.50 7,360.50 7,559.52 7,108.00
Schedule IIE 11,718.75 13,813.95 14,129.64 13,443.00
Schedule IIIA 147174.50 17,711.35 17,815.94 15,837.00
Schedule IIM 9,745.40 11,748.30 12,938.72 10,608.00
Schedule IIIC 10,092.80 :2,433.05 14,398.72 10,932.00
Schedule IIID 40,549.20 54,061.15 59,187.96 33,059.00
Schedule IIIE 67261.25 7,636.70 7,564.76 7,049.00
Schedule IIIF 9,621.25 14,140.85 10,532.12 10,384.00
Schedule IVB 34,089.33 37,289.49 40,161.88 36,775.70
Schedule IVE 28,370.40 31,528.20 35,148.64 30,218.00
Schedule IVK 11,770.20 13,510.60 14,174.72 13,538.00
Schedule V 195,170.80 169,548.14 215,176.08 163,237.40
Schedule VII 29,269.60 33,401.20 34,227.52 35,467.00
Schedule VIII 41,067.60 249445.00 39,112.00 39,112.00
Schedule IX 22,173.25 32,032.10 26,124.12 25,655.00
Total Schedules: 552,042.30 569,321.74 655,613.08 539,424.70
MOTION.
Councilmember moves, Councilmember— seconds that Schedules I, IIA, IIB,IIC, IID,
TIE, IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, HID, IIIE, IIIF,IVB, IVE, IVK, V, VII, VIII and 1X of the 2000 Asphalt
Overlay contract be awarded to Icon Materials, Inc. for the bid amount of$552,042.30.
2000ovorlay
Project file:00-3001 File 990.3
TOTAL P.02
REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
C. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
D. PUBLIC WORKS
E. PLANNING COMMITTEE
F. PARKS COMMITTEE
G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES
OPERATONS COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 69 2000
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Rico Yingling, Tim Clark, Connie Epperly (sitting in for Judy
Woods)
STAFF PRESENT: Brent McFall, Dena Laurent, Bob Olson, Becky Fowler, John Hodgson, Marty Mulholland,
John Hillman, Cliff Craig, Sue Viseth, Jim Harris, Cheryl Viseth
PUBLIC PRESENT: John Santana
The meeting was called to order by Chair Rico Yingling at 4:10 PM.
Approval of Minutes of'Vlav 16. 2000
Committee Member Tim Clark moved to approve the minutes of May 16, 2000. The motion was
seconded by substitute Committee Member Connie Epperly and passed 3-0.
Approval of Vouchers dated May 31. 2000
Tim Clark moved to approve the vouchers dated May 31, 2000. The motion was seconded b_v
Connie Epperly and passed 3-0.
PC Purchase
Information Services Director Marty Mulholland reported that a request for quotes had recently been
yukt out for 34 Pentium III PC's. She introduced IS Client Services Operations Manager Bob Olson
o said the purchase was pan of a continuing process in the PC replacement plan. The training room
will receive new PCs and those replaced will be distributed to other departments to update the Pentium
75s and 90s which are currently in use. Some employees in the IS Department will also receive new
PCs. Ms. Mulholland said staff is trying to get the best expected life out of the current PCs based on
the kinds of software used at the Citv. Making the machines last for at least 3% vears was the target
established in the Tech Plan.
Tim Clark commented that the new PCs had 10 giLys of hard drive. Ms. Mulholland said footprint sizes
for disk space were being moved up, particularly in the training room where substantial images would
be stored to support training on the local drives. Rico Yingling questioned why monitors weren't
I eing purchased. Bob Olson said the 17 inch monitors would be kept and used that belonged to the
Pentium 75s and 90s that would be taken out of service.
Tim Clark moved to recommend to the Council to accept the quote of S55,068.89 for the
purchase of 34 Hewlett-Packard Pentium III computers from Unisoft, Inc., and authorize the
Mayor to execute the necessary contract documents. The motion was seconded by Connie
Epperly and passed 3-0.
Taxation on Internet Sales
Government Affairs Manager Dena Laurent said the Taxation on Internet Sales issue had not been
addressed in anv of Council's legislative policy documents. A national advisory committee on Internet
' es, after meeting over several vears, failed to reach consensus on recommendations to Congress
regarding taxation of Internet sales. A moratorium on taxation of Internet sales was extended to
Operations Committee, 6/6/00 Page 2
taxation on Internet service use, although 10 states already have that authority grandfathered in. The
House of Representatives took action to extend the moratorium, prompting several of the associations
of cities and Mayors to take positions in opposition to the extension. Some people prefer a shorter
moratorium, believing that efforts right now to streamline state authority to collect taxes on remote
sales will yield a positive result. Others prefer a complete and permanent ban. The issue has long term
fiscal implications, but it's not clear what the implications or impacts will be.
Tim Clark stated that the task force appointed to come up with a policy not only did not reach
consensus but on a split vote refused to submit a minority report looking at the issues that were not
resolved. Mr. Clark felt the committee was dominated by the industry and that their recommendation
was given in order to avoid the difficulty of having to deal with a tax vote. The general consensus in
Congress is to not look for new taxes on the Internet because it would require a national policy to
coordinate, but to instead look at the establishment of the payment of ordinary sales tax collected
within the counties and cities. Mr. Clark stated the task force was not fairly represented to Congress.
Brent McFall answered Rico Yingling's request for clarification between sales tax on Internet sales
versus sales tax on catalog sales by saying that catalog sales are taxed if the company has either a retail
outlet or a distribution outlet in the state. Internet sales, at this point, are sales tax free. In addition to
the issue of funding state and local governments is the equity issue for the main street retailer that is
collecting local and state sales taxes while also maintaining the overhead of leasing or owning a
storefront. Internet sales do not have that same overhead and can also avoid the sales tax collection
issue.
Mr. Yingling said he had heard a comment from Amazon.com that Internet companies shouldn't pay
sales tax in places where they didn't utilize the roads and utilities infrastructure. Mr. McFall said it
was not a matter of whether a retailer gains services from local or state government, but of the citizens
paying taxes for the services they receive, whether they're buying through a catalog, at the main street
retailer, or over the Internet. The citizens who use the services pay the tax while the retailer is just the
collector.
Tim Clark commented that the national task force included two representatives of the National League
of Cities, both of which publicl; disclaimed participating with the committee because it failed to
recognize the split vote in the public report and because the committee was biased in terms of its
outcome. The National League of Cities' position is that the national task force organized by Congress
had an 8/10 split in sending a minority report, but when the House of Representatives received the
report, it was made to appear that the task force was unanimously in favor. Because the chair of the
committee gave the presentation to Congress, no opposition was brought forward at the time to be put
into a legislative action, and it passed the House of Representatives. Mr. Clark said the Nationai
League of Cities had requested the City to take a position on the issue.
Mr. Clark moved that Council support the National League of Cities and oppose the extension of
the moratorium on state and local sales tax on Internet transactions. Connie Epperly seconded
the motion which passed 3-0.
I
Operations Conunittee, 6/6/00 Page 3
Voluntary Retirement Incentive Program
F-,,plovee Services Director Sue Viseth, in presenting information about the Voluntary Retirement
-entive Program, said as a result of sales tax revenue losses and the impacts of I-695, all departments
were tasked with looking at ways to reduce costs to the City. One of those ways is the Retirement
Incentive Program which has been used twice previously in the mid 1990s to provide salary cost
savings to the City. Earlier this year the State Legislature offered an early retirement program that
would have increased the number of employees eligible but that program did not receive approval in
the legislature.
Benefits Manager Becky Fowler said approximately 42 employees would be eligible for the
Retirement Incentive Program. If approved, the program would begin on June 261h and go through
August 3151. Employees would have to provide their intent to retire in that time period and would need
to retire by December 31S` of this year. The dates were picked to coincide with the budget process and
to give advance notice of those that did intend to retire. The Employee Services Department did an
analysis of the savings to the City by enacting the program. The cost for 3%z years of salary for the 42
current employees is S 10,275,000. To replace those positions, because of the step classification
system, A through E (which is a 3%2 years process), it would cost 38,033,000, with an approximate cost
savings of S 1,836,000 if all 42 positions retired early, or an average savings of$44,000 per each
employee. In 1996-1997, five employees accepted the program. Seven employees are currently
showing an interest.
Tim Clark asked how many of the 42 positions would be critical and difficult to replace. Sue Viseth
said that aspect was being evaluated, but the positions did include some high level, experienced
�-4,ividuals. The time period between now and the end of the year creates an opportunity for
- __cession planning and working with the departments to determine the process to refill positions, or
whether to restructure or reorganize, as that would be an appropriate time to evaluate the job and its
duties. Mr. Clark asked how many police and fire administration would be in the potential retirees
since that was the biggest pool of employees. Ms. Fowler said five in the total number of potential
retirees are from Police and Fire, but none of the seven that have shown interest are from those
departments.
Sue Viseth said health insurance is the main deterrent for early retirement, and staff is working on a
solution to that with AWC. Medicare coverage starts when a person reaches age 65, and there is oniv
an t 8 month COBRA time period where group health insurance can be continued when a person retires
between the ages of 55-65. Unless a spouse has insurance, only a few employees can afford to take
early retirement even though there is an incentive payment.
Mr. Clark asked if City employees would be eligible for the public employee plan called VEBA that
allows for approving of sick leave into a pool to pay for insurance. Ms. Fowler said that, Citywide,
emplovees were not eligible for the plan at this time, however the Fire Department has the VEBA
account set up through their union. Mr. Clark stated that in order to attract quality employees, the
VEBA plan should be considered Citywide. Sue Viseth said the plan was being considered, and as
part of the feasibility study with AWC, a shared pool, retiree-access health care plan had been looked
at and staff was waiting to receive a report back. Mr. Clark asked if there would be potential cost
Implications to the City if a plan like that was adopted. Ms. Fowler said there would be, and Ms.
eth added that cost was part of the feasibility study. The trend in health care is that costs are going
Operations Committee, 616/00 Page 4
up, and since the City has a self-funded health care plan for its employees and there is already a risk
pool, staff has the obligation of making sure those funds are covered.
a
Connie Epperly moved to recommend to Council to authorize the Voluntary Retirement
Incentive Program through Auaust 31", 2000 with retirement commencing no later than
December 3151, 2000. The motion was seconded by Tim Clark and passed 3-0.
April Financial Report
Assistant Finance Director John Hillman said the economy was finally starting to slow down which
could be good news in the long run because the engines of inflation are coming into check. The April
to April cost of living was about 3.22%, and April unemployment rose from 3.9% last month to 4.20/0
this month. US manufacturing posted its largest decline in the decade and the electronics part, the
largest group of that industry, took its largest dip ever. The FED, due to meet on June 27`h, is expected
to raise the discount rate again. _
For April, the General Fund revenues were up by 32.7% over budget. Part of the reason for the large
percentage appears to be that people paid their Property Taxes early. By the end of the year, the
difference should be zero from the budget. Sales Tax, shown on Page 6 was up also, with
manufacturing (down by 14%) the only portion of Sales Tax that was down. Wholesaling was up 21%
and retailing 20.8%. Rico Yingling commented that the overall 12% above budget was a significant
increase throughout the year and asked if the trend was expected to continue. Mr. Hillman said that
with the economy slowing down, that trend was not expected to continue.
The Utilitv Tax and other major revenue graphs are shown on Pages 8 through 11 of the report. The
Utilitv Tax was up 11.7°% because of higher telephone utility taxes. Building Permits, Recreation
Fees, and Fines and Forfeitures were within 5% of the budget for the month. The General Fund
Budget Financial Statement on Page 12 shows a fund balance at the end of April of 56,237,842, which
was an increase of about 5400,000 from last month's projections. The ending fund balance of the
Capital Improvement Fund went up about 5300,000-5331,000 from last month's projection. The Golf
Course revenues were down a little from budget for the month of April.
Tim Clark asked if the Permit Coordinator in the Planning Department had been hired vet. Brent
McFall said that position had not been hired, but applications had been closed and staff was in the
selection process. The position should be filled by early July. Recruitment had also been done for the
Plans Review position but without satisfaction.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:40 PM.
Jackie Bicknell
Citv Council Secretary
fi
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 13, 2000
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Connie Epperly, Sandy Amodt, Tom
Brotherton
STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miller, Bob Cline, Ed Crawford, Nancy Mathews, Norm
Angelo, Pat Fitzpatrick, Jackie Bicknell
The meeting was called to order by Chair Connie Epperly at 5:12 PM. There was one
item added to the agenda: Kent Drinking Driver Task Force Grant Approval.
AUproval of the Minutes of May 9, 2000
Committee member Tom Brotherton moved to approve the minutes of May 9, 2000.
The motion was seconded by Committee Member Sandy Amodt and passed 3-0.
Camping Ordinance
Assistant City Attomey Pat Fitzpatrick said the Camping Ordinance addresses the issue
of dealing with people camping in public places, including under freeway overpasses, on
large shoulders of certain roadways, and by the railroad tracks behind the Borden Plant.
The ordinance prohibits and makes it a crime to camp without a permit in public places in
the City of Kent. Permits can be issued that would take into consideration the things
currently causing the problems like sanitation, trash, and health issues. The ordinance
does not have any affect on private property, or on parking recreational vehicles in front
of residences unless that is otherwise prohibited by other laws.
The penalty for a violation is a simple misdemeanor which is a possible 90 days in jail
and/or a thousand dollar fine. There are mandatory penalties in the event that somebody
frequently offends. The second offense is one day in jail with a mandatory S 100 fine; the
third offense is 5 days in jail with a mandatory S500 fine. The ordinance would not affect
Comucopia Days and the folks that camp out along Willis Street which is allowed by
permit.
Sandv Amodt asked if the Police Department if the ordinance was strong enough.
Officer Robert Miller said the ordinance would be a real asset and a tool for the Police
Department to use in keeping the homeless from parking and living on a daily basis in the
downtown area's public roadways and parking lots. Connie Epperly commented that the
City of Kent has electricity outlets in the municipal parking lot and last year a van was
found camping all night using City electricity for a TV and radio. Officer Miller said that
same thing had happened again recently in the Harrison lot.
Tom Brotherton asked how police would determine if someone was really camping or
just parked. Officer Miller said it would have to be proved that someone was actually
living in a place. Pat Fitzpatrick agreed and said officer discretion would be involved in
Public Safety Committee, 6/13/00 Page 2
determining whether somebody was at a park for a day or staying overnight. The officer
also would have the opportunity to not charge, but to just move people on. The ordinance
does not require a person to be arrested or cited with a criminal offense, but it does give
the police the tool to do that if they determine that camping is involved. If the police are
not sure, they can encourage people to pack up and move along.
The City has already cleaned out both sides of the Burlington Northern trestle on I-167'
just north of the soccer fields, and the DOT has put fences up. City staff and several
work release prisoners did cleanup on three consecutive Fridays on camps, and over the
three days, 4'/2 tons of tents, garbage, and other material was cleaned up. One location
off the Green River Road where the old gravel pit used to be had a garbage pile 10 feet in
diameter and 3 feet deep. The ordinance will help move those people along and prevent
the garbage build up.
Sandy Amodt said she had noticed camping on library property and asked if the
ordinance would allow police the authority to go onto library property to clean out
campers. Mr. Fitzpatrick said the library had already given the police the authority to
trespass people who are loitering on the property there. The ordinance would not enable
police to go into parks and chase the homeless out just because they had been sitting there
for three or four hours.
Tom Brotherton moved to recommend to Council adoption of the proposed camping
ordinance. The motion was seconded by Sandy Amodt and passed 3-0.
Kent Drinkina Driver Task Force Grant approval
Drinking Driver Task Force Coordinator Nancy Mathews said the City had received a
grant in the amount of S77,600. About a year ago Congress made funds available to
states through the US Juvenile Justice Department to do underage drinking enforcement
education for their communities. The Washington State Liquor Control Board, Traffic
Safety Commission, and Department of Social and Health Services put together the grant
for the State of Washington and included the City of Kent's program as one of five
identified across the state that could qualify for funding. It was the only city program to
be identified.
The grant money received for the Kent Program will be coming in over a two year
period. About S8,500 of that money will go directly to the Liquor Control Board and
another S5,000 will go to the Traffic Safety Commission to do evaluations. The
remaining S64,000 will come to the City of Kent to continue the Youth Conference
Programs for the next two years and to do enforcement with the Liquor Control Board
and the police. Ten hotspots in the City where kids access alcohol will be identified for
enforcement and education.
Available funds will be used for a match, so no additional funding will be required from
the City. Accepting the funds will allow the City Attorney to go over the contract for
approval, and will allow the department to establish a budget. "f`
Public Safety Committee, 6/13/00 Page 3
Sandy Amodt moved to authorize the Mayor to accept the grant of$77,600 funding
from the Washington Traffic Safetv Commission to the Kent Drinkina Driver Task
Force and to establish a budget, subject to legal department approval. Tom
Brotherton seconded the motion which passed 3-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:28 PM.
Jackie Bicknell
City Council Secretary
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES
JULY 179 2000
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Tim Clark, Connie Epperly, Rico Yingling
STAFF PRESENT: Don Wickstrom, Tom Brubaker, Gary Gill, Jackie Bicknell
The meeting was called to order by Chair Tom Brotherton at 4:03 PM. There was one added
item: Citizen Inquiry.
Approval of the Minutes of July 3, 2000
Committee Member Connie Epperly moved to approve the minutes of July 3, 2000. The
motion was seconded by Committee Member Rico Yingling and passed 3-0.
Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program—Set Hearing Date
Public Works Director Don Wickstrom asked that a hearing date be set for August 15, 2000 for
the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program. He said the full program would be brought
to the Public Works Committee meeting on August 7, 2000.
Rico Yingling moved to recommend setting a Public Hearing date of August 15`h for the
adoption of the Six Year Transportation Improvement Program. The motion was
seconded by Connie Epperly and carried 3-0.
Condemnation Ordinance— 1961h Street Corridor Proiect, 1961h/East Vallev Highwav
Don Wickstrom said the Public Works Department is seeking condemnation authority for
property at 196`h Street and East Valley Highway in order to construct drainage and utility work
associated with the 196`h Street Corridor project. The condemnation is needed to complete the
project. Deputy City Attorney Tom Brubaker said two properties were involved, one owned by
Scarsella Family Partnership and one owned by Batavia Holdings. The condemnation would
affect a portion of each of those properties.
Connie Epperly moved to recommend adoption of the respective condemnation ordinance.
The motion was seconded by Rico Yingling and carried 3-0.
196"' Street Corridor/200`h Street Improvements — Accept as Complete
Don Wickstrom said the 196`h;200`h Street Improvement project was within King County and the
City of Kent had acted as lead agency for the County in implementing the project. The City had
awarded the improvement contract to Scarsella Brothers.Inc. for S3,242.543. The project did not
go as hoped and there were cost overruns of S1,000,000, unanticipated cost of S470,000 in
widening Orillia Road, wetland mitigation work required for permit approval by the Corp of
Engineers in the amount of S132,000, and additional traffic control work in the amount of
S70,000. The final contract amount was S5,246.547.63, S2,000,000 over the original contract
figure. The County has accepted responsibility for the cost overruns, but the City needs to accept
the project as complete.
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
A) Property Acquisition