HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 11/06/2001 City of. Kent
City Council Meeting
Agenda
4e
KENT
WASHINGTON
Mayor Jim White
Councilmembers
Leona Orr, President
Tom Brotherton Judy Woods
Tim Clark Gregory Worthing
Connie Epperly RicoYingling
November 6, 2001
Office of the City Clerk
SUMMARY AGENDA
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
November 6, 2001
KEAIT WASHINGTON Council Chambers
7 : 00 p.m.
MAYOR: Jim White COUNCILMEMBERS : Leona Orr, President
Tom Brotherton Tim Clark Connie Epperly
Judy Woods Gregory Worthing Rico Yingling
*******************************************************************
1 . CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
2 . ROLL CALL
3 . CHANGES TO AGENDA
A. FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF
B. FROM THE PUBLIC
4 . PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A. Employee of the Month
B. Introduction of Appointees
C. groglamation - Human Services Month
D. bmayet Message
5 . PUBLIC HEARINGS J
None
6 . CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Minutes - Approval
B. Bills - Approval
C. Washington State Department of Transportation Grant,
Freight Mobility Systems - Accept
D. Contract for Environmental Impact Statement for Planned
Action Ordinance - Approve Budget and Authorize
Negotiations
E. Contract with State Office of Community Development for
Comprehensive Plan Update - Authorize and Accept Grant
F. 2002 Budget and the 2001 Tax Levy for the 2002 Budget -
Set Hearing Date
G. Land Use and Planning Board Appointment - Confirm
7 . OTHER BUSINESS AbSel►ce fn t-1.,�-frrn - A-p p+reJe � Aits A. 2002 Legislative Agenda l�s - -t0"
B. Design Contract for City Hall Seismic Work [J
8 . BIDS
None
9 . REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF
10 . REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES
11 . CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
12 . EXECUTIVE SESSION
A. Pending Litigation
13 . ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: A copy of the full agenda packet.is available for perusal in the City Clerk's Office and the Kent
Library. The Agenda Summary page is on the City of Kent web site at www.ci.kent.wa.us.
An explanation of the agenda format is given on the back of this page.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office in advance at(253)
856-5725. For TDD relay service call the Woshington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388.
777"
, a
' 'CPS TC3�,e� `A,CENI?A
Citizens wishing to a�ddress 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
I
PU]3C COMw*ICATIONS
A) EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
B) INTRODUCTION OF APPOINTEE
C) PROCLAMATION - HUMAN SERVICES MONTH '
•
1
SENT CALMMAR
i
6. City Council action:
Councilmember moves, Counciltetnber
seconds to approve Consent Calendar ' Items A! through . �
Discussion
Action
6A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
October 16, 2001 .
I C
6B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received trough October 15
and paid on October 15 ,after auditing by the Operations
Committee on October 16; 2001 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
10/15/01 Wire Transfers 1054-1061 $1, 105,203 .71
10/15/01 Prepays 523865-524159 676,439.81
10/15/01 Regular 524160-524605 1, 541, 628 .75
10/15/01 Void
09/15/01 Reissued
$3, 323,272 .27
Approval of checks issued for payroll for September 16 through
September 30 and paid on October 5, 2001 ;
Date Check NumbeKo Amount
10/5�01 Checks 255317-255655 $ 285, 891 .29
10/5/01 Advices 117885-118593E 1, 040,416 .57
� $1, 326, 307 .86
E Council Agenda
Item No. 6 A-B
Kent, Washington
October 16, 2001
The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order
at 7 : 00 p.m. by Mayor White. Councilmembers present : Brotherton,
Clark, Epperly, Orr, Worthing, and Yingling. Others present :
Interim Chief Administrative Officer Martin, City Attorney
Lubovich, Police Chief Crawford, Interim Fire Chief Hamilton,
Public Works Director Wickstrom, Planning Manager Satterstrom,
Finance Director Miller, Parks, Recreation and Community Services
Director Hodgson and Employee Services Director Viseth.
Councilmember Woods was excused from the meeting. Approximately
20 people were in attendance .
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
Mayor White added Consent Calendar Item 6J. Continued
Communications Items 11A and 113 were added at the
request of Bob O'Brien and Joe Rubio.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Proclamation - Make a Difference Day. Mayor White read a
proclamation noting that the City of Kent , the Points of
Light Foundation, USA Weekend magazine, and volunteers in
the Kent community will join together for a common goal
to beautify parks in Kent and proclaimed October 27 , 2001
as Make a Difference Day in the City of Kent . He
encouraged all citizens to join him in recognizing the
importance of this observance by volunteering their time
to help "Make A Difference" in our community. The pro-
clamation was presented to Parks Director Hodgson, who
explained the events taking place at Clark Lake Park,
Morrill Meadows Park, Glenn Nelson Park and the Green
River Natural Resource Area, and invited the Community to
participate in these events .
Introduction of Appointee. The Mayor introduced Ms . Moon
Bang, his appointee to the Kent Diversity Advisory Board.
The Mayor announced his reappointment of Sherri Ourada,
Linda Denny, Carol McPherson, Doug Gesler, and Diana
Albertson to the Kent Arts Commission.
CONSENT CALENDAR
ORR MOVED to approve Consent Calendar Items A through J.
Clark seconded and the motion carried.
1
Kent City Council Minutes October 16, 2001
MINUTES
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6A)
Approval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of the
regular Council meeting of October 2 , 2001 .
BILL OF SALE
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6F)
Span Alaska Building Expansion Bill of Sale. ACCEPT the
Bill of Sale for the Span Alaska Building Expansion
submitted by Span Alaska Consolidators for continuous
operation and maintenance of 300 feet of street
improvements, as recommended by the Public Works
Director. Bonds are to be released after the one-year
expiration period. This project is located at 8130 South
216th Street .
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6G)
Seattle Mack Truck Bill of Sale. ACCEPT the Bill of Sale
for Seattle Mack Truck submitted by Sea-Mac LLC for
continuous operation and maintenance of 506 feet of
street improvements and 513 feet of storm sewer, as
recommended by the Public Works Director. Bonds are to
be released after the one-year expiration period. This
project is located at 25619 Pacific Highway South.
PUBLIC WORKS
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6C)
Year 2000 Downtown Sidewalk Replacement and Gateway
Improvements. ACCEPT the 2000 Downtown Sidewalk
Replacement contract as complete and release retainage to
Gary Merlino Construction upon standard releases from the
State and release of any liens, as recommended by the
Public Works Director. The original contract amount was
$1, 135, 836 . 50 . The final construction cost was
$1, 157, 866 . 10 .
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6E)
Kent Springs Production Well. ACCEPT the Kent Springs
Production Well contract as complete and release
retainage to Arcadia Drilling upon standard releases from
the State and release of any liens, as recommended by the
Public Works Director. The original contract amount was
$55 , 586 . 91 . The final construction cost was $57, 085 . 73 .
2
Kent City Council Minutes October 16 , 2001
APPOINTMENTS
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6I)
Kent Diversity Advisory Board. CONFIRMATION of the
Mayor' s appointment of Ms . Moon Bang to serve as a member
of the Kent Diversity Advisory Board. Ms . Bang and her
husband and two children are Kent residents . She has
lived here for nineteen years and she and her husband own
and operate East Hill Cleaners . She spends much of her
spare time with church activities .
On August 21 , 2001, City Council passed Ordinance
No . 3570 which increased the number of members on the
Diversity Advisory Board from seven to nine members .
Ms . Bang will fill one of the newly created positions .
Her term will continue until 9/30/2003 .
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6J)
Kent Arts Commission. Confirmation of the Mayor' s
reappointment of Ms . Sherri Ourada, Ms . Linda Denny,
Ms . Carol McPherson, Mr. Doug Gesler, and Ms . Diana
Albertson to continue serving as members of the Kent Arts
Commission. Their new appointment will continue until
10/31/2005 .
BUDGET
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6D)
2001 First Half Budget Adjustments. ADOPTION of
Ordinance No . 3576 amending the 2001 Budget for
adjustments made from January 1, 2001 to July 31, 2001 in
the amount of $31, 914 , 129, as recommended by the
Operations Committee . This ordinance is primarily a
housekeeping adjustment, consolidating individual budget
items into one adjusting ordinance . The majority of this
budget adjustment is in the Street Capital Projects Fund
which includes the budget for the City of Auburn ' s
portion of the 277th Street Corridor project .
FINANCE
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6B)
Approval of Bills . APPROVAL of payment of the bills
received through September 28 and paid on September 28 ,
2001 after auditing by the Operations Committee on
October 2 , 2001 .
3
Kent City Council Minutes October 16, 2001
FINANCE
Approval of checks issued for vouchers :
Date Check Numbers Amount
9/28/01 Wire Transfers 1047-1052 $ 788 , 263 . 66
9/28/01 Prepays 523201-523483 3 , 648 , 509 . 29
9/28/01 Regular 523484-523864 2 , 848, 589 . 97
9/218/01 Void
9/15/01 Reissued
$7, 285, 362 . 92
COUNCIL
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 6H)
Excused Absence. APPROVAL of an excused absence for
Councilmember Judy Woods from the October 16, 2001, City
Council meeting, as she is unable to attend.
KENT STATION
(CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS - ITEM 11A)
Kent Station. Bob O'Brien, 1131 Seattle St . , stated, in
reference to a discussion at the last Council meeting,
that government does not grow anything in a capitalist
economy. He suggested having a public discussion of the
huge financial layout by the City for this project . He
expressed concern that the City will be asked to partici-
pate in the details of the project .
(CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS - ITEM 11B)
Kent Station. Joe Rubio, 3831 S . 248th, said the City
should sell the land for this project and put the money
in the bank to earn interest . He also suggested putting
large issues such as this up for a vote of the people .
Mayor White said Rubio has no concept of what is going on
and that this project will not be negotiated in the
newspaper or on television.
Martin explained that this project is not unlike the
Redmond Town Center, and explained the many valuable
things the project brings to the community. He assured
the Mayor and Council of public participation in the
process . He noted for Yingling that the multiplier
effect for sales tax and other revenue generated on the
areas outside of the project would be 6 to 1, and that
there is no doubt it will be an asset to the community.
4
Kent City Council Minutes October 16, 2001
ADJOURNMENT
At 7 : 16 p.m. , Orr moved to adjourn. Clark seconded and
the motion carried.
Brenda Jaco je ,"2CMC
City Clerk
5
= 11
tent : City, Cou.ncil Meeting
Date November 6, 2001
Categro Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
GRANT, FREIGHT MOBILITY SYSTEMS - ACCEPT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, accept grant and direct staff to establish a budget
for the Puget Sound Freight Mobility Systems Team Project
grant . The project ' s purpose is to develop a team for setting
performance measures and providing feedback to freight
handlers .
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Director memorandum and grant
agreement
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONN'EL IMPACT: NO YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION: F
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6C
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Mike H. Martin, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Don E. Wickstrom, P.E. Public Works Director
Phone:253-856-5500
K E N T Fax: 253-856-6500
W A 3 H I N O T O N
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
Date : October 15, 2001
To : Pub i Works Committee
From: Dorms Wkstrom, Public Works Director
Subject : WSDOT Grant - Freight Mobility Systems
We are in receipt of a grant from WSDOT ($18, 790 . 00) for the
Puget Sound Freight Mobility Systems Team project . The purpose
is for development of a team to develop a plan for setting
performance measures and providing feedback to freight handlers .
The grant has been received and we are requesting authorization
to establish a budget for same.
MOTION:
Recommend authorization to direct staff to establish a budget
for the Puget Sound Freight Mobility Systems Team Project .
fms9rant
/Aff Department of Transportation
Agency City of Kent CFDA No. 20.205
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance)
Address 220 4th Avenue South Project No.
Kent, WA 98032
Agreement No.
For OSC WSDOT Use Only
The Local Agency having complied,or hereby agreeing to comply,with the terms and conditions set forth in(1)Title 23.U.S.Code Highways,(2)the regulations
issued pursuant thereto,(3)Office of Management and Budget Circulars A-102,A-87 and A-133,(4)the policies and procedures promulgated by the Washington State
Department of Transportation,and(5)the federal aid project agreement entered into between the State and Federal Government,relative to the above project,the
Washington State Department of Transportation will authorize the Local Agency to proceed on the project by a separate notification.Federal funds which arc to be
obligated for the project may not exceed the amount shown herein on line o,column 3,without written authority by the State,subject to the approval of the Federal
Highway Administration.All project costs not reimbursed by the Federal Government shall be the responsibility of the Local Agency.
Project Description
Name Puget Sound Freight Mobility Systems Team Project Length
Termini
Description of Work
This project will develop a team and select a facilitator to develop a plan for setting performance measures and
providing feed back to freight handlers.
Estimate of Funding
Type of Work (�) (2) (3)
Estimated Total Estimated Agency Estimated
Project Funds Funds Federal Funds
PE a.Agency .18,790.001 18,790.00
100 % b. Other
c.Other
Federal Aid d.State
Participation
Ratio for PE e.Total PE Cost Estimate(a+b+c+d) 18,790.00 I 18,790.00
Right of Way f.Agency
% g. Other
h.Other
Federal Aid i. State
Participation
Ratio for RW j.Total R/W Cost Estimate (f+g+h+t
Construction k. Contract I
I. Other
m. Other
n.Other
% o.Agency
Federal Aid p. State
Participation
Ratio for CN q.Total CN Cost Estimate(k+l+m+n+o+p)
r.Total Project Cost Estimate(e+j+q) 18,790.001 1 18,790.00
Agency Official Washington State Department of Transportation
By /L By
Title � j� 1�ILT/cam,vc �e Assistant Secretary for Highways and Local Programs
Date Executed •
DOT Form 140-039 EF
Revised 512000
Kent �City Council Meeting
Date ' November 6, 2001
Category Consent Calendar
1 . SUBJECT: CONTRACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR
PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE - APPROVE BUDGET AND
AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATIONS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve a budget not to exceed $51,460
and authorize the Mayor to negotiate and enter into a contract
with Huckell/Weinman Associates, Inc. for the Planned Action
Environmental Impact Statement.
The -Planning Committee is considering this matter on
November 5, 2001. The Planning Department is requesting
approval of a budget not to exceed $51,460, and authorization
for the Mayor to negotiate and enter into aicontract based on
the attached proposal by Huckell/Weinman Associates, Inc for
the Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement . This likely
will be a supplemental EIS to the Downtown Strategic Action
Plan and Integrated Environmental Impact Statement that was
completed in 1998 . Completion of this projoct fulfills the
environmental process for the anticipated Kent Station
development.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo dated 10/30/01; Consultant Services
Contract between the City of Kent and Huckell/Weinman
Associates; and Attachment A - Scope of Work
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning 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:
4
ACTION: '
Council Agenda
Item No. 6D
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, Acting CD Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Charlene Anderson,Acting ManagerKENT
WASHINGT Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
October 30, 2001
TO: Mayor Jim White, Council President Leona Orr, and City Council Members
FROM: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Senior Planner
RE: Environmental Impact Statement—Planned Action Ordinance for Kent Downtown
North Core
Enclosed is a draft contract, scope of work and estimated budget of S51,460 from
Huckell/Weinman Associates, Inc. for a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS")
for the Kent Station area. It is anticipated that the planned action document will be a Supplemental
EIS to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan and Integrated Environmental Impact Statement that
was completed in 1998.
Planned Action ordinances are fairly new to Washington State and Huckell/Weinman has been on
the forefront of the planning efforts in this area. The firm also is acceptable to the
Langley/Tarragon/LMN team with whom the City is negotiating for the Kent Station development.
According to the requirements of City of Kent Procurement Policy No. 1.1.7 and 1.1.8 and Kent
City Code Section 3.70.050 and 3.70.060, staff is requesting approval of a budget not to exceed
$51,460 and authorization for the Mayor to negotiate and enter into a contract based on the attached
proposal by Huckell/Weinman Associates, Inc. for the Planned Action Environmental Impact
Statement.
The Planning Committee is reviewing these materials at their November 5`h meeting; their
recommendation will be available at the November 6`h City Council meeting.
CA\pm S:\Permit\Plan\kent station\2001\seis-weinmancc.DOC
Enclosures— Consultant Services Contract
Attachment A—Scope of Work,Estimated Budget,Project Schedule
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT
between the City of Kent and Huckell/Weinman Associates
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the CITY OF KENT, a Washington
municipal corporation (hereinafter the "City"), and HUCKELL/WEINMAN ASSOCIATES
organized under the laws of the State of Washington, located and doing business at 270 — 3ra
Avenue, Suite 200, Kirkland, WA 98033, telephone number (425) 828-4463, attention Richard
Weinman(hereinafter the "Consultant").
RECITALS
1. The City desires that the Consultant perform services necessary to provide
consultation, advice, and alternatives to the City in the preparation of plans, specifications, and cost
estimates for the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ("SEIS") for the Downtown Kent
North Core Planned Action.
2. The Consultant agrees to perform the services more specifically described in the
Scope of Work, including any addenda thereto as of the effective date of this Agreement, attached
hereto as Exhibit "A"which is incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, it is agreed
by and between the parties as follows:
AGREEMENT
I. Description of Work. Consultant shall perform all work as described in Scope of Work
attached hereto as Exhibit "A." Consultant further represents that the services furnished under this
Agreement will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices in effect
at the time such services are performed.
II. Payment.
A. The City shall pay the Consultant, based on time and materials, an amount not to
exceed FIFTY ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED SIXTY AND N0/100
DOLLARS ($51,460.00) for the services described in this Agreement. This is the
maximum amount to be paid under this Agreement for the work contracted for herein
and described in Exhibit "A," and shall not be exceeded without the prior written
authorization of the City in the form of a negotiated and executed supplemental
agreement. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, the City reserves the right to direct the
Consultant's compensated services under the time frame set forth in Section IV
herein before reaching the maximum amount. The Consultant's billing rates shall be
as delineated in Exhibit"A."
B. The Consultant shall submit monthly payment invoices to the City after such
services have been performed, and a final bill upon completion of all the services
described in this Agreement. The City shall pay the full amount of an invoice within
forty-five (45) days of receipt. If the City objects to all or any portion of any
invoice, it shall so notify the Consultant of the same within fifteen(15) days from the
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT- 1
(between City of Kent and Huckell/Weinman Associates) October 30, 2001
date of receipt and shall pay that portion of the invoice not in dispute, and the parties
shall immediately make every effort to settle the disputed portion.
C. In the event the Scope of Work is modified or changed so that more or less work or
time is required by the Consultant, and such modification is reached by mutual
agreement of the parties to this contract, the payment for services and maximum
contract amount shall be adjusted accordingly upon agreement of the parties.
III. Duration of Work. The City and Consultant agree that work will begin on the tasks described
in Exhibit "A" immediately upon execution of this Agreement. The parties further agree that the
work contracted for herein shall be completed within the timelines established in Exhibit "A" for
each identified task, with the entire project to be completed by April 9, 2002; PROVIDED,
however, that additional time shall be granted by the City for excusable delays or extra work, as
described in Section VI.(D) below.
IV. Relationship of Parties. The parties intend that an independent contractor-employer
relationship will be created by this Agreement. As Consultant is customarily engaged in an
independently established trade which encompasses the specific service provided to the City, no
agent, employee, representative or sub-contractor of Consultant shall be or shall be deemed to be
the employee, agent, representative or sub-contractor of the City. In the performance of the work,
Consultant is an independent contractor with the ability to control and direct the performance and
details of the work, the City being interested only in the results obtained under this Agreement.
None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees, including, but not limited to,
compensation, insurance, and unemployment insurance are available from the City to the
employees, agents, representatives, or sub-contractors of the Consultant. Consultant will be solely
and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Consultant's agents, employees,
representatives and sub-contractors during the performance of this Agreement. The City may,
during the term of this Agreement, engage other independent contractors to perform the same or
similar work.
V. Place of Work. The Consultant shall perform the work authorized under this Agreement at its
offices in Kirkland, Washington. Meetings with the City staff shall take place at the City's offices at
400 West Gowe, Kent, Washington, or at locations mutually agreed upon by the parties.
VI. Termination
A. Termination of Agreement
If the City receives reimbursement by any federal, state, or other source for work
described in Section I herein, and that funding is withdrawn, reduced or limited in
any way, or the project is cancelled or substantially reduced after the execution date
of this Agreement and prior to the completion of the work, the City may summarily
terminate this Agreement. Termination shall be effective ten (10) calendar days after
Consultant's receipt of the written notice by certified mail.
B. Termination for Failure to Provide Services Bargained For.
The Consultant agrees that it was hired by the City based on the Consultant's
representation that employees identified in the Scope of Work, attached hereto as
Exhibit "A," will be available to perform the services described in Section I for the
duration of this Agreement. If any of the employees identified in the Scope of Work
are unavailable to perform the services bargained for, for any reason, the City of
Kent reserves the right to terminate this contract or renegotiate the amount of
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT-2
(between City of Kent and HuckelUWeinman Associates) October 30, 2001
consideration. The consultant must immediately notify the City, in writing, if any
employee identified in the Scope of Work is unavailable to perform the services
described in Section I of this Agreement. Nothing in the foregoing language will
alter the Consultant's independent contractor status.
C. Termination for Failure to Prosecute Work or to Complete Work Satisfactorily
If the Consultant refuses or fails to prosecute the work with such diligence as will
ensure its completion within the time frames specified herein, or as modified or
extended as provided in this Agreement, or to complete such work in a manner
consistent with the standard of care in Consultant's profession, then the City may, by
written notice to the Consultant, give notice of its intention to terminate the
Consultant's right to proceed with the work. On such notice, the Consultant shall
have ten (10) calendar days to cure, to the satisfaction of the City or its
representative, or the City shall send the Consultant a written termination letter
which shall be effective upon the Consultant's receipt of the written notice by
certified mail. Upon termination, the City may take over the work and prosecute the
same to completion, by contract or otherwise, and Consultant shall be liable to the
City for any additional costs incurred by it in the completion of the Scope of Work
referenced as Exhibit "A" and as modified or amended prior to termination.
"Additional Costs" shall mean all reasonable costs incurred by the City beyond the
maximum contract price specified in II(A), above.
D. Excusable Delays
The right of Consultant to proceed shall not be terminated nor shall Consultant be
charged with liquidated damages for any delays in the completion of the work due
to: 1) any acts of the federal government in controlling, restricting, or requisitioning
materials, equipment, tools, or labor by reason of war, national defense, or other
national emergency; 2) any acts of the City, its consultants, or other public agencies
causing such delay; and 3) causes not reasonably foreseeable by the parties at the
time of the execution of the Agreement that are beyond the control and without the
fault or negligence of the Consultant, including, but not restricted to, acts of God,
fires, floods, strikes, or weather of unusual severity; and (4) negotiated and executed
supplemental agreements between the City and Consultant for Consultant to perform
extra work defined as tasks not included in the Scope of Work referenced as Exhibit
"A." PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the Consultant must promptly notify the City
within ten (10) calendar days in writing of the cause of the delay. If, on the basis of
the facts and the terms of this Agreement, the delay is properly excusable, the City
shall, in writing, extend the time for completing the work for a period of time
commensurate with the period of excusable delay.
E. Rights Upon Termination
In the event of termination, the City shall pay for all services performed by the
Consultant to the effective date of termination, as described on a final invoice
submitted to the City. After termination, the City may take possession of all records
and data within the Consultant's possession pertaining to this project which may be
used by the City without restriction. Any such use not related to the project which
Consultant was contracted to perform shall be without liability or legal exposure to
the Consultant.
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT-3
(between City of Kent and HuckelUWeinman Associates) October 30,2001
VII. Discrimination. In the hiring of employees for the performance of work under this
Agreement or any sub-contract hereunder, the Consultant, its sub-contractors, or any person acting
on behalf of such Consultant or sub-contractor shall not, by reason of race, religion, color, sex,
national origin, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, discriminate against
any person who is qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment relates.
Consultant shall execute the attached City of Kent Equal Employment Opportunity Policy
Declaration, Comply with City Administrative Policy 1.2, and upon completion of the contract
work, file the attached Compliance Statement.
VIII. Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers,
officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages,
losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of or in connection with the
Consultant's performance of this Agreement, except for that portion of the injuries and damages
caused by the City's negligence.
The City's inspection or acceptance of any of Consultant's work when completed shall not be
grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115,
then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to
property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its
officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's liability hereunder shall be
only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence.
IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE
INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONSULTANT'S WAIVER
OF 11VIMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE
PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
IX. Insurance. The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement,
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in
connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents,
representatives, employees, sub-consultants or sub-contractors.
Before beginning work on the project described in this Agreement, the Consultant shall provide a
Certificate of Insurance evidencing:
1. Automobile Liability insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit
per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and
2. Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less
than $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and general aggregate for personal
injury, bodily injury and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be limited to:
blanket contractual; products/completed operations/broad form property damage; explosion,
collapse and underground (XCU) if applicable; and employer's liability; and
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT-4
(between City of Kent and HuckelIlWeinman Associates) October 30, 2001
3. Excess Liability insurance with limits not less than 1,000,000 limit per occurrence and
aggregate..
4. Professional Liability insurance with limits no less than$1,000,000 limit per occurrence.
Any payment of deductible or self-insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the
Consultant.
All required policies shall be provided on an "occurrence" basis except professional liability
insurance (if required),which shall be provided on a"claims-made"basis.
The City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance
policy, as respects work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant and a copy of the endorsement
naming the City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The City
reserves the right to receive a certified copy of all the required insurance policies.
The Consultant's Commercial General Liability insurance shall contain a clause stating that
coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought,
except with respects to the limits of the insurer's liability.
The Consultant's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the City and the City shall be
given thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, of any
cancellation, suspension or material change in coverage.
The City also reserves its unqualified right to require at any time and for any reason, proof of
coverage in the form of a duplicate of the insurance policy with all endorsements as evidence of
coverage.
X. Exchange of Information. The City warrants the accuracy of any information supplied by it to
Consultant for the purpose of completion of the work under this Agreement. The parties agree that
the Consultant will notify the City of any inaccuracies in the information provided by the City as
may be discovered in the process of performing the work, and that the City is entitled to rely upon
any information supplied by the Consultant which results as a product of this Agreement.
XI. Ownership and Use of Records and Documents. Original documents, drawings, designs and
reports developed under this Agreement shall belong to and become the property of the City. All
written information submitted by the City to the Consultant in connection with the services
performed by the Consultant under this Agreement will be safeguarded by the Consultant to at least
the same extent as the Consultant safeguards like information relating to its own business. If such
information is publicly available or is already in Consultant's possession or known to it, or is
rightfully obtained by the Consultant from third parties, Consultant shall bear no responsibility for
its disclosure, inadvertent or otherwise.
All data, documents and files created by Consultant under this Agreement may be stored at
Consultant's office in Kirkland, Washington. Consultant shall make such data, documents, and files
available to the City upon its request at all reasonable times for the purpose of editing, modifying
and updating as necessary until such time as the City is capable of storing such information in the
City's offices. Duplicate copies of this information shall be provided to the City upon its request,
and at reasonable cost.
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT-5
(between City of Kent and Huckell/Weinman Associates) October 30, 2001
Any use or reuse of the documents, data and files created by Consultant for the City on this project
by anyone other than Consultant on any other project shall be without liability or legal exposure to
Consultant.
XII. Recyclable Materials. Pursuant to Chapter 3.80 of the Kent City Code, the City requires its
contractors and consultants to use recycled and recyclable products whenever practicable. A price
preference may be available for any designated recycled product.
XIII. City's Right of Inspection. Even though Consultant is an independent contractor with the
authority to control and direct the performance and details of the work authorized under this
Agreement, the work must meet the approval of the City and shall be subject to the City's general
right of inspection to secure the satisfactory completion thereof. The Consultant agrees to comply
with all federal, state, and municipal laws, rules, and regulations that are now effective or in the
future become applicable to Consultant's business, equipment, and personnel engaged in operations
covered by this Agreement or accruing out of the performance of such operations.
XIV. Consultant to Maintain Records to Support Independent Contractor Status. On the
effective date of this Agreement (or shortly thereafter), Consultant shall:
A. File a schedule of expenses with the Internal Revenue Service for the type of
business Consultant conducts;
B. Establish an account with the Washington State Department of Revenue and other
necessary state agencies for the payment of all state taxes normally paid by
employers, register to receive a unified business identifier number from the State of
Washington; and
C. Maintain a separate set of books and records that reflect all items of income and
expenses of Consultant's business, all as described in the Revised Code of
Washington (RCW) Section 51.08.195, as required to show that the services
performed by Consultant under this Agreement shall not give rise to an employer-
employee relationship between the parties which is subject to RCW Title 51,
Industrial Insurance.
XV. Work Performed at Consultant's Risk. Consultant shall take all precautions necessary and
shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and subcontractors in the performance of
the work hereunder and shall utilize all protection necessary for that purpose. All work shall be
done at Consultant's own risk, and Consultant shall be responsible for any loss of or damage to
materials, tools, or other articles used or held for use in connection with the work.
XVI. Non-Waiver of Breach. The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of any of
the covenants and agreements contained herein, or to exercise any option herein conferred in one or
more instances shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of said covenants,
agreements or options, and the same shall be and remain in full force and effect.
XVII. Resolution of Disputes and Governing Law. Should any dispute, misunderstanding, or
conflict arise as to the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement, the matter shall first be
referred to the City, and the City shall determine the term or provision's true intent or meaning. The
City shall also decide all questions which may arise between the parties relative to the actual
services provided or to the sufficiency of the performance hereunder.
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT-6
(between City of Kent and HuckelUWeinman Associates) October 30,2001
If any dispute arises between the City and Consultant under any of the provisions of this Agreement
which cannot be resolved by the City's determination in a reasonable time, or if Consultant does not
agree with the City's decision on the disputed matter,jurisdiction of any resulting litigation shall be
filed in King County Superior Court,King County, Washington.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
Washington. In any claim or lawsuit for damages arising from the parties' performance of this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to compensation for all legal costs and attorney's
fees incurred in defending or bringing such claim or lawsuit, in addition to any other recovery or
award provided by law; provided, however, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the
City's right to indemnification under Section VIII of this agreement.
XVIII. Written Notice. All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the parties
at the addresses listed on the signature page of the agreement, unless notified to the contrary. Any
written notice hereunder shall become effective upon the date of mailing by registered or certified
mail, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addressee at the address stated in this
Agreement or such other address as may be hereafter specified in writing.
XIX. Assignment. Any assignment of this Agreement by the Consultant without the written
consent of the City shall be void. If the City shall give its consent to any assignment, the terms of
this agreement shall continue in full force and effect and no further assignment shall be made
without the City's consent.
XX. Modification. No waiver, alteration, or modification of any of the provisions of this
Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the
City and Consultant.
XXI. Entire Agreement. The written provisions and terms of this Agreement, together with any
Exhibits attached hereto, shall supersede all prior verbal statements of any officer or other
representative of the City, and such statements shall not be effective or be construed as entering into
or forming a part of or altering in any manner this Agreement. The entire agreement between the
parties with respect to the subject matter hereunder is contained in this Agreement and any Exhibits
attached hereto. All of the above documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement and form the
Agreement document as fully as if the same were set forth herein. Should any language in any of
the Exhibits to this Agreement conflict with any language contained in this Agreement, the terms of
this Agreement shall prevail.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties below have executed this Agreement.
CONSULTANT THE CITY OF KENT
By By Jim White
Its Its Mayor
DATE: DATE:
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT-7
(between City of Kent and Huckell/Weinman Associates) October 30, 2001
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
Kent City Attorney City Clerk
NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: NOTICES TO BE SENT TO:
HUCKELL/WEINMAN ASSOCIATES CITY OF KENT
270—3`d Avenue, Suite 200 220—4`h Avenue South
Kirkland, WA 98033 Kent, WA 98032
�r�wrteroP.Fann=sxrow.aw W.m..cw.o.en.o.r.
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT-8
(between City of Kent and Huckell/Weinman Associates) October 30, 2001
DECLARATION
CITY OF KENT EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY POLICY
The City of Kent is committed to conform to Federal and State laws regarding equal opportunity.
As such all contractors, subcontractors and suppliers who perform work with relation to this
contract shall comply with the regulations of the City's equal employment opportunity policies.
The following questions specifically identify the requirements the City deems necessary for any
contractor, subcontractor or supplier on this specific contract to adhere to. An affirmative response
is required on all of the following questions for this contract to be valid and binding. If any
contractor, subcontractor or supplier willfully misrepresents themselves with regard to the directives
outlines, it will be considered a breach of contract and it will be at the City's sole determination
regarding suspension or termination for all or part of the contract;
The questions are as follows:
1. I have read the attached City of Kent administrative policy number 1.2.
2. During the time of this contract I will not discriminate in employment on the basis of sex, race,
color,national origin, age, or the presence of all sensory, mental or physical disability.
3. During the time of this contract the prime contractor will provide a written statement to all new
employees and subcontractors indicating commitment as an equal opportunity employer.
4. Duringthe time of the contract I the rime contractor, will actively consider hiring and
� P � Y g
promotion of women and minorities.
5. Before acceptance of this contract, an adherence statement will be signed by me, the Prime
Contractor, that the Prime Contractor complied with the requirements as set forth above.
By signing below, I agree to fulfill the five requirements referenced above.
Dated this day of 2001.
By:
For:
Title:
Date:
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS-9 (October 29,2001)
CITY OF ]KENT
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
NUMBER: 1.2 EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1998
SUBJECT: MINORITY AND WOMEN SUPERSEDES: April 1, 1996
CONTRACTORS APPROVED BY Jim White, Mayor
POLICY:
Equal employment opportunity requirements for the City of Kent will conform to federal and state
laws. All contractors, subcontractors, consultants and suppliers of the City must guarantee equal
employment opportunity within their organization and, if holding contracts with the City amounting
to $10,000 or more within any given year, must take the following affirmative steps:
1. Provide a written statement to all new employees and subcontractors indicating commitment as
an equal opportunity employer.
2. Actively consider for promotion and advancement available minorities and women.
Any contractor, subcontractor, consultant or supplier who willfully disregards the City's
nondiscrimination and equal opportunity requirements shall be considered in breach of contract and
subject to suspension or termination for all or part of the contract.
Contract Compliance Officers will be appointed by the Directors of Planning, Parks, and Public
Works Departments to assume the following duties for their respective departments.
1. Ensuring that contractors, subcontractors, consultants, and suppliers subject to these regulations
are familiar with the regulations and the City's equal employment opportunity policy.
2. Monitoring to assure adherence to federal, state and local laws, policies and guidelines.
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS- 10 (October 29,2001)
CITY OF KENT
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
This form shall be filled out AFTER COMPLETION of this project by the Contractor awarded the
contract.
I, the undersigned, a duly represented agent of
Company, hereby acknowledge and declare that the before-mentioned company was the prime
contractor for the contract known as that was entered into on the
(date) ,between the firm I represent and the City of Kent.
I declare that I complied fully with all of the requirements and obligations as outlined in the City of
Kent Administrative Policy 1.2 and the Declaration City of Kent Equal Employment Opportunity
Policy that was part of the before-mentioned contract.
Dated this day of . 2000.
By: - -
For:
Title:
Date:
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS- 11 (October 29,2001)
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF WORK
DOWNTOWN KENT NORTH CORE PLANNED ACTION EIS
Project Background
In response to a request for proposals from the City of Kent, Langly Properties
has proposed a mixed-use urban village development in the vicinity of the
Commuter Rail Station in downtown Kent. The City wishes to designate the
proposed mixed-use area as a planned action, pursuant to authorization in the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA, RCW 43.21C), implementing rules (WAC
197-11), and other provisions of state law (36.70B).
The subject area is approximately the east one-half of the North Core district
of the Downtown. The area is generally bounded by Meeker Street on the
south, James Street on the north, Fourth Avenue on the west and the BNSF
Railroad right-of-way on the east.
The Planned Action area has been addressed, to some extent, in existing plans,
0 analysis and environmental documentation, including the following:
■ Commuter Rail Station Area Study, 2000
■ Downtown Development Strategy and Impact Analysis, 2000.
■ Kent Water System Plan, 2000.
■ Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan and Integrated EIS, (Draft and
Final EISs), 1997 and 1998
■ Kent Comprehensive Sewer Plan, 1998.
■ Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan Market Analysis Update, 1998.
■ Kent Downtown Plan - Preliminary Market Analysis, 1996.
■ City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, 1995.
■ Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS (Draft and Final), 1994-1995.
■ Downtown Kent Parking Study, 1993
■ Kent Downtown Plan Implementation Program, 1991.
■ Kent Downtown Plan Supplement, 1989
A Supplemental EIS (SEIS) will be prepared to add to and augment the
environmental analysis contained in these existing documents, and to satisfy
SEPA's requirements for a planned action.
1
SEIS Scope of Work
Huckell/Weinman Associates will be responsible for the tasks identified below.
Alternatives. Three alternatives will be considered in the EIS. These include:
(1) the master plan proposed by Langly Properties, Inc. and agreed to by the
City; (2) Alternative E from the Downtown Strategic Action Plan: and (3) no-
action.
Analysis Time Horizon. Langly Properties has proposed development of the
master plan area in four phases. Phase I is planned to be completed by the end
of 2003. Although no specific timeline is established for the other phases, they
are not precluded from being completed concurrent with the first phase.
Kent's Downtown Strategic Action Plan anticipates development through 2010;
this would provide a reasonable horizon year for the planned action.
For the purpose of analysis, the EIS will evaluate potential i at
completion of Phase I (end of 2003) and at the end of Ph a4 III (2610 assumed).
The City will provide the consultant with estimates of deve o ent for each of
the three alternatives for the years 2003 and 2010.
Huckell/Weinman Associates will be responsible for preparing the EIS
document, and for analyzing environmental impacts to land use, plans and
policies and aesthetics. This will include reviewing/summarizing the input of
other technical consultants, including analyses of transportation/parking,
wetlands and public health issues. Huckell/Weinman Associates will not be
responsible for contractual relationships or management of technical
consultants.
Major issues that will be considered in the planned action EIS include land use
compatibility, relationship to plans and policies, aesthetics,
transportation/parking, wetlands, and public health (soil contamination).
Information in the EIS prepared for the City's Comprehensive Plan may be
adopted or incorporated by reference as appropriate.
As an initial project task, the consultant will review existing documentation for
the study area to confirm that no additional elements of the environment
require analysis. A contingency task/budget is included to accommodate
potential inclusion of additional issues, should that be deemed necessary or
desirable by the City.
SETS Substantive Issues
Land Use Compatibility. The land use analysis will compare and evaluate the
amount, types, scale and pattern of uses proposed in the planned action with
the existing land use pattern and with adjacent development. The focus will
be on potential conflicts between uses, bulk and scale, particularly at the
2
edges of land use districts. It is assumed that the City will provide basic
quantitative information related to the development capacity of the proposal
and alternatives (i.e., square feet of use by type) and will identify a typical
building footprint. In addition, the City will calculate the quantity of
development (by type) anticipated within the downtown and North Core sub-
area in the Comprehensive Plan, and the amount that would be permitted by
the planned action.
Relationship to Plans and Polices. Major plans and policies that will be
addressed include the federal Endangered Species Act, the state Growth
Management Act, and the Kent Comprehensive Plan. The analysis will
summarize the requirements of these plans/policies and discuss the relative
consistency of the proposed action with them.
Aesthetics. The overall aesthetic character of the sub-area will be described
in terms of the quality of the urban environment, the design and character of
existing buildings, and building height, bulk and scale. The degree and nature
of changes encouraged by the proposal and alternatives will be discussed. The
analysis will rely primarily on narrative descriptions, as supplemented by
photographs of existing character; no photographic or computer simulations of
future development character are proposed.
Transportation and Parkin. A consultant identified by and contracted with
the City, will prepare the transportation analysis. Huckell/Weinman Associates
will review and summarize the analysis for inclusion in the SETS.
Wetlands. A wetlands report will be prepared by a technical consultant
selected by the City. Huckell/Weinman Associates will review and summarize
the analysis for inclusion in the SEIS.
Public Health. An analysis of potential contamination of sites identified by the
City wilt be prepared by a technical consultant selected by the City.
Huckelt/Weinman Associates will review and summarize the analysis for
inclusion in the SEIS.
Other EIS/Project Tasks
The consultant's rote in preparation of the planned action SEIS will involve
drafting other sections of the document required by SEPA, including the
summary, fact sheet, table of contents, and cover memo. We will also
coordinate with the city and other technical consultants. Huckell/Weinman
Associates will participate in up to two public meetings related to public
comment on the SEIS as requested by the City.
3
A formal scoping process is not required for a supplemental EIS; no scoping
meeting or notice is assumed, therefore. We will assist the City in preparing a
determination of significance.
Contineency Issues: It is possible that additional environmental issues, beyond
those identified above, may be deemed necessary or desirable to include in the
SEIS. If desired, we could also assist the City with preparation of a
determination of significance. Our budget includes a small "contingency" line
item to accommodate such potential issues.
Printing/Graphics. The budget assumes that the consultant will print the
preliminary (pre-publication) SEIS documents (Draft and Final) for internal
review, and that the City will print and distribute the published SEISs. It is
assumed that the only graphics necessary for the SEIS will be the alternatives,
a land use/zoning map, sketches of the type of development anticipated in the
planned action area (such as those included in Langly's proposal), and similar
graphics; these will be provided by the City.
4
Estimated Budget
Task Hours Cost
Draft SEIS
Project management/coordination 50 $ 6,000
Meetings 20 2,400
Review of Existing Documents 8 960
Project description 40 4,800
Misc. EIS sections (summary, fact sheet, etc) 30 3,600
Land use compatibility 40 4,800
Plans Ft policies 24 2,900
Aesthetics 32 3,900
Transportation (summary) 12 1,500
Wetlands (summary) 12 1,500
Public health/contamination (summary) 12 1,500
Contingency 30 3,600
Preliminary Draft SEIS preparation/editing 24 2,900
Draft SEIS preparation/editing 24 2,900
Printing 200
Misc. Expenses (travel, xerox, communication) 600
Subtotal Draft EIS $ 44,060
Final SETS
Final EIS Estimate a 7,000.
Total Budget $ 51,060
Notes:
1. Costs are estimated using an average hourly rate of$120. Billing rates
(year 2001) for assigned staff range from $85 to $151 per hour.
2. Budget assumes that all necessary graphics will prepared and provided
by the City. Assumes 1 preliminary Draft EIS/1 round of internal review
and comment.
3. Prelim DSE1S Printing: assumes 25 copies of PDEIS, 1 volume, 100
pages@7 cents. Assumes City will print and distribute Draft SETS.
4. The level of effort and costs required to complete the Final EIS will
depend primarily on the number and substance of comments received on
the Draft. It is also possible that new alternatives and/or revisions to the
proposal, could be identified. Our budget assumes that relatively few
comments will be received and that a relatively modest level of effort will
be required.
5. Budget does not include attendance or testimony at hearings or
administrative or judicial appeals.
5
Project Schedule
The Draft and Final Supplemental EIS are planned to be completed within a six-
month time frame. This estimate assumes that project information, technical
reports, review of preliminary draft documents and other tasks over which the
consultant has no direct control, can occur within a timeline jointly established
by the City and consultant.
Tasks Duration Dates
Review existing documents/confirm SETS 1 week October 22 - 26
scope
Receive alternatives information from City by October 22
Prepare preliminary description of 1 week October 22 -29
proposal/alternatives
City review/comment on description of 1 week October 29 -
alternatives November 5
Prepare preliminary Draft SETS sections 6 weeks October 29 -
December 10
Receive technical reports - transportation, by November 19
wetlands, contamination (starts October 22)
Submit preliminary Draft SEIS to City by December 10
City review/comment on Draft SEIS 2 weeks December 10 -21
Prepare revisions to preliminary Draft SEIS 10 days Dec. 26 - Jan.10,
2002
Submit 2" preliminary Draft SEIS to City By January 10
Final review by City 3 days January 10 -14
Revisions by Consultant 4 days January 15 -18
Camera-ready Draft SETS to City January 18
Draft SEIS printed and issued by City 4 days January 24
30-day comment period 30 days January 24-
February 22
Receive public comments on Draft SEIS by February 25
Prepare preliminary Final SEIS 2 weeks Feb. 25 - March
8
Submit preliminary Final SEIS to City March 8
City review and comment 1 week March 11 -18
Prepare revisions to Final SEIS 1 week March 18 -25
Submit 2" preliminary Final SEIS to City March 25
Final review by City 3 days March 25 - 28
Revisions by Consultant 4 days March 29 - April 3
Camera-ready Final SEIS to City Aril 3
Final SEIS printed and issued by City 4 days Aril 9
6
i Counci1 Meeting
060a_mber 6, 2041
y; pry o_ nsent Calendar
I'
1. StMJZCT: CONTRACT 'FOR STATE OFFICE OF`'� 'CZ "Y 1'DEVELOPMENT
FOR COMPREHUNSIVE PLAN UPDAT0, -� ! RIZE AND
ACCEPT GRAN !
` 2 . SUMKARY STATEMENT: accept the Growth �gement Act grant, a
in the amount of $57, 50,0 and authorize the = to execute a
m
contract and establish a budget for the s . _ ,,
On November 5, 2001, the Planning Committa�; i ;;c' ' ,sidering the,.,
above item. The Planning Department is ,r ing acceptance
of the Growth Management Act grant in thee^"' t. $57, 500 and .
authorization to execute a contract outlihe: icope of work
and deliverables. f
I
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo dated 10/30/01; At ,b0idnt� A - Scope of
Work; letter from Office of Community Deve jpWMatl elated
10/2/01; and letter from Office of Communilt oovO d ed dated
10/9/01 � a
4 . RECOMNENDED BY: Plannij Committee
(Committee Staff 'E
x�miner, Commission,,_
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PER,04 L IMPACT: �I�1I1;��xx '� - YES
I
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $.
SOURCR OF FUNDS
7. CITY g2UNCIL ACTION: '
Councilmember ;,moves, Councilmeml ' second&
k
l
DISCUSSION:
i' F
f 11
ACTION: , f '
Council Agenda
` Item No. 6E
a r , ,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, Acting CD Director
PLANNING SERVICES
K E N T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Acting Manager
WASHINGTON
Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
October 30, 2001
TO: Mayor Jim White, Council President Leona Orr, and City Council Members
FROM: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Senior Planner
RE: GMA Update Grant
Enclosed are letters from the State of Washington Office of Community Development informing
us that the City of Kent was awarded a total of$57,500 pursuant to our application for GMA
Update Grant. The grant is contingent upon execution of a contract outlining the scope of work
and deliverables.
I have enclosed a draft scope of work including deliverables and time frame. Our original
application estimated a budget of S750,000 for completion of the entire comprehensive plan
update by December, 2002. The resources identified in the enclosed scope of work have
decreased by $200,000 in anticipation of a different time frame for addressing the update of the
Shoreline Master Program and issues related to the Endangered Species Act. Although the City
of Kent still is required to complete a major update of our comprehensive plan next year, the
scope of work and deliverables for the grant concentrate on specific critical areas amendments,
transportation and natural resources.
The Planning Committee is considering these materials at their meeting of November 5`h. Their
recommendation will be available at the November 6`h City Council meeting.
CA\pm\S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2001\GMA-UpdateGrant.doc
Enclosures— October 2&9,2001 letters from Office of Community Development
Attachment A—Scope of Work
Attachment A: Scope of Work
City of Kent
Contract # (to be provided by CTED)
Project Title: GNIA Update
The GRANTEE is responsible for the preparation of all contract deliverables set forth below. The
process and product shall be substantially consistent with the GRANTEE's grant application submitted
to the Department for this round of funding and with the requirements of the Growth Management Act.
Deliverables will be provided to the Department in electronic format wherever possible. At the
Department's or the GRANTEE's request, deliverables may be provided in paper format.
Project Description: The City of Kent proposes to review and update its comprehensive land use plan
and development regulations according to RCW 36.70A.130(1), specifically completing update of the
critical areas ordinance and transportation element.
Milestones:
I"Quarter 2002 Critical Areas:Digitize hazard area maps
Update wetland inventory maps
Incorporate soils maps into comp plan maps
Review zoning code regulations for hazard area development for
consistency with Best Available Science—propose amendments as appropriate
Review BMP's for sewer/water system and road maintenance for
consistency with Best Available Science—propose amendments as appropriate
Adopt Integrated Pest Management regulations consistent with
Best Available Science
Adopt stormwater management plan.
2°d Quarter 2002 Transportation: Inventory/describe state-owned facilities; relate to land uses
(Commuter Rail?Freight railroad?)
Inventory/describe locally-owned transportation facilities
Estimate traffic impacts to all transportation facilities
Identify LOS for state-owned facilities (Add definition of
"urban"LOS for HSS?—LOS "D" for urban"C"for rural)
Coordinate needs for state-owned facilities with DOT
Determine relationship of state-owned facilities to other comp
plan elements
Update LOS standards for locally-owned arterials and transit;
coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions; coordinate with RTPO
Review concurrency ordinance—concurrency not required for
facilities of state-wide significance
Review definitions section to ensure appropriate new terms are
defined.
Review definition of public capital facilities/essential public
facilities—include transportation facilities of statewide significance
Update Projects and financing section(TIP/CIP)
3`d Quarter 2002 Natural Resources:
Finalize consideration of agricultural lands, including TDR/PDR
as appropriate
Deliverables:
March 31, 2002 Digitized hazard area, wetland and soils maps
Draft Stormwater Management Plan
Draft or Ordinance for BMP's for sewer, water&road
maintenance
Draft Integrated Pest Management Plan
Draft Critical Areas Ordinance amendment
June 30, 2002 Draft Transportation Element update, including inventory of and
impacts to facilities of statewide significance
September 30, 2002 Draft ordinance related to Agricultural lands, including
0 TDR/PDR as appropriate
Resources:
July 1, 2001 —June 15, 2002: Salaries/Benefits $172,000 (4.5 FTE @ 4/5 of$215,000)
Contracts 268,000 (4/5 of$335,000)
$ 440,000
July 1, 2002—June 15, 2003 Salaries/Benefits $ 43,000 (115 of$215,000)
Contracts 67,000 (115 of$335,000)
$ 110,000
Status Reports: brief status report on or about March 15, 2002 indicating progress-to-date and
describing how the FY 2002 work items will be completed by June 15, 2002; a report on or about
January 15,2003, only if the GRANTEE has not completed their project.
Close-out-Report: brief report(500 words or less) describing project accomplishments when project
as specified in the scope of work is completed but no later than June 1, 2003.
\\NY\USR\PLANNING\CANDER-1\USERDATA\DOC\GMA Scope of Work Format.doc
STArf O,a
t
�y1 isee ao
STATE OF WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
906 Columbia St. SW • PO Box 48350 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8350 • (360) 725-2800
October 2, 2001 Cv
OCT 03 2001
Ms. Charlene Anderson PL�1N CITY, SERV CES
Senior Planner
City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, Washington 98032-5895
Dear Ms. Anderson:
Congratulations. The City of Kent has qualified for a GMA Grant to perform the review and
update of your GMA documents in the amount of$50,000.00 (Please see the enclosed memo for
an explanation of the distribution method and reporting standards). Since your requested or
budget amount is greater than your reserved amount, we are also informing you that we will be
making a decision on this additional funding by October 12, 2001. We will be sending a formal
award letter to your mayor shortly.
This Growth Management Grant is contingent upon the execution of an agreement between the
City of Kent and the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development. To
accomplish this, we will need a scope of work that describes the tasks and products necessary for
you to accomplish the project you applied for. To facilitate the contracting process, I
recommend you use the enclosed"Scope of Work Format"to address the elements identified in
the document. Additional elements could be added if necessary.
The completed scope of work should be sent electronically to Matt Ojennus at the following
email address: matthewo(u-cted.wa.aov by Friday,November 3, 2001. If you do not have
Internet access, please send the completed scope of work by mail on or before Friday,November
3, 2001 to
Mr. Matt Ojennus, Assistant Planner
Washington State Office of Community Development
Growth Management Program
PO Box 48350
Olympia, WA 98504-8350
As soon as we receive an acceptable scope of work, we will draft a contract based on your
application, incorporate more detail if necessary, and send it to you within two weeks for review. M
sure
o i
N
� s
v� y02
O
1889 a
STATE OF WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
906 Columbia St. SW • PO Box 48350 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8350 • (360) 725-2800
October 9, 2001
Ms. Charlene Anderson
Senior Planner
City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, Washington 98032-5895
Dear Ms. Anderson:
Recently you received a letter announcing that the City of Kent qualified for the GMA Update
Grant, and that your grant application was being considered for any additional funding beyond
the basic "reserve" amount. I am pleased to inform you that due to the excellent quality of your
proposal, we are able to award the City of Kent a total of$57,500 pursuant to your GMA Update
Grant application.
This extra amount of additional funding was available because some jurisdictions did not apply
for their"reserve" amount. The unclaimed funds are being distributed to other projects under the
GMA Update Grant program. Since your application scored among the very highest, it qualified
for a slightly larger share of the unclaimed funds than other applications.
Getting a contract executed quickly is the best way to ensure that state funding will stay available
for your project. I've asked my staff to be extra-responsive in helping you expedite this process.
If you wish to further discuss the scope of work, or if you have general questions about the
Growth Management Grant program, please contact Ike Nwankwo at(360) 725-3056.
Thank you for your commitment to good land use planning and the provision of local service to
the citizens of Washington. We look forward to working with you.
In Partnership,
Gi .-1� 1 /c_
,5 d
Shane Hope
Managing Director Rz C
Growth Management Program
air - I�'eb
P 11 ?Opl
��Ao ,, ��� S kFNT
ERV��FS �
merle ��
k
t� _
12 y it Meeting
21
co Cale ax
1. SUBJECT: 2002 BUDGET'AND THE 2001 TAX �#Ojt THE 2002
BUDGET - SET HEARING DATE �';
2 . SUMMARY STATBXENT: Set November 20, 20-0, .f Public
Hearing for the 2002 Budget and the 2001' for the 2002
Budget.
- i I
• 3 . EXHIBITS: None
t
4 . RECOMMENDED. BY: Finance-'Director
(Committee, Staff, Ex4iminer, Commiasioh,"I�t ;.)
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PSR02 L IMPACT: NO'' :f `{ YES
6. EXPITURE REQUIRED: ,' "r
t
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
- 1
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmen „�. � second$
Y DISCUSSION:
ti
ACTION: r '
Council Agenda
xCem No. 6F
IV
11 Meetir
Or 6, 200-1
-cat �neent Calenda�c
-u
1 . SUBJECT: LAND USE AM PLANNING BOARD
M%NT - CONFIRM
t
, k !
2 . SUMMARY STATEWENT: Confirmation of th�J` f"s ,appointment
of Ms. Nicole Fincher too serve as a membe*1 f;°i6, xent Land Use
and Planning Board. Me,; Fincher is amplo ' The Dierickx
' Co. where she is a Legal. Accounts Specials �(;T; ,%e -,is a Kent
resident, serves as a Board Member for K # ,! 4 �,�'' and Family
Services and is involver with the Lighth�Aiip�. t;ceaich program.
She also served as an intern in Administre(,t!"b '4sgme years ago.
Ms. Fincher will replace Sharon Woodford'a a�� "igned, and her
appointment will continge until 12/31/2064 .
" 3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum
4 . RECOM LADED BY: Mayor White
(Committee, Staff, miner, Commissionl
5. UNBUDCrFTED FISCAL/PERSQii��1 IMPACT. N4 YES
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
�
SOURC$ OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTIONSi 'f'
} -
Councilmember 'moves, Councilmembe- � seconds
IRS •'
y I
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
t "
�'�` Council Agenda
( Item No. 6G
•
KEN T
W A 5 H 1 N G T O N
MEMORANDUM
TO: LEONA ORR, CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: MAYOR JIM WHITE
DATE: OCTOBER 26, 2001
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT TO KENT LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD
I have appointed Ms.Nicole Fincher to serve as a member of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board.
Ms. Fincher is employed by DX The Dierickx Co. where she is a Legal Accounts Specialist. She
is a Kent resident, serves as a Board Member for Kent Youth and Family Services and is involved
with the Lighthouse Outreach program. She also served as an intern in Administration some years
ago.
She will replace Sharon Woodford, who resigned and her appointment will continue until
12/31/2002.
I submit this for your confirmation.
jb
y_
^ Di l Meeting
'Lr 6, 20 �
her Busineim
{ 1. SUBJECT: 2002 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
k :a
2 . 3U T STATEMENT: The 2002 Legisl i ,,, � h ;serves as
our advocacy work plan 'during the 2002 I� It ei-Session.
The Agenda reflects the', input of staff, � , qJ- ,,and the Mayor's
L
Office and responds to -issues we expect ,tc Ya+e;, xminently
discu$sed in Olympia next Spring. This d;4; t .was reviewed '
by Council during the October 16, 2001 WoT S �,*nd forwarded -
to the November 6, 200, �', Council Meeting if consideratiop
and approval . The draft attached for acts ioo-lodes minor
modifications requested'�, at the Council WoN,
I.
3 . EXHIBITS: 2002 Legislative Agenda
4 . RECOWMENLED BY:
(Committee, Staff, E3C,ruiner, CommissioI
rE I A f
5 . UNBLDPETED FISCAL/KERB I1+dFACTs T{ `� "� YES
A '
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS: ! t
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember ,moves, Councilme ' `'', seconds
to accept the 2002 Legiplative Agenda as Atte4g^
DISCUSSION:
ACTION: � MIC,
Council Agende
Item No. 7A
a -
City of Kent 2002 Legislative Agenda
The City of Kent's 2002 Legislative Agenda is divided as follows:
1. The 2002 Action Issues lists matters on which the City will actively work on and lobby fofor
legislative/budget provisions. Items are alphabetized by general subject area (e.g. Economic
Development, Finance, etc.) and, where an item is a placeholder'for one reason or another, this
is noted within the subject heading.
2. The 2002 Support/Oppose List details issues that are important to Kent, and on which the City
will play either a supporting role in the upcoming session—or strongly oppose to prevent
enactment of adverse measures.
3. The 2002 Track/Monitor List notes important issues that the City will keep track of, and possibly
involve itself in if necessary, during the upcoming session.
City of Kent 2002 Legislative Aeenda
2002 Action Issues
Economic Development
• Economic Development Funding and Financing Tools/Kent Station: With The Boeing Co.'s
recent headquarters departure and layoff announcement,the need for Kent to expand and diversify
its economy is even more critical—and so are redevelopment projects such as Kent Station and the
Midway Landfill. To ensure the success of these types of projects,the City of Kent will continue
to push for additional funding and economic development financing tools. The 2001 Legislature's
passage of ESHB 1418,a property tax-based Tax Increment Financing(TIF), is a small,very
limited step. The City will look for additional tools such as 1)sales and excise tax-based TIF
authority; 2)support of"community development financing" legislation(HB 1518)that was
promoted by the Governor's Office in 2001and may be re-introduced in 2002; 3)re-establishment
of the"Planning and Environmental Review Fund"(PERF)monies that allow up-front planning of
a given subarea(such as Kent did with its downtown)to expedite back-end permitting and process;
and 4)other tools that may emerge from recommendations of the Governor's 32-member
Competitiveness Council.
Finance/Local Revenues/Unfunded Mandates Prevention
• Prevent Unfunded Mandates/Local Revenue Preservation: Kent and other local governments
throughout Washington have been adversely impacted in recent years by unfunded or
"underfunded"mandates as well as sales tax exemptions on manufacturing activity that
significantly undercut local revenues. The expected passage of property-tax-limiting Initiative 747
this November would further restrict revenues. State and local tax revenues will be further hit by
an economic downturn that had already begun and was exacerbated by the terrorist attacks in New
York City and Washington,D.C., last September 11. In fact,the state is now staring at a budget
shortfall that could be in the range of$800 million. Just as the state cannot afford additional `hits'
to its budget,cities such as Kent simply cannot afford to absorb further unfunded mandates or
revenue reductions brought on by tax exemption or tax relief measures at the state level.The City
will actively work with other local governments to urge the Legislature to refrain from imposing
new mandates unless the corresponding funding is provided to implement them. Further,Kent will
work to ensure that any changes in tax or budget policy enacted by the Legislature do not come at
the expense of local revenues.
• LEOFF 1—Utilize surplus in pension program to help offset portion of city/county/fire
district medical costs: In 2001,the Legislature came close to enacting legislation and budget
provisions that would have taken surplus pension funds from the LEOFF 1 pension program and
established a medical program to help cover long-term and extraordinary medical costs for LEOFF
1 members. Alas,the legislation and budget provisions `died'—and this issue may be back front
and center for the 2002 Legislature. Under this legislative initiative,cities,counties,and fire
districts that financed 12%of the LEOFF 1 pension program(the state financed 76%, and LEOFF
I fire and police employees financed the remaining 12916)would be able to have 12%of the surplus
in the pension fund devoted toward offsetting long-term and extraordinary medical costs incurred
by their LEOFF 1 employees and retirees. NOTE: Again,this is an issue where the state's
economic downturn and the major losses in the stock market may have a dramatic impact. A
surplus in the LEOFF 1 pension fund that had been estimated at$1.2 billion last Dec. 31 is now
estimated at 1/6 of that-$200 million. Whether that takes the LEOFF 1 issue off the table,or still
allows a discussion of whether to at least set up a program for any surplus monies,is unknown at
this time.
2
Green River Community College
• Placeholder—Capital Funding for Green River Community College International Studies
Facility at Kent Station: One of the featured pieces of the Kent Station redevelopment is expected
to be a Green River Community College facility that will be used for international studies
programs. While it is likely that Green River Community College and the City of Kent will wait
until 2003 to make a bid for state capital budget funding to help finance this facility,the two
agencies may well begin work on it in 2002. For that reason,the City wants to reserve a place on
its 2002 Legislative Agenda for any initiative that may be required next year to advance the effort
for funding for Green River Community College.
Land Use
• Timeline extensions for legal requirements to update comprehensive plans and critical areas
ordinances: Under current law,Kent and other cities throughout the state, as well as counties
throughout much of the state, will be required to update Growth Management Act(GMA)-
mandated comprehensive plans and critical areas ordinances by September 2002. The burden of
doing these updates is considerable, and the costs for doing so are in the hundreds of thousands of
dollars. Because it is highly unlikely that the state will live up to its requirements to help fund
these required updates,Kent believes it is vital that the Legislature extend the for updates of comp
plans and critical areas. Kent will work closely with the Association of Washington Cities, the
Washington State Association of Counties, and other organizations in urging this change with the
2002 Legislature.
Parks and Recreation
• Capital Funding for Clark Lake: While the City has been successful in securing nearly$1.6
million in state and county funding for Clark Lake, it still needs an additional$2.5 million to pay
off the$4.1 million water fund loan that it utilized in 2000 to purchase precious open-space acreage
around Clark Lake. Because the preservation of Clark Lake is a regional project,and because so
much urban encroachment has occurred around the Lake, a number of state legislators have been
sensitive to this capital funding need and have been helpful to the City. Kent particularly
appreciates a special $250,000 earmark by the 2001 Legislature and will be working on additional
earmarks for Clark Lake.
Public Safety
• Regional Law Enforcement Services Study: Kent participated in a recent, legislatively-directed
study that asked Washington sheriffs and police chiefs to look at where certain specialized law
enforcement services could be better delivered in a regional manner. The report which grew out of
the study, and will be delivered to the Legislature this fall, encourages local jurisdictions to
"carefully consider"regionalizing certainty specialized services such as bomb squads,hostage
teams, and narcotics units. However, it also emphasizes local control and decision-making and
notes there are many different ways to define what is `regional.' In Kent's case,the city has
teamed up with other cities for things such as SWAT teams,bomb squads,and hostage negotiating
—and thus does not believe such services need to be further regionalized or delivered via
countywide processes. Kent will work to ensure that in any legislative response to the regional law
enforcement services study, local control,discretion,and flexibility is respected and no ill-
conceived"one size fits all"solution is imposed.
3
Public Works •
• Funding for Public Works Trust Fund: Kent will join many others in asking the Legislature to
approve a Public Works Trust Fund(PWTF)loan program that includes an additional$10 million
in low-interest loans to assist the City with its participation in the"Pipeline 5"regional water
supply project headed up by Tacoma and involving Seattle,Kent,and the Covington and
Lakehaven water districts as well. Public Works Trust Fund loans recommended by the Public
Works Board are required to be approved by the Legislature—and,historically, the Legislature has
rarely removed projects from the approved list. The City will be working to ensure the list of
PWTF loans—and particularly, legislation to ratify the list—is enacted without a hitch.
Transit
• Placeholder—Possible 2002 recommendations arising from urban transit services study:
During the 2001 Legislature,Kent was successful in lobbying for a study of how transit services
can be supplemented in highly urban and dense areas that need more localized"circulator"or-
"feeder"service than a regional system such as METRO is designed or equipped to deliver. A
perfect example, in Kent's case, involves the lack of transit circulator service to connect the Sound
Transit Commuter Rail station in Kent with industrial areas in the City. The City would like to be
authorized to initiate,or contract for,such service to help workers who would like to take
commuter rail and then be bused directly to an employment site. Unfortunately, Kent has no
authority within the construct of current laws to do so. The aforementioned study is to examine
options for supplementing transit laws to address such problems—and the study further calls for
potential development of a pilot project. While the study is timed to run through 2002 with
recommendations to the 2003 Legislature, it is possible that there may be certain recommendations
or needs in concert with an"interim report"to be delivered to the 2002 Legislature. For this
reason,Kent wishes to reserve a place within its 2002 Legislative Agenda for any
recommendations that may come forward.
Transportation
• Transportation Funding—Overall Needs: Kent will join with other public and private sector
organizations in urging the 2002 Legislature to take comprehensive action on a transportation
funding package. In particular,the City will work to advance new funding for critical state
highway projects, for freight mobility, for the Transportation Improvement Board(TIB),and,
certainly, for local road needs. Certainly the economic downturn and recent increases in gasoline
prices call into question the timing of a state transportation funding initiative—and yet,with
congestion problems in Kent and other areas of the Puget Sound reaching crisis proportions, and
with the knowledge that a new investment in transportation can create thousands of new
construction jobs,Kent officials strongly believe there must be a comprehensive,significant
funding package enacted in 2002. Addressing congestion in this area is key to facilitating the
movement of people and goods through this region and across the state.
• Funding for Transportation Projects—Local Freight Corridors,State Route 509,Interstate
5/272°d Street,Pacific Highway,State Route 167/405 Interchange,Interstate 5 HOV lane
extension: In order for the Legislature to enact a new-investment package of transportation
funding,or for the public to approve it,there must be a demonstration that the investment will
result in real projects that make a real difference in a commute, freight delivery,etc. In Kent's
case,the City believes it is critical that several key projects within the City, the Kent Valley,and •
South King County be a part of any statewide transportation investment package. Major projects
the City will advance for inclusion on any list include:
4
*SR 509-$681 million. This high-profile regional"megaproject" includes the
construction of`collector/distributor' lanes on Interstate 5 that will make a major dent in South
King County congestion on 1-5.
*167/405 Interchange: While this interchange—considered the `poster child' or choke
point within the state—is not in Kent,the major congestion that occurs at this interchange
significantly impacts vehicles,freight,and goods coming from or heading to Kent.
*Local Freight Corridors-$8.5 million for Freight Board approved improvements.
*Pacific Highway improvements: Much of the money is in hand to continue with widening
and improving Pacific Highway through Kent. However,additional state funding is needed to
ensure expedited construction of this portion of Pacific Highway and to begin improving other
segments of the state route.
*I-5/272nd Street—and 272nd improvements between I-5 and Pacific Hi hway: In all, an
estimated$17 million is needed for widening and improvements underneath I-5/272nd, and on 272nd
between I-5 and Pacific Highway.
*SR 167—HOV improvements,ultimate connection to Port of Tacoma: The City strongly
supports additional HOV improvements on 167 and,ultimately, capacity improvements and
extensions to this corridor to directly link it with the Port of Tacoma.
*Interstate 5 HOV Extension:Kent supports funding to help the State Department of
Transportation(WSDOT)continue to extend the I-5 HOV corridor into Pierce County.
• Transportation Funding—"Regionalism": During 2001,the Legislature spent considerable time
on this issue and came very close to enacting legislation. The"regionalism" initiatives would have
empowered regional authorities in the Central Puget Sound and elsewhere to solve some of their
transportation needs—and would have provided a series of taxing options to take to area voters for
their consideration. While the City of Kent understands the premise that drives `regionalism' —
e.g., the state does not have enough funding capacity to fully address the mammoth capacity and
congestion needs in areas such as Central Puget Sound—Kent had significant concerns with the
way in which regionalism legislation was crafted in 2001. Any `regionalism' bill advanced and
enacted in 2002 needs to ensure that cities are actively involved and `at the table' when a regional
authority is created,that local road needs can be eligible for funding,and that equitable distribution
of funds can be assured. Further, in pursuit of regional solutions,the City opposes any regional
delineation that would divide the Puget Sound Metropolitan Statistical area for the purposes of
allocating federal transportation dollars across more than this single area.
Water
• Water Rights—"Growing Communities"legislation: Kent will actively work on expected 2002
legislation involving water rights, rnstream flows,water conservation, and water infrastructure. An
11-member Joint Executive and Legislative policy group is evaluating these issues over the fall
with the expectation of recommending a legislative vehicle for 2002. For Kent,it is critical that
any legislation advanced in 2002 provide more protection and certainty for existing water rights,
including provisions that ensure water utilities have ample time to `perfect' their existing rights.
Kent also wants to ensure that any water conservation and insteam flow provisions the Legislature
considers as a `quid pro quo' for increased water rights protection take a few things into account:
1)credit for good conservation work already done(Kent achieved major water savings last summer
in response to the drought, and its Pipeline S agreement calls for a 1%per year water savings); 2)
flexibility and performance-based solutions rather than specific `one size fits all' requirements; and
3) assurances that instream flows achieved through a"Habitat Conservation Plan"(as Kent is
embarking upon with Rock Creek)are recognized and respected.
5
City of Kent
2002 Leeislative Aeenda—Support List
• Kent will strongly support efforts to ensure appropriate waivers and exemptions under state
welfare program reauthorization ("TANF"),so that a`safety net' remains in place for those who
continue to have assistance needs for one reason or another. Kent carries a significant proportion
of the welfare caseload for King County.
• The City will support a legislative initiative to create additional funding for low-income and
affordable housing through enactment of an increased recording fee for housing transactions.
• Kent will continue to strongly support efforts to provide needed infrastructure funding for local
governments that face a$3 billion+"infrastructure deficit"as shown by a recent legislatively-
directed study.
• Kent will continue to urge that funding,flexibility,and inclusion of local government be woven
into state programs and requirements that respond to the Endangered Species Act listings of
Chinook salmon, coho, and bull trout.
• Kent will strongly support agency requests by the Transportation Improvement Board(TIB)for
additional funds for corridor congestion relief efforts.
• Kent will support legislative proposals that allow a voter-approved increase of 1/10 of 1 cent in
sales tax for 9-1-1 operations—provided the legislation is crafted in a manner that authorizes this
options for not just county-run 9-1-1 operations but city-run 9-1-1 operations as well.
• Kent will support legislation that requires local agencies to provide public-agency retirees access
to local health care plans—provided the plans can be structured in a way that separates them from
`active' employee plans and further allows local agencies to require the retiree to pay additional
costs that accrue as a result.
• The City will continue to join others in urging that the Legislature provide increased immunity
for probation liability that poses a growing and potentially expensive risk to probation programs.
• Kent will strongly support efforts by Fire Chiefs to amend state statute regarding fire apparatus
weight restrictions—particularly since the state statute hinders safety with weight limits that
preclude the use of trucks equipped with ladders to reach high-rise buildings.
• Kent will support legislation—known as the"Main Street"bill--which includes tax incentives
and credits to assist local jurisdictions and Downtown Associations with downtown
development efforts.
• Kent will strongly oppose any legislative effort to pre-empt local zoning authority by requiring
jurisdictions to allow manufactured housing in all single-family zones.
• Kent will strongly oppose efforts to further weaken drug seizure laws that are critical to local
police drug enforcement efforts.
• Kent will strongly oppose efforts to undercut local business licensing authority and revenue.
• Kent will oppose efforts by groups that have in the past sought to impose `buildable lands'
requirements on cities and counties that are too prescriptive and punitive.
• Kent will work to ensure that recommendations from a Legislatively-established Task Force
on local parks maintenance and operations funding do not recommend solutions that increase
M&O funding at the expense of needed capital funding.
• Kent will join many other cities in opposing any legislation that significantly weakens or
undermines local authority for municipalities to operate Municipal Courts. At the same time,
the City supports efforts for collaborative discussion over how courts can be more efficiently
operated and administered.
6
City of Kent
2002 Legislative Agenda
Track/Monitor List
Kent will closely track and monitor:
• Proposed legislation authorizing local governments to utilize photo-radar and photo-red
technology to curb speeding and enhance safety at key intersections, school zones,railroad
crossings, etc. Kent may wish to explore the use of such technology if it is authorized.
• Legislative discussion and possible action on shorelines updates that were required via a
December 2000 Department of Ecology but invalidated in part by a recent Shoreline Hearings
Board decision. Cities need to be provided adequate time and funding for responding to any
shorelines requirements.
• Consideration of requirements for local police to address"racial profiling"concerns. Kent
strongly opposes racial profiling and agrees with policies and training that ensure it does not occur;
however, the City also wants to ensure racial profiling policies and training can be structured in a
manner that recognizes the fiscal limitations of local government.
• Efforts to under city authority on assumption of water/sewer districts in connection with
annexations, infill, or changes to urban growth area boundaries. Kent opposes any weakening of
current authority.
• Efforts to pre-empt or weaken local authority and control over use of fireworks in a given
community. Kent opposes any such efforts.
• Legislation dealing with annexation under the Growth Management Act(GMA). Kent favors
changes to annexation law to make annexations more workable—and imposes legislative changes
that make annexations even more difficult when in fact it is assumed under GMA that they will
occur over time.
• A 2002 effort to make technical corrections to a 2001 law on fair market value for street
vacations. Kent will support such fixes.
• Any legislation dealing with home rule authority,local revenues,and cities' bottom lines. Kent
strongly supports home rule authority and opposes imposition of unfunded mandates, as well as tax
exemptions and tax relief,which erode local revenues and authority.
• "False Claims Act"and "Civil Rights Act"legislation which, in past years,may have sounded
good on the surface but had costly or problematic provisions for cities.
7
t 14
f9 ;m
� r �
04
ll Meeting
Other Busineas
1 . 3Ts DESIGN CONTACT FOR' CITY iORK
2 . SUMMARY ST T ENT: Xn 1999 there ,evaluation
' .
done on the City Hall . iiThe evaluation d*' ` #hat
additional seismic upgrades are needed. -'�; I'`, `
The Parks Director rec nds authorize ' , ' eer into an
agreement with Merritt Pardini Arehit',e s,:,rQ •design the
seismic upgrade for the,i City Hall building,,.'
3 . EXHIETS: Copy of Scope of Services frp ie t & Pardini
Architects
4 . RECONK END ED BY: Staff a0d Operations Co `!
1
(Committee, Staff, Ex4miner, Commission,,,V i }
5 . UNBUDGETEp J�FISCAL/PERSG IMCTs YES X
6 . EXPMITURE REQUIRED: $;9 7, 17 4.5 0
SOURCE OF FUNDS: CIP Midget balances
j
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS 4
Councilmember 'moves, Councilmem0or, J seconds`
to enter into an agreement_ ^��eitt & Pardini
Architects to ,design the seismic upgrade- C Hall in the
amount of $192, 174 .50.
DISCUSSION,: �
ACTI011T: � =F »
"1,,a, I.,C6unci 1 Agend'at
No. 7B
October 18, 2001
KENT CITY HALL SEISMIC DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
SERVICES EXHIBIT"A"— SCOPE OF SERVICES
PHASE 1 —PREDESIGN:
City Hall Analysis: COMPLETED IN OCTOBER 2000
Existing Police Building Seismic Analysis: Included in this proposal
PHASE 2 —BASIC SERVICES:
Task A. Work Elements: Schematic and Design Development
Objective: To collect. assemble and prepare the information necessary to initiate
the project. Prepare initial documents indicating intent and scope of
work.
1. Review Existing Documents Provided by Owner
• Existing City Hall Building Systems (Mechanical. Electrical. and
Structural).
• Existing drawings and surveys.
• Existing reports and studies.
• Seismic. fire and life safety issues.
2. Research Agency Requirements
• Identify all reviewing agencies. Make initial contact.
• Identify review submittal requirements and required checklists.
• Identify/review code compliance issues.
I Initial Tests and Surveys
• Geotechnical: review of proposed load impacts. Review existing soils
condition.
• Structural: Review of existing structure for areas of impacts with proposed
systems approach.
• Architectural: Review areas of impact and disruption and document.
• Mechanical/Electrical: Review areas of impact and disruption and
document.
4. Coordinate with Sub-consultants
• Confirm scopes of work
5. Walk-through Existing Facilities
City of Kent 10/18/01
Scope v3.doc Page 1
• Schedule and walk-through existing facilities with Owner's representatives
to determine/define impact of structural work
6. Review and update Cost Estimate
• Prepare SD /DD estimate for City review
7. Prepare and finalize SD/DD design documents
• Develop base floor plan drawings of each floor
• Photograph and document existing conditions at all impact areas
8. Investigate Interior Space Design Issues
• Develop alternative treatments to address visual impact of structural
requirements
9. Attend (2) staff and Council meetings if necessary
Deliverables:
• (1) Full size and (3) Half size document sets indicating intent of construction and
extents of work, affected areas, and potential finishes/material/colors. All floors
will be addressed in one submittal package.
• (1) Copy of Cost Estimate of work to be performed
• (1) Copy Geotechnical Report of soils conditions and recommendations of work to
be performed
• (1) Copy Report of Seismic conditions of the police building
Task B. Work Elements: Construction Documents and Bidding
Objective: Complete all documents for construction and bidding based on those
submitted in Task A and approved by the owner. It is anticipated that
the work efforts for this Task may continue over a 2-3 year period due
to a phased implementation schedule.
1. Prepare and complete drawings and specifications for an open bidding process.
• Integrate Owner's comments from Task A into final bid package
• Adjust design to address cost implications
• Complete Design Team's and Owner's approved design.
• Assimilate owner furnished Bid Procedure and Contract documents into
specification
• Prepare Construction and Implementation Schedule.
2. Prepare final cost estimate.
3. Assist City during bidding.
City of Kent 10/18/01
Scope v3.doc Page 2
4. Finalize Interior Space Design Issues
5. Develop Construction Phasing Criteria(based on current staff configuration)
• Discuss Administration Requirements during construction.
• Discuss construction sequence parameters (phasing).
• Outline Work-Around Plan to provide required customer services during
construction.
6. Provide information for City to apply and acquire required permits
Deliverables:
• (1) Copy of Full Size Completed Construction Document Sets ready for printing
and advertising by the City of Kent.
• (1) Set Project Specifications ready for printing and advertising by the City of
Kent.
• (1) Copy Updated Cost Estimate
• (1) Copy Work Around Plan Report
• Documents and specifications will be prepared for bid so each floor may be bid
separately, Cost Estimate will address total project costs. not addressed by floor.
Tasks not included in Scope of Work:
• Construction Administration Services
• Construction Document distribution or tracking during bidding
• Preparation of as-built documentation of City Hall building
• Updating Work Around Plan Report after bidding phase
City of Kent 10/i 8/01
Scope v3.doc Page 3
REPORTS FROk, `, y'
ING howl
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
'
,
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTE
C. PUBLIC SAFETY CO ITTEE
• f I �Y'R Ikk�li S'��e r]l� M 'h
D. PUBLIC WORKS ,
E. PLANNING COMMITTED ;a
F. PARKS COMMITTEE Tu
M
G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
7v IF
REPORTS F ' SPBCTAL
to
Is 4
' ell
Special Public Works Committee
September 24, 2001
Committee Members Present: Chair Tim Clark, Rico Yingling
Staff Present: Don Wickstrom, Gary Gill, Cyndi Wilbur, Simon Stocker, Jackie Bicknell
The meeting was called to order at 5:08 PM by Chair Tim Clark. Mr. Clark announced that he
had gotten prior concurrence from absent Committee Member Connie Epperly on all of the
motions to come before tonight's Committee.
Approval of the Minutes of September 10, 2001
Committee Member Rico Yingling moved to approve the minutes of September 10, 2001. The
motion was seconded by Tim Clark and passed 2-0.
WSDOT Grant— Citywide Bicycle Improvements. Acceptance
Don Wickstrom said the WSDOT Grant was received for the installation of bicycle safety
signage and bicycle route maps. The grant was in the amount of S9,670 for a total project cost of
S11,500.
Rico Yingling moved to recommend authorizing Council to direct staff to accept the grant
funds and establish a budget for the Citywide Bicycle Improvements project. The motion
was seconded by Tim Clark and passed 2-0.
Tim Clark commented that the bicycle trails in King County were predominantly north. The
City of Federal Way had been working on trying to run a bike trail from Browns Point waterfront
all the way along the power line to the Weyerhaeuser land. At Weyerhaeuser, the trail had come
to a halt. He stated that the trail needs to go down the hill, and Kent has tried to tie in with some
of the other neighboring cities to accomplish that. A bike trail runs along Lake Fenwick Road,
and one ties in with SeaTac at about 2001h. Mr. Clark asked if there would be any chance of a
trail heading down towards 272"d. Don Wickstrom responded that the Interurban Trail runs all
the way down to Pacific and there is also a bike lane on 272"d
Supplement Tacoma Second Supply Agreement
Don Wickstrom said all the parties in the Tacoma Second Supply Project, except Tacoma, have
concurred on the partner agreement, and Tacoma staff is now in the process of getting their
council's approval. One of the issues is that Seattle has in their particular agreement an out
option that if the north branch of the pipeline work does not get built by 2006, they can pull out
of the agreement. The north branch runs from Lake Youngs down to the main part of the
• pipeline and from Howard Hanson dam, which delivers water to Seattle's system. The
construction EIS is only in the beginning stage and no permits have been obtained for the work
Public Works Committee,9/24/01 2
and there is no guarantee that the north branch will be built,which is the reason Seattle wanted
an out provision.
If Seattle were to pull out, their share of$76 million would come up for grabs and all the
remaining parties in the contract would have the option to take a piece. If nobody did, Tacoma
would end up with it—and their council is feeling that they would not want to pick up that entire
option. So, a side agreement was formed where the remaining parties, consisting of Kent,
Lakehaven Utility District, Tacoma, and Covington Water District, would equally share.
If Seattle did drop out, the project costs would drop by the$32 million cost for their stretch of
the main, and about $44 million dollars would then be left in the obligation, which would be split
four ways. Kent's share would be about $11 million dollars in additional obligation. Over 22
million gallons of water(which would have been Seattle's share) would be shared equally. Kent
would get about 5.6 million gallons, the cost of which equals a little under$2 million per million
gallons per day, versus about 3'/z million gallons for the cost now incurred. Kent would be able
to buy a substantial amount of water for a lot cheaper than it's presently paying that would serve
the City's needs into the year 2025. The City would have to look for a new source by 2009
under the present circumstances, even with the supply from Tacoma online. The next source of
development would be impoundment, which would develop about the same amount of water but
be more expensive. Mr. Wickstrom said it would be to Kent's advantage for Seattle to pull out,
but surmised that would be a remote possibility.
Tim Clark questioned what the source of revenue would be for the $11 million if Seattle did drop
out and Kent had to pick up a share. Mr. Wickstrom said rates would have to be adjusted—as
was anticipated anyway within that time frame in order to proceed with the impoundment
project. Kent has to have another water project online by 2009, and the impoundment would
cost $25 million.
Rico Yingling asked what the time frame was for knowing one way or the other whether Seattle
would stay with the project. Mr. Wickstrom said it would probably be within the next couple of
years, particularly after the two year process of getting the EIS and permits on the construction
done.
Rico Yingling moved to recommend to the full Council that the Mayor be authorized to
execute the Supplement Tacoma Second Supply Agreement subject to the concurrence of
the terms and conditions therein by the Public Works Director and the City Attorney. Tim
Clark seconded the motion which passed 2-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:23 PM.
Jackie Bicknell I
City Council Secretary
{
1 I '
2
�! t Vi ��ltF . r, ��•
a
r
I s r
H �v
AN
I �4
„ IVY WOr
v- T� 'u� �• a'
A)' Pending Litigatjo
k Kr iC ` ' •
— i
` a a
ttf J
I •J,�f •