HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 10/05/2004 i
� 1
i
� i
I
ILI
1
City of Kent
CityCouncil Meeting
! Agenda
October 5, 2004
Mayor Jim White
Julie Peterson, Council President
Councilmembers
Tim Clark Debbie Raplee
Ron Harmon Les Thomas
Bruce White Deborah Ranniger
i KENT
WASHINGTON
i City Clerk's Office
1
SUMMARY AGENDA
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
KENT October 5, 2004
• W A g H I N G T G N Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
MAYOR: Jim White COUNCILMEMBERS: Julie Peterson, President
Tim Clark Ron Harmon Deborah Ranniger
Debbie Raplee Les Thomas Bruce White
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. 2005 Budget Message
C. Fcoviom l� beve,(C) YMenf Update.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Formation of LID 358, Pacific Highway South High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Minutes of Previous Meeting —Approve
B. Payment of Bills—Approve
C. Cultural Development Authority of King County Grant for 2004 Programs—
Accept and Amend Budget
D. Declare Residential Structures Surplus and Allow Demolition—Approval
E. Federal Department of Justice Office Grant for Safe Havens—Accept and Amend
Budget
F. 2003 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan Amendment—Approve
G. East Hill Park Agreement—Appro e
H. Prostitution Loitering—OrdinanceYeklng Kent City Code 9.02.300—Adopt
I. Violation of Seattle-King County Department of Public Health Order, Ordinance �1f�
Adopt
J. Transportation Demand Model Consultant Services Agreement—Authorize
K. Sale of Properties at Ramstead Pointe Short Plat—Authorize
L. Puget Sound Energy Construction Agreement—Authorize
M. Surplus 1987 hevrolet Suburban—Authorize
N. ReappoinBvif +v 1) l-itotfy AdvlsD� BC)anrj.
7. OTHER BUSINESS I
A. Howards Addition Rezone (Quasi-Judicial Proceeding)
B. Anderson Rezone(Quasi-Judicial Proceeding)
C. Meeker Street Law Building LLC Real Estate Trade Agreement—Authorize
D. Kent Chamber of Commerce Contract—Authorize
V4,ji Consewvai} cm D iS4-r 1'Gt No , 9
(continued next page)
SUMMARY AGENDA CONTINUED
8. BIDS
A. Kent Centennial Parking Garage Seismic Retrofit and Strengthening
9. REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES, STAFF AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
10. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION AND AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION
A. Pending Litigation
12. 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 Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at
1-800-833-6388.
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time, make known the subject of
interest, so all may be properly heard.
A) FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF
B) FROM THE PUBLIC
I
i
1
1
i
i
I
1
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A) EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
B) 2005 BUDGET MESSAGE
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5 2004
Category Public Hearin
1. SUBJECT: FORMATION OF LID 358, PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH HIGH
OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for the public hearing on the
formation of LID 358, which is intended to fund a portion of the costs to construct
planned improvements to Pacific Highway South(SR99). The estimated total cost to
construct these improvements is $10,431,116, and the estimated total amount to be
funded from this LID is $572,598. The Public Works Director will make a
presentation, and the City Attorney will make a few brief comments at the conclusion
of the Public Works Director's presentation.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Director's memorandum and vicinity map
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Council 8/17/2004
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
A. Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to close the public hearing.
B. Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to approve the formation of LID 358 for street frontage improvements for the Pacific
Highway South HOV Lanes project and to direct the City Attorney to draft the
necessary ordinance.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 5A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Mike H.Martin, Deputy Chief Adrmmstrative Officer
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Don E. Wickstrom,P.E. Public Works Director
Phone 253-856-5500
K ENT Fax 253-856-6500
W♦lMIHOTON
Address 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent,WA 98032-5895
Date- October 5,2004
To- Mayor and City Council
1 From: Don Wickstrom
Regarding: LID 358 -Pacific Highway South HOV Lanes
Formation Public Hearing
October 5, 2004 has been scheduled for the formation hearing for Local Improvement Distnct
358.
BACKGROUND
The Pacific Highway South HOV Lanes project has been in the planning and construction phase
for a number of years. Various jurisdictions are involved each completing their portion of the
route The portion within the City of Kent is being constructed in phases and is not yet complete.
Other portions are complete.
Various funding sources,including grants and City money, have been approved for the project.
In addition,there are a total of 19 properties that are included in this proposed LID. Sixteen of
the properties have signed no protest LID Covenants for street frontage improvements for which
those improvements are now part of the City's project.These 16 properties were required to
execute a no protest LID Covenant in lieu of having to construct their street frontage
improvements in conjunction with building their development. Since more-recent developments
along Pacific Highway have either constructed their frontage improvements or paid the City the
equivalent dollar amount to include same into the City's project, the Public Works Department
felt it was only fair to follow up on these obligations. As such, the department contacted these
property owners with three options on how to proceed and meet their obligation. The choices
included constructing the improvements themselves,paying the City to construct,or fornung an
LID to provide payment over 10 years. Seven(33.5%of assessment)of the properties requested
the City form an LID, 2 were undecided and the others did not respond. The other 3 properties
1 included in the LID are properties that are currently being developed. The owner of these 3
properties has agreed to be included in the LID to satisfy his obligation for providing frontage
improvements.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
The Pacific Highway South HOV Lanes Project will reconstruct and widen the roadway to a
curb to curb width of 86 feet providing a northbound and nouthbound high occupancy vehicle
lane adjacent to the street curb with a raised center median. Improvements also include the
construction of concrete curb, gutters, a 7-foot-wide sidewalk,undergrounding the overhead i
utilities, upgrading the existing traffic signals, control of driveway access points, drainage and
illumination system improvements.
PROJECT FUNDING
The total cost of this project is approximately$10,431,116. The City is receiving funds from
several sources: federal and state funds ($7,776,613), Local/Private fiuids($2,081,905) and the
Local Improvement District($572,598). The LID constitutes only 5 5 percent of the total project
costs.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH AFFECTED PROPERTIES
In June 2003, the City of Kent sent a letter to each affected property owner explaining
improvements the City of Kent is constructing along Pacific Highway South. That letter also
explained the property owner's commitment to provide improvements along the frontage of their
property. This letter informed the owners that even though they may not have personally
executed the Covenant, they are the current owner of this property and, by law,are now subject
to the terms and conditions of the Covenant. A copy of the LID Covenant was provided in that
letter. j
In February 2004,the City of Kent sent another letter further explaining the property owner's
commitment and,in that letter, the City presented the property owners three alternatives for
meeting this commitment: Direct payment to the City for cost of improvements, constructing the
improvements themselves or formation of a Local Improvement District. Each owner was asked
to indicate their preferred option on an attachment to the letter and return it to the City.
In August 2004 the City sent a letter to each property owner explaining the City's intention to
proceed with the formation of the LID This letter also provided them notice of an informal
public meeting to be held at the City.
On September 13, 2004 each property owner was sent their preliminary assessment and a notice
of the Public Hearing to be held on October 5, 2004.
The informal property owner meeting was held on September 22, 2004 in council chambers to
provide each property owners affected by the LID an opportunity to ask the City staff questions
regarding the project or their assessment. One property owner chose to attend this meeting.
METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
Since the requirements of the property owners was to provide frontage improvements,the LID
costs were calculated based on a front footage charge.
PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT
1 Upon City Council passing the Ordinance confirming the final assessment roll,there will be a
30-day period in which any or all of the assessment can be paid without interest charges.After
the 30-day period,the balance is to be paid over a ten-year period wherein each year's payment
is one-tenth of the principal plus interest on the unpaid balance. The market rate at the time the
LID bonds are sold determine the interest rate.
SUPPORT FOR LID 358
1 In order to defeat an LID proposal, there must be protests from property owners representing 60-
percent or more of the total proposed LID assessments. Since each affected property is subject to
! a no-protest LID Covenant, there can be no official opposition to the formation. Therefore,it is
the City Council's decision whether or not to proceed with the LID formation process and the
approval of the LID formation ordinance.
!
1
1
f
!
1
!
!
ld3l M0-3B 33S 3Nn Ham
IN
j • Y I �•" 3�W w
rip
i ��y j ! ®`'1 lloii � _1_—•J �smu�s _—n--rr, Sao g
r g k v d
lag
-
•` V 1 �__ -�d � I Ll t0
L � - —
go
14
PI
L �
I � _ r ►� 1
I 1 I
1HOI8 3AOSY 33S 3Nn HO1YW
4
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. City Council Act0 .
Councilmember UY) moves, Councilmember
seconds to approve Consent Calendar Items A through
Discussion
Action d ► `�
6A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of September 21, 2004.
6B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through September 15 and paid on
September 15 after auditing by the Operations Committee on September 21, 2004.
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
9/15/04 Wire Transfers 1816-1831 $1,4005540.70
9/15/04 PrePays & 567775 995,331.67
9/15/04 Regular 568351 1,250,409.35
$3,6469281.72
Approval of checks issued for pavroll for September 1 through September 15 and paid
on September 20, 2004:
Date Check Numbers Amount
9/20/04 Advices 169295-169953 $1,201,268.58
9/20/04 Checks 279469-279723 212,183.78
9/20/04 Interim Checks 279724-279725 750.05
9/20/2004 Void Check Ws 279194 & 279369 (750.05)
$1,413,452.36
Council Agenda
Item No. 6 A-B
K E N T Kent City Council Meeting
W A S H I M O T O M September 21,2004
The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem
Peterson. Councilmembers present: Clark, Harmon, Ranniger,Raplee, Thomas and White.
(CFN-198)
1 CHANGES TO AGENDA
A From Council, Administration, or Staff. (CFN-198) An item for Other Business was added
and the Copper Ridge Closed Record Appeal Hearing will be continued to October 19. The
Executive Session was removed by CAO Martin.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A. Proclamation—Constitution Week. (CFN-155) Mayor Pro Tem Peterson read a proclama-
tion declaring September 17-23, 2004 as Constitution Week in the City of Kent.
1 B. Proclamation—Mayor's Day of Concern for the Hungry. (CFN-155) Mayor Pro Tem
Peterson read a proclamation declaring September 25, 2004 as Day of Concern for the Hungry in
the City of Kent.
C. Introduction of Appointee. (CFN-198) Mayor Pro Tem Peterson announced that
' Councilmember Tim Clark was appointed to serve on the LEOFF I Disability Board.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. LID 356, Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Final Assessment Roll Ordinance (Quasi
Judicial Proceeding). (CFN-1280) The City has determined that certain properties are specially
benefited by the sanitary sewer system and has proposed to proportionately assess these properties
in accord with those special benefits.
Public Works Director Wickstrom explained the project and noted that the neighborhood
requested the LID due to system failures. He said that two protests were received for Lots 8 and
10 with no appraisals done but that these letters were just protesting the assessment. CLARK
MOVED to make the two letters of protest from Valerie Anderson and Daniel and Nicole Garves a
part of the public record. White seconded and the motion carried. City Attorney Brubaker
explained the quasi-judicial proceedings. Mayor Pro Tem Peterson opened the public hearing.
There were no comments from the audience and CLARK MOVED to close the public hearing.
White seconded and the motion carried.
WHITE MOVED to adopt Ordinance No. 3711 which approves and confirms the final assessment
roll on Local Improvement District 356—the I 1 Ith Avenue SE Sanitary Sewers. Clark seconded
and the motion carried.
B. LID 357, Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Final Assessment Roll Ordinance(Quasi-
Judicial Proceeding). (CFN-1284) The City has determined that certain properties are specially
benefited by the sanitary sewer system and has proposed to proportionately assess these properties
i in accord with those special benefits.
1
Kent City Council Minutes September 21, 2004
Public Works Director Wickstrom explained the project and noted that the neighborhood
requested the LID. He said no protests have been received. City Attorney Brubaker noted that the
same quasi-judicial proceeding applied to this local improvement district. Mayor Pro Tem
Peterson opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the audience and CLARK
MOVED to close the public hearing. White seconded and the motion carved.
WHITE MOVED to adopt Ordinance No. 3712 which approves and confirms the final assessment
roll on Local Improvement District 357— 120th Place SE sanitary sewers. Clark seconded and the
motion carried.
C. 2005-2010 Capital Improvement Plan (First Hearing). (CFN-775) The First Public
Hearing on the 2005-2010 Capital Improvement Plan is designed to have public comment on the
issues and concerns of the public. The Capital Improvement Plan covers six years with the first
year incorporated into the 2005 Annual Budget and the 2006—2010 five year period as a planning
document. The second hearing is scheduled for November 16. Assistant Finance Director Craig
explained the plan and Mayor Pro Tem Peterson opened the public hearing. There were no
comments from the public. CLARK MOVED to close the public hearing. White seconded the ,
motion carried.
D. 2005 Annual Budget(First Hearing). (CFN-186) The First Public Hearing on the 2005
Annual Budget is designed to receive public comment on the issues and concerns of the public.
This hearing is scheduled prior to any presentation on the 2005 Budget in order to allow the public
to assist with shaping the budget. Finance Director Nachlinger explained the budget development
process. Clark commented on Referendum 49 concerning property taxes. Mayor Pro Tem
Peterson opened the public hearing. Ted Kogita, 25227 Reith Road, said he would like to see
departments budget line item details. There were no further comments. CLARK MOVED to
close the public hearing. White seconded and the motion carved.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CLARK MOVED to approve Consent Calendar Items A through J. Clark seconded and the
motion carried.
A. Approval of Minutes. (CFN-198) The minutes of the regular Council meeting of
September 3, 2004 were approved.
B. Approval of Bills. (CFN-104) The payment of the bills received through August 31 and paid
on August 31 after auditing by the Operations Committee on September 7, 2004 were approved.
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
8/31/04 Wire Transfers 1801-1815 $1,081,141.43
8/31/04 Prepays & 567170 1,366,760.11
8/31/04 Regular 567774 1,880,998.03
$4,328,899.57
2
Kent City Council Minutes September 21, 2004
r
Approval of checks issued for payroll for August 1 through August 15 and paid on August 20,
2004:
8/20/04 Advices 167969-168633 $1,189,157.80
' 8/20/04 Checks 278901-279189 256,787.35
8/20/04 Interim Checks 279190 168.58
8/20/04 Void Check# 278915 (168.58)
' $1,445,945.15
Approval of checks issued for payroll for August 16 through August 31 and paid on September 3,
' 2004:
Date Check Numbers Amount
9/3/04 Advices 168634-169294 $1,204,181.22
9/3/04 Checks 279191-279468 252,374.16
$1,456,555.38
C. Mirabella Espresso Cafe Infrastructure Improvements Bill of Sale (CFN-484) The Bill of
Sale for Mirabella Espresso Cafe Infrastructure Improvements was accepted.
D. Seattle Southside Visitors Services Tourism Contract. (CFN-1170) The three-year inter-
local agreement with Seattle Southside Visitor Services (SSVS) for$300,000, in addition to a
onetime charge of$25,200 to update the Seattle Southside Vacation Planner was approved.
E Donation To Senior Activity Center. (CFN-118) The $20,000.00 donation from the Harvey
Cox estate to purchase fitness equipment for the Senior Center was accepted, and expendrtuie of
funds in the Memorial and Miscellaneous Budget was authorized.
' F. 2004 Computer Replacements. (CFN-1172&1155) The Mayor was authorized to sign
purchase orders for replacement computers and vendor services not to exceed $123,344.
G. Upper Meridian Valley Creek Box Culverts Proiect. (CFN-470) The Upper Meridian
Valley Creek Box Culverts project was accepted as complete and release the retainage to Granite
' Precasting and Concrete upon standard releases from the state and release of any liens was
approved.
' H. Village Creek Estates Final Plat. (CFN-1272) The Final Plat Mylar for Village Creek
Estates was approved and the Mayor was authorized to sign the Mylar.
1 L Kara III/Annandale Sewer Extension Bill of Sale. (CFN-484) The Bill of Sale for Kara III/
Annandale Plat Infrastructure Improvements was accepted.
J. LEOFF I Disability Board Appointment. (CFN-122) The Mayor's appointment of Council
Member Tim Clark to serve as a Council Representative on the LEOFF I Disability Board was
confirmed.
' 3
Kent City Council Minutes September 21, 2004 '
OTHER BUSINESS
A. Mid-Year Staffing and Fee Adiustment. (CFN-186&131&205) The total average monthly
value of permit applications in the permit center"pipeline"has more than doubled, from a
monthly average last year of$25 to $30 million to a monthly average of$70 million for about the
last six months. Staff originally thought this was a temporary increase, but now it appears to be
consistent and will be ongoing and perhaps even increase in the future. As a result, these
ordinances and resolutions increase certain permit fees and adjust the budget accordingly, in order
to hire nine full-time permit processing staff to insure that the City can timely process permit
applications. Finance Director Nachlinger explained the fee adjustments, budget and increase in
staffing. CLARK MOVED to adopt Ordinance Nos. 3713 and 3714 and Resolution Nos. 1686
and 1687, amending the 2004 budget for adjustments relating to development permit processing
and raising certain permit fees. White seconded. Clark explained that the City is trying to deliver
first class service and struggling with previous cuts in staffing. The motion then carried.
ADDED
B. Street Vacation, SE 278th Street. (CFN-102) The public hearing for the street vacation on
SE 278th Street is scheduled for October 19, 2004. A Street and/or Alley Vacation Application
and Petition was filed by Cherie Lang to vacate a portion of Southeast 278th Street. WHITE
MOVED to adopt Resolution No. 1688 scheduling a public hearing for October 19, 2004, for a
Street Vacation Application and Petition to vacate a portion of SE 278th Street. Clark seconded
and the motion carried.
BIDS I
A. Pioneer Street/Smith Street Improvements. (CFN-1038) The bid opening for this project
was held on September 13, 2004, with six bids received. The low bid was submitted by Rodarte
Construction, Inc. in the amount of$713,672.60. The Engineer's estimate was $756,968.22, The '
Public Works Director recommends awarding the contract to Rodarte Construction, Inc. subject to
approval from Federal Highway Administration/Washington State Department of Transportation.
WHITE SO MOVED, Clark seconded and the motion carried.
REPORTS
Council President. (CFN-198) Mayor Pro Tem Peterson announced that Councilmember Clark
has been appointed to serve on the Parks and Human Services Committee and Councilmember
Ranniger has agreed to serve as Chair of that Committee. '
Planning and Economic Development Committee. Councilmember Clark announced a special
meeting on Tuesday, October 4 on the critical areas ordinance at 4:00 p.m.
Administrative Reports. (CFN-198) Martin thanked Council for passing the mid-year staffing
and fee adjustment.
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:12 p.m. WHITE MOVED to adjourn. Thomas seconded and the motion carried. (CFN-198)
�ea7Mary Simmons I
Deputy City Clerk
4
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF KING COUNTY
GRANT FOR 2004 PROGRAMS—ACCEPT AND AMEND
BUDGET
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the $10,100.00 grant from the Cultural
Development Authority of King County Sustained Support and authorize expenditure
of funds in the Kent Arts Commission budget to support miscellaneous 2004 programs.
The grant supports the following programs: Spotlight Series, Kent Kids' Arts Day,
Kent Summer Concert Series, Canterbury Arts Festival and Missoula Children's Theater
Residencies.
3. EXHIBITS: King County Contract 91-6001254 summary page, Exhibit A— Scope
of Service
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue? X
Currently in the Budget? Yes No X
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund 10006222.64190.4310 Amount $10,100.00
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund 10006222.53705.4310 Amount $10,100.00
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6C
Agreement No. 104027A
Contractor's Federal Taxpayer ID No. 91-6001254
Contractor City of Kent Arts Commission
1 Project Title: 2004 Programs
Contract Amount: $ 10,100.00 Fund Source: CP—Arts Sustained Support
1 Contract Period From: 01/01/04 To: 12/31/04
IAGENCY SERVICES CONTRACT 2004
THIS CONTRACT is entered into by the CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF KING COUNTY
("4Culture"), whose address is 506 Second Avenue, Ste 200, Seattle, WA 98104-2307 and telephone
number is (206)296-7580 and the City of Kent Arts Commission (the "Contractor"), whose address is 220
4th Avenue South, Kent WA 98032-5895 and telephone number is (253)856-5050 Contractor is an art,
cultural or historical organization or specialist qualified to receive funds pursuant to King County Code
Sections 2.48 and 4.42 and RCW 67.28.180 and as hereinafter may be amended.The 4Culture Board of
Directors approved providing funds for this project by Motion No. 2004-09.
4Culture desires to provide funds with which the Contractor shall render certain services to King County
I citizens. Such services are for the benefit of art museums, cultural museums, heritage museums, the arts,
and/or the performing arts and are consistant with those defined in RCW 67.28.180 ("Public Benefit
Services").
4Culture is organized pursuant to King County Ordinance 14482 and RCW 35.21.730, et seq. RCW
35.21.750 provides as follows: "[All] liabilities incurred by such public corporation, commission, or authority
shall be satisfied exclusively from the assets and properties of such public corporation, commission or
authority and no creditor or other person shall have any right of action against the city,town,or county
creating such corporation, commission, or authority on account of any debts, obligations,or liabilities of such
public corporation, commission, or authority."
The legislative authority of 4Culture has found and declared that providing funds to Contractor to reimburse
Project costs in consideration of services provided hereunder constitutes a public purpose with the meaning
of Article VI I, Section 1 of the Washington State Constitution for which public funds may properly be
expended or advanced.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of payments, covenants, and agreements hereinafter mentioned,to
be made and performed by the parties hereto,the parties covenant and do mutually agree as follows:
AG SVC 04 Page 1 of 7
Exhibit A
SCOPE OF SERVICE
City of Kent Arts Commission and 4Culture,the Cultural Development Authority of King County,
mutually agree that the following services be provided in accordance with the application and contract
work sheet submitted to and approved by the 4Culture Board of Directors.
Support for 2004 Programs, including"Spotlight Series"performance series held January-December
2004; "Kent Kids'Arts Day"in March 2004; "Kent Summer Concert Series"performance series held
July-August 2004; "Canterbury Arts Festival"in August 2004;and"Missoula Children's Theater
Residencies"in March and July 2004.Events are open and publicized to the community.
AMOUNT $10,100
For artist fees and program expenses.Payable upon completion, submittal of invoice and documentation
regarding:
• Final budget,actual
• Completion of evaluation form
• Final report of program activities
• Programs,brochures, flyers if available
PUBLIC BENEFIT
Programs will be accessible to a broad range of King County citizens.
PUBLICITYIPROMOTION POLICY
Prominent acknowledgment of 4Culture/King County Lodging Tax Fund is required of all recipients for
use in all publicity and promotional materials, including,but not limited to brochures,press releases,
programs,posters,public service announcements,flyers and advertisements.
Final payment will not be made until acknowledgment is submitted on printed material
i
- t
i
j
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: DECLARE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES SURPLUS AND
ALLOW DEMOLITION—APPROVAL
2. SUIVEVIARY STATEMENT: Approve the surplus of all structures at 25520
Hawley Road, 25000 Hawley Road, and 26621 132°d Ave. SE and authorize
demolition.
The properties were purchased with the intent to develop parks. Structures located on
the properties at the time of acquisition were incidental to the purchase and are not
Ineeded for park purposes.
3. EXHIBITS: None
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks &Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes_ No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6D
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE GRANT FOR
SAFE HAVENS —ACCEPT AND AMEND BUDGET
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the $200,000.00 grant from the Federal
Department of Justice and authorize the Mayor to executive appropriate agreements for
the expenditure of such funds.
In January of 2003, the City of Kent received a 3-year, $500,000.00 grant from the
Federal Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women(OVW) to establish
a supervised visitation and safe exchange program for families impacted by domestic
violence, child abuse, sexual assault, and stalking. OVW has recently awarded the City
an additional $200,000.00 to assist in further development of the program and site
location.
3. EXHIBITS: Federal Department of Justice Contract No. 2004-CW-AX-KO01
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue? X
Currently in the Budget? Yes No X
' If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund H00010.4625 Amount $200,000.00
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund H0010.53125 Amount $200,000.00
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6E
U.S. Department of Justice
' # ¢ Office on Violence Against Women
August 30,2004 Washington.D C 1053/
The Honorable Jim White
City of Kent
220 4th Avenue South
Kent,WA 98032-5895
' Dear Mayor White:
On behalf of Attorney General John Ashcroft,it is my pleasure to inform you that the Office on Violence Against Women has
' approved your application for funding under the FY04 Safe Havens: Supervised Visitation& Safe Exchange Program in the
amount of$200,000 for City of Kent. This award provides the opportunity for recipients to develop and strengthen effective
responses to violence against women. This grant award supports supervised visitation and safe exchange options for
families with a history of domestic violence,child abuse,sexual assault and stalking.
Enclosed you will find the award package. This award is subject to all administrative and financial requirements,including
the timely submission of all financial and programmatic reports,resolution of all interim audit findings,and the maintenance o
' a minimum level of cash-on-hand. Should you not adhere to these requirements,you will be in violation of the terms of this
agreement and the award will be subject to termination for cause or other administrative action as appropriate.
If you have questions regarding this award,please contact Knsta S.Blakeney-Mitcbell at(202)353-4567. For financial
questions,contact the Office of the Comptroller,Customer Service Center(CSC)at (800)458-0786,or by email at
ask.oc@usdoj.gov.
' Congratulations,and we look forward to working with you.
' Sincerely,
%" r _ `
' Diane M. Stuart
Director,Office on Violence Against Women
Enclosures
U S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
,,emu
PAGE 1 OF 5
Office on Violence Cooperative Agreement
Against Women ,
1 RECIPIENT NAME AND ADDRESS(Including Zip Code) 4 AWARD NUMBER: 2004-CW-AX-KD01
jCity of Kent
220 4th Avenue South 5 PROJECT PERIOD FROM 10/012004 TO 09/30/2006
Kent,WA 98032-5895 '
BUDGET PERIOD.FROM I0/01l2004 TO 09/302006
6.AWARD DATE 08/30/2004 7 ACTION
I GRANTEE IRSNENDORNO. 8 SUPPLEMENT NUMBER Initial '
j 916001265 00
j 9.PREVIOUS AWARD AMOUNT so '
3 PROJECT TITLE 10.AMOUNT OF THIS AWARD S 2D0,000
i FY04 Safe Havens: Supervised Visitation&Safe Exchange Program
11.TOTAL AWARD $200,000 '
- -- - - -- -- -- ----- — --- - — -- --
12 SPECIAL CONDITIONS
THE ABOVE GRANT PROJECT IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO SUCH CONDITIONS OR LIMITATIONS AS ARE SET FORTH
ON THE ATTACHED PAGE(S).
13.STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR GRANT
This project is supported under 42 USC 14041a
i
15.METHOD OF PAYMENT ,
PAPRS
AGENCY APPROVAL _— GRANTEE ACCEPTANCE —
16 TYPED NAME AND TITLE OF APPROVING OFFICIAL 18 TYPED NAME AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED GRANTEE OFFICIAL
Diane M Stuart Jim White ,
Director,Office on Violence Against Women Mayor
17 SIGNATURE OF APPROVING OFFICIAL 19 SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED RECIPIENT OFFICIAL 19A DATE
I
I 1
I
AGENCY USE ONLY '
20.ACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION CODES 21 CW04D00020
FISCAL FUND BUD. DIV
YEAR CODE ACT. OFC. REG. SUB POMS AMOUNT ,
X A CW 29 00 00 200000
n 1r,ClIDAA AnnAll M=17 C Q71 DDCV TIT TQ Pr%17TrW Q ADC ran'ZAT CTC
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ACTION
PLAN AMENDMENT—APPROVE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve the amended Community Development
' 2003 Action Plan and authorize the Mayor to execute the appropriate agreements.
In 2003, the City of Kent did not use all of the Community Development Block Grant
' (CDBG) funds allocated to Planning and Administration. Also in 2003, funds were
allocated for the Kent One-Stop Program and those funds need to be reallocated, as the
One Stop is leasing space and will reapply for funding when it is ready to purchase a
facility. Per HUD regulations, the City of Kent needs to amend the 2003 CDBG Annual
Action Plan to reallocate the funds.
3. EXHIBITS: Amendment to the CDBG 2003 Action Plan
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
' 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6F
Kent Parks, Recreation &Community Services
Amendment to the 2003—2007 Kent Consolidated Plan Action Plan
A. Background
1. In 2002, the City of Kent filed an application with the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development(HUD)for Metropolitan City entitlement status to receive a direct
allocation of Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)funds
2. As a part of the entitlement process, HUD required the City to submit a five-year Consolidated
Housing and Community Development Plan. The City of Kent began working on its 2003—
2007 Consolidated Plan in the spring of 2002
3. HUD approved the Consolidated Plan in June 2003,and the City received its first direct
allocation of CDBG funds in 2003
4. The Consolidated Plan was developed with citizen participation and residents were invited to
comment on the draft document.
5. The final plan included a 2003 Action Plan in which the City outlined the specific actions that it
would undertake to implement the goals and strategies of the five-year Consolidated Plan.
' 6. The 2003 Action Plan stated that$116,002 in funds transferred from the King County CDBG
Consortium would be allocated to the One-Stop Human Services Center, a facility bringing
low/moderate-income clients together in one place for easy access to human services
providers. The One-Stop Center did not open in 2003.
7. The City stated that 20%of the 2003 CDBG funds would be allocated to CDBG Program
Planning and Administration The City did not use the full amount to administer the CDBG
program, consequently, $74,182 was recaptured
B. Amendment
1 Amend the 2003 Annual Action Plan to allow for the cancellation of$116,002 of funds
allocated to the One-Stop Human Services Center and to recapture$74,182 of unspent
Planning and Administration Funds This is a grand total of$190,184 of funds available for
1 reallocation.
2 Funds shall be reallocated as follows:
$90,184: Kent Home Repair Program-Rehabilitation assistance and health and safety
' repairs to 100 unduplicated low/moderate-income Kent households.
$100,000: Pediatric Interim Care Center-Acquisition of property and construction of a
new facility to care for infants suffering from prenatal drug exposure.
C. Public Participation Process
1. A public hearing on the amendment will be held on September 16, 2004 at 2.30 at City Hall,
Council Chambers East,220 41^Avenue South, Kent,WA 98032.
2. Copies of the draft amendment are available at the Kent Parks, Recreation &Community
Services Department, Human Services Division,400 West Gowe Street, Suite 410, Kent, WA
98032, The draft amendment is also available for review on the City of Kent website at
http,//www a kent wa us/HumanServices/default him
3. The City of Kent's Amendment to the 2003—2007 Kent Consolidated Plan, 2003 Action Plan,
is available for public review and comment at the City Clerk's Office, 15t Floor, Kent City Hall,
220 4w Avenue South,the Kent Regional Library,212 2nd Avenue North,or the Housing &
Human Services Division, Suite 410, Centennial Center,400 West Gowe Street, Kent,WA
98032
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5. 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: EAST HILL PARK AGREEMENT—APPROVE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the
Consultant Services Agreement with Entre Prises, USA in the amount of$129,837.00
for design and fabrication of two climbing features at East Hill Skate Park.
Parks Department staff researched options for design and fabrication of similar
climbing features and found that Entre Prises, USA, Inc. is the sole source provider and
will offer the safest and most cost effective design and final product. This company is
recognized as the industry standard in the design and fabrication of climbing structures.
No other company in the United States provides these services, similar companies are
located in Europe.
i3. EXHIBITS: Waiver memo, Consultant Agreement and Exhibit A— Scope of Work
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6G
KENT
WASHIMOTOM
PARKS, RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
i MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Jim White
FROM: John M. Hodgs lars, Recreation & Community Services
Director
C: Mike Martin, Chief Administrative Officer
SUBJECT: Waiver of Procurement Requirements
■ DATE: September 14, 2004
■ REFERENCE: Section 3.70.080 Kent City Code
City of Kent Administration Policy No. 1.1.10
PROJECT: East Hill Community Skate Park
FUNDING: IAC/WWRP Grant Funds and Capital Improvement Project Funding
The City's Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department is requesting a
waiver, pursuant to KCC 3.70.080, of the City's procurement ordinance as negotiation
with a particular supplier is appropriate as the contemplated services are limited to a
single source of supply through Entre Prises, USA. The Parks Department would like to
contract design and fabrication of two climbing features with Entre Prises, USA to be
installed at the East Hill Community Skate Park.
The Parks Department believes it is in the City's best interest to negotiate an agreement
directly with Entre Prises, USA. Parks Department staff has researched options for
design and fabrication of similar climbing features and found that Entre Prises, USA will
provide the best final product as is the only company the City found that could fabricate
what the City desires. The cost of design and fabrication is $129,835.00, including state
sales tax and delivery. The funding source is through the City's General Fund.
' By this memo, the Parks Department requests that you determine the bidding process
usually required by KCC 3.70.030 and .040 is not in the best interests of the City and that
you authorize the Parks Department to enter into direct negotiations with Entre Prises, USA
for the design and fabrication of the climbing features for the East Hill Community Skate
Park. In the event the Parks Department successfully negotiates a Consultant Services
Agreement with Entre Prises, USA, the contract will be brought before the City Council for
' East Hill Community Skate Park 09/14/04
Climbing Feature Waiver
EXHIBIT A
r
r
9W " Climbing Wall Cost Estimate
Date: September 10,2004
Customer. Perry Brooks
City of Kent
Parks,Recreation&Community Services
1 — BI FEET
AVE.PERIMETER 28.25 ft
HEIGHT: 30.00 ft
TOPO FACTOR: 1,30
'TOTAL TOWER AREA: 1102.00 ft'
10'tall Freeform boulder. 375.00 ftZ
TOTAL AREA: 1477.00 ft' r
! 6 on tower r
QTY UNIT COST TOTAL
2 Freefonn surface: 1,102 sf $50.00 $55,10000
Modular Holds: 368 ea $4.75 $1,74800
Custom access door. 1 ea $750.00 $750.00
3 Steel frames: 2 ea $12,750.00 $25,500.00
10'tall Freeform boulder. 1 ea $22,000.00 $22,000.00 r
Design/Shop Drawings, 1 ea $4,298.00 $4,298.00
5Engineering• 1 ea $2,149.00 $2,14900
5 Foundation engineering 1 ea $2,500.00 $2,500.00
pper�] Pro' Administration: 1 ea $77200 $772 00
Shipping: 2 trks $1,500.00 $3,000.00 '
Handii 40 hrs $30.00 $1,200.00
EPIC (2 personJ: 3 days $862.50 $2,587.50
Freeform Wall Detailer 4 da s $500.00 $2,000.00
Expenses: 1 ea $6,230.00 $6,230.00
$129,835.00
a�nT�Cl�41:BY�EPR :,a=
THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES ON BEHALF OF ENTNE PRISES USA.INC
THIS COST ESTIMATE ASSUMES USE OF ENTRE PRISES AGREEMENTS AND ACCEPTANCE OF EP USAS PAYMENT TE
ANY DEVIATIONS FROM THIS WILL LIXELY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL COSTS
THIS ESTIMATE IS GOOD FOR BD DAYS FROM DATE SHOWN ABOVE
Page 1 of 2
r
•
KENT
WAEM1"OlOM
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
between the City of Kent and
Entre Prises USA, Inc.
jTHIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation
(hereinafter the "City"), and Entre Prises USA organized under the laws of the State of Oregon, located and
doing business at 20512 Nels Anderson Place,Bend,Oregon 97701,Eric Meade(hereinafter the"Consultant").
I. DESCRIPTION OF WORK.
Consultant shall perform the following services for the City in accordance with the following described
plans and/or specifications: Design and fabricate a 30' FreeformTM climbing wail and 10'FreeformTM climbing
boulder for the future East Hill Community Skate Park in Kent, Washington as described on the Consultant's
Cost Estimate dated September 10,2004 and attached and incorporated as Exhibit A.
Consultant further represents that the services famished under this Agreement will be performed in
accordance with generally accepted professional practices in effect at the time those services are performed.
II. TIME OF COMPLETION. The parties agree that work will begin on the tasks described in
Section I above immediately upon the effective date of this Agreement. Upon the effective date of this
Agreement, Consultant shall complete the work described in Section I by March 1, 2005 (design) and by
SAugust 1, 2005 (fabrication).
' III. COMPENSATION.
A. The City shall pay the Consultant, based on time and materials, an amount not to exceed One
Hundred Twenty-Nine Thousand, Eight Hundred Thirty-Five Dollars and NO/100ths
($129,835.00) for the services described in this Agreement. This is the maximum amount to be
paid under this Agreement for the work described in Section I above, and shall not be exceeded
without the prior written authorization of the City in the form of a negotiated and executed
supplemental agreement. The Consultant agrees that the hourly or flat rate charged by it for its
services contracted for herein shall remain locked at the negotiated rate(s) for a period of one (1)
year from the effective date of this Agreement. The Consultant's billing rates shall be as
delineated in Exhibit A.
B. The Consultant shall submit monthly payment invoices to the City for work performed, and a
final bill upon completion of all services described in this Agreement. The City shall provide
payment within forty-five (45) days of receipt of an invoice. If the City objects to all or any
portion of an invoice, it shall notify the Consultant and reserves the option to only pay that
portion of the invoice not in dispute. In that event, the parties will immediately make every
effort to settle the disputed portion.
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT- 1
approval in accordance with the requirements of KCC 3.70.050. If you approve of the
Parks Department's request for a waiver of the City's procurement policies, please note
your approval by signing below.
Thank you. '
Jim White Date '
Mayor
t
1
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
East Hill Community Skate Park 09/14/04 ,
Climbing Feature Waiver !
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: PROSTITUTION LOITERING—ORDINANCE AMENDING KENT
CITY CODE 9.02.300—ADOPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adopt Ordinance No. amending section
9.02.300 of the Kent City Code entitled"Prostitution loitering."
Section 9.02.300 of the Kent City Code has existed in its current form since its original
adoption and inclusion in the City's 1986 code. Since the ordinance's adoption, those
who commit the crime of prostitution loitering have changed their conduct in an attempt
to conceal their criminal activity. The revisions made in the proposed ordinance are
needed in order to revise the Kent City Code to reflect the crime as it is currently being
committed and to clarify who the City may charge with the crime of prostitution
loitering.
3. EXHIBITS: Ordinance
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount$
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6H
l
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, amending section 9.02.300 of the
Kent City Code, entitled"Prostitution loitering."
RECITALS
A. The provisions of section 9.02.300 of the Kent City Code has been in
effect in the City of Kent since the adoption of the City's 1986 code.
B This code section has not been amended since its original adoption,
however, in response to this ordinance, those who commit the crime of prostitution
loitering have changed their conduct in an attempt to conceal their criminal activity.
C The amendments set forth in this ordinance are needed in order to take
into account the manner in which the crime is currently being committed and to clarify
who may be charged under the ordinance.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
1 Prostitution Loitering—
Amend KCC 9.02.300
ORDINANCE
SECTION L — Amendment. Section 9.02.300 of the Kent City Code, entitled
"Prostitution loitering,"is amended as follows.
See. 9.02.300. Prostitution loitering. ,
A. A person is guilty of prostitution loitering if he or she is in a
public place and intentionally solicits, induces, entices, or procures another to commit
the crime of prostitution or patronizing a prostitute.
i
B. The f lio-A ng nane.iel si e .,..,anees may be ,.,eider-e Among the
circumstances which may be considered in determining whether the actor intends
intentionally solicits, induces. entices, or procures another to commit the crime of
prostitution or patronizing a prostituteleiteriag The are that he or she:
1. Repeatedly beckons to, stops or attempts to stop passersby, or engages
passersby in conversation;
2. Repeatedly stops or attempts to stop occupants of a motor vehicle or
motorcycle epefater-s-by hailing, waiving, or beckoning to the occupants using words or
conduct, . a- v-ing of arm or attempts to obtain the attention of the occupants by
walking or otherwise conducting oneself in a sexual manner-,an other-bedi y gestufe
3. Circles or repeatedly returns to an area and repeatedly beckons to, ,
contacts, or attempts to stop pedestrians;
4. Circles or repeatedly returns to an area known by the police as an area of ,
prostitution.
45. Is a known prostitute, a person known to patronize prostitutes, or a ,
person known to promote,permit, or advance prostitution gweeuref; or
-56. Inquires whether another is a police
officer, searches for articles that would identify a police officer, or exposes his or her
2 Prostitution Loitering— '
Amend KCC 9.02.300
I ,
genitals or her le breasts, or requests the other to touch' his or her 4
genitals or€etnaleher breasts to prove that the othez{ sen is not a police officer.
C. As used in this section•
1. Patronizing a prostitute shall have the same meaning as set forth in
RCW 9A 88.110 as now enacted or later amended or recodified.
42. C&�Prostitution means to engage or agree or offer to engage in
sexual conduct for a fee, reward, exchange of any item or service, or promise, but does
not include sexual conduct engaged in as part of any stage performance, play, or other
lawful and,properly licensed entertainment open to the public.
23. Known prostitute, a person known to
' patronize prostitutes, or a person known to advance prostitution means a person who
within one (1) year previous to the date of arrest for violation of this section has,within
ithe knowledge of the arresting officer, been a-mer:onvicted of an offense
Hof prostitution, patronizing a prostitute, prostitution loitering, permitting
prostitution, or promoting prostitution whether or not such conviction occurs under the
I
Revised Code of Washington or comparable laws of municipalities in the state of
Washington.
I 34. Public place is an area generally visible to public view and includes
without limitation streets, sidewalks, bridges, alleys, plazas, parks, driveways, parking
lots, bus stops, automobiles (whether moving or not), and buildings open to the general
public, including those which serve food or drink, or provide entertainment, and the
doorways and entrances to buildings or dwellings and the ground enclosing them
45. Sexual conduct shall Dave the s -as mean "sexual
intercourse" or "sexual contact" as defined in RCW 9A.88.030 and Chapter 9A.44.010
as currently enacted or later amended or recodified4>� W.
6. Walking or otherwise conducting oneself in a sexual manner shall mean
the swaying of hips, drawing attention to one's buttocks, legs, or breasts, grabbing
oneself in the genitals or breasts, blowing kisses, or using one's body or any part
thereof to simulate sexual conduct.
' 3 Prostitution Loitering—
Amend KCC 9.02.300
D. Prostitution loitering is a misdemeanor.
SECTION 2. — Severabihtv. If any one or more section, subsections, or
sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same
shall remain in full force and effect
SECTION 3. —Effective Date This ordinance shall take effect and be in force
thirty (30) days from and after its passage as provided by law. '
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
4 Prostitution Loitering— '
Amend KCC 9.02.300
PASSED: day of October, 2004.
APPROVED: day of October, 2004.
iPUBLISHED: day of October, 2004.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the
Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
I
P`Cnl'ORWN\CflRewwminneWp.fl2tloa
I
1
1
1
i
I
5 Prostitution Loitering—
Amend KCC 9.02.300
Kent City Council Meeting
i Date October 5. 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: VIOLATION OF SEATTLE-KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER, ORDINANCE—ADOPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adopt Ordinance No. amending the Kent City
Code to add a new section 9.02.335 making it a crime to violate an order issued by the
Seattle-King County Department of Public Health under the authority of Ch. 64.44
RCW.
The Seattle-King County Department of Public Health("Health Department") has
jurisdiction over the clean up of property that is contaminated by the illegal
manufacture of drugs including methamphetamine. As part of that clean up process,
the Health Department has authority to issue orders that prohibit people from using or
entering contaminated property until clean up has occurred. Unless the City makes it a
crime within the City of Kent to violate a Health Department order, the City is without
jurisdiction to enforce a violation of that order. This ordinance would allow the City to
arrest someone who enters upon or uses contaminated property in violation of a Health
Department order or who removes or damages the order.
3. EXHIBITS: Ordinance
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount$
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6I
1
1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, amending the Kent City Code to add
a new section 9.02.335 making it a crime in the City of
Kent to violate an order issued by the Seattle-King County
Department of Public Health under the authority of Ch.
64.44 RCW.
' RECITALS
A. Ch. 64.44 RCW provides that when law enforcement becomes aware
that property has been contaminated by hazardous chemicals used in the manufacture of
illegal drugs, that agency is to report the contamination to the local health department,
which for King County is the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health
("Health Department").
B. In the event an officer from the Health Department determines that the
property is unfit for use, the officer may issue, serve, and post an order prohibiting
entry and use of the property. Under the Health Department's regulations, any person
who violates an order of the Health Department is guilty of a misdemeanor, which is
punishable by a fine up to five hundred dollars ($500), or imprisonment in jail up to
ininety (90) days, or both.
1 Violation Seattle-King County
Dept. of Public Health Order
C. Generally,the Health Department's regulations are enforced by the King
County Sheriffs Office. However, the King County Sheriff has no jurisdiction to '
enforce criminal charges within the City limits of Kent. Moreover, unless the City
makes it a crime to violate a Health Department order, the City is without jurisdiction 1
to enforce the King County provision that makes it a crime to violate an order of the
King County Health Department.
D. This ordinance adds a section to the City's criminal code making it
crime to violate, remove, or damage an order of the Health Department. This
amendment would allow the City to arrest someone who enters upon or uses property in
violation of a Health Department order or who removes or damages such order.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
i
SECTION 1. -Amendment Ch. 9.02 of the Kent City Code, entitled `'Criminal
Code," is amended by adding a new subsection 9.02.335 as follows:
Sec. 9.02.335. Contaminated property - Order of Seattle-King County
Department of Public Health prohibiting use or entry—Violation.
A. Whenever an order is issued pursuant to RCW 64.44.030, as that law is now
enacted or later amended or recodified, which restrains a person or the public from
entering upon or using property, and that order is posted in a conspicuous place on the
property, a violation of the provisions restraining use or entry shall be a gross
misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in jail for a maximum term fixed by the
court of not more than one (1) year, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of not
more than five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by both such imprisonment and fine.
2 Violation Seattle-King County
Dept. of Public Health Order
B. Whenever an order is issued pursuant to RCW 64.44.030, as that law is now
enacted or later amended or recodified, which restrains a person or the public from
entering upon or using property, and that order is posted in a conspicuous place on the
property, the removal or damage of such order shall be a gross misdemeanor punishable
by imprisonment in jail for a maximum term fixed by the court of not more than one (1)
year, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of not more than five thousand dollars
' ($5,000), or by both such imprisonment and fine.
SECTION 2. - Severability. If any one or more section, subsections, or
sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same
Ishall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 3. -Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force
thirty (30) days from and after its passage as provided by law.
i
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
3 Violation Seattle-King County
Dept. of Public Health Order
PASSED: day of October, 2004.
APPROVED: day of October, 2004.
PUBLISHED: day of October, 2004. '
1 hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. '
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the
Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P`CmIDPUINANCEFInPM1Dq.Ote a'.W.edx i
l
I
i
1
1
4 Violation Seattle-King County
Dept. of Public Health Order
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MODEL CONSULTANT
SERVICES AGREEMENT—AUTHORIZE
STATEMENT: Authorize the Mayor to sign 2. SUMMARY y the Consultant Services
Agreement between the City of Kent and PTV America, Inc. to convert the City of Kent
2003 Transportation Model to version 9.1 of the VISUM software.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Director's memorandum and agreement
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue?_
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6J
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Don E. Wickstrom, P.E. Public Works Director
Phone:253-856-5500
Fax. 253-856-6500
i K E N T Address. 220 Fourth Avenue S
WASHINGTON
Kent,WA 98032-5895
DATE: September 20,2004
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom,Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Transportation Demand Model
MOTION: Recommend the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the Consultant Services
Agreement between the City of Kent and PTV America, Inc to convert the City of Kent 2003
Transportation Model to version 9.1 of the VISUM software.
SUMMARY: The consultant shall provide services necessary to convert the City
of Kent transportation model to version 9.1 of the VISUM software,updating forecasts and
adding truck trip data to the model.
iBUDGET IMPACT: No Unbudgeted Fiscal/Personnel Impact as the funding
($25,421.00) would come out of the respective project fund.
BACKGROUND: In 2003, the Public Works Engineering/Transportation section
went through the painstaking process of updating the city's transportation model in order to write
I the Transportation Element(Chapter 9)of the city's Comprehensive Plan Update. During that
process, it became clear that the city's existing transportation model was in dire need of
modernization as far as software capabilities. While still technically sound and able to manage a
great deal of data,the existing transportation model is written in the old DOS format and is
cumbersome to operate. There are very few people (even in our IT department)who are still
knowledgeable about DOS computer language. Converting the existing transportation demand
model to the VISUM software would move the city's modeling effort into a Window's-based
computer software system and facilitate writing the needed update to the city's Comprehensive
Transportation Plan. It is essential to be able to model travel demand in order to help determine
future transportation system needs,to update the 6 year TIP, for the long-term CIP, and for
potential revisions to the concurrency management ordinance. This new software will allow us
to separate out truck trips from the other vehicle traffic. Having the ability to model freight trip
demand(origins and destinations) in future scenarios will help us when applying for grants
related to freight corridors. While in the process of conversion from one model to another,we
will take this opportunity to add in those land-use changes which have occurred since the 2003
model update(large developments in Kent&neighboring jurisdictions)as well as the latest
transportation system changes.
Mayor White and Kent City Council 1
Consultant: PTV America,Inc, t
Project: Transportation Model
Amount: $25, 421.00*
Date: September 9, 2004
Please circulate for approval to process the attached agreement.
CM Project Engineer �/9�0� I
Initials and Date
Eng.Manager ^
pl
Imti and Date (j
Don W q 1
Initials and Date
*Date of Council Approval: ,
For contracts over$25,000.00,please include the date of council approval for the budget of this
project.
KENT
' wws"'MOToCONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
between the City of Kent and
PTV America, Inc.
THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation
(hereinafter the "City"), and PTV America, Inc. organized under the laws of the State of Washington, located
and doing business at PO Box 1850, Vashon, WA 98070, Phone: (206) 463-3768/Fax: (206) 463-5055,
Contact: Robert Shull(hereinafter the "Consultant").
I. DESCRIPTION OF WORK.
Consultant shall perform the following services for the City in accordance with the following described
plans and/or specifications:
iThe Consultant shall provide consultation to the Ctiy to convert the City of Kent's transporation
model to version 9.1 of the VISUM software,updating forecasts and adding truck trip data to the
model. For a detailed description, see the Scope of Work which is attached as Exhibit A and
incorporated by this reference.
Consultant fiuther represents that the services furnished under this Agreement will be performed in
accordance with generally accepted professional practices in effect at the time those services are performed.
II. TIME OF COMPLETION. The parties agree that work will begin on the tasks described in
Section I above immediately upon the effective date of this Agreement. Upon the effective date of this
' Agreement, Consultant shall complete the work described in Section I by April 29,2005.
M. COMPENSATION.
A. The City shall pay the Consultant,based on time and materials, an amount not to exceed Twenty
Five Thousand, Four Hundred Twenty One Dollars ($25,421.00) for the services described in
this Agreement. This is the maximum amount to be paid under this Agreement for the work
described in Section I above, and shall not be exceeded without the prior written authorization of
the City in the form of a negotiated and executed supplemental agreement. The Consultant
agrees that the hourly or flat rate charged by it for its services contracted for herein shall remain
locked at the negotiated rate(s) for a period of one (1) year from the effective date of this
Agreement. The Consultant's billing rates shall be as delineated in Exhibit A.
B. The Consultant shall submit monthly payment invoices to the City for work performed, and a
final bill upon completion of all services described in this Agreement. The City shall provide
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT-1
(Over$10,000)
payment within forty-five (45) days of receipt of an invoice. If the City objects to all or any
portion of an invoice, it shall notify the Consultant and reserves the option to only pay that
portion of the invoice not in dispute. In that event,the parties will immediately make every
effort to settle the disputed portion.
IV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The parties intend that an Independent Contractor-
Employer Relationship will be created by this Agreement and that the Consultant has the ability to control and
direct the performance and details of its work, the City being interested only in the results obtained under this
Agreement.
V. TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, upon '
providing the other party thirty (30) days written notice at its address set forth on the signature block of this
Agreement. 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. If the City's use of
Consultant's records or data is not related to this project, it shall be without liability or legal exposure to the
Consultant.
VL DISCRIMINATION. In the hiring of employees for the performance of work under this
Agreement or any subcontract, the Consultant, its subcontractors, or any person acting on behalf of the
Consultant or subcontractor shall not, by reason of race, religion, color, sex, age, sexual orientation, 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 tow hich 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.
VII. 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
IMMUNITY 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.
VIII. INSURANCE. The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement,
insurance of the types and in the amounts described in Exhibit B attached and incorporated by this reference.
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT-2
(Over$10,000)
i
IX. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION. The City will provide its best efforts to provide
reasonable accuracy of any information supplied by it to Consultant for the purpose of completion of the work
under this Agreement.
X. OWNERSHIP AND USE OF RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS. Original documents,
drawings, designs, reports, or any other records developed or created under this Agreement shall belong to and
become the property of the City. All records submitted by the City to the Consultant will be safeguarded by the
Consultant. Consultant shall make such data, documents, and files available to the City upon the City's request.
The city's use or reuse of any of the documents, data and files created by Consultant for this project by anyone
other than Consultant on any other project shall be without liability or legal exposure to Consultant.
XI. CITY'S RIGHT OF INSPECTION. E ven 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 w ork in ust m eet the approval o f t he C ity and shall b e subject t o t he C ity's general r ight o f
inspection to secure satisfactory completion.
XII. WORK PERFORMED AT CONSULTANT'S RISK Consultant shall take all necessary
precautions and shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and subcontractors in the
performance of the contract work 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.
XIIL MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
A. 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.
B. Non-Waiver of Breach. The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of any of the
covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement, or to exercise any option conferred by this Agreement
in one or more instances shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of those covenants, agreements
or options, and the same shall be and remain in full force and effect.
C. Resolution of Disputes and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. If the parties are unable to settle any dispute,
difference or claim arising from the parties' performance of this Agreement, the exclusive means of resolving
that dispute, difference or claim, shall only be by filing suit exclusively under the venue, rules and jurisdiction
of the King County Superior Court, King County, Washington, unless the parties agree in writing to an
alternative dispute resolution process. In any claim or lawsuit for damages arising from the parties'
performance of this Agreement, each party shall pay all its legal costs and attorneys 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
V1I of this Agreement.
D. 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 three(3)business days after 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.
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT-3
(Over s10,000)
E. Assignment. Any assignment of this Agreement by either party without the written consent of
the non-assigning party shall be void. If the non-assigning party gives its consent to any assignment, the terns
of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and no further assignment shall be made without
additional written consent.
F. 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.
G. 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. All of the above documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement.
However, 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.
H. Compliance with Laws. 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 those operations.
IN WITNESS,the parties below execute this Agreement,which shall become effective on the last
date entered below.
CONSULTANT: CITY OF KENT:
By:, By:
(Signature) (signatur e)
Print Name: Print Name: Jim White
Its Its Mayor
(Title) 01(le)
DATE: DATE:
NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: NOTICES TO BE SENT TO:
CONSULTANT: CITY OF KENT:
Robert Shull Don E.Wickstrom,P.E.
PTV America, Inc. City of Kent
PO Box 1850 220 Fourth Avenue South
Vashon,WA 98070 Kent, WA 98032
(206)463-3768(telephone) (253) 856-5500(telephone)
206)463-5055 facsimile (253) 856-6500(facsimile)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kent Law Department
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT-4
(Over$10,000)
i
PTV Ammea-Transporatmon Model/Mooney
i
i
i
1
i
i
i
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT-5
(Over$10,000)
I
I
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 Agreement 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 Agreement to adhere to. An affirmative response is required on all of
the following questions for this Agreement 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 detennination regarding suspension or termination for all or part of the
Agreement;
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 Agreement 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 Agreement the prime contractor will provide a written statement to all new
employees and subcontractors indicating commitment as an equal opportunity employer.
4. During the time of the Agreement I,the prime contractor,will actively consider hiring and promotion of
women and minorities.
5. Before acceptance of this Agreement, 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 ,200_.
By:
For:
Title:
Date:
l
I
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS-1
I
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 Agreements 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.
I 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 Agreement.
iContract 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.
i
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS-2
CITY OF KENT
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLIANCE STATE)IENT
This form shall be filled out AFTER COMPLETION of this project by the Contractor awarded the
Agreement.
I,the undersigned, a duly represented agent of Coml Pany, hereby
acknowledge and declare that the before-mentioned company was the prime contractor for the Agreement
known as that was entered into on the date I
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 t e City of Kent
Administrative Policy 1.2 and the Declaration City of Kent Equal Employment Opportunity Pol cy that was part
of the before-mentioned Agreement.
Dated this day of 1200 .�
By: ,
For:
Title:
Date:
i
i
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS-3
' EXHIBIT A
CITY OF KENT
2004 MODEL CONVERSION AND UPDATE
SCOPE OF WORK
The goal of this project is to convert the City of Kent transportation model to version 9.1 of the SUM
software.This is described in more detail with level of effort and cost estimates.
This effort involves importing the TMODEL network,including link and node coding,turn move nent
penalties, and multi-point assignment equivalencies
GIS data layers will be imported,including available aerial photography,and the model will be re pistered
' over these layers,
Travel characteristics data will be imported including land use,trip generation,and trip distribution.
Intersection detail will be added using the Synchro database for approximately 125 signal location within
the City of KenL This will include adding data on turn lanes and timing.This level of detail will cilitate
' microsimulation of traffic operation in VISSIM and computation of intersection LOS using VISU V.
Truck Count data as percentages will be coded into the VISUM data base.Counts or percentages Nill be
required for all model externals and key locations within the model network.
A separate truck trip purpose will be added to the revised trip generation.The gravity distribution model
will updated to accommodate the truck trip purpose.This well not be a full freight model but it should be
sufficient to reflect the truck volumes on major facilities.
The model will be calibrated to the 2000 counts and will meet or exceed FHWA standard calibra on
validation statistics on a total volume(trucks plus passenger vehicles)basis.Volumes will be rep rted as
passenger vehicles,trucks,and total vehicles.
After the model is calibrated,the 2010 No-Build,2010 Build,2020 No-Build,and 2020 Build m el
versions will be recreated in VISUM.This includes updating the networks as well as the travel
characteristics. Additional detail will be added for intersection improvements.
The model parameters and changes will be documented in an update to the Kent model documen ation.
City of Kent-Model Conversion-PTV America,Inc-9/3/2004 Page I
t
t
BUDGET
The budget is presented using estimated Level of Effort. Efforts in the Principal column will be ducted
by Robert Shull. Efforts in the Engineer column will be conducted by Tony Woody and/or Kean w.All
are staff members of PTV America,Inc.
City of Kent
Model Conversion, Calibration,and Forecasts
TASKS Principal Engineer Total
Convert Network 2 8 10
Convert Travel Characteristics 2 6 8
Add Intersection Detail 4 62 66
Add Truck Counts 2 8 10
Add Truck Trip Purpose 2 8 10
Recalibration 10 20 30
Update 2010 and 2020 8 40 48
Documentation 4 16 20
Meetings and Admin (Including travel) 8 8 16
TOTAL HOURS 42 176 218
Labor cost $23,11
Direct Expenses,fee, and contingencies 1 $2,311
TOTAL ESTIMATE $25,421
City of Kent-Model Conversion-PTV Amenca,Inc-9/3/2004 Page 2
1
EXHIBIT B
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENTS
Insurance
The Contractor 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 Contractor,their ager is,
' representatives,employees or subcontractors.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Contractor shall obtain insurance of the types described below:
I 1. Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned,non-owned,hired an
leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office 0 SO)
form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability cover . If
necessary,the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability
coverage.
2. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurren e
form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises,operations
independent contractors,products-completed operations, personal injury id
advertising injury,and liability assumed under an insured contract.The
Commercial General Liability insurance shall be endorsed to provide the
Aggregate Per Project Endorsement ISO form CG 25 03 1185. There sh 1 be
no endorsement or modification of the Commercial General Liability
insurance for liability arising from explosion,collapse or underground
property damage. The City shall be named as an insured under the
Contractor's Commercial General Liability insurance policy with respect o
the work performed for the City using ISO additional insured endorseme t
CG 20 10 1185 or a substitute endorsement providing equivalent covera e.
3. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws
of the State of Washington.
B. Minimum Amounts of Insurance
Contractor shall maintain the following insurance limits:
1. Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum combined single imit
for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per acciden
2. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with limi no
less than$1,000,000 each occurrence,$1,000,000 general aggreg
and a$1,000,000 products-completed operations aggregate limit.
EXHIBIT B (Continued)
C. Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain,or be endorsed to contain, the following provi 'ons
for Automobile Liability and Commercial General Liability insurance:
1. The Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respe the t
City. Any Insurance,self-insurance,or insurance pool coverage maintai ed
by the City shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not
contribute with it.
2. The Contractor's insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not
be cancelled by either party, except after thirty(30)days prior written nol ice
by certified mail,return receipt requested,has been given to the City.
3. The City of Kent shall be named as an additional insured on all policies
(except Professional Liability)as respects work performed by or on behalf of
the contractor and a copy of the endorsement naming the City as addition il
insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The City resery s
the right to receive a certified copy of all required insurance policies. Th
Contractor's Commercial General Liability insurance shall also 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.
D. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than
A:VA.
E. Verification of Coverage '
Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the amendatory
endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the additional insured
endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Contractor before
commencement of the work.
F. Subcontractors
Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall fumish
separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for
subcontractors shall be subject to all of the same insurance requirements as stated h in
for the Contractor.
PTY P11MICA INC 6417S4EE137 06/1S/04 02%2Spm P. 001
ACORDe, CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 07/01/2004
PRGDUCHR (541) 744-7550 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER C F INFORMATION
Selco Serva ces Group ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON T E CERTIFICATE
HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEI ID, EXTEND OR
925 Harlow Road #210 ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POL CIES BELOW.
S rim field OR 97477- INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NA 0
s a ukaD INSURERA'Assurance Co America
ptv America Inc mmmERB.Continental Casualtv
112E NE 2nd Street; Suite 204 INsImERCMa land Casualty
1R
Corvallis OR 97330- DsuRERe
COVERAGES
THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED NO VATHSTANDWG ANY
REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSU D OR MAY PERTAIN,
THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREJN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS. EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES
AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS
MR AQVL POUCYEFFECTNE POLICY EXPIRAMON
L ME OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBE
R DATE M DATE MMWWff
1 A X OENERALLIABNJTY ! ! ! ! EACH OCCURRENCE s 1,000,000
X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LLABITY DAMAGE To RENTED S 1,000,000
PREMISES fiegaarler,u
CLAIMS MADE QX OCCUR PPSO42318114 07/01/2004 07/01/2005 MEDEXP aw S 10,000
PERSONAL A ADv RMURY s 1,000,000
GENERALAGGREGATE T 2,000,000
GENL AGGREGATE LW APPLIES PER PRODUCTS-COMPIOP AGGs 2,000,000
POLICY Map aT LOC ! ! ! !
A AUTOMOBILE L41sRTY PPS42318114 07/01/2004 07/01/2005 COMBINED SINGLE LSAT
ANY AUTO (Ea emlea* i 1,000,000
ALL OV*"AUTOS / / / / BODILY INJURY s
SCHEDULED ALTOS (Pw Peremd
X HIRED AUTOS ! f / / DMILY INJURY s
X NON-ONNED AUTOS (PerexkIV0)
PROPERTYLLWAGE S
(Pt wwwo)
GARAGE UAERJTY AUTOONLY-EAACCDENT S
ANY AUTO ! ! ! ! OTHER THAN EA S
AUTO ONLY A S
A EXCEeSIUMBRELLALumuTY FPSO4231B114 07/01/2004 07/01/2005 EACH OCC RRENCE s 2,000,000
X OCCUR CLAUS MADE AGGREGATE 4 2,000,000
DEDUCTIBLE ! ! ! ! T
X RETENTION 110,000 4
C VVORKBRS COMPENSATION AND 042577297 09/15/2063 09/15/2004 X1 —72%w 0
EMPLOYERS'UA9KJW
ANY PROPRIEIDWARTNFRNXECITNE EL EACH ACCIDENT S 500,000
OFFICERNEMBEREXCLUDED? / / / / E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOY 4 500,000
EYea OMOM weer
I SPECIAL PROVISIONS IMI. EL DISEASE-POLICY UMI S 500,000
19 OTHER Prof Liab ARP.114004166 07/01/2604 67/01/2005 Per Claim Limit 1,000,000
Aggregate Limit 1,000,000
Deductible $22,500/cla=
DESCRIPTION OF OPERAwNwLocA1DNSNEwwwEACLUBION9 ADDED BY ENDDNSEmiacOSPECIAL PROYIS1ONs
re: Transportation Model
CERTIFICATE HOLDER - CANCELLATION
( ) ( ) SHOULD ANY DP THE ABOVE DF.SMBED POLICES BE BEFORE THE
I.'f(MRATION DATE THUREOP, TM UNINAN0 INSURER ENDEAVOR To MAIL
30 DAYs WRITTEN N07ms TO THE CERTFICATB HOLDER TO THE LEFT,BUT
CityOl` Kent FAILURE oBLJGATDII GR LUBI DIP ANY I UPON THE
220 4th Avoiwe S INSUR AG oR
A
Kent WA 9B032-
ACORD 25(2001/08) 0 ACO CORPORATION 1988
ti 1NS025(D1"as ELECTRONIC LASER FORM W--TB00)349T4W Page 1e12
i
POLICY NUMBER 6010S-27-61 COMMERCIA GENERAL LIABILITY '
THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE poUCY. PLEASE READ IT CAI EFULLY.
ADDITIONAL INSURED - OWNERS, LESSEES OR
CONTRACTORS (FORM B)
This endorsement modinea insurance provided under the following:
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART ,
SCHEDULE
Name of Persoq or Organization:
CITY OF KENT
(if no entry appaara above, Information required to complete this endorsement will be hown In the Declara-
tions as eppiicable to this endorsement)
WHO IS AN INSURED (Section it) is amended to include as an Insured the person or rganlzatlon shown In
the Schedule, but only with respect to liability arising out of your ongoing operatlona performed for that In-
sured.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: SALE OF PROPERTIES AT RAMSTEAD POINTE SHORT PLAT—
AUTHORIZE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization for the Mayor to sign all documents
required for the sale of property known as "Ramstead Pointe Short Plat." In order to
construct the 277th Corridor, east leg project, the City purchased a number of
properties,both for construction and construction staging. Upon project completion,
some of this property was no longer needed. The City created this short plat out of one
of the larger remaining parcels, and it is now ready for sale for private residential
development.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Director's memorandum and vicinity map
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure?_ Revenue? X
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount$
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6K
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Don E.Wickstrorn, P E. Public Works Director
Phone 253-856-5500
K E N T Fax* 253-856-6500
W A S H I N G T O N Address* 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent,WA.98032-5895
DATE: September 21,2004
TO: Mayor White and Kent City Council
FROM: Don Wickstrom,Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Sale of Properties at the SW quadrant of SE 274'Way and 1081'Ave. SE,west of
the Valley Communications Center(AKA Ramstead Pointe Short Plat)
MOTION: Recommend authorizing the Director of Public Works to subdivide excess properties
acquired for the South 277`r' Street Corridor project, and the City of Kent Property Manager to
sell same at appraised value.
SUMMARY: The Public Works Department requests authorizing the Director of Public Works
to subdivide excess property remaining from the acquisition property for the South 2771s Street
Corridor, and permit the Property Manager to sell the property at the appraised value or higher
BUDGET IMPACT. No Unbudgeted Fiscal/Personnel Impact
1 BACKGROUND: In conjunction with the development of the South 277d'Corridor project
numerous properties impacted by the foot print of the project were bought. In this particular case
two parcels, one of which is now part of the right-of-way for South 2741'Way,have been short
platted into eight(8) lots. It is my personal belief that we will net$550,000 to $800,000 for the
property. All sales will be at or above appraised value for which we are in the nudst of having
the properties appraised We have yet to complete all the improvements associated with this
corridor project,and the monies received from this would be used to do so. It also should be
noted that this money is not a windfall but an anticipated financial element of the projects
funding.
Mayor White and Kent City Council Authorization to sell property
September 21,2004 1
v
S
+ r
• i
w3 $t
r
O
I s
un
l
CD
o CD
a•f L3 4
CD
w
k t
c
w;=
` s
- � 9
G. 1, { � �.'.� N i .J •
4
J % 1
\ h x
All
j. �wTf+.r.,X».ano �+�f•.:s.'yt•'{.�-.��.��1,�#+`�..ri'ytlui. f�flF -
_i�.::i.�Jr'&,�r�Y.SZ'�0[�...,
Kent City Council Meeting
' Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: PUGET SOUND ENERGY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT—
AUTHORIZE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorize the Mayor to sign the Puget Sound Energy
Construction Agreement for the underground conversion of Puget Sound Energy's
overhead facilities in association with Kent Station and Sound Transit street
improvements,upon concurrence of the language therein by the City Attorney and the
Public Works Director.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Director's memorandum and agreement
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount$
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6L
' PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Don E Wickstrom, P.E. Public Works Director
Phone 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
K E N T
W A S H I N G T O N Address. 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent,WA 98032-5895
' DATE: September 14, 2004
TO: Public Works Committee
' FROM: Don Wickstrom,Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Puget Sound Energy Construction Agreement for
I"Avenue N. and 4tb Avenue N. Underground Power Conversion
MOTION: Recommend authorizing the Mayor to sign the Puget Sound Energy Construction
Agreement upon concurrence of the language therein by the City Attorney and the Public Works
Director.
SUMMARY: The Public Works Director recommends approval of the agreement and that the
Mayor be authorized to sign same upon concurrence of the final language by the City Attorney.
BUDGET IMPACT. No Unbudgeted Fiscal/Personnel Impact
BACKGROUND: As part of the Kent Station project and Sound Transit Improvements,the
City is widening Vt Avenue N. between Temperance Street and Smith Street and4th Avenue N
between Temperance Street and Hamson Street. Along both street,overhead utilities need to be
converted to underground in accordance with City ordinance. The attached draft agreement with
Puget Sound Energy establishes a scope of work, schedule,and costs for PSE's work.
Preliminary estimate for the City's portion of the work is $80,000 -$130,000.
' Mayor White and Kent City Council 1 Puget Sound Energy Construction Agreement
' SCHEDULE 74 UNDERGROUND CONVERSION
Project Construction Agreement
Project Name: 1s'Avenue North and 4th Avenue North Conversion
Project Number: PSE#10530193
THIS Agreement, dated as of this_day of 200 , is made by and
between CiTY OF KENT, a Municipal Corporation(the"Government EntiV),and PUGET SOUND
ENERGY, Inc.,a Washington Corporation(the"Company").
RECITALS
A. The Company is a public service company engaged in the sale and distribution of electric
energy,and pursuant to its franchise or other rights from the Government Entity,currently locates its
electric distribution facilities within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Government Entity.
B. The Government Entity has determined that it is necessary to replace the existing overhead
electric distribution system within the area specified in the Project Plan(as defined below)(the
"Conversion Area")with a comparable underground electric distribution system,all as more specifically
described in the Project Plan(the"Conversion Project).
C. The Government Entity and the Company have previously entered into a Project Design
Agreement dated as of the 19t°day of April,2004(the"Design Agreement"), pursuant to which the parties
completed certain engineering design,cost assessment,operating rights planning and other preliminary
work relating to the Conversion Project and,in connection with that effort,developed the Project Plan.
' D The Government Entity and the Company wish to execute this written contract in accordance
with Schedule 74 of the Company s Electric Tariff G("Schedule 74")to govern the completion of the
Conversion Project,which both parties intend shall qualify as an underground conversion under the terms
of Schedule 74.
AGREEMENT
' The Government Entity and the Company therefore agree as follows:
1. Definitions.
(a) Unless specifically defined otherwise herein,all terms defined in Schedule 74 shall have the same
meanings when used in this Agreement, including,without limitation,the following:
' i) Cost of Conversion;
1) Public Thoroughfare;
li) Temporary Service;
iv) Trenching and Restoration;
v) Underground Distribution System;and
vi) Underground Service Lines.
(b) "Company-initiated Upgrade"shall mean any feature of the Underground Distribution System
which is required by the Company and is not reasonably required to make the Underground
Distribution System comparable to the overhead distribution system being replaced. For
purposes of the foregoing, a"comparable"system shall include,unless the Parties otherwise
agree,the number of empty ducts(not to exceed two(2),typically having a diameter of 6"or less)
' Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Pagel
City of Kent: I*'Avenue North and 4°h Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
I
of such diameter and number as may be specified and agreed upon in the Project Plan necessary
to replicate the load-carrying capacity(system amperage class)of the overhead system being
replaced.
(c) "Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs"shall mean the Company's good faith
estimate of the Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs,as specified in the Project Plan and as
changed and adjusted from time to time in accordance with Section 6,below.
(d) "Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs"shall mean the Company's good faith
estimate of the Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs,as specified in the Project Plan and as
changed and adjusted from time to time in accordance with Section 6,below.
(e) "Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs"shall mean the Company's good faith estimate of the '
Reimbursable Upgrade Costs, as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted from
time to time in accordance with Section 6,below.
(f) "Estimated Shared Company Costs"shall mean the Companys good faith estimate of the Shared
Company Costs,as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted from time to time
in accordance with Section 6, below.
(g) "Estimated Shared Government Costs"shall mean the Government Entity's good faith estimate of
the Shared Government Costs,as specified in the Project Plan and as changed and adjusted
from time to time in accordance with Section 6,below.
(h) 'Government-Requested Upgrade shall mean any feature of the Underground Distribution '
System which is requested by the Government Entity and is not reasonably required to make the
Underground Distribution System comparable to the overhead distribution system being replaced.
For purposes of the foregoing,any empty ducts installed at the request of the Government Entity '
shall be a Government-Requested Upgrade.
(i) "Party'shall mean either the Company, the Government Entity,or both. '
0) "Private Property Conversion"shall mean that portion, if any,of the Conversion Project for which
the existing overhead electric distribution system is located, as of the date determined in
accordance with Schedule 74, (i)outside of the Public Thoroughfare,or(ii)pursuant to rights not '
derived from a franchise previously granted by the Government Entity or pursuant to rights not
otherwise previously granted by the Government Entity.
(k) "Project Plan"shall mean the project plan developed by the Parties under the Design Agreement ,
and attached hereto as Exhibit A,as the same may be changed and amended from time to time in
accordance with Section 6,below. The Project Plan includes,among other things,(i)a detailed
description of the Work that is required to be performed by each Party and any third party,(h)the
applicable requirements and specifications for the Work,(iii)a description of the Operating Rights '
that are required to be obtained by each Party for the Conversion Project(and the requirements
and specifications with respect thereto), ('iv)an itemization and summary of the Estimated Shared
Company Costs, Estimated Shared Government Costs, Estimated Reimbursable Private '
Conversion Costs (if any), Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs(if any)and
Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs(if any),and(v)the Work Schedule.
(1) "Operating Rights"shall mean sufficient space and legal rights for the construction,operation,
repair,and maintenance of the Underground Distribution System.
(m) "Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs"shall mean(i)all Costs of Conversion, if any,incurred
by the Company which are attributable to a Private Property Conversion,less(H)the distribution ,
pole replacement costs (if any)that would be avoided by the Company on account of such Private
Property Conversion,as determined consistent with the applicable Company distribution facilities
Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 2 '
City of Kent: 1't Avenue North and 0 Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
replacement program,plus(iii)just compensation as provided by law for the Company's interests
in real property on which such existing overhead distribution system was located prior to
conversion; provided that the portion of the Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs attributable to
the Costs of Conversion under subparagraph(i)of this paragraph shall not exceed the Estimated
' Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs without the prior written authorization of the Government
Entity.
(n) "Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs"shall mean all costs incurred by the Company which
are attributable to(I)any facilities installed as part of the Conversion Project to provide Temporary
Service,as provided for in Schedule 74,and(ii)the removal of any facilities installed to provide
Temporary Service(less salvage value of removed equipment);provided that the Reimbursable
Temporary Service Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service Costs
without the prior written authorization of the Government Entity.
(o) "Reimbursable Upgrade Costs"shall mean all Costs of Conversion incurred by the Company
which are attributable to any Government-Requested Upgrade;provided that the Reimbursable
Upgrade Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs without the prior
written authorization of the Government Entity.
(p) "Shared Company Costs"shall mean all Costs of Conversion(other than Reimbursable Upgrade
Costs, Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs and Reimbursable Temporary Seance Costs)
incurred by the Company in connection with the Conversion Project;provided,however,that the
Shared Company Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Shared Company Costs without the prior
written authorization of the Government Entity. For the avoidance of doubt, the"Shared Company
Costs"shall,as and to the extent specified in the Design Agreement, include the actual,
reasonable costs to the Company for the"Design Work"performed by the Company under the
Design Agreement.
(q) "Shared Government Costs"shall mean all Costs of Conversion incurred by the Government
Entity in connection with(i)any duct and vault installation Work which the Parties have specified
in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity as part of the Government Work,
and(ii)the acquisition of any Operating Rights which the Parties have,by mutual agreement,
specified in the Protect Plan are to be obtained by the Government Entity for the Conversion
Project,but only to the extent attributable to that portion of such Operating Rights which is
' necessary to accommodate the facilities of the Company,provided, however,that the Shared
Government Costs shall not exceed the Estimated Shared Government Costs without the prior
written authorization of the Company.
(r) "total Shared Costs"shall mean the sum of the Shared Company Costs and the Shared
Government Costs. For the avoidance of doubt,the Total Shared Costs shall not include, without
limitation,(I)costs to the Government Entity for Trenching and Restoration, or(11)costs associated
with any joint use of trenches by other utilities as permitted under Section 3(b).
(s) "Work"shall mean all work to be performed in connection with the Conversion Project,as more
specifically described in the Project Plan,including,without limitation,the Company Work(as
defined in Section 2(a),below)and the Government Work(as defined in Section 3(a),below).
(t) "Work Schedule"shall mean the schedule specified in the Project Plan which sets forth the
' milestones for completing the Work,as the same may be changed and amended from time to
time in accordance with Section 6,below.
2. Obbciations of the Company.
(a) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement,the Company shall do the following as
specified in,and in accordance with the design and construction specifications and other
requirements set forth in,the Project Plan(the"Company Work"):
Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 3
City of Kent 1°f Avenue North and 4" Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
i) furnish and install an Underground Distribution System within the Conversion Area
(excluding any duct and vault installation or other Work which the Parties have
specified in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity);
ii) provide a Company inspector on-site at the times specified in the Work Schedule to
inspect the performance of any duct and vault installation Work which the Parties
have specified in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity;and ,
iii) upon connection of those persons or entities to be served by the Underground
Distribution System and removal of facilities of any other utilities that are connected to
the poles of the overhead system,remove the existing overhead system(including
associated wires and Company-owned poles)of 15,000 volts or less within the
Conversion Area except for Temporary Services.
(b) Upon request of the Government Entity,the Company shall provide periodic reports of the ,
progress of the Company Work identifying(i)the Company Work completed to date, (ii)the
Company Work yet to be completed, and (III)an estimate regarding whether the Conversion
Project is on target with respect to the Estimated Shared Company Costs,the Estimated
Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs(if any),the Estimated Reimbursable Temporary Service
Costs(if any), the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs (if any)and the Work Schedule.
(c) Except as otherwise provided in the Company's Electric Tariff G, the Company shall own,operate
and maintain all electrical facilities installed pursuant to this Agreement including, but not limited
to, the Underground Distribution System and Underground Service Lines.
(d) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement,the Company shall perform all Company '
Work in accordance with the Project Plan,the Work Schedule and this Agreement.
3. Obligations of the Government Entitv.
(a) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement,the Government Entity shall do the
following as specified in,and in accordance with the design and construction specifications and
other requirements set forth in,the Project Plan(the"Government Work"):
i) provide the Trenching and Restoration; ,
ii) perform the surveying for alignment and grades for ducts and vaults;and
id) perform any duct and vault installation and other Work which the Parties have
specified in the Project Plan is to be performed by the Government Entity. '
(b) Other utilities may be permitted by the Government Entity to use the trenches provided by the
Government Entity for the installation of their facilities so long as such facilities or the installation ,
thereof do not interfere(as determined pursuant to the Company s electrical standards)with the
Underground Distribution System or the installation or maintenance thereof. Any such use of the
trenches by other utilities shall be done subject to and in accordance with the joint trench design
specifications and installation drawings set forth or otherwise Identified in the Project Plan,and the
Government Entity shall be responsible for the coordination of the design and installation of the ,
facilities of the other utilities to ensure compliance with such specifications and drawings.
(c) Upon request of the Company,the Government Entity shall provide periodic reports of the
progress of the Government Work identifying(i)the Government Work completed to date, (i)the
Government Work yet to be completed,and(in)an estimate regarding whether the Conversion
Project is on target with respect to the Estimated Shared Government Costs and the Work
Schedule.
(d) The Govemment Entity shall be responsible for coordinating all work to be performed in
connection with the street improvement program within the Conversion Area. '
Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 4 '
City of Kent: 1 st Avenue North and 41"Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
(e) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement,the Government Entity shall perform all
Government Work in accordance with the Project Plan, the Work Schedule and this Agreement.
4. Work Schedule.
(a) The Government Entity and the Company have agreed upon the Work Schedule as set forth in
the Project Plan. Changes to the Work Schedule shall be made only in accordance with
' Section 6,below.
(b) Promptly following the execution of this Agreement, and upon completion by the Government
Entity of any necessary preliminary work, the Government Entity shall hold a pre-construction
meeting involving all participants in the Conversion Project to review protect design,coordination
requirements,work sequencing and related pre-mobilization requirements. Following the pre-
construction meeting,the Government Entity shall give the Company written notice to proceed
with the Work at least ten(10)business days prior to the commencement date specified in the
LWork Schedule.
(c) Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, each Party shall perform the Work
assigned to it under this Agreement in accordance with the Work Schedule. So long as the
Company performs the Company Work in accordance with the Work Schedule,the Company
shall not be liable to the Government Entity(or its agents, servants,employees,contractors,
subcontractors,or representatives)for any claims,actions, damages,or liability asserted or
' arising out of delays in the Work Schedule.
5. Location of Facilities.
All facilities of the Company installed within the Conversion Area pursuant to this Agreement shall be
located,and all related Operating Rights shall be obtained, in the manner set forth in the applicable
provisions of Schedule 74,as specified by the Parties in the Project Plan.
6. Changes.
(a) Either Party may,at any time,by written notice thereof to the other Party,request changes in the
' Work within the general scope of this Agreement(a"Request for Change"), including,but not
limited to:(i)changes in,substitutions for,additions to or deletions of any Work;(ii)changes in the
specifications,drawings and other requirements in the Project Plan,(III)changes in the Work
Schedule,and(iv)changes in the location,alignment,dimensions or design of items included in
the Work No Request for Change shall be effective and binding upon the Parties unless signed
by an authorized representative of each Party.
(b) If any change included in an approved Request for Change would cause a change in the cost of,
or the time required for, the performance of any part of the Work,an equitable adjustment shall be
made in the Estimated Shared Company Costs,the Estimated Shared Government Costs,the
Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs(if any),the Estimated Reimbursable
Temporary Service Costs(if any),the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs(if any)and/or the
' Work Schedule to reflect such change. The Parties shall negotiate in good faith with the objective
of agreeing in writing on a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment. If the Parties are unable to
agree upon the terms of the equitable adjustment,either Party may submit the matter for
resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions in Section 10,below.
(c) The Work Schedule,the Estimated Shared Company Costs,the Estimated Shared Government
Costs,the Estimated Reimbursable Private Conversion Costs,the Estimated Reimbursable
Temporary Service Costs and/or the Estimated Reimbursable Upgrade Costs shall be further
equitably adjusted from time to time to reflect any change in the costs or time required to perform
the Work to the extent such change is caused by:(i)any Force Majeure Event under Section 11,
below, (i)the discovery of any condition within the Conversion Area which affects the scope,cost,
Construction Agreement,Attachment'B"to Schedule 74. Page 5
City of Kent I"Avenue North and 4"'Avenue North Conversion
PS Notification#10530293
schedule or other aspect of the Work and was not known by or disclosed to the affected Party
prior to the date of this Agreement,or(iii)any change or inaccuracy in any assumptions regarding ,
the scope,cost,schedule or other aspect of the Work which are expressly identified by the Parties
in the Project Plan. Upon the request of either Party,the Parties will negotiate in good faith with
the objective of agreeing in writing on a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment. If,at any time '
thereafter,the Parties are unable to agree upon the terms of the equitable adjustment,either
Party may submit the matter for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions in
Section 10,below.
(d) Notwithstanding any dispute or delay in reaching agreement or arriving at a mutually acceptable
equitable adjustment,each Party shall,if requested by the other Party,proceed with the Work in
accordance with any approved Request for Change. Any request to proceed hereunder must be
accompanied by a written statement setting forth the requesting ParVs reasons for rejecting the ,
proposed equitable adjustment of the other Party.
7. Compensation and Payment.
(a) Subject to and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement(including,without
limitation,the payment procedures set forth in this Section 7),payment in connection with the
Conversion Project and this Agreement shall be as follows:
The Total Shared Costs shall be allocated to the Parties in the following percentages:
(A)sixty percent(60%)to the Company,and(B)forty percent(40%)to the
Government Entity. ,
it) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%)of all Reimbursable
Private Conversion Costs, if any.
M) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%)of all Reimbursable
Upgrade Costs,if any. ,
iv) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%)of all Reimbursable
Temporary Service Costs, if any.
v) The Government Entity shall pay one hundred percent(100%)of the costs it incurs to '
perform that portion of the Government Work specified in Section 3(a)(Q and(h)(i.e.,
Trenching and Restoration and surveying).
vi) The Company shall pay one hundred percent(100%)of the costs it incurs to design,
provide and construct any Company-Initiated Upgrade. '
vn) The Company shall pay one hundred percent(100%)of the costs it incurs to obtain
Operating Rights outside the Public Thoroughfare.
(b) Based on the allocation of responsibilities set forth in Section 7(a),above,the Parties shall ,
determine the net amount payable by the Government Entity or the Company,as applicable,to
the other Party under this Agreement(the"Net Amount"). The Net Amount shall be determined
by using the amount of the Total Shared Costs allocated to the Government Entity under
Section 7(a)(i), and adjusting such amount as follows: ,
1) Subtracting(as a credit to the Government Entity)the amount of the Shared
Government Costs. ,
ii) Adding (as a credit to the Company)the amount of all Reimbursable Private
Conversion Costs, Reimbursable Upgrade Costs and Reimbursable Temporary
Service Costs.
iii) Subtracting(as a credit to the Government Entity)any payments previously made to
the Company by the Government Entity under the Design Agreement which,under
the terms of the Design Agreement,are to be credited to the Government Entity
under this Agreement.
The Net Amount, as so calculated,(A)will be an amount payable to the Company if it is a positive 1
number,and (B)shall be an amount payable to the Government Entity if it is a negative number.
Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 6
City of Kent list Avenue North and 4th Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification 910530293
(c) Within sixty(60)business days of completion of the Conversion Project,the Government Entity
shall provide the Company with an itemization of the Shared Government Costs(the"Government
Itemization"),together with such documentation and information as the Company may reasonably
request to verify the Government Itemization. The Government Itemization shall,at a minimum,
break down the Shared Government Costs by the following categories,as applicable:(i)property
and related costs incurred and/or paid by the Government Entity, including any costs of obtaining
Operating Rights,and(ii)construction costs incurred and/or paid by the Government Entity,
including and listing separately inspection,labor, materials and equipment,overhead and all costs
charged by any agent,contractor or subcontractor of the Government Entity.
(d) Within thirty(30)business days after the Company's receipt of the Government Itemization and
requested documentation and information,the Company shall provide the Government Entity a
written statement(the"Company Statement")showing(i)an itemization of the Shared Company
Costs, (ir)the Parties'relative share of the Total Shared Costs based on the Company's
1 itemization of the Shared Company Costs and the Government Entitys itemization of the Shared
Government Costs set forth in the Government Itemization,(0)any Reimbursable Private
Conversion Costs, (iv)any Reimbursable Upgrade Costs,(v)any Reimbursable Temporary
-Service Costs, (vi)any credits to the Government Entity for payments previously made to the
Company by the Government Entity under the Design Agreement which, under the terms of the
Design Agreement,are to be credited to the Government Entity under this Agreement,and
(vii)the Net Amount,as determined in accordance with Section 7(b),above,together with such
documentation and information as the Government Entity may reasonably request to verify the
Company Statement. The itemization of the Shared Company Costs included in the Company
Statement shall, at a minimum,break down the Shared Company Costs by the following
categories,as applicable: (i)design and engineering costs,and(ii)construction costs,including
and listing separately inspection,labor, materials and equipment,overhead and all costs charged
by any agent,contractor or subcontractor of the Company.
(e) Within thirty(30)business days after the Government Entity's receipt of the Company Statement
and requested documentation and information,the Net Amount shall be paid by the owing Party to
the other Party, as specified in the Company Statement
8. Indemnification.
(a) The Government Entity releases and shall defend, indemnify and hold the Company harmless
from all claims, losses,harm, liabilities,damages,costs and expenses (including, but not limited
to,reasonable attomeys'fees)caused by or arising out of any negligent act or omission or willful
misconduct of the Government Entity in its performance under this Agreement. During the
performance of such activities the Government Entity's employees or contractors shall at all times
remain employees or contractors,respectively,of the Government Entity.
(b) The Company releases and shall defend,indemnify and hold the Government Entity harmless
from all claims, losses, harm,liabilities,damages,costs and expenses(including, but not limited
to, reasonable allomeys'fees)caused by or arising out of any negligent act or omission or willful
misconduct of the Company in its performance under this Agreement. During the performance of
such activities the Company s employees or contractors shall at all times remain employees or
contractors, respectively,of the Company.
(c) Solely for purposes of enforcing the indemnification obligations of a Party under this Section 8,
each Party expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the
Industrial Insurance Act,and agrees that the obligation to indemnify,defend and hold harmless
provided for in this Section 8 extends to any such claim brought against the indemnified Party by
or on behalf of any employee of the indemnifying Party. The foregoing waiver shall not in any way
preclude the indemnifying Party from raising such immunity as a defense against any claim
brought against the indemnifying Party by any of its employees.
Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 7
City of Kent: I"Avenue North and 4"'Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
9. Conversion of Service to Customers within Conversion Area
(a) Upon commencement of the Work,the Government Entity shall notify all persons and entities
within the Conversion Area that service lines to such customers must be converted from overhead
to underground service within the applicable statutory period following written notice from the ,
Government Entity that service from underground facilities are available in accordance with RCW
35.96.050. Upon the request of any customer,other than a single family residential customer,
within the Conversion Area,the Company shall remove the overhead system and connect such
persons'and entities'Underground Service Lines to the Underground Distribution System.
(b) The Parties acknowledge that single family residences within the Conversion Area must(i)
provide a service trench and conduit,in accordance with the Company's specifications,from the
underground meter base to the point of service provided during the conversion,and(ii)pay for the
secondary service conductors as defined in Schedule 85 of the Company's Electric Tariff G. The
Government Entity shall exercise its authority to order disconnection and removal of overhead
facilities with respect to owners failing to convert service lines from overhead to underground
within the timelines provided in RCW 35 96.050.
10. Dispute Resolution. ,
(a) Any dispute, disagreement or claim arising out of or concerning this Agreement must first be
presented to and considered by the Parties. A Party who wishes dispute resolution shall notify the
other Party in writing as to the nature of the dispute. Each Party shall appoint a representative ,
who shall be responsible for representing the Party's interests. The representatives shall exercise
good faith efforts to resolve the dispute. Any dispute that is not resolved within ten(10)business
days of the date the disagreement was first raised by written notice shall be referred by the
Parties' representatives in writing to the senior management of the Parties for resolution. In the
event the senior management are unable to resolve the dispute within twenty(20)business days
(or such other period as the Parties may agree upon), each Party may pursue resolution of the
dispute through other legal means consistent with the terms of this Agreement. All negotiations
pursuant to these procedures for the resolution of disputes shall be confidential and shall be
treated as compromise and settlement negotiations for purposes of the state and federal rules of
evidence.
(b) Any claim or dispute arising hereunder which relates to any Request for Change or any equitable '
adjustment under Section 6, above,or the compensation payable by or to either Party under
Section 7,above,and which is not resolved by senior management within the time permitted
under Section 10(a),above, shall be resolved by arbitration in Seattle,Washington,under the '
Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect. The
decision(s)of the arbitrator(s)shall be final, conclusive and binding upon the Parties. All other
disputes shall be resolved by litigation in any court or governmental agency,as applicable,having
jurisdiction over the Parties and the dispute.
(c) In connection with any arbitration under this Section 10,costs of the arbitrator(s), hearing rooms
and other common costs shall be divided equally among the Parties. Each Party shall bear the
cost and expense of preparing and presenting its own case(including,but not limited to,its own
attomeys'fees); provided,that, in any arbitration,the arbitrator(s)may require,as part of his or
her decision,reimbursement of all or a portion of the prevailing Party s costs and expenses
(including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys'fees)by the other Party.
(d) Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in writing,the Parties shall continue to perform their
respective obligations under this Agreement during the pendency of any dispute.
Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 8
City of Kent 1 u Avenue North and 0 Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
11. Uncontrollable Forces
In the event that either Party is prevented or delayed in the performance of any of its obligations under
this Agreement by reason beyond its reasonable control(a"Force Majeure Event"),then that Party's
performance shall be excused during the Force Majeure Event. Force Majeure Events shall include,
without limitation,war,civil disturbance;flood,earthquake or other Act of God;storm,earthquake or
other condition which necessitates the mobilization of the personnel of a Party or its contractors to
restore utility service to customers;laws,regulations,rules or orders of any governmental agency;
sabotage; strikes or similar labor disputes involving personnel of a Party,its contractors or a third
party;or any failure or delay in the performance by the other Party,or a third party who is not an
employee, agent or contractor of the Party claiming a Force Majeure Event, in connection with the
Work or this Agreement. Upon removal or termination of the Force Majeure Event,the Party claiming
a Force Majeure Event shall promptly perform the affected obligations in an orderly and expedited
manner under this Agreement or procure a substitute for such obligation. The Parties shall use all
commercially reasonable efforts to eliminate or minimize any delay caused by a Force Majeure Event.
12. Insurance.
(a) PSE shall,and shall require each of its contractors to,secure and maintain in force throughout the
duration of the Conversion Project(or,if sooner,unfit termination of this Agreement)
comprehensive general liability insurances,with a minimum coverage of$2,000,000 per
occurrence and$2,000,000 aggregate for personal injury,and$2,000,000 per occurrence/
aggregate for property damages,and professional liability insurance in the amount of$2,000,000.
(b) The Government Entity shall ensure that each of its contractors performing any Government Work
secures and maintains in force throughout the duration of the Conversion Project(or,if sooner,
until termination of this Agreement)insurance policies having the same coverage,amounts and
limits as specified Section 12(a),above.
(c) In lieu of the insurance requirements set forth in Section 12(a),above,the Company may self-
insure against such risks in such amounts as are consistent with good utility practice. Upon the
Government Entity's request,the Company shall provide the Government Entity with reasonable
written evidence that the Company is maintaining such self-insurance.
13. Other.
(a) Agreement Subject To Tariff. This Agreement is subject to the General Rules and Provisions set
forth in Tariff Schedule 80 of the Company's electrical Tariff G and to Schedule T4 of such Tariff
as approved by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission and in effect as of the
date of this Agreement.
(b) Termination. The Government Entity reserves the right to terminate the Conversion Project and
this Agreement upon written notice to the Company. In the event that the Government Entity
terminates the Conversion Project and this Agreement,the Government Entity shall reimburse the
Company for all costs reasonably incurred by the Company in connection with the Work
performed prior to the effective date of termination. In such event,the costs reimbursable to the
Company(i)shall not be reduced by any Shared Government Costs or other costs incurred by the
Government Entity,and(h)shall be paid within thirty(30)days after the receipt of the Company's
invoice therefor. Sections 1,5,7,8,9, 10, 11 and 13 shall survive any termination of the
Conversion Project and/or this Agreement.
(c) Facilities Greater Than 15,000 Volts. Nothing in this Agreement shall in any way affect the rights
or obligations of the Company under any previous agreements pertaining to the existing or future
facilities of greater than 15,000 Volts within the Conversion Area.
Construction Agreement,Attachment OW to Schedule 74, Page 9
City of Kent: I'd Avenue North and 4"'Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
l
(d) Compliance With Law. The Parties shall,in performing the Work under this Agreement,comply
with all applicable federal,state,and local laws,ordinances,and regulations.
(e) No Discrimination. The Company,with regard to the Work performed by the Company under this
Agreement,shall comply with all applicable laws relating to discrimination on the basis race,color,
national origin,religion,creed,age, sex,or the presence of any physical or sensory handicap in '
the selection and retention of employees or procurement of materials or supplies.
(f) Independent Contractor. The Company and the Government Entity agree that the Company is an
independent contractor with respect to the Work and this Agreement. The Company is acting to
preserve and protect its facilities and is not acting for the Government Entity in performing the
Work. Nothing in this Agreement shall be considered to create the relationship of employer and
employee between the Parties. Neither the Company nor any employee of the Company shall be
entitled to any benefits accorded employees of the Government Entity by virtue of the Work or this
Agreement. The Government Entity shall not be responsible for withholding or otherwise
deducting federal income tax or social security or contributing to the State Industrial Insurance
Program,or otherwise assuming the duties of an employer with respect to the Company,or any
employee of the Company.
(g) Nonwaiver of Rights or Remedies. No failure or delay of either Party to insist upon or enforce
strict performance by the other Party of any provision of this Agreement or to exercise any other
right under this Agreement,and no course of dealing or performance with respect thereto,shall,
except to the extent provided in this Agreement,be construed as a waiver or,or choice of,or
relinquishment of any right under any provision of this Agreement or any right at law or equity not
otherwise provided for herein. The express waiver by either Party of any right or remedy under
this Agreement or at law or equity in a particular instance or circumstance shall not constitute a
waiver thereof in any other instance or circumstance.
(h) No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no third-party beneficiaries of this Agreement. Nothing '
contained in this Agreement is intended to confer any right or interest on anyone other than the
Parties, their respective successors, assigns and legal representatives.
(i) Governmental Authority. This Agreement is subject to the rules, regulations,orders and other t
requirements,now or hereafter in effect,of all governmental regulatory authorities and courts
having jurisdiction over this Agreement,the Parties or either of them. All laws,ordinances,rules, ,
regulations,orders and other requirements,now or hereafter in effect,of governmental regulatory
authorities and courts that are required to be incorporated into agreements of this character are by
this reference incorporated in this Agreement
()) No Partnership. This Agreement shall not be interpreted or construed to create an association, '
joint venture or partnership between the Parties or to impose any partnership obligations or liability
upon either Party. Further,neither Party shall have any right,power or authority to enter into any
agreement or undertaking for or on behalf of,to act as or be an agent or representative of,or to
otherwise bind the other Party.
(k) Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement or the application of any such
provision shall be held invalid as to either Party or any circumstance by any court having '
jurisdiction,such provision shall remain in force and effect to the maximum extent provided by
law,and all other provisions of this Agreement and their application shall not be affected thereby
but shall remain in force and effect unless a court or arbitrator holds they are not severable from
the invalid provisions.
Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 10 ,
City of Kent: 1"Avenue North and a Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
(1) Notice. Any notice under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be faxed(with a copy
followed by mail or hand delivery),delivered in person, or mailed,properly addressed and
stamped with the required postage,to the intended recipient as follows:
If to the Govemment Entity: City of Kent
Attn:
Fax:
If to the Comoanv Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
6905 South 228"'Street, SKC-SVC
Kent,WA 98032
Attn: Linda Streissguth
Fax: 253-395-6882
Any Party may change its address specified in this Section 13(I)by giving the other Party notice of
such change in accordance with this Section 13(l).
(m)A)olicable Law. This Agreement shalt in all respects be interpreted,construed and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the State of Washington(without reference to rules governing conflict
of laws),except to the extent such laws may be preempted by the laws of the United States of
America.
(n) Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to
the subject matter hereof and all other agreements and understandings of the Parties,whether
written or oral,with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement are hereby superseded in their
entireties;provided, however,that except as expressly set forth in this Agreement,nothing herein
is intended to or shall alter,amend or supersede the Design Agreement and the same shall
remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.
(o) Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the
respective successors,assigns,purchasers,and transferees of the Parties, including but not
limited to,any entity to which the rights or obligations of a Party are assigned,delegated,or
transferred in any corporate reorganization,change of organization, or purchase or transfer of
assets by or to another corporation, partnership,association,or other business organization or
division thereof.
Government Entity: Company:
CITY OF KENT PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC.
BY BY
ITS ITS
Date Signed Date Signed
Approved as to form:
1 Construction Agreement,Attachment"B"to Schedule 74, Page 11
City of Kent: 1"Avenue North and 4 h Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification#10530293
t
PUGET SOUND ENERGY
Joint Draft 8-26-04 —Linda, Arnie, Mark, Ken &
Kate
Schedule 74 Construction Agreement
Exhibit A "Project Plan"
City of Kent: Vt Avenue North and 4th Avenue North Conversion
PSE Notification Number
PSE Superior Order Number 101021657
City of Kent Project Number 04-3003
This Project Plan describes work to be performed by Puget Sound Energy(PSE)and the City of
I Kent(the City)for the conversion of certain PSE electrical distribution system facilities as
described herein(the Conversion Project). In addition to this document,the Project Plan
includes and consists of:
• Attachment A—Applicable drawings,requirements and specificaitons for the coversions
Project work.
• Attachment B—Summary of Estimated Conversion Project Costs
• Attachment C-All relevant PSE Standards for installation of PSE facilities
Revisions to this Project Plan must be mutually approved by the City and PSE.
Scope of Work
The project includes conversion of the existing overhead electrical distribution facilities(15 kV
or less)to underground facilities within the City public thoroughfare along portions of two
separate roadways, I"Avenue North and 4th Avenue North. The project limits along I"Ave are
firm Temperance to Smith street and along 0 Av from North of the Bank of America property to
mid block betweeen Harrison and Meeker St. The portion of the project along 1"Avenue North
extends a distance of approximately 400 feet and the portion of the project along 4th Avenue
North including the extension to Smith St Switch Cabinets extends a distance of approximately
1095 feet. The project includes removal of PSE's existing overhead distribution facihties from
1 the areas described above,with the exception of the overhead services to the 105 building on I"
Av N. Scope will need to include any PSE upgrades and description of the franchise relocation
work.
tCity would like spare conduits installed between Meeker&Smith for potential new business
development. Per discussions, City can install what they would like independent of the PSE
City of Kent 1
0/4'h Avenue North Underground Conversion
4101011034
2/26103
I
design. Recommend pictures with details for depth&type be on file, should they sell or assign
this conduit to the new businees customer to avoid digging up the sidewalks,etc.
A new connection point for every customer within the conversion area will be provided by the i
new underground system.
Responsibilities of Parties
CitV
a)The City will provide all surveying for equipment placement locations and establish all grade
elevations for new PSE underground distribution facilities within the conversion area.
b)The City,or its contractor,will provide all necessary excavation,bedding,backfill,off-site
disposal, and site restoration for the conversion project, along with the coordination of other
utilities participating in the conversion project.
c)The City,or its contractor,will install all ducts and vaults for the new PSE distribution
facilities in accordance with PSE Standards using materials provided by PSE.
d)The City,or its contractor,will provide PSE,or its contractor,ten(10)working days notice of
anticipated conduit and vault installation to allow for delivery of PSE's materials and scheduling
of the on-site Inspector. A working day is defined as an 8 hour work day Monday through
Friday between the hours of 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM,excluding holidays.
e) The City,or its contractor, shall provide a secure staging area for materials storage. A
schedule for vault deliveries must also be provided to coincide with the contractor's schedule.
1g;--3 w .� " s
ci1 t'�#�i�rn.�e to �: � stin �r` e_aclrs�r,�iee�`t4-;un�erg3tounc���-�
.Aaaw.+s JI.��e�.rrs�w3� X4`m.
g)The City, or its contractor,is responsible for coordinating and scheduling removal of other I
utility attachments on PSE poles.
h) The City will provide ten(10)working days notice to schedule mobilization and wreck-out of
PSE conductors,devices, equipment and poles.
i)The City,or its contractor,is responsible for all flagging and traffic control, including ,
Uniformed Officers when required, for the duct and vault installation phase of this project.
j) The City,or its contractor,will provide scheduled excavation within two(2)working days
notice for cut overs and locations where PSE or its contractor's line crews will intercept
energized facilities. Cut over is defined as rerouting an existing electrical facility from the
overhead system to the new underground connection point.
PSE
City of Kent 2
1'/4a Avenue North Underground Conversion
*101011034
2/26/03
a)PSE,or its contractor, will provide all of the duct and vault materials necessary for the
electrical supporting structure,along with inspection services needed for overseeing the proper
installation of such. Materials will be delivered within the ten(10)working day notice provided
by the City.
tb)PSE will accept delivery of the completed duct and vault system once the new system has
been"proofed"by the City,or its contractor. "Proofing"is defined as: successful confirmation
by use of a mandrel that the duct system is free and clear of debris and damage,installed to the
proper grade and location and containing a pulling line.Mandrel will be loaned to the city or it's
contractor.
c)PSE will mobilize construction crews when the circuitry can be installed from the new switch
locations from V6 to the conversion area on 1"Av N. Construction crews will be mobilezed a
2°a time when the underground circuitry can be installed from the new switches at V6 to the
conversion area on 41h Av N. PSE franchise relocation will not prevent the mobilization of these
construction crews.
e)PSE or its contractor will perform cut-over and transfer of existing customers and facilities to
the new underground system,where applicable.
f)PSE will remove the existing overhead system and poles in 2 phases. Phase 1 is along I"Av
N and Phase 2 is along 4 h Av N upon notice provided by the City that all other utilities and
services will be removed off of the poles.
g) PSE, or its contractor, is responsible for all flagging and traffic control during the installation
of wire and removal of the existing overhead system for this project.
h)PSE, or its contractor,will tamp fill holes left from pole removal with crushed rock.
i)PSE will provide on-site inspection services for the installation of PSE facilities that are
installed by the City, or their contractor. PSE will arrange for the inspection services.
j)Inspector and PSE Project Manager or it's representative will attend weekly construction
meetings.
Operating Rights
The existing overhead distribution facilities within the Conversion Area are located within Public
1 Thoroughfare. The Underground Distribution System will be located within Public
Thoroughfare,or other equivalent rights(title to which shall be in the City's name)pursuant to
Schedule 74 Section 3.
f
Schedule
City of Kent 3
1°/4i°Avenue North Underground Conversion
#101011034
2/26/03
j
1
Duct and Vault installation must begin by the end of November 2004 and be completed by the
end of January 2005. Installation of the duct and vault may be constructed in 2 phases as
described in section f PSE responsibilities. 05 n
Cost Allocation ,
Cost allocation for this project will be governed by PSE's Rate Schedule 74. Please refer to the
Compensation and Payment section of the Construction Agreement for additional information.
Cost Assumptions
The project design, construction plans and cost estimates are based on the following t
assumptions. Construction conditions that are not consistent with these assumptions may result
in a request for change or an equitable adjustment to project compensation under Section 6 of the
Construction Agreement.
1. Once PSE crews are mobilized, crews will be provided continuous access to the construction
site and associated electrical work during the core work day hours from 7:OOAM to 6:00 PM
and standard 40 hour work week,Monday through Friday.
2. Should lane closures become necessary,PSE or its contractor will be limited to working
between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM or as specified by the City's traffic department.
3. Work will be required on three(3)weekend days to cross Smith St and 0 Av N. Overtime ,
premium pay will be required for those Potelco employees that work weekends. Inspection
services and overtime premium pay for the three(3)weekend days that will be scheduled is
included in the cost estimate. ' i
`N^,�"";�F ". i 3-�-N--�A' 't
4. ? sts ar ?? ,F*7?i wx Ye1 Q ..,,.. unt� 1 EIW T cli�uis4904
�e
5. Cutover and transfers of existing customers will be performed during the working period
referenced in assumption 1. Overtime charges will apply for work performed outside of the
working period referenced in assumption 1.
6. The cost estimate,prepared on approximately September 7,2004 is based on a specific scope
of work to be performed by PSE and/or their contractor with the assumption that PSE crews
will have continuous productive work to install facilities in the conduits and energize the
system, starting no later than January 15"2005.
7. 1 degMR ,
s' �\\y.,jj
City of Kent 4
1"/40A Avenue North Underground Conversion
#101011034
2126103
i
8. City right-of-way use permits are the only permits necessary for PSE to install facilities in
the conduits,energize the system and remove the existing overhead system and poles and
will be issued within two(2)weeks of submitting a complete permit application(including
any supporting documentation reasonably required by the City). The cost estimate assumes
ithere will be no charge for the permit(s).
9. Uniformed Police officers are not included for traffic control that may be necessary during
the wire-pulling and wreck-out stages of this project.
10. Conduits and vaults installed by the City for use by PSE are accessible and are installed to
PSE standards suitable for pulling power conductors and installation of power equipment.
11. Locations for new facilities as shown on the plans are available for use.
12. Work requiring a scheduled disruption of electric service to non-residential customers will be
done during work hours specified in assumption 1.Outages shall be scheduled with a
minimum of two(2)business days notice,more if possible. PSE or its contractor will notify
customers of pending outages.
13. Work does not include installation and/or removal of"temporary"facilities at the request of
others during construction.
14 The current cost estimate is based on the installation of facilities at locations shown on the
plans.
15. If the City requests additional mobilizations for wreck out of electrical facilities,PSE will
seek additional compensation.
16. Smith Street and 4 Av N crossings will be constructed on a Saturday or Sunday during
daylight hours.
Additional Considerations
Overhead Service Conversions
Transfers and cut-overs will be accomplished based on the completed applications received for
service conversions placed by the customers within the conversion area. Once all customers and
the remaining utilities have transferred off the existing overhead system,PSE can begin removal
of the overhead system.
City of Kent 5
1 s l 4'Avenue North Underground Conversion
#101011034
2126/03
t
1
New Service
Connection of new or increased load for City facilities(such as new traffic signals)under terms
of PSE rate schedule 85 will be addressed on a separate work order and work sketch. Additional
costs may apply and will be quoted separately.
Service Disruption
Some PSE customers within the conversion area will experience disruption of electric service as
a result of this conversion.The following is a list of PSE customers within the conversion area
and what PSE has determined to be the effect on these customers:
Bank of America
US Bank
Washington Mutual
Home Street Bank
City signal/stgreet lights
Metro Park&Ride Garage
105 Building
BN Railway
Pastimes
e sfome anil note j
1disr o r` n� ► t� ttr lice ouf:,' ` ut made d
� �wu., ., �� i > ►,
pi?!tiar�r,� � c�rs t
PSE Facility Design Standards ,
The following PSE Design Standards are included in this Project Plan and may be applicable to
this Conversion Project:
6325.3200 Underground Services
6775.0035 Vault,Handhole and Padmounted Equipment Location
6775.0040 Vault and Handhole Installation
6790.0110 Customer Supplied Trench for Commercial/Multifamily Developments
6800.4050 Depth of Burial Requirements for Underground Cable
6800.6000 PVC Conduit Installation
6825.6505 Installation of Electronic Markers
City of Kent 6
1'10 Avenue North Underground Conversion
#101011034
2/26/03
Acceptance of Project Plan
The City and PSE mutually agree to and accept this Project Plan as of the date indicated below:
For the City: For PSE:
By: By:
Date: Date:
City of Kent 7
1"/40A Avenue North Underground Conversion
#101011034
2126/03
1
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: SURPLUS 1987 CHEVROLET SUBURBAN—AUTHORIZE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization to surplus a 1987 Chevrolet Suburban.
The vehicle complies with current replacement policy guidelines. It is old and the
engine repair would not be cost effective. This vehicle was assigned to the Valley
Special Response Team and owned by the Kent Police Department. It is sin
1GNGV26JOHF170905, with 107,724 miles.
3. EXHIBITS: Fleet Services data sheet on equipment#9988, 1987 Chevrolet
Suburban
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee 9/16/04
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure?_ Revenue? _
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 6M
N M
N
aAF � c
o v o 0
O O O N
on O 0 $ �r O O O O N O
n '�-. N O O rG O Z z M
O
10,
U
°o
g co
rntdf
au aa
zaoco
o o 0
a. 00
z oe O o oa
U Z ao NZ o o o
W A7 � o "rO d o0 0C; go
�[-i A c pa Fvoi ao . 00 000
Z ►an N
Co
a
wOc
W y0 °D AUr�n ; a s N d � ¢ �
•� d d d w N k u to
F. 0 0 0 0 Owe V1 F SUN
aU � u �
rnW rna wUA 0J AAAAE Ay o
w O
o [�{qj] U �F�y
M 5
O M O w
E.
v � qE:
� � W
a ON
�.� oho .. O E" o 0 o A o � o 8 n >
o 0
a o M a A O o d o Q a o a v N
a rn M o a H d O
^" o o ti �. U
w � U g o „� �
q a °pj eo o p u U
�, AUm > qa u Col.
C
c o W d u o u uE xl
.
rn g
o C u o (q 5 a c C a
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: HOWARDS ADDITION REZONE (QUASI-JUDICIAL
PROCEEDING)
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: This request by Howard Wilson is to rezone 4.43
acres of property from SR-2, Single-Family Residential to SR-3, Single-Family
Residential. The property is located at 27830 106s'Avenue SE. The Kent Hearing
Examiner held Public Hearings on May 19 and July 7, 2004, and issued Findings,
Conclusions and Recommendation for approval on July 21, 2004. The Planning &
Economic Development Committee considered the rezone at their September 20, 2004,
meeting and forwarded it to City Council without recommendation.
3. EXHIBITS: Staff Report with map; Hearing Examiner Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendation; letter of objection received 1/8/04 signed by Gilmore, Warren,
Anderson, Pawlowski, Davis, Wing, Hoglund, Buchanan; public comment letters (5)
from Zimmerman, Henry, Pawlowski, Wing, and Gilmore; City of Kent Wetland
Inventory
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Hearing Examiner
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? No Revenue? No
I Currently in the Budget? Yes No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount$
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember Cia,4 . moves, Councilmember P.tmpn/ seconds
to•aeeept the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Hearing
Examiner on the Howard's Addition Rezone and to direct the City Attomey to prepare
the necessary ordinance. Grp-ram. AZ wvc" v%, e d 0
DISCUSSION: CICanfi rn7fti 1 U� 3
ACTION: CtUIt-YYI.IJyI O� �
Council Agenda
Item No. 7A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
• Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
K E N T Phone.253-856-5454
W A S N I N G T O N Fax. 253-856-6454
Address 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
KENT PLANNING SERVICES
(206) 856-5454
STAFF REPORT
FOR HEARING EXAMINER MEETING OF
May 19, 2004
FILE NO. Howard's Addition Rezone
RZ-2003-2, KIVA 2031319
APPLICANT: Howard Wilson
403 Howell Way
Edmonds, WA 98020
REQUEST: A request to rezone 4 43 acres of property from SR-2
single family residential to SR-3, single family
residential
STAFF
REPRESENTATIVE Sharon Clamp, Planner
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION. APPROVAL
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A Description of the Proposal
The applicant proposes to rezone 4.43 acres from the current zoning of SR-2
single family residential to SR-3, single family residential.
B. Location
The subject property is located at 27830 106" Avenue SE and is Identified by
King County Tax Parcel number 3222059094.
C. Size of Property
The property consists of one parcel totaling 4.43 acres.
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003=2 KIVA#2031319
D. Zoning
Adjacent properties surrounding the subject site in all directions are zoned SR-2
Single Family Residential.
E. Land Use t
Currently, there is a single family residence and a barn on the parcel. The City
of Kent Comprehensive Plan designates the property as SF-3, Single Family
three units per acre.
F. History
The property is part of 3372 acres annexed to the City of Kent on January 1,
1996 under Ordinance No. 3241.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Environmental Assessment
A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (ENV-2003-14) for the rezone ■
proposal as well as a project-specific proposal for a 10 lot subdivision was issued j
on April 15, 2004. No conditions were proposed for the rezone portion of the
SEPA application.
The proposed project rezone contemplates a 10-lot subdivision The applicant's
SEPA application requested both a non-project analysis (rezone) and protect-
specific (subdivision) analysis. On-site environmental impacts associated with
the proposed project specific development have been analyzed and conditioned
in the above referenced determination. The project specific proposal is
dependent upon the outcome of the rezone application.
B. Significant Physical Features
Topography. Wetlands and Vegetation
According to an approved wetland assessment prepared by B-Twelve Associates
dated January 13, 2003, there is a Category 3 wetland on the site. Category 3
wetlands require a minimum 25-foot no build buffer and a 15-foot building
setback from the buffer edge. The site is described as rolling with the steepest
slope being 11 percent. The vegetation on site consists of pasture, shrubs,
grass, and wet soil plants.
Page 2 of 9
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
C. Significant Social Features
1. Street System
The site is located along 108th Avenue SE, one-quarter mile south of the
South 2 77Ih Street Corridor. U pon f uture development of the property,
road and street frontage improvements to meet City of Kent roadway
standards will be required as conditions of approval. These
improvements include but are not limited to curb, gutter, sidewalks,
planting strips, street lighting, paving, necessary street improvements,
and public stormwater conveyance.
The p roposed r ezone a ppears t o h ave n o t mpact o n t he t ransportation
system at this time. However, upon development of the subject property,
this proposed rezone could potentially result in the creation of nine more
PM Peak Hour Trips upon the City's street system than would be
generated under the existing zoning designation based on the maximum
densities allowed.
2. Water System
Water service is provided by the City of Kent and is currently available
System improvements will be necessary to accommodate any
subsequent development
3. Sanitary Sewer System
Sanitary s ewer s ervice i s p rovided b y t he C ity of Kent a nd i s c urrently
available. System improvements will be necessary to accommodate any
subsequent development.
4. Stormwater System
A stormwater system will be necessary to accommodate any subsequent
development. The developer will be required to complete a drainage
analysis and develop and submit drainage plans prepared in accordance
with the 2002 City of Kent surface Water design Manual and the 1998
King County Surface Water Design Manual.
D. CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
The proposed rezone is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Kent
Comprehensive Plan.
Page 3 of 9
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
III. CONSULTED DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
The following departments and agencies were advised of this application.
Economic Development Manager Police Department
Director of Public Works Fire Chief
Parks & Recreation Director City Clerk
City Attorney Kent School District
U.S. Post Master WA Dept. of Ecology
Washington State DOT K. C. Wastewater Treatment
Puget Sound Energy King Co. Environmental Health
Owest King Co. Transit Division
In addition to the above, all persons owning property which lies within 300 feet of the site
were notified of the application and of the public hearing. A Notice of Application was
posted on the site and published in the King County Journal on January 2, 2004.
Comments have been incorporated in the staff report where applicable. i
IV. PLANNING SERVICES REVIEW
A. Comprehensive Plan
In 1995, the Kent City Council adopted the Kent Comprehensive Plan, which
represented a complete revision to the City's 1977 comprehensive plan. The
1995 plan was prepared under the provisions of the Washington State Growth
Management Act. The Comprehensive Plan, through its goals and policies,
presents a clear expression of the City's vision of growth for citizens, the
development community, and other public agencies. Thep Ian i s u sed by the
Mayor, City Council, Land Use and Planning Board, Hearing Examiner, and City
departments to guide decisions on amendments to the City's zoning code and
other development regulations, which must be consistent with the plan, and also
guide decisions regarding the funding and location of capital improvement
projects.
LAND USE ELEMENT
The Land Use Element of the plan contains a Land Use Plan Map, which
designates the type and intensity of land uses throughout the city, as well as in
the entire potential annexation area. The Land Use Plan Map designates the
subject property as SF-3, Single Family Residential which allows three units per
acre. The land use element also contains goals and policies relating to the
location, density, and design of future development in the City and in the
Potential Annexation Area.
I
Page 4 of 9
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
Overall Goal: Encourage a future growth and development pattern which
implements the community's vision, protects environmentally sensitive areas,
and enhances the quality of life of all of Kent's residents.
Goal LU-8: The City of Kent adopts a 20-year housing target of 7,500 new
dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King County through
an interlocal agreement on housing targets in the unincorporated area within
Kent's Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-8.1: Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to
accommodate both city and county housing targets within the Potential
Annexation Area. Average net residential densities throughout the Potential
Annexation Area s hould be at least four u nits per a cre i n order to adequately
support urban services.
Policy LU-8.3: Locate housing opportunities within close proximity to
employment, shopping, transit and human and community services.
Goal LU-9: Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types, options, and
densities throughout the city and the Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-9.4: Allow single family housing on a variety of lot s izes, including
5,000 square foot lots. Locate smaller lot sizes within close proximity to the
j urban activity centers.
■ Planning Services Comment:
The goals and policies of the land use element support the proposed rezone. The
proposed location is easily served by existing urban services and is in convenient
proximity to urban services along 104`" Avenue SE and Kent Kangley Road
Also, the proposed rezone is consistent with the Land Use Plan Map which
allows up to three dwelling units per acre.
Growth Management Hearings Board decisions have determined that lands
within Urban Growth Areas should a divided at a minimum of four dwelling units
per net acre to ensure efficient provision of urban services. The zoning district
SR-3 allows 3.63 dwelling units per acre and a minimum lot size of 9,600 square
feet. The net density calculations will be evaluated with the analysis of an
application for subdivision.
HOUSING ELEMENT
The primary goal of the housing element is to meet the current and future need
for housing in the Kent area.
Overall Goal: Ensure opportunities for affordable housing and an appropriate
living environment for Kent citizens.
Page 5 of 9
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
Goal H-1: Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide range of housing
options throughout the community that are accessible to community and human
services, employment opportunities, and transportation and by being sensitive to
the environmental impacts of development.
Policy H-1.1: Ensure that community and human services, including, but not
limited to, fire, police, library facilities, medical services, neighborhood shopping,
child care, food banks, and recycling facilities are easily accessible to
neighborhood residents. ■
Planninq Services Comment 1
The proposed rezone is supported by relevant goals and policies of the housing 1
element. A ppropriate s ervices, i ncluding, b ut n of I imited to, fire, p olice, p ublic
schools, medical services, neighborhood shopping and child care are easily
accessible to neighborhood residents upon development of the subject property.
NATURAL RESOURCES GOALS AND POLICIES:
Goal LU-20: Protect and enhance environmentally sensitive areas via the
adoption of t he C ity regulations a nd p rograms which a ncourage w ell-designed
land use patterns such as clustering and planned unit development. Use such
land use patterns to concentrate higher urban land use densities and intensity of
uses in specified areas in order to preserve natural features such as large
wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and forests.
Goal LU-22. Ensure that the City's environmental policies and regulations
comply with state and federal environmental protection regulations regarding air
and water quality, noise and wildlife and fisheries resources and habitat
protection. Demonstrate support for environmental quality in land use plans,
development regulations, and site plan review to ensure that local land use
management is consistent with the City's overall natural resource goals.
Planning Services Comment:
The proposed rezone is supported by relevant goals and policies contained
within the Natural Resources Section of the Comprehensive Plan. The site
contains a .25 acre Category 3 wetland. Category 3 wetlands require a minimum
25-foot no build buffer and a 15-foot building setback from the buffer edge. Any
subsequent development on the property will be subject to the wetland area
requirements outlined in Chapters 11.05 of the Kent City Code. Future
development of the site will include wetland buffer areas which preserve the j
natural features of the site. Wetland buffers also limit the overall density of the
site.
1
Page 6 of 9
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
Goal TR-1: Coordinate land use and transportation planning to meet the
needs of the City and the requirements of the Growth Management Act.
Policy TR-1.2: Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent
with transportation projects to improve affected roadways.
Policy TR-1.5: Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so
that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible.
Planning Services Comment:
The Growth Management Act requires consistency between land use and
transportation planning. As noted, the Land Use Plan identifies the area of the
rezone a s S F3, S ingle F amily R esidential. T he P ublic Works D epartment w ill
identify specific improvements which will be necessary on 108"Avenue SE along
the property frontage to serve future development of the property and
accommodate higher density permitted under this rezone.
B. Standards and Criteria for Granting a Request for Rezone
The following standards and criteria (Kent Zoning Code, Section 15 09.050) are
used by the Hearing Examiner and City Council to evaluate a request for a
rezone. Such an amendment shall only be granted if the City Council determines
that the request is consistent with these standards and criteria.
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Services Comment
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the subject property as SF3,
Single Family Residential, which allows up to three units per acre. A rezone of
the site from SR-2 Single Family Residential to SR-3 Single Family Residential
will allow residential development of 3.63 dwelling units per acre. As previously
mentioned, the proposed rezone is also consistent with the applicable goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan. However, because of Growth Management
Hearings Board decisions establishing a net density of four dwelling units per
acre, additional evaluation of consistency with the Growth Management Act will
occur with review of the application for subdivision.
2. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would
be compatible with development in the vicinity.
Planning Services Comment
Land uses in the vicinity of the site are predominantly single family residential.
Although development in the immediate vicinity is predominantly single family
Page 7 of 9
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
residences on large lots, the majority of these lots have future development
potential, and many of these lots do not have the development constraints of on-
site wetlands as does the subject property.
3. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation
system in the vicinity of the property with significant adverse
impacts which cannot be mitigated.
Planning Services Comment
A rezone of this property to SR-3 Single Family Residential will not generate
additional trips onto the existing transportation system. However, subsequent
development of a proposed 1 Not subdivision will add nine PM peak hour trips to
the local street system. Upon development of the site, road and street frontage
improvements to meet the City of Kent roadway standards will be required as
conditions of approval. These improvements include but are not limited to curb,
gutter, sidewalks, planting strips, street lighting, paving, necessary street
improvements, and public stormwater conveyance. The applicant will be ,
required to participate in other City transportation improvement projects by
providing an environmental mitigation fee for the impacts created by
development.
4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment
of the current zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone.
Planning Services Comment
The subject parcel was annexed to the City of Kent on January 1, 1996 and is
developed with a single-family residence on the west side of the parcel.
In 1995 the City of Kent adopted its Comprehensive Plan which designated this
area as SF-3 Single Family Residential. Along with the Land Use Plan Map and
Policies, the plan also contains a target for the number of new households the
City must accommodate for the 20-year time horizon of the plan. The GMA also
states the City's development regulations must implement, and be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. Higher density single family development with
smaller lot sizes while recognizing significant environmental features is
consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
This area is currently characterized by low density residential development. Prior
to Kent annexing this area, King County had zoned the area Urban Reserve, one
dwelling unit per five acres. However, at the time the area was annexed, King
County the was in the process of recommending lifting all Urban Reserve zoning
because it was considered inconsistent with the King County Comprehensive
Plan recommended capital improvement strategy for phasing growth. The new
density King County recommended for this area was R-4-P, four dwelling units
per acre. The County's reason for this proposed increase in density was the fact
that lands within the Urban Growth Area were required by the County Wide
Page 8 of 9
Staff Report
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
Planning Policies to be characterized by urban development, surrounding parcels
in the Urban Reserve zoned areas were zoned R-4-P and R-6-P, and urban
services were available to, or planned for, the Urban Reserve parcels.
Therefore, upon annexation, the City of Kent zoning for this area was set at R1-
20, single family residential two dwelling units per acre with a comprehensive
plan designation of SF3, three units per acre. This zoning represents a midpoint
between the original King County zoning and King County's recommended
zoning change to four units per acre.
Since the time of annexation significant improvements to roadway infrastructure
in the immediate area have been completed, specifically the South 272"d/277th
Street corridor located north of the site. This corridor connects the East Hill area
of Kent to the valley floor and provides direct freeway access for residents
coming off the Kent East Hill. An on ramp and off ramp to this new corridor are
provided for at 108th Avenue Southeast, just one-quarter mile to the north of the
subject property.
5. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and
general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
Planning Services Comment
The proposed rezone is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
Subsequent development on the site will have to meet applicable codes and
regulations, including mitigation of anticipated environmental impacts. Therefore,
the rezone proposal will not adversely affect the health, safety and general
welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
V. CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the merits of this request and the Code criteria for granting a rezone, the
City staff recommends APPROVAL without conditions of the Howard's Addition rezone
KENT PLANNING SERVICES
April 21, 2004
SC:ch:S:\Permit\Plan\rezone\2003\2031319-2003-2report.doc
Page 9 of 9
11
s£ 274V ST
SITE
to
� � 1
X
co
ST 1 1
SE 281ST ST
a
0
SE 284TN ST
0
APPLICATION NAME:HOWARD'S ADDITION REZONE
REQUEST. #RZ-2003-2 KIVA#RPP4-20313I9
VICINITY MAP
OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER
Theodore P. Hunter
Hearing Examiner
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
FILE NO: HOWARD'S ADDITION
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#RPP4-2031319
APPLICANT: Howard Wilson
REQUEST: A zoning map amendment (rezone) to rezone
4.65 acres from SR-2 (Single-Family
Residential, maximum density 2.18 dwelling
units per acre) to SR-3 (Single-Family
Residential, maximum density 3.63 dwelling
units per acre); and a preliminary plat to
subdivide the 4.65 acres into ten single-family
lots.
LOCATION: The subect property is located at
27830 106 Avenue S E, Kent, Washington and
is identified as King County Tax Parcel No.
3222059094
PROCEDURE: The Hearing Examiner held a consolidated open
record hearing on the rezone and preliminary
plat a pplications on M ay 19, 2 004. 1 n a n o rder
dated June 4, 2004 (Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendation, No. RZ-2003-2), the Hearing
Examiner remanded the rezone application to
the Planning Department for further analysis of
the relationship between the zoning request and
the Comprehensive Plan. The open record
I hearing was reconvened on July 7, 2004 to
supplement the record with the requested
information and to allow interested parties to
comment on the new information.
Because the preliminary plat application was
based on SR-3 zoning of the subject property,
the Hearing Examiner determined that no
decision on the preliminary plat could be made
prior to City Council action on the rezone
application. Thus, this recommendation
addresses only the requested rezone. If the
City Council approves the rezone, the Hearing
Examiner will issue findings, conclusions and
decision on the preliminary plat application.
DETERMINATION OF
NONSIGNIFICANCE ISSUED: April 15, 2004
MEETING DATES: May 19, 2004 and July 7, 2004
RECOMMENDATION ISSUED July 21, 2004 ,
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVED
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Sharon Clamp, Planning Services
PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Torn Redding, Baima & Holmberg
Ed Pawlowski
Fred Wing
Brian Gilmore
Jeff Wilson
Attorney Bill Williamson represented the Applicant
at the open record hearing.
EXHIBITS: At the open record hearing the following exhibits
were admitted on the rezone application:
1. Staff Report dated May 19, 2004 and Staff
Report Addendum dated July 7, 2004, with the
following attachments:
a. Rezone Application, including Preliminary
Plat Map
b. Correspondence, including letter of
objection received January 8, 2004 (signed
by Gilmore, Warren, Anderson, Pawlowski,
Davis, Wing, Hoglund, Buchanan)
c. City Staff Routing
d. Public Notice / Public Routing
e. Notice of Application / Notice of
Completeness
f. Mitigated Determination of Non-
Significance and SEPA checklist
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA #2031319
Page 2 of 11
2. Public Comment Letters (5) from Zimmerman,
Henry, Pawlowski, Wing and Gilmore
3. City of Kent Wetland Inventory
4. Letter from Washington State Department of
Community, Trade and Economic
Development dated February 23, 2004
5. Letter from 1000 Friends of Washington dated
February 27, 2004
6. Letter from Bill Williamson dated July 6, 2004'
7. Letter from Shupe Holmberg, P.E. dated
July 6, 20042
Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits submitted at the open record hearings,
the Hearings Examiner enters the following Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendation.
FINDINGS
1. The Applicant requested a zoning map amendment to rezone 4.65 acres of
land from SR-2 (Single-Family Residential, maximum density 2.18 dwelling
units per acre) to SR-3 (Single-Family Residential, maximum density 3.63
dwelling units per acre); and a preliminary plat to subdivide the 4.65 acres
into ten single-family lots. The subject property is located at 27830 106th
Avenue SE, Kent, Washington and is identified as King County Tax Parcel
No. 3222059094. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 1; Exhibit 1, Attachment a.
2. The subject property and all adjacent properties are zoned SR-2. Exhibit 1,
Staff Report, page 2; Exhibit 1, Attachment a (Preliminary Plat Map). There is
some property in unincorporated King County two parcels south of the subject
property that is zoned for residential development at a density of four dwelling
units per acre. Exhibit 1, Attachment a (Applicant Response to Criteria).
' This exhibit was admitted into the record during the July 7, 2004 remand hearing on the rezone
application, but some of the issues raised (i.e., project density) will be addressed as part of the Hearing
Examiner's review of the preliminary plat. For the rezone application, the relevant inquiry is the
consistency of the proposed zoning designation with the Comprehensive Plan. Issues raised with respect
to the consistency of the project with the Comprehensive Plan (i.e., whether the project density is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and/or Growth Management Act minimum density requirements)
are relevant to the preliminary plat application. The Hearing Examiner will issue a decision on the
preliminary plat application after the City Council has made a decision on the rezone.
2 This exhibit was admitted into the record during the July 7, 2004 remand hearing on the rezone
application but will be addressed as part of the Hearing Examiner's review of the preliminary plat
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA #2031319
Page 3 of 11
i
1
3. The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the subject
property and all surrounding properties as Single-Family, three units per acre
(SF-3)3. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2; Testimony of Ms. Clamp; City of Kent
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The difference between the density
limitation as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan (maximum density three
dwelling units per acre) and the SR-3 density limitation as expressed in the
Zoning Code (maximum density 3.63 dwelling units per acre) is explained by
the legislative history of the zoning designation (described in Finding No. 4,
below). Exhibit 1, Staff Report Addendum.
4. When the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan was adopted in April of 1995, the j
City zoning districts were defined by minimum lot sizes (e.g., the R1-12 zone
required a minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet) rather than allowable ■
density. At that time the SF-3 Comprehensive Plan designation was deemed 1
compatible with the R1-12 zoning designation. Although not expressed as
such, the 12,000-square foot minimum lot size allowed in the R1-12 zone
yielded a gross density of 3.63 dwelling units per acre (43,560 square feet per
acre _ 12,000 s quare f eet p er I of = 3.63 d welling u nits p er a cre). T hrough
Ordinance No. 3268 (December 1995), the City Council reduced the minimum
lot sizes in the single-family residential zones to reflect the fact that plat
features such as roads, stormwater facilities and open space tracts prevented
the allowed zoning density to be achieved. The minimum lot size in the R1-12
district was reduced to 9,600 square feet. Through Ordinance No. 3290 (April
1996), the Council redefined the zoning districts such that R1-12 became SR-
3 (maximum density three dwelling units per acre). The unintended effect of
Ordinance No. 3290 was that project densities decreased. Consequently,
through Ordinance No. 3327 (December 1996), the Council amended the
maximum permitted densities to coincide with the density factors that existed
prior to adoption of Ordinance No. 3268. Under Ordinance No. 3327, the
maximum permitted density in the SR-3 zone is 3.63 dwelling units per acre,
which is consistent with the density allowed in the R1-12 district at the time
the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Exhibit 1, Staff Report Addendum;
Testimony of Ms. Clamp.
5. The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan contains the following goals and
policies that are relevant to the rezone application:
3 Please note that the Comprehensive Plan designation has an "SF prefix, whereas the Zoning Code
designation has an"SR" prefix
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA #2031319
Page 4 of 11
Goal LU-8: The City of Kent adopts a 20-year housing target of 7,500 new
dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King County through
an interlocal agreement on housing targets in the unincorporated area within
Kent's Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-8.1: Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to
accommodate both city and county housing targets within the Potential
Annexation Area. Average net residential densities throughout the Potential
Annexation Area should be a t least f our u nits per a cre in o rder to adequately
support urban services.
Goal LU-9: Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types, options, and
densities throughout the city and the Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-9.4: Allow single family housing on a variety of lot sizes, including
5,000 square foot lots. Locate smaller lot sizes within close proximity to the urban
activity centers.
Goal LU-20: Protect and enhance environmentally sensitive areas via the
adoption of the City regulations and programs which encourage well-designed
land use patterns such as clustering and planned unit development. Use such
land use patterns to concentrate higher urban land use densities and intensity of
uses in specified areas in order to preserve natural features such as large
wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and forests.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 5-6.
6. The Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A) provides cities with goals for
guiding the development of comprehensive plans and development regulations.
One of the goals is to "encourage development in urban areas where adequate
public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner."
RCW 36.70A.020(1). Another goal is to "reduce the inappropriate conversion of
undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development." RCW
36.70A.020(2). Within urban areas, the Central Puget Sound Growth
Management Hearings Board has established a "bright line" net density threshold
of four dwelling units per acre at or above which residential development would
clearly constitute urban development consistent with growth management goals.
Cities may plan urban areas at densities lower than four dwelling units per acre
only with adequate justification, such as when needed to protect environmentally
sensitive systems that are large in scope, have a complex structure and
functions, and high rank order value. Litowitz v. City of Federal Way, No. 96-3-
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KlVA #2031319
Page 5 of 11
0005 (Final Decision and Order, March 25, 1996); MBA v. Pierce County, No. 02- t
3-010 (Final Decision and Order, February 4, 2003); Exhibits 4-6.
7. The subject property was annexed to the City of Kent in 1996. Prior to l
annexation, the King County zoning designation of the property was Urban
Reserve, one dwelling unit per five acres, but the County was in the process of
recommending that the Urban Reserve designation be replaced with the R4-P
designation, which allowed four dwelling units per acre. Upon annexation the City
of Kent zoned the property for residential development at a density of two
dwelling units per acre. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 8-9.
8. During the City of Kent's recent Comprehensive Plan update process, the
Washington State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development
(CTED) recommended that "every parcel within a UGA should be subdivided to
a minimum density of four units per net (buildable) acre" and cautioned against
averaging across a wide area to reach the minimum density requirement. Exhibit
4.
9. The subject property is currently developed with a single-family residence and a
barn. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2.
10. Development in the immediate vicinity of the site consists predominately of
single-family residences on large lots. These lots could be developed to a density
of 2.18 dwelling units per acre without a rezone. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 7-
8, Exhibit 1, Attachment a (Preliminary Plat Map).
11. Taking into account the site area required for right-of-way dedication, access, 1
wetlands and stormwater detention, the Applicant could divide the subject
property into approximately seven single-family residential lots under current SR-
2 zoning standards. Testimony of Ms. Clamp; Exhibit 1, Attachment a
(Applicant's Response to Criteria and Preliminary Plat Map). With the requested
rezone the Applicant proposes to divide the 4.65-acre parcel into ten single-
family residential lots.5 Access to the plat would be from 108th Avenue SE, and
access to individual lots within the plat would be from a new hammerhead road
°CTED is the agency responsible for administering the Growth Management Act
5 This finding is based on the Applicant's original preliminary plat submittal (see Exhibit 1,Attachment a).
At the July 7, 2004 remand hearing on the rezone application, the Applicant proposed to create an 11th
lot to comply with the GMA four dwelling unit per acre standard described in Finding of Fact No. 6 (see
Exhibits 6 and 7).Whether such action is warranted under GMA case law or permissible under the
requested SR-3 zoning will be addressed in the preliminary plat decision
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA #2031319
Page 6 of 11
I (Tract B). According to the preliminary plat map (Exhibit 1, Attachment a), the
Applicant proposes to develop six lots (9,600 to 10,263 square feet in area) on
the north side of Tract B and four lots (9,965 to 25,026 square feet in area) on
the south side of Tract B. A 15,080-square foot stormwater detention tract (Tract
C) and a 24,363-square foot wetland tract (Tract A)6 would also be located on
1 the south side of Tract B, between proposed Lots 8 and 10. The preliminary plat
map depicts a dedication of right-of-way along the west and south property lines
and sidewalks along Tract B and the 108th Avenue SE property frontage, Exhibit
1, Attachment a (Preliminary Plat Map).
12. The subject property is on the west side of 108th Avenue SE, approximately one-
quarter mile south of the City's South 272nd/277th Street Corridor. Exhibit 1,
Staff Report, pages 3 & 9. Since the SR-2 zoning was established the City has
completed significant transportation improvements to the South 272nd/277th
Street C orridor. This corridor c onnects t he East H ill a rea o f K ent t o t he v alley
floor and provides direct freeway access for residents coming from East Hill. An
on-ramp and off-ramp to and from the new corridor have been provided at
108"' Avenue SE to the north of the site. City staff submitted that the
transportation improvements are a change in circumstance since the SR-2
zoning designation was adopted in 1996. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 9,
Testimony of Ms. Clamp.
13. The residential density allowed by the rezone would generate more traffic than
the residential density allowed under current SR-2 zoning. This traffic impact
would be mitigated during the subdivision process through frontage improvement
requirements and payment of environmental mitigation fees. The City has
already issued a SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for
the plat which requires traffic mitigation. The MDNS was not appealed. Exhibit 1,
' Staff Report, pages 3 & 8; Exhibit 1, Attachment f.
14. The City of Kent conducted environmental review of the rezone and preliminary
plat applications pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and
issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) on April 15, 2004.
The MDNS requires mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the plat, and
installation of a fence and wetland identification signs around the perimeter of the
wetland buffer. The MDNS does not contain any conditions directly applicable to
the rezone application. The MDNS was not appealed. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
1 page 2; Exhibit 1, Attachment f.
6 The subject property contains a Category 3 wetland. The wetland and required 25-foot wide buffer
comprise 24,363 square feet of the site area. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6;Exhibit 1, Attachment a
(Preliminary Plat Map).
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Heanng Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
I #RZ-2003-2 KIVA #2031319
Page 7 of 11
i
15. Notice of the rezone application was posted on the property, published in King
County Journal, and mailed to agencies with jurisdiction on January 2, 2004.
Exhibit 1, Attachment e.
16. Notice of the open record hearing was posted on the property, published in King ■
County Journal, and mailed to properties within 300 feet of the site on May 7, j
2004. Exhibit 1, Attachment d.
17. Public comment was submitted in opposition to the rezone application. The
concerns raised included pedestrian and bicycle safety on 108th Avenue SE
(which is already a busy street); the accuracy of the Applicant's wetland
delineation (the contention was that the wetland extends throughout the site as
depicted in the July 17, 2001 City of Kent Wetland Inventory (Exhibit 3)); flooding
on SE 279th Street; the inconsistency between SR-3 lot sizes and lot sizes in the I
vicinity of the site; increased burden on public services such as schools; and
negative impacts to wildlife and Mt. Rainier views. The witnesses objected to an
increase in residential density. The current level of development in the area is
approximately nine houses on 40 acres. Testimony of Mr. Pawlowski, Mr. Wing,
Ms. Davis and Mr. Gilmore, Exhibit 1, Attachment b, Exhibit 2.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hold an open record hearing on this quasi-
judicial rezone and to issue a written recommendation for final action to the Council,
pursuant to RCW 35A.63.170 and Chapters 2.32 and 15.09 of the Kent City Code.
Criteria for Review I
Section 15.09.050(C) of the Kent Zoning Code sets forth the standards and criteria the
Hearing Examiner must use to evaluate a request for a rezone. A request for a rezone
shall only be granted if:
a. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
b. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be ■
compatible with development in the vicinity; i
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA #2031319
Page 8 of 11
C. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the
vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be
mitigated;
d. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current
1 zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone;
e. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general
Iwelfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
Conclusions based on Findings:
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The 3.63
dwelling unit per acre standard of the SR-3 zone is consistent with SF-3
Comprehensive Plan designation. Increasing the allowed density on the subject
property through the requested rezone would further GMA goals as expressed in
the RCW 36.70A, Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board
decisions, and Policy LU-8.1 of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. Findings of
Fact Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7& 8.
j2. The proposed rezone is compatible with surrounding development.
Development in the area surrounding the proposed rezone is all single family
residential. The Applicant proposes a single-family development as part of this
project rezone. Thus, the proposed rezone is compatible with surrounding
development. The primary purpose of a zoning code is to provide separation and
transition between incompatible uses. That is why the zoning map includes
commercial and industrial designations. H ere, even though the density of the
proposed project rezone may be greater than that in the surrounding area, the
' proposed use is single-family residential, the same use that exists all around the
subject property. Findings of Fact Nos. 9 & 10.
1 3. The proposed rezone would not unduly burden the transportation system
in the vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which
cannot be mitigated. The proposed rezone would add slightly more traffic to
the local transportation system than would be generated by a development
limited to SR-2 density. However, sufficient evidence was provided to be able to
conclude that the additional traffic could be fully mitigated through the preliminary
plat process. The MDNS issued for the proposal also includes traffic mitigation
for the plat. Findings of Fact Nos.13 & 14.
4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the
current zoning district. In Bjarnson v. Kitsap County, 78 Wash.App. 840, 846
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 XIVA #2031319
Page 9 of 11
(1995), the court held that "where the proposed rezone ... implements policies of
the comprehensive plan, changed circumstances are not required." The court
adopted the rationale from the earlier decision Save Our Rural Environment v.
Snohomish County that:
If such implementation were not allowed to occur until physical or developmental ■
circumstances in the area had changed, the new comprehensive plan might j
never be fulfilled: if an area is presently undeveloped and newly amended
comprehensive plan calls for industrial development, no industrial development I
may occur until al least one rezone has been granted.
Bjamson, 78 Wash.App. at 846 (quoting Save Our Rural Environment v.
Snohomish County, 99 Wash.2d 363, 370 (1983)).
In the present case, the proposed rezone implements policies of the
Comprehensive Plan (particularly Policy LU-8.1) by increasing residential
densities in the annexation area to a level more consistent with the GMA
standard. Although under Bjarnson changed circumstances need not be shown
in this case, it should be noted that significant transportation improvements have
occurred in the vicinity of the site since the zoning was established. Finding of
Fact No. 12.
5. The proposed rezone would not adversely affect the health, safety and
general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent. Residents in the vicinity of
the site provided much comment on the potential negative impacts of the rezone.
However, the evidence was insufficient to conclude that there would be adverse
health and safety impacts associated with the proposed SR-3 zoning. The rezone
would allow only a slightly higher density of residential development than is
allowed under the current zoning designation. Whether the zoning is SR-2 or SR-
3, development of the property would add traffic to the local street system and
add impervious surfaces to the drainage basin. The additional quantity of impact
caused by the SR-3 project density can be mitigated through the requirements of
existing development regulations and conditions of subdivision approval. It must
be emphasized in this regard that environmental review was conducted pursuant
to SEPA on both the rezone and the plat. It was determined that no significant
adverse impacts will occur if the mitigation measures are implemented. This
determination was not appealed. The issue regarding wetland protection need
not be resolved through the rezone process. The wetland must be properly
characterized and protected in accordance with ordinance standards regardless
of whether the p roperty i s zoned S R-2 o r S R-3. M ost of the remaining i ssues
raised in public comment related to neighborhood character. However,
neighborhood character is not a health or safety issue identified by the City
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KI VA #2031319
Page 10 of 11
i
Council in the criteria for review of a proposed rezone. The criteria do refer to
"the "citizens of the City of Kent", but this is a broader category of individuals than
the property owners in the immediate vicinity of the site. While the concerns of
immediate neighbors are taken into consideration, the Hearing Examiner must
review a proposed rezone with the interests of the entire city in mind. Findings of
Fact Nos. 11, 13, 14 & 17.
The "general welfare" of the citizens of the City of Kent should be determined
' with reference to the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is
the key legislative statement regarding the level of development that is
appropriate for the community. Because the proposed SR-3 zoning is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan, the Hearing Examiner concludes that the rezone
would not have an adverse impact on the general welfare of the citizens of the
City of Kent.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner
recommends that the application for a rezone of King County Tax Parcel No.
3222059094 from SR-2 to SR-3 be APPROVED.
Dated this 21st day of July 2004.
THEODORE PAUL HUNTER
Hearings Examiner
S\Permit\Plan\rezone\2003\2031319-2003-2findings2 doc
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for City of Kent
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA #2031319
Page 11 of 11
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
Ns
KEN T Phone:253 856 5454
WASH IN O T O H Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent,WA 98032-5895
KENT PLANNING SERVICES
(206) 856-5454
STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM
FOR HEARING EXAMINER MEETING OF
JULY 7, 2004
FILE NO: Howard's Addition Rezone
RZ-2003-2, KIVA 2031319
1 GENERAL INFORMATION
The applicant proposes to rezone 4.43 acres from the current zoning of SR-2 single
family residential to SR-3, single family residential The property is located at 27830
1061h Avenue SE and is identified by King County Tax Parcel number 3222059094.
II. HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION
On June 4, 2004, the Hearing Examiner remanded the application for rezone to the
Planning Services office for further analysis in accordance with his Conclusion No. 1.
The Hearing Examiner concluded he needed additional evidence in order to determine if
the proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Specific concerns
related to a Comprehensive Plan land use designation of SF-3 providing for a maximum
of three dwelling units per acre, and a zoning designation of SR-3 providing for 3 63
dwelling units per acre. The Hearing Examiner also desired citations for the Growth
Management Hearings Board decisions regarding urban density of four dwelling units
per acre.
iIll. STAFF COMMENT
I A. Consistency with Kent Comprehensive Plan
When the GMA Kent Comprehensive Plan was adopted in April of 1995, the
zoning districts were defined by minimum lot sizes rather than allowable density
Property with a land use designation of SF-2 was consistent with an R1-20
(20,000 square foot minimum lot size) zoning designation; property with a land
use designation of SF-3 was consistent with an R1-12 (12,000 square foot
minimum lot size) zoning designation.
In December, 1995 via Ordinance No. 3268, the City Council adopted revised
minimum lot sizes in single family residential districts in recognition of Kent
jComprehensive Plan goals and policies recommending a revised calculation
Staff Report-Addendum
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
system for determining maximum allowable single family density. In general the
minimum lot sizes recognized that roads and detention areas restricted the ability
of applicants to achieve the density allowed by the zoning district. The new
provisions for the R1-20 district provided for a minimum lot size of 16,000 square
feet; the R1-12 district provided for a minimum lot size of 9,600 square feet. The
provisions of Ordinance No. 3268 were further clarified in Ordinance No. 3290
that was passed in April, 1996. Ordinance No. 3290 redefined zoning districts
such that R1-20 became SR-2 (2 single family dwelling units per acre)and R1-12
became SR-3 (3 single family dwelling units per acre). Further clarification of the
Council's intent was provided with passage of Ordinance No. 3327 in December,
1996. Ordinance No. 3327 recognized the "unintended effect" of "rounding off'
maximum permitted density for each of the single family residential zoning
districts. The Council amended the maximum permitted densities for all single
family residential zones to coincide with density factors that existed prior to
adoption of Ordinance No. 3268, based on mathematically precise calculations.
Thus, SR-2 allows 2.18 single family dwelling units per acre, and SR-3 allows
3.63 single family dwelling units per acre.
Because of the history of the connection of land use and zoning designations,
specifically within the referenced SR-2 and SR-3 districts, staff is able to
conclude that the SR-3 zoning district is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
land use designation of SF-3.
B. Urban Density
The following two paragraphs are excerpts from the original staff report*
Policy LU-8.1. Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to
accommodate both city and county housing targets within the Potential
Annexation Area. Average net residential densities throughout the Potential
Annexation Area should be at least four units per acre in order to adequately
support urban services
Growth Management Hearings Board decisions have determined that lands
within Urban Growth Areas should be divided at a minimum of four dwelling units
per net acre to ensure efficient provision of urban services. The zoning district
SR-3 allows 3.63 dwelling units per acre and a minimum lot size of 9,600 square
feet. The net density calculations will be evaluated with the analysis of an
application for subdivision.
Further staff comment: During the City's recent efforts to update the Kent
Comprehensive Plan, staff received letters from both the Washington State
Department of Community, Trade & Economic Development ("CTED") and 1000
Friends of Washington on the subject of urban density. The CTED letter states in
part, "The GMA was intended to ensure that lands inside urban growth areas
(UGAs) are developed at urban densities, unless there are compelling reasons
for developing at lower densities. The Central Puget Sound Growth
Management Hearings Board (CPSGMHB) has determined that lands within a
Page 2 of 3
1
Staff Report-Addendum
Howard's Addition Rezone
#RZ-2003-2 KIVA#2031319
UGA should be divided at a minimum of four dwelling units per net (buildable)
acre to ensure efficient provision of urban services such as sewer, water, and
public transit...The land may be developed at lower densities, but should allow
for infill when services become available."
The letter from 1000 Friends of Washington states in part, "The Growth
Management Act (GMA) goals encourage development Inside urban growth
areas (UGAs) and the reduction of low-density sprawling development.' Further,
urban growth at urban densities shall be encouraged within the UGA.2...To
address these issues and carryout the goals and requirements of the GMA, the
Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board has adopted a'bright
line' rule that comprehensive plans and development regulations must have a
maximum density of no less than four residential dwelling units per net acre for
all lands within the UGA.3 This density "is clearly compact urban development
and satisfies the low end of the range required by the [Growth Management]
Act." "Any new residential land use pattern within a UGA that is less dense is
not a compact urban development pattern, constitutes urban sprawl, and is
prohibited." The board has recognized a limited exception for
"...environmentally sensitive systems [that] are large in scope (e.g., watershed or
drainage sub-basin), their structure and functions are complex and their rank
I order value is high, .. " Then a local government can apply densities of less than
n four housing units per et acre.6 All three of these criteria must be met to qualify
for the exception and generally few lands in the UGA will qualify for this limited
exception."
Staff proposes to embark soon on an analysis of Its land use and zoning
designations of less than 4 dwelling units per acre to ensure compliance with the
GMA. In the meantime, wherever possible under existing designations, (in this
case a rezone to SR-3 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use
designation of SF-3)staff will propose conditions to facilitate such compliance,as
indicated by its proposed Condition #A.2 of the preliminary plat.
'RCW 36.70A.020(1)&(2).
2RCW36.70A.110(1).
3Master Builders Association of Pierce County, Terry L. Brink, at al. v. Pierce County(MBA/Bnnk),
CPSGMHB Case No. 02-3-0010 Order Finding Partial Noncompliance and Continuing Invalidity p *8,
2003 WL 22896415 p. *7(September 4, 2003)&Bremerton, at al. v Kitsap County, CPSGMHB
Consolidated Case No..95-3-0039c Corrected Final Decision and Order p. *33(October 6, 1995)
"Bremerton, et al. v.Kitsap County, CPSGMHB Consolidated Case No.: 95-3-0339c Corrected Final
Decision and Order p *33(October 6, 1995).
51d and RCW 36 70A 110(1)
6Master Builders of Pierce County&Bnnk(MGA/Bnnk), et al v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB Case No..02-
3-0006 Final Decision and Order p. *10, 2002 WL 31998487 p. *11 (February 4,2002)
KENT PLANNING SERVICES
June 9,2004
SC:CA.ch.S:\Permit\Plan\rezone12 00312 0 31 31 9-2003-2reportadd doc
IPage 3 of 3
29
RLCEzy�D
JAN 0a 2od4
Date: '�' `1 RAW):gwr
Kent Planning Services
220 4es Avenue South
Kent.Washington 98032
Re: Application Name: Howard's Addition
Application Number ENV-2003-14(KIVA#2031316)
SU-2002-6(KIVA#2031319
RZ-2003-2(KIVA#2031319
To Whom It May Concern:
Please consider this our notice that we object to the rezoning of the referenced property
located at 27930106ei Avenue S.E.,King County tax parcel#3222059094.
We wish to become party of record;receiving notice of and participating in any hearings
as well as request a copy of decisions once they have been made.
� ,��
Sincerely, Z-7 7z7--I al'o 45
- AUS,M4,i,
oru�t bt orc �' 1J�t ltlrc
�P.a.Mv� '
It:&A3 SC- a74
l��ca•. w -• P n d G4 A �I �0 3a
J7?ay /dG'K+ Se. lor saaav/� 'J
� , !ad"� R•�► ��a� /vim+ of s�
V ��- /r11� 9ts17.3o Wn U0304 ZI&
30 .
This page intentionally left blank.
i
i
1
I
I
Z
� /, � / _ �
` � / / � , ',� � I
r / i
� i �
�v � . ♦ / i
i � � -
I
I � � � i � � �
f � �/ / , �
� /� � / � � i
� � � �. � i
l
� � / ,
i �� i /
/ �
I � / / � �
� � ._
% , � � ,
f - /, i
i i
. ,
� � � i
i � � � ' � %.
� � ,, � ,
r � � �
i
" � / � '� %
i . , �
',
' � % � �
� i / = � � /�
� ,
/ � �� /
i
�, i�r, ,
'�
� f _ ,
�� F t
,� � .- i �
• � �
J ' / . � � . i
� / - ' i
i �
/ _ '
_- - - ,• � �
r i i
i ' . i
`•� � .'
32 - !
F .
'w' r .'.tt,, tt' ly rY i, l-'��: ,�v;s�vw�.o�� �rrr
'S� • R•' y..,i� .�� t•.S
�. , • '• ilsc:;a(^ 3:p„'fli'kt +�;' _y�N'�Y:-,•:3' '��r' 4t't^: - t.t,.Qr}i I� II - t Z+f' '�j`y ��'ll� .
S. •• ,' iw=::;�c. t! yY,,,•Wp•txN;!•�.'.iV�,i4.4'� �•• :"�.r��'� }t �'lltj�„4y I�p f� A4 -��'1 Y' G'!.'` l t•'7�i r -
S�. -y, t }4- ,y♦y', - ' ' ' ,°7]�� . ♦ ; X :�..+VIYY•L. ,{ty�T,'riy, j y 5ry}��j� + �`l. .#
t ' :t�.Y+S Dt ♦ , '' • �Y�• fit• 3 R tl', ice' .t y} y.'I� tr�� ••� ;
i.' ' •'. r s.'- f fr!-lC it tAyyf''.h. .7�ri .n!'" 4p...y�• \.y ( ,YK#..
_ qy •��}yy�, �`yi�'c' .S ,���, 'AFT . ___TTT s �• ♦. 7/ !S� � � t,•Li
v •,�.• •��'•�k�-•_ :J,.x. i;•;' ���,f•1Y•i d .T. 't. 1.'i �.'�I' • '�T � •s Ch1•.�1 f447:'
T j
i
1
1
!
!
v+rro+ra�scnober(Omtntstl
An increasing number of people worry that construction and lgdustrial waste will ruin Olsen Carryon and its creek.
j r. ,♦. , �.w. !� I Y, � if',f. �r ll ' i.. • pti..S1-YJJ•.•fr •✓i'�r.kfir%C/.•.....7 ��{µ'�'ys .t>I'tqq}}M�� • 'i :'F Y�'�i#j N``Lt.',tl�.�4t�O•• lsi;eIII,N• . IV
�rik•
movemet-grov oese '
n
r�yA�•� � ,
l)ANNY YVESTNEAT � �. ':•`i/ .•i •+ `�'�.C• .. x;!p'.:.'+i�'• �'.'.x1��' �'•1 a4j �
sllce'thi%h the�wpalls�o�f the Gi ' R1 cc�'• 'Cap �}} t !
I dYY New�l�;;�tf .♦.' `•:y: r;•=.^`} •;Vallyy%13C' 7i'T.P"€'7G:{; 'r';y.;�j75im .��SJ /y`
'I ♦ ♦ 1 r 4` =.•,MST ,; ."d ••�� a I 1`"'�4, I .
p n=tie ch o�l+uid betw,'eeti Aulnun�•• :( , ;]3k4 foSttiL�growing gr°up of aa"rdY.i p 1,"•<, .• a sf �. 1Iliyi; � y'and Ken!% 'skrc�C{ades du`o_ub►!s 5;.,;°:.w-)i0. reiJu�i�bd fo tht bottatu;thee�rlyo�r�'a; u �.I�te _ You ulirmjiiel`bnnl
otl $'�ndltt.�dCL ilWt '- . .i T r•n
ttiriy Fi�tcep r no! i writ8rfal)s,dramauti aloPi anri ratite riiittt f i •a rfsf dr�iha+
c'veri ilt8 resider whq Lre'on its rim seem to;• .•falmtin'a c{�ter. trout htske it otie of l'• y W lry. t iClp$
krtpw ntirclt about it.✓3•�+�(• ,k% .?fir}, �; •. .'most ra j'pq ns cc natu
,74..l4Olte of i4Climb' 4:''A.111 7'A'r,ID L-11 r f'l�Jl�i'�A�►• :$Ontli NUTS 90111_,��, .,49 .A',:. •a.t� s ✓•
i 15-fobF s ' rai pnsistiletso.ors • �+'�it� YuY tits' I~;cot �Fdo�lwnWHere;I m s ' t FJ1S • :
pjat �a"&rra)l, t ly,s+�gllenfr�dm bZ +un_`ri ttn err or 7'cGieltyia '3sid� po�e� "1 tinb
rrc"en4 raiosY I i reij)i�arn'touctied set, •'�„ da 7,i `""tad w6i3 K'eat L t t t
"I dOA'tlMa �.,, ' �♦ 'ram ' S r+ • to rw r " b r. f , n
' gown aowphireortei� thp, `o�ort �oback�Qt�ie s rtd n e 1
helaujuyeiin, hgr+ctirt tid,`PddiaY�',�tti t w[i�i► e[gca wrl o of
>asrliveilLdjec l, I tit•." 4}`�4Y_�krsi uwljt`, .m� c gas�'t �' u erel
any
owl on t�` � th'tr to
st north otttiLtiy•r��"�Z;o�^�,,;;„. ° '! "l n'# itiEth" r 3tri else a f �a;s
18nCe1/ate er�
;f riq %ditlir:amnyrsrrrslirsvl �• rr��t__i9:aw� 9fj�4o0
33
a�
3 s
' '• d C
c
ail
QY
•.r• D Y
C �
' 10 16_00U >.a a Leo � eO�al,� Z� Ltiy ?s` v � `� a€ 3 -to,
.. e � y .o _Zlz ■ I $t7a. f � � Sa > VIJ' og c� rr$�
a. CS ag O .Os O r. Lyr•.. Yy y•- N ;� OEy U
u`g ve2e ppw!� wGgi• ay sae •3 �3 >, ae tr'� reu 3 �•2 e :i be meit a :_p
OE c"'7 6C c IAC Oyi .'=.g<.a. pw L :3 ar3�p tIGC ALL �Q $ a. e 'w•Ea �1
' o•E C ` a xa o p a ., o s p
�! L �.._ 3 !7 r;C '.S L w_La .0
v,1 L a c �X .. pOp E ,� S'>.-. •� � �3 C a ao y $ t��q a> P: av'a
�g u2aa 0 E �Cf V � Oapq Vl .D O t oq�g � O N
» c 5E u 3E3rn ■ m r� �, .. u ' g� C wm`
' " •gSot 03 °Sic vvoasa0 5a $.� wm■e�- a Sates i cc
ua�
Ir. p i+g y � Q >,g`• >. .E u w 3 ■ cc 0
e�Dcoe" lims9. Eguwa' ue �i.-. ,, 9.5 b _ `ae �e > > a aw $ }! oQ
■ a.Rc'- uvw " o.vuws . _ ....^ q 3 a o c' c
e �p�Vo r o1Z�Q� a >, a ., m> E�' ua ■' ' •- x pe-'er
A �.
Co= =yB °NBpr=Y:- >sLtLv = o=
5 uwLg � s 3a +tUu� n. �u �Qo 3 ycr
yo arJ 39:
�"d":, � $ EF_¢,tb' " ae�
c E
C w ■ a
0 $W �c° o7i � gm or9 9� 8 a '��g ' a �JE >o `� � °'1 0g.tto
• O okay 9s� P �' y �m0, Q?Ega .1u. `O at 5.go� e� a ew
� jrs L $ asy "�'c .seV rQ � 0 = `alla, HJ' Qu �^e°Em ' u �
a_ as >.` a 0m_ �. 3 c- aQ;�. .q.rs __ytc exEjsgg
V� c Q= � >. b � ee'rCg q �� e � sC04g�w � �g3
+� ++ 8 •a m- o�� ros rs�'= o cOr � Em� y0 va' 3o>.y8w>3 ooA> aE
m • E � e � �v� 8 � vTe�_. $c � c.9oo$> o• vepp"E' GG "%gVuQEg
' U+ Q a=.G d3��, . 3 € o a ;r^9 „ Et���$ a�a� 3 �go•uv� 8'oT�Pi �iu � pnpc
.J 3i u <'� .00LaurSg ■ o� ;t o iote 3a w� �igij >.C12 >'� O ■a$o
.SO 5' a ■ og ,ycjXs, u .� �joeoa2acW cAL a }� 3�_ ca mao
♦ � (� �aGvoruaW, C- 0.; o° ' eoaoc= �a'£�u `A $�� 0� O `$' c xE �
C'^ r c
w c>� 2 a,w. ag aCao8l`3 Yd aax! 5Sa A!
34 .
Wednesday, February 23, 1972
. Single copy fifteen cents 5i't x - Kent,King Covmy. wosh•..gtu••
Wit. ..•
TAW
,
� t• 1
1
t
Outlaw's sixshooter demonstrated 1
rred Dixon. 96. left. smoked rinumats of a cigarette xented to Jim Shaughnessy, right, prnldrnl rigthr
it1cradled a sixshooter that belonged to the Infamous tYhitr hirer Taller Ilistorical Society.The Mir w0l hr
flaw Harry Trarr, w•he held Olson and other mein- an dispfarIn the Society's museum In Auburn.
-s of his fansifp captive Is IOMTheColt.4S was pre —Photo hJ J1arinwr i'heerrhill
3rmer captive of Harry Tracy 1
Ives outlaw's guru ' to museum i
Itr%Iarlvwr Churchill lox The gun won will 911 all dksldar The cabin is gont• inn► in it. '
t•ft>,cki cf and inoperable•out• in the museum to Auburn place stands a quaint toll♦aa
larn• Trarr s lethal Call 45 The old six-shooter has Ittree in while house twntexrltur11.1{{enret,nit
•er has b,•t•n itsrn a neehe in thr possession of Allred ula•n xnwr the tirttn ltittr Iw•Iwn•!r h19u Imt ;
'bile Itn•t•r %alien Ifixtorfcal an eastern Washington slee•nrf Iml Auburn 1
•nt thinks Pr a hint atan who mg the passe on the trail of Trat_♦. Olson• now go. Ix•whe.lnrd No '
rhl raprtst• of-. 1902 by the sent the gun to Olson after Irking if Irtsh even after evtltng r we el
-n dot ing Trarr's run from an from the hand of the de/11 erutlaw nt warth of fertw•aod, Itr.ellt.t th,
e primen it+ rasbrn %VwltinX• August. 1901.(Iisou Said rt'ents that happtturl 7n rr•.un.1FF♦.y
'
After bean artattr wnundmi hr Ile said he-aw•nke al a a in Julr
the passe. T mracy r1i"wtrd 1v •hut 1902 to find a ♦irangre •wine
himalf in the herd with tlu• pt♦hrl breakfast with hie nnothrr Im1 •Ieyl
to at-Wd capture. father
- — Olson'!! slrpfather £?1 Jeeltn.%n. Olsnn rt mrmlte•rSTra,•. w e%ill it-
was sent to Tacoma lee purrha.♦1•Ihr rnno w„t fr~ . .••••^.-: _ _
' —— ....• . ..... 35
NAME Johnson _
-- �• w-^•:s Fa rm
Alf Olson Site so.
' VACATION
Number s Street 28624 Crean River Road S. Not fax 1blieatlon•__
City or Tam Kent lip 90031
Incorporated_ Unincorporated X Comarnity name
Congressional Diatrict 7 Community Planning District S,gp. Creek
' State Legislative District 11 toning RS
County Council District�3 Shoreline Environment
CLRSBIFICATION
CATEGORY OWNERSHIP STATUS PRESENT USE
' District Public occupied i( hgrlculture Museums
$—Ruildingls) _!Private L Cowm
ik"Cupied mrclal _Park
_structure path Preservation _Educational Private
HfetAr/e fits —Mork in progress Entertainment• —Resldemw
_Arc. site ACCESSIBLE Threatened byi _t:overnaeat Snllglam
Object XYes Restricted Demolition Industrial scientific
Yes Unrest. _Neglect _Military Transportation
Other
. OWNER OF PROPERTrt Alfred Olson
Number b &treat th Ave. .
City or row" Des Holnas State NA zip 98198
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONr sva�U TwnJJ Rag -J_ (TIm 72 1
CL 2 LESS PM LY SULT OF FOLD DESC LN SM Nun COX CL TH E ALC 11 LN SO CL 240 FT IN s
09-30-00 9 To NELY M= CO RD TH SELY ALC SD MN TO S IN SO CL & TERMINUS SD LN LESS
L 441.0 FT OF N 402 FT
' PRESENT RD:ISTER STATUS riw1�
_Hat. "late[ State Register
Other
CONDITION SITU11TlON
X-fteelleat _(Onaltered 'w « ti•; 4
_Good Altered y
Pair
—Deteriorated ri inal Site
_Nuins _Moved ''i•
Unexpood rate
PRESENT a DRIC. PRYSIChL APPEARANCE
The Olson Roume is a 1% story 141 x 261, structure with shiplap siding.
The roof consimts of two gables which Jois at right angles. When viewed from the
front (mouth), the and of the high gable to on the right. The ridge of tho'bellc st
' portion is on the left and parallel to the maim Iscads. The save* and verges of both
sections of the roof projeetl however, the rafter@ are exposed only under the rests of
the ballast section of the roof. There in a chimmy etroddlimg the ridge of each sec-
tion of the roof. Although one of the chisseys appears unalterod, the other ban been
rebuilt with new brick. The roof is now revered with composition shinglem.
The win (scads is simple and unadorned. The decorated front door opens onto a
recessed parch. The porch is offset @lightly to the left and rests entirely wader the
eaves of the bellcast roof. The wood stairs are now missing. A darner with a shd
roof is centered on the slope of the roof above the porch. To the iweadiste•left of
' the porch there are three adjoining double-hung windws. To the right of the porch,
ummder time high stable end. titers ors two pair& of doubla-hung windawat one pair as
each floor. The front door and the double-hung windows have simple entablature bode.
Several outbuildings are located to the rear of the honest outhouses, barons ■
%' es toot shad, and, finally, a shed which at one ties housed the works of a amell gee
' Plants Little can be seen of the outbuildings, bowevpr. Most appear to be front
structures with vertical board siding and high gable roofs. The outbuildings retain
tbeir cedar-ahake roofs.
The Olson Fars is especially isportent. The Muse lot in fact. one of the few houses
' built around the turn-of-the-century which has survived the last seven decades without
major internal or extarual modification. The architectural integrity of the house•y .
be judged. to part. by its lack of either electrical wiring or indoor plumbing. It should
also be rated that the Muse still boasts gas-Aigat sAxcures. Amon ouromic3ngs,
like the houses appear to be in very much the a&" condition on when they were built.
The house and outbuildings are remarbably vell-preserved esamples of farm structure
at the turn-of-the-coattury.
_ . a Thu mac_nary - s been removed from the property, and In now on display at
the White River Yallev
abi_s),jt,tve r 36
• 1rwAos:ir) E.H. Johnson
�- Architectfs) and/or rngineerUs) '
..-...,.j w.aa 1902 present Level of Significance-
most Significant Period 1902-oresent _National _state jL14cal
BTATzmCoT Or n3sTOAr a SIGN1picn= i
The Alfred Olson Fars is significant for two reasons. First, it caw& wrvived for
over seven decades without major modification;and thus life sot only a prime example of
turn-of-the-century rural architecture, but is also an excellent source for soyos,e who '
wishes to study the social history of that period. And second, because It was the site
of a famous incident during which the Johnson family was held hostage by a notorious
outlaw.
The vacant history of the site begins with Its purchase by Alfred Olson, a Swedish '
!migrant, in 1874.e Mr. Olson married during the 1880's and became the father of two
children, Ann& (b- INS) and Alfred,Jr. (b. 1887). The family lived in a small cable
near where the Olson Novae now stands. Mr. Olson died shortly after the birth of his
son. Mrs. Olson subsequently married C.N. Johnson, and the family coaseisud to live
In the cabin and work the farm. In early 1902, the existing house was built, i
In July of 1902, the farm was visited by Marry Tracy. Tracy had escaped from
prison In Oregon, where he was serving a twenty-year sentence for armed robbery. prior
to big arrival at the Johnson tars, the outlaw apparently killed & number of men, mostly
guards and deputies. Upon ranching the Johnson farm, Tracy was in desperate need of i
rest and supplies. de forced Mr. Johnsoi.to go to Terms to buy a gun while he held
Mrs. Johnson and the children hostage. The incident ended after Mr. Johnem raturned
with the required supplies. Tracy was eventually cornered in Eastern Washington, where
he committed suicide, rather than submit to capture;** Alfred Olson, Jr. rowbers the
detail• of the hostess, incident clearly. i
The site is still used for agricultural purposes, end, although now retired, Alf
Olson to still the owner. The farm is operated by his heir#. the Jameson#.
' • A lumber mill had previously been operated an the site.
*e The gum purchased by Mr. Johnson is on display at the White River Valley Mistoricel i
Society buxom in Auburn. This is the weapon with which Tracy committed wields.
i
-.. BIBLIt)GAAPMIlJ1L REFrRENCEB i
"Former Captive of Marry Tracy Gives Outlaw's Gun to Museum,; Rent Revs-Journal. i
February 23, 1972, p. 1.
Interviews
Olson, Alfred, Jr. Born June 22, 1687. 22650 24th Avenue S. Des Moines, WA. 98109. i
TA4-5242. Morn on the property and bag lived there most of him life.
Y
FOAM LIPMtEL NU FAINT) F# Patrick Heeban i
signature -4 Pe1'w :, k %A.ILU. Date 6-2-78
Organisation Xing County Historic Site& Survey i
Address 1955 6th Avenue W. Seattle, WA 98119 Phone (206) 254-85S6
_ 37
&tea cn - V
X Aa 0 e
1 Qua um
pF
Q [0 a Hit
-z
Q J or a ; : = s• C O C
Ito
z
w J w r r r Lit
W � � otso ag
w r. t•ftl � - __
stool
im
44
w
1 I _ �r�• .r. .•tl ,.y. i if rf wN f!�
it • -»�_r 77 r � .r� a
d I
•l 1 � �
r
�^ Lr� ' w lr•ca
ff
61
MA
-'
38
54
M � I, .I e•eu '�—�Se a •r \ t'r 4• •Yfee - '
• O ynm
ch 1 Jr M Sd1 1 \ �i " \
ScA �
ase '
! ♦ s l _ � 11\ Res
r1 L[ tt��r1
i-N! d i z7o
i I s7 a
\ 3
guy
r 1 1 77 •' ,�'• C'► K r SE r • Y7e00
j 1 6• \ . -4L•t r -
N * —�lo.w• rd•..a. . y,-�';rl ■Ic.i+e t1 `v M.i yT ■1. t 4
se 2n St •,7� :.000 J
seLC 44
+ s I
_'• .r �--•'I I � " Sri�y«.I Y6S te10d1 t
_ k Clot sx 1 s
ueoo,
. PLY : VnLI6 ;
S gg
e .37 Sr HE I'� . e � "A... � 1B.!!... ...._�....� 7 ......... ....._....3.... ........
> S ■ 1
{ � ♦ e�e 1 � tY00 1
If
- —� Fi
rwus D[sts �uburn Munleips ` e T ; I o>x '
opher �,;, � r Colt Course jIr
a i
' � .n Iw1 ( Oe■Oe !,•�-• .� •i +\ a sUW V�ffaSA'�
1 •�> r S { ti S - �I
20r
O '•� Lee INM; rr. f •.
2• r � �• ri+ gib- i EIM4.
~
CA
• _L 17 i 77 Y. -st —'11312 STWelwo d
p K 4m PLi ♦ �Vt,V�1 0�
.I • Irr:Poo SE
\ r
— _ _.. ---
oleo
olio � BE sr SIM
• � r
4
1 Y •
�, # 1 C!� 1rift
..W a t. 7 f /,•� •� —
s 1 24 Im 11 11
WOO
is + �t r 1 sl ae ,Cree11 Rirkr
y ...•r" I• �n r__ K '�- Ceamniy CotlKe f♦.fl •��
e L �•
P - M I 1 11 tl "'^• i I�w+ ..� ; ' / O�
I fir
ism
oil !w• tt o
-- •e 1 — .a�ea� • A IA r ~wf• I 1g
It
»eoo
39
tic is
IF
-s• ,� ! . Ins � ••, \\ t� \.\, \�• 1 •�\\•
Is
VIN-
jo
4 `� � ,11\ `�(' JI � s / �4 � � n ( b 1 �+ \�Z� O` `•`fit 111 `,O 1 tD
♦\,,t`�`\,\1� ; , `� ♦\l\ \, e/ L`f (♦` ♦` \ 1,1� S 11 \O - 1 1 I 11 •`
\•.J , ram_ V. ` l , \ 1 �✓ , ♦ ��\�; � 1
IF I
• � 1 i
:r4�1`,t\`1�\\I\I� 11�1 11�1� '•-� 1 / �♦ ` 1 � \� \`�� � ,�^�-"� 1�1�• 1 �
ai 0 `� it 1 i ; !t to �, `�— `=�Y= ♦�•t.
' 4jR IF
� r �11 i ✓ ,J� 1 � ` ` ` `\\ ♦ ,Ili•.
�J� � i'�'2J ' ' I 1 1 �' O f �t 'j'I 1 ♦j }'�'�.
� ice' `;\,+ '1'i ` f /� (_) � _ ' ' \ • -� c 1, I ` tl i�'�i',
1 ACD
\ 1♦ \� 1 Ilit
�1a � �. : �b - it 0 a � . . �•:l. �. . !�� `\ al t;: .
I; zit •;�1 D - 1 � `G2../ .. _ ;rJl`==
♦ '`�� c 9= 4 1•
!e
- k� fillIs
NO Ol lit
IF
. �._.__ ---
•_-� • • M__ • �. ._.• • w .-� • • •• _ _ - M _
40 '
This page intentionally left blank.
1
1
41
lvlay 1212004
RECEIVED
MAY 17 2004
CITY OF KW
PLANNING SERVICES
City of Kent
Office of the Hearing Examiner
RE: Howard's Addition#SU-2002-6(KIVA#RPP3-2031319)and#RZ-2003-2(KIVA
#M4-2031319)
Rezoning ofproperty located at 27830—1066 Avenue SE from SR-2 to SR-3
The property is near Meadow Glen elementary school and borders the walkway that
children use to walk to and from school. Increasing the housing density will increase the
traffic on the 2-lane road as well as creating the potential of additional stress to the
already stretched Kent School District budget.
' Depending on what water and sewage sources are used,current residents'well water
tables and drainage could be affected.
The property is near wetlands that is hone to birds and wildlife. Do we want to continue
to drive our creatures of nature to extinction by continually eacroacbing on their habitat?
It would appear that the re-zone is for the economic beahh of the requestor with no regard
to the effects to the surrounding community.
If the re-zone is granted,anyone with a 2/3 or more acre parcel in the SR-2 area would be
able to request a re-zone compounding the effects of tralEc,school overcrowding,
wildlife extinction and quality of fife.
I oppose the SR-2 to SR-3 re-zone in an effort to help preserve the quality of Ide of
this community.
Respectfully,
Carole Henry
10604 SE 281
Kent, WA 98030
Exhibit —
Fie .aoo
l>at H�of 1
42 - 1
This page intentionally left blank.
!
!
!
!
1
1
1
1
1
i
!
1
1
!
- - -- . - !
43
Impact due to Howard's Addition
May 19, 2004
1. This hearing should be re-scheduled three months from now in order
that the adjoining neighbors can adequately respond to this Addition.
We did not receive details until three days ago. This is insufficient
time to prepare. The developer had years to prepare.
2. The homes and property currently in the neighborhood are well kept
and maintained and are within the $350K range. The Howard Addition
will substantially reduce the property values.
3. The proposed dwellings will be in a rural setting thereby making the
Howard Addition appear out of place. An Addition like this should
only be considered on existing bus lines and adjacent to existing
shopping and service areas. This will have the appearance of a ghetto
and certainly be an instant slum. It will only attract people who
traditionally ignore property upkeep and are continually making life
miserable for people who express concerns regarding their life style.
Fences will not keep these people at their homes.
4. This proposed high density, to my knowledge, does not exist in the
Kent area except at apartment dwellings.
S. Nine new homes mean 18 automobiles along with their noise and
eventual Junkers. We are having difficulty currently exiting 279*Street
onto 108*Avenue; 108*Avenue should be a candidate for four lanes
now.
' 6. Pedestrian impact will be increased substantially from its present state
no matter what is produced. The increase will alter lifestyles for my
' neighbors and 1, who moved here to get away from overly busy areas
for peace and quiet. If one complains, all we can expect is a finger
wave and some bad mouthing.
7. The same with bike traffic from the new Addition because no
reasonable parent will allow their children to ride elsewhere except on
1061 Avenue S.E. All of our children are grown and gone. Locate this
Addition in town where children's facilities are in place for these kinds
of activities. What Is my liability for children getting Into an accident
on arty private road?
E)"blt a
File Rz-.zoC2r-;2
Date a%-19•ow 1
-- - - Cky o
44 _
8. My neighbors and I moved here for the view of the mountain -ask any ,
real estate salesperson what value they place on it. We will all see the
garbage cans and junk in their back yards.
9. We can expect nine dogs and nine cats as a minimum. Where will they ,
do their toileting? Certainly not on their postage stamp lot. Their
next door neighbor won't allow it either. 'Dear old Ed" across the
street will have to clean up the mess.
10. 1 don't believe In fences (except deer fences). I do not propose to
keep people out. What kind of fencing provisions will these new
tenants permit? These are private roads in the area now - how do they
propose to honor them as private?
11. Noise. It presently is non-existent but it certainly will increase
measurably from this tenant Addition. Did you ever try to reason with ,
someone who generates noise from radios, music boom boxes,
musical instruments and loud cars to name only a few sources? It is
no fun getting the finger and being told to go to hell. ,
12. Why don't all lots in this Addition be made to exit and enter on 108*
Avenue? '
13. It is now difficult to see oncoming traffic on 108*Avenue when exiting
from 2791 Street. It will become extremely dangerous when the ,
ghetto and instant slums arrive and a building on lot 9 is built.
14. What is minimum distance between homes for this proposed ghetto
and instant slums? Hopefully, it's 20 feet.
15. We are currently experiencing worse flooding and drainage conditions ,
than in the past since the 911 facilities and Pheasant Ridge homes
have been added In spite of the fact that this has been the driest
spring in the past 40 years. What can we expect when the ghetto is ,
built?
16. Where do children from the ghetto play? I don't want to be the nasty '
neighbor chasing them off my property only to get the finger and a lot
of verbal abuse.
17. 1 want to be excluded from any water damage claims due to drainage `
from my property onto the proposed ghetto property. I have already
had words regarding drainage onto that property in the past. This is
natural drainage.
2
45
18. 1 want to make it absolutely clear that items S and 6, on page 16 of
the staff report, be very specific in stating that access from the ghetto
be only on I OP Avenue. Items on page 8 of the staff report should
be clarified or deleted.
19. What is a category 3 wetland?
20. Seems that Land Use Plan LU8 and LU9 are not being fully complied
with. Especially LU-8.3 which states "locate housing opportunities
within close proximity to employment, shopping, transit and
community services". None of the above conditions are compliant to
the Howard Addition.
21. Would anyone in this Hearing room live in a neighborhood as depicted
In the Howard Addition?
22. 1 have no objection to subdividing providing it is in concert with the
existing dwelling and property values. Strongly recommend that
1 zoning remain as is (SR-2).
23. Kent is proposing four homes on 10 acres behind the 911 facility
whereas the reverse is true for the ghetto,just a block away, which
has 10 homes on less than four acres.
24. The wetlands as noted on the site map of the preliminary plat are not
completely defined nor is the culvert under 279*shown. This culvert
area floods heavily after most rain storms. It should be noted that a
large pond which has been filled in is also not shown. Not shown also
Is the wetlands which exist from currently shown Tract A through
proposed lots 5, 6 and 7. The previous owner of lot 10 and I had a
1 serious discussion regarding the natural rain water runoff from
properties 22801, 27727 and 27707 - all on 1061 Avenue S.E. The
existing wetlands (not shown on site map) is a 30 to 40 foot wide
swath from Tract A and continues north through lots 3 and 4 and
continues through 27761 1080 Avenue S.E property and on up to and
including an existing pond on 27704106*Avenue S.E. which no
1 longer dries up in the heat of summer as it previously did prior to the
911 installation and its extensive paving.
The wetlands survey by B-Twelve Associates seems to be very
generous for the developer showing minimum conditions. In my
observations while walking almost daily and Irving here for 25 years,
the wetlands were far greater than that depicted on the site map. The
horse was not allowed to graze in one half of the pasture during fall,
winter and early spring due to adverse muddy conditions. is B-Twelve
3
46 - !
Associates a government agency or private firm hired by Howard's !
Addition? Can we neighbors hire another firm or ask the City of Kent
to perform anothei wetlands survey?
25. Our area represents a transition between urban areas of Kent and the
outlaying rural areas. We ask you to maintain the current status and
zoning. 1
Ed Pawlowski
27727 106*Avenue S.E. ■
Kent. Washington 98030 s
!
1
!
!
1
1
!
I
_ I
4
47
May 19,20D4
' Page]!2
Subject •-- - .
Howard's Addition#SU-2001-6,Subdivision Proposal to divide 4.43 acres
into 10 single-family ree idental lots
W Hunter
Land am Hearing Examiner
Kent Planning Services
After reviewing the subject proposal,it appears that there remains several issues
regarding the wetlands area which must still be addressed. I have lived adjacent
to the subject property for 29 years,and have observed the drainage pattern which
occurs after a significant rainfall,and in general,the water flow during an average
winter season. These wetlands are not isolated to this property exclusively,and are
part of a complex ECO system which includes drainage from several acres to the North,
West,and South of the Subject property. Also,2 large ponds to the South of this
Property an directly affected. Below are some of the Items which still must be addressed
and recommendations to alleviate these concerns.
1. Lots#3,4,S and 6,will directly interfere with surface water runoff which occurs
after eadi raiafill,and during most wintermonths. BuNings located in these
areas will be vulnerable to flooding and other drainage problems,and will also
interfere with the overall water drainage pattern which currently exists..
2. 270 St SE floods across the roadway routinely after most rainfalls,indicating
that there are indeed,large amounts of water drainage which does occur. It is
believed that a significantly larger arcs must be set aside in tract A to address the
Wetland issue
3. There are at least 2 large ponds directly to the South of the subject property which
depend at least partially for their water source through the complex natural water flow
drainage system which crosses through and under the subject property. Even small
changes to this natural drainage system will adversely affect these downstream ponds
which support many varieties of our birds,ducks,and many,other species of wildlife
which depend on these ponds for their existence. These Wetlands on downstream
adjacent properties must also be considered and protected.
The subjectproperty slopes from North to South,and the natural water flow from arras to the
North and South must cross this property. The subject property is not an isolated parcel,but
represents arty a link in a large and complete natural drainage system. As indicated above,
water flowing from adjacent areas must cross through and/or under this property, and interfering
with this natural process will also impact sensitive Wetlands on downstream areas as well.
EAM -9L.
Ftle oo -
DaW - -o
Exernirher
rutty of Kent
48 _
w
Page 212 May 19,2004 ,
It is recommended that lots 3,4,5,and 6 be abandoned as proposed banding sites,and that they
be pemtaneatly preserved as they currently exist. Hopefully this proposal will be ccosidered and
accepted as stated herein. If this proposal is not accepted as stated. it is requested that the
Hearing Exanbw will make a detemtination that further study is required to mitigate the issues
brought forward herein
Page M
I wish to thank the Hearing Examiner for his time and consideration of this proposal,
which is intended to can the least impact to the envin=ent and area to be affected
by the proposed Addition
Resp
77-1�4I
Fred E Vmg Jr
27901 106a Ave Se
Kent, Wa,98030
Re:
Harold's Addition
1
1
t
49
i
i1 Impact due to Howard's Addition
May 19, 2004
j:
OPENING STATEMENT
■ Presently, our community has nine homes situated on approximately 40 acres.•
■ A number of people have horses that they keep year round and we all enjoy a
irural-type life style which includes the wildlife indigenous to this area. We very
much enjoy our neighbors and our community and the safety this secluded
ineighborhood provides not only for ourselves but for both our children and
grandchildren.
We understand that development is part of the growth of the City of Kent and
we simply want to make it clear that the present zoning (category SR 2) should
remain in place and the SR-3 zoning request, as proposed by the Howard's
i Addition, be rejected. if the zoning were kept as is, development of like, kind
and quality structures would be undertaken that would be complimentary to our
community and profitable for the developer. The proposed rezoning would
negatively affect our community in every aspect of our daily life.
We have no objection to reasonable subdividing providing It is in harmony with
the existing dwelling and property values. We request and strongly recommend
the zoning remain as SR-2.
AREAS / ISSUES OF CONCERN
First Point -Environmental impact
During the winter months, it is common for our only access road to be flooded
at its lowest point from the saturation of the adjoining wetland. Building on the
proposed lot is going to significantly exacerbate this already existing condition.
Exhibf._.s;k_
Fite
Dab - -o i
ExaNner
50
. r
It is my understanding that the Environmental Committee that oversaw the ,
wetland report was not aware of a body of water which joins two large ponds
within our community. The northern most pond is located on Mr/Mrs. Warren's
property- the southern most pond is located on Mr/Mrs. Hogland's property.
These two ponds are connected by a waterway that dissects the Howard ,
Addition property. The culvert, under our only access road, and areas
surrounding this location stay saturated year round, eventually overflowing in
the winter months.
We want to be excluded from any water damage claims due to natural drainage
from our property onto the proposed Addition. ,
Second Point-WATER QUALITY I
We believe this development, as proposed, will severely affect our private
aquifer. Our community is serviced by one common well and allowing such a ,
large concentration of people, including their vehicles, animals and landscaping
by-products will most certainly contaminate our water supply because of the
waste runoff from these external sources; runoff that we presently do not have.
It is also my contention that such a concentration of housing will most certainly ,
adversely affect the delicate structure of the existing wetlands, pushing waste
water and erosion into the adjoining properties. ,
Third Point-Safety
Significant safety issues exist with this proposed development.
o There is to be a significant increased In the traffic flow on 108*Avenue
S.E. as one mile down the road construction is already underway for a
500 plus unit housing development in the Lea Hills area. Building nine '
additional homes will only add to the congestion of this already taxed
roadway. I
51
o There will be an increased difficulty exiting 279*(a private drive) onto
108*Avenue S.E because of the close proximity of ingress and egress of
this development to the north, the most dangerous direction for the
traffic as this southbound traffic crests a hill just prior to our private road
■ and visibility is very limited.
i o Increased liability on our private road, e.g. children, children on bikes,
domestic animals where we, the existing homeowners, will have to bear
the responsibility for the addition liability insurance.
o Increased wear and tear with respect to all local utilities
o There is an elementary school directly across the street from this
�• proposed development. Children walk to and from this school every day
in great numbers.This appears to be a very dangerous location for 9 to
18 additional vehicles to enter/exit daily.
o And,we are very concerned about the demographic of the population
targeted to live in this development. Crime basically does not exist in our
community and we believe allowing such a dense population naturally
increases the risk to our neighborhood safety.
Fourth point- ?roper Values
We live In a rural-type setting where coyotes, deer, raccoon, feral cats, rats and
mice exist in great number. Doubling the population, in such a concentrated
area, will almost certainly increase the nuisance posed by these wild animals.
Whatever development materializes, it is clear there needs td-lie a tightly fenced
perimeter to keep the vermin out; and that fence needs to be landscaped so it
Is harmonious with the existing layout of our community. '
it is critical that no access to our private road be granted to this development.
This private road (106*Avenue S.E.)was designed only for the five existing
homes which it now services - nothing more. Significantly increasing the load
3
52 I
on this easement will deteriorate its lifespan exponentially, resulting in its ,
repair at "our"expense.
Presently we enjoy an unobstructed view of Mt. Rainier,The Howard Addition
proposes building single family dwellings directly in our line of site of Mt.
Rainier.
I am a professional commercial/residential damage appraiser and my
profession Is to evaluate and estimate construction costs and values with
respect to damaged real property. The prevailing square foot price for new
construction of this type of structure could be estimated at approximately
S80/SF. Assuming a generous square footage of 2,000 SF per home, the s
construction costs will be roughly S160K each. In contrast, the replacement
cost for reconstruction of our dwelling has been calculated at $535K. I cannot
rationalize how homes costing 70%less than ours to construct will not
significantly diminish our property values.
The affect this development will have on our rural type buffer zone will be
significant. Presently, we have nine homes on approximately 40 acres. All of
these homes are situated on acreage in a very regular and attractive format. It
Is our understanding there is a planned development adjoining our property ,
directly to the north, behind the new 911 center. The plan, as I understand it,
is to construct four to five homes on approximately 10 acres ... each home on
approximately two acres. We will be separated from these homes by green
belts and distance. This development is complimentary to our present layout.
It will not detract from our property values nor will it add significantly to our
population density. I do not understand why the Howard's Addition has to be
the exception to the existing zoning requirements which appear to be perfectly
adequate regarding construction In this area.
53
We were fortunate enough to purchase a very nice home at the end of a dead
end street where we enjoy the solitude, peace and harmony afforded to us by
this remote location. One of the driving reasons for our purchase of this home
was the peace and serenity that now appears to be jeopardized by this new
development.
rinally-Construction Nuisances
I work from our residence where noise and distractions are a detriment to my
productivity. Construction in such close proximity to my office will invariably
decrease my productivity. During the recent construction of the 911 facility,
our phone lines were severed a number of times; disrupting my business
extensively. I can't help but anticipate the proposed construction by the
Howard's Addition, which will occur near the location where all of our phone
lines are presently distributed, will cause significant delays in productivity and
efficiency. As such, I propose, prior to any ground breaking, that high speed
Internet service be run to every home In our community that wishes to have this
1 service._This will help offset many of the possible delays caused by construction
damages.
During the construction phase there will be increased dirt, noise and pollution
for the duration of the project. Limiting the number of houses produced will
minimize the length of time necessary to build these new homes therel?y
keeping the detrimental effects to the surrounding community to a minimum.
SUMMARY
We do not object to the reasonable subdivision of the Howard's Addition .
providing it is representative of the existing dwellings, property values and
environmental conditions. Building two homes per acre, as the existing code
now allows, with design concepts that enhance rather than detract from the
existing community will not take any more time to complete. Considering
5
54 .
I
today's housing market, building homes of this nature may be even more
• profitable for Mr. Wilson.
r 1
• There is no pressing need to saturate, to the maximum level, the small piece of
i land owned by Howard Wilson with homes that do not reflect our very,well
established community.
We are all separated by space and natural buffer zones; we have formed a
strong community where neighbors look after one another. Introducing nine
new families in such a tightly compacted location will disrupt this harmony-
without question.
Our community represents a transitional buffer zone between the densely
populated urban areas of Kent and the outlying rural areas. To allow Howard
Wilson, a man who lives in Edmonds, which obviously has no long term interest
in well being of our community, to so adversely effect our standard of living is
reprehensible. This property owner has no other concern regarding this project
other than his own profitability and as such we ask that you maintain the
current SR2 zoning status.
i
6
LEY jE
shy,€�9
a •
} a ,
i t `�� 1'S' If ► C3
Al I
t '
11-3
fol
�1�.r I I ! •�
.• � I I I � � ,
j I '
I
J a
W
o ;
all
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5. 2004
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: ANDERSON REZONE (QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDING)
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: This request by Debra Purcell-Cink of TLT
Development is to rezone 1.96 acres of property from SR-4.5, Single-Family
Residential to SR-6, Single-Family Residential. This applicant also filed a separate but
related request for a major plat alteration. Only the rezone is being considered by the
Council this evening. The property is located at 23519-98 h Avenue SE. The Kent
Hearing Examiner held a Public Hearing on August 18, 2004, and issued Findings,
Conclusions and Recommendation for approval of this rezone on September 2, 2004.
3. EXHIBITS: Staff report with map; and Hearing Examiner Findings, Conclusions
and Recommendation
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Hearing Examiner
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? No Revenue? No
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember UAIA moves, Councilmember w seconds
to accept/Fejeeb�r�the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Hearing
Examiner on the Anderson Rezone and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the
necessary ordinance.
DISCUSSION: '6
ACTION: 1rnC
Council Agenda
Item No. 7B
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N Satterstrom, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
KENT Phone 253-856-5454
WASNINOTON
Fax. 253-856-6454
Address 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
KENT PLANNING SERVICES
(206) 856-5454
STAFF REPORT
FOR HEARING EXAMINER MEETING OF
August 18, 2004
FILE NO. Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
APPLICANT' Debra Purcell-Cink
TILT Development
700 M Street
Auburn, WA 98002
REQUEST: A Zoning Map Amendment (Rezone) for one (1)
existing tax parcel from SR-4.5 Single Family
residential to SR-6, Single Family Residential
STAFF
REPRESENTATIVE: Matt Gilbert, Planner
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Description of the Proposal
The applicant is requesting a Zoning Map amendment (Rezone) for
approximately 1.96 acres on one (1) existing tax parcel, known as the Anderson
property, which is currently zoned 4.5 Single Family Residential. The applicant
has proposed rezoning the site to SR-6 Single Family Residential. The City of
Kent Comprehensive Plan designates the property SF-6 Single Family. No
environmentally sensitive areas have been identified on the subject site. In
addition to this rezone request, staff has reviewed a plat alteration application
' that seeks to incorporate the Anderson property into the approved Morgan's
Place subdivision (SU-2000-6) and divide the property into six single family lots
and a storm drainage tract consistent with SR-6 development standards. Staff is
1
1
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
recommending approval of the plat alteration contingent upon approval of this
rezone request.
B. Location
The subject property is located at South 236`h Street and 98'h Avenue SE and is j
identified as King County Tax Parcel number 1822059137
C. Size of Property i
The subject property is approximately 1.96 acres.
D. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan
The property is currently zoned SR-4.5 Single Family Residential. Properties to
the south and to the east, on the other side of 98 h Avenue South, are zoned SR-
6, Single Family Residential. Adjoining land to the west and north of the subject
site is zoned SR-4 5, Single Family Residential.
The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan designates the site, together with
surrounding properties as SF-6, Single Family, 6 units per acre. '
Utilizing gross acreage, the SR-4.5 zoning designation would allow for the
development of approximately 8 single family lots, as opposed to 11 single family
lots allowed under the SR-6 zoning designation.
E. Land Use
One single-family residence and an accessory building currently occupy the site.
These buildings will be razed and removed from the site prior to development.
Surrounding properties are zoned SR-4.5 and SR-6, Single Family Residential.
Housing in the general surrounding area consists of a mixture of (older and
newer) single family residences on both platted and unplatted lots. No
environmentally sensitive areas have been identified on the subject site.
F. History
The subject property was annexed to the City of Kent on February 28, 1995 as
part of the 218 acre Beck annexation area (Ordinance No. 3210).
The two parcels immediately south of the subject property are part of the t
Morgan's Place preliminary subdivision, which was approved by the Hearing
Examiner on September 17, 2003. This approval was contingent upon City
Council's approval of a rezone request for these properties from SR-4 5 to SR-6.
The City Council approved the rezone request on October 21, 2003. In
conjunction with this request for rezone, the applicant has filed a request for
Major Plat Alteration to incorporate the subject property into the Morgan's Place
Page 2 of 9 t
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-20034 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
approved preliminary subdivision. Additionally, on February 13, 2004, the
applicant received administrative approval for a minor plat alteration which
allowed the relocation of the Morgan's Place stormwater pond to the eastern
portion of the Anderson property.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Environmental Assessment
Amending the City's zoning map is considered a "non-project" action under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). As the lead agency, and pursuant to
WAC 197-11-600, the City determined that the Environmental Document, ENV-
2002-52 (R) originally issued on July 24, 2003 and revised on July 29, 2004 is
adequate for this proposal. That environmental document originally addressed
the impacts of a rezone and subdivision of the 35 lot Morgan's Place preliminary
subdivision. As the Anderson property is located adjacent to Morgan's Place,
and t he p roposed rezone a Iso s eeks a zoning change of S R-4.5 t o S R-6, the
original MDNS was revised on July 29, 2004 to include the Anderson property.
The City of Kent SEPA Responsible Official determined that the revised SEPA
document adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of this
proposed rezone and that the proposed rezone does not warrant additional
environmental review.
B. Significant Phvsical Features
Topography. Wetlands and Vegetation
The subject site is characterized by gently sloping topography with maximum on-
site slopes of approximately 7 percent.
According to the USDA Soil Conservation Service, on-site soils are classified as
Alderwood series. Deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, grasses as well as
wet soil plants have all been identified in various plant communities.
No wetlands, streams or geologic sensitive areas have been identified on the
subject site.
C. Significant Social Features
t1. Street System
The proposed development project is located within the East Hill area of
the City, with existing frontage to 98" Avenue SE. A new north-south
public street has been approved as part of the Morgan's Place preliminary
subdivision and, when constructed, will be available to serve the
Anderson property.
Page 3 of 9
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
2. Water Svstem
Water service is provided by the City of Kent and is currently available to
serve the subject site.
3. Sanitary Sewer System
The public sanitary sewer system will be extended and made available to
the site as part of the Morgan's Place development.
4. Stormwater System `
A stormwater system will be necessary to accommodate any subsequent
development. The developer will be required to construct a stormwater
treatment system in accordance with Kent Construction Standards in
conjunction with a development proposal.
III. CONSULTED DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
The following departments and agencies were advised of this application:
City Administration City Attorney
Director of Public Works Police Department
Parks & Recreation Department Fire Chief
KC Water Pollution Control City Clerk
KC Environmental Health U.S. Postmaster
Washington State Dept. of Ecology Puget Sound Energy
Washington State DOT KC Transit Division
Cities of Renton, Tukwila and Auburn KC Wastewater Treatment
Qwest
In addition to the above, all persons owning property which lies within 300 feet of the site
were notified of the application and of the public hearing. No public comments were
received pertaining to this application.
Comments have been incorporated in the staff report where applicable. ,
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW
A. Comprehensive Plan
In 1995, the Kent City Council adopted the Kent Comprehensive Plan, which
represented a complete revision to the City's 1977 comprehensive plan. The
1995 plan was prepared under the provisions of the Washington State Growth
Management Act. The Comprehensive Plan, through its goals and policies,
Page 4 of 9
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
presents a clear expression of the City's vision of growth for citizens, the
development community, and other public agencies. The p Ian i s used b y t he
Mayor, City Council, Land Use and Planning Board, Hearing Examiner, and City
departments to guide decisions on amendments to the City's zoning code and
other development regulations, which must be consistent with the plan, and also
guide decisions regarding the funding and location of capital improvement
projects.
LAND USE ELEMENT
The Land Use Element of the plan contains a Land Use Plan Map, which
designates the type and intensity of land uses throughout the city, as well as in
the entire potential annexation area. The Land Use Plan Map designates the
subject property as SF-6, Single Family Residential. The land use element also
contains goals and policies relating to the location, density, and design of future
development in the City and in the Potential Annexation Area.
Overall Goal: Encourage a future growth and development pattern which
implements the community's vision, protects environmentally
sensitive areas, and enhances the quality of life of all of Kent
residents
Goal LU-8: The City of Kent adopts a 20-year housing target of 7,500 new
dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King
County through an interlocal agreement on housing targets in
the unincorporated area within Kent's Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-8.1 Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to
accommodate both city and county housing targets within the
Potential Annexation Area. Average net residential densities
throughout the Potential Annexation Area should be at least four
units per acre in order to adequately support urban services.
Policy LU-8.3: Locate housing opportunities within close proximity to
employment, shopping, transit, and human and community
services.
Planning Services Comment
The proposed rezone is supported by relevant goals and policies contained
within the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed location
is served by existing urban services and is in convenient proximity to commercial
areas along 240"' Street SE and 104"' Avenue SE. Also the proposed rezone is
consistent with the Land Use Plan Map, which allows up to six dwelling units per
acre.
Page 5of9
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
HOUSING ELEMENT
The primary goal of the housing element is to meet the current and future need
for housing in the Kent area.
Overall Goal: Ensure opportunities for affordable housing and an appropriate
living environment for Kent Citizens.
Goal H-1: Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide range of
housing options throughout the community that are accessible to
community and human services, employment opportunities, and
transportation and by being sensitive to the environmental impacts
of the development.
Policy H-1.1: Ensure that community and human services, including, but not
limited to, fire, police, library facilities, medical services,
neighborhood shopping, child care, food banks, and recycling
facilities, are easily accessible to neighborhood residents.
Planning Services Comment.
The proposed rezone is supported by relevant goals and policies contained
within the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Appropriate services,
including, but not limited to, fire, police, library facilities, medical services,
neighborhood shopping, childcare, food banks, and recycling facilities, are easily
accessible from the subject site Further, upon site development, pedestrian
improvements will be required to serve the subject site.
NATURAL RESOURCES GOALS AND POLICIES-
Goal LU-20: Protect and enhance environmentally sensitive areas via the
adoption of the City regulations and programs which encourage
well-designed land use patterns such as clustering and planned
unit development. Use such land use patterns to concentrate
higher urban land use densities and intensity of uses in specified
areas in order to preserve natural features such as large wetlands,
streams, steep slopes, and forests.
Goal LU-22: Ensure that the City's environmental policies and regulations
comply with state and federal environmental protection regulations
regarding air and water quality, noise and wildlife and fisheries
resources and habitat protection. Demonstrate support for
environmental quality in land use plans, development regulations,
and site plan review to ensure that local land use management is
consistent with the City's overall natural resource goals.
Page 6of9
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
Planning Services Comment:
The proposed rezone is supported by relevant goals and policies contained
within the Natural Resources Section of the Comprehensive Plan. Subsequent
development of the site is subject to environmental review as well as applicable
codes pertaining to stormwater management, tree preservation and development
standards which address environmental quality and protection.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
1 Goal TR-1: Coordinate land use and transportation planning to meet the
needs of the City and the requirements of the Growth
Management Act.
Policy TR-1.2: Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent
with transportation projects to improve affected roadways.
Policy TR-1.5: Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans
so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are
compatible.
Planning Services Comment:
1 The Growth Management Act requires consistency between land use and
transportation planning. As noted, the comprehensive plan land use map
identifies the property as SF-6, Single Family 6 units per acre. In the July 29,
2004 revised MDNS, the Public Works Department has identified improvements
to the local transportation network necessary to accommodate the proposed
higher density These improvements will be required as part of any subsequent
subdivision approval.
B. Standards and Criteria for a Rezone Request
The following standards and criteria (Kent Zoning Code, Section 15.09.050) are
used by the Hearing Examiner and City Council to evaluate a request for a
rezone. A zoning map amendment shall only be granted if the City Council
Idetermines that the request is consistent with these standards and criteria.
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Services Comment
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map designates the subject property as
SF-6, Single Family 6 units per acre. Rezoning the site from SR-4.5 Single
Family Residential to SR-6 Single Family Residential will allow residential
development up to 6.05 units per acre, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 7 of 9
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
As previously discussed, the proposed rezone is also consistent with the
applicable goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be
compatible with development in the vicinity.
Planning Services Comment
The proposed rezone and subsequent single family residential development of
the site would be compatible and integrate well with the existing development in
the vicinity. Development in the immediate vicinity is a mix of platted subdivisions
and unplatted parcels developed with single family homes and zoned SR-4.5,
and SR-6, Single Family Residential. The subject property is located just north of
the 8-lot Haupt and Not Supra short plats both of which are currently under
construction and when complete, will connect to the subject site through
Morgan's Place via an extension of S 237th Street. Residential properties
associated with the Strawberry Lane subdivision and Swan Vista short plat,
located across 98th Avenue S are zoned SR-6 and developed with homes
similar to what would be allowed if this rezone is approved.
3. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in
the vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot
be mitigated.
Planning Services Comment
A rezone of the Anderson property to SR-6 Single Family Residential will not
generate additional trips onto the existing transportation system.
4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the
current zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone.
Planning Services Comment
The Anderson property was annexed to the City of Kent on February 28, 1995 as
part of the 218 acre Beck annexation (Ord. 3210) and is developed with three
single family residences.
In 1995 the City of Kent adopted its Comprehensive Plan which designated this
area as SF-6 Single Family Residential. Along with the Land Use Plan Map and
Policies, the plan also contains a target for the number of new households the
City must accommodate for the 20-year time horizon of the plan. The GMA also
states the City's development regulations must implement, and be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. This proposal, which seeks to establish higher
density single family development with smaller lot sizes while recognizing
significant environmental features, is consistent with the goals and policies of the ,
Comprehensive Plan.
Page 8 of 9
Staff Report
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
Upon annexation in 1995, zoning for the area was set at R 1-9.6 (equivalent to
the current SR-4.5 designation), which represented a reduction of the allowable
density of 6 units per acre associated with the previous King County zoning of R-
6. At the time, the 218-acre annexation area was generally characterized by
single family homes on lots in the 1 to 5 acre range. Records of deliberations
associated with the initial establishment of the R 1-9.6 zoning indicate that local
residents were concerned with preservation of the existing neighborhood
character and potential traffic impacts, primarily along 94t'Avenue SE, that would
likely arise with further development of the area. The reduced density associated
with the initial City of Kent zoning was established to address these concerns.
Since that time, significant medium density, single family development has taken
place within the immediate vicinity of the subject site. The density and character
of development allowed under the proposed SR-6, Single Family Residential
zoning designation would be generally consistent with surrounding residential
development.
Further, since establishment of the current SR-4.5 (R1-9.6) zoning, significant
improvements to sanitary sewer infrastructure in the immediate area were
completed. Specifically, the extension of sanitary sewer lines located north and
west of the subject site has made the further extension of sanitary sewers to this
site feasible. These extensions were necessary to provide for the higher
densities allowed under SR-6 zoning. Conditions of approval require the
owner/subdivider to improve the existing transportation network.
5 The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and
general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
Planning Services Comment
The proposed rezone is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
Subsequent development on the site will have to meet applicable codes and
regulations, including mitigation of anticipated transportation and environmental
impacts. Therefore, the rezone proposal will not adversely affect the health,
safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
V. CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the merits of this request and the Code criteria for granting a rezone, City
staff recommends APPROVAL of the Anderson Rezone request without conditions.
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
July 29, 2004
MG1ch:S:1PermitlPlanlrezone\2003\2033756-2003-4report.doc
Page 9 of 9
l
i
SUBDIVISION
01 LOCAilON
N N
s
�t
z00 � O l
E JAMES
8
E SMITH
J�
l
APPLICATION NAME: ANDERSON REZONE AND MORGAN'S PLACE PLAT ALTERATION
REQUEST: #RZ-20034 and#PTA-2003-5
VICINITY MAP
OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER
Theodore P. Hunter
Hearing Examiner
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
FILE NO: ANDERSON REZONE
#RZ-2003-4 KIVA#RPP4-2033756
APPLICANT: Debra Purcell-Cink
TLT Development
REQUEST: A zoning map amendment to rezone 1.96 acres
1 from SR-4.5 (Single-Family Residential, maximum
density 4.53 dwelling units per acre) to SR-6
(Single-Family Residential, maximum density 6.05
dwelling units per acre); and a plat alteration to
incorporate the rezoned property into the approved
Morgan's Place subdivision (SU-2000-6) and divide
it into six single-family residential lots and
associated improvements. The subject property is
located at 23519 98"' Avenue SE, Kent,
Washington and is identified as King County Tax
Parcel No. 1822059137
LOCATION: 23601, 23659 and 23519 98th Avenue S.
APPLICATION FILED: December 18, 2003
DETERMINATION OF
NONSIGNIFICANCE ISSUED: August 2, 2004 (REVISED)
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2004
RECOMMENDATION ISSUED: September 2, 2004
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVED with conditions
I STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Matt Gilbert, Planning Services
Gary Gill, Public Works
PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Andy Rykels, representing applicant
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 1 of 9
i
1
Other
Josephine Sturtz
Karl Hoel
Maria Scarcella
Mike Labrecque
Joe Singh
EXHIBITS: 1. Staff Report on Rezone Application dated
August 18, 2004, with the following attachments:
A. Rezone Application, with Response to Criteria,
Vicinity Map, Plat Map, Legal Description, and
Zoning Plan Amendment Map
B. Department Routing
C. Public Notice Documents, including Affidavits
and Mailing List
D. Notice of Completeness and Notice of
Application
E. Environmental Checklist
2. Staff Report on Plat Alteration Application dated
August 18, 2004, with the following attachments:
A. Plat Alteration Application, with
Resubmittal/Revision Form, Site Map, and
Project Description
B. Correspondence, including Letter from Andy
Rykels dated April 15, 2004
C. Department Routing
D. Public Notice Documents, including Affidavits
and Mailing List
E. Notice of Completeness and Notice of
Application
F. Revised Mitigated Determination of ■
Nonsignificance for Plat A Iteration and Rezone,
with Environmental Checklist
3. Aerial photograph of subject property and
surrounding properties
The Hearings Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions based upon the
testimony and exhibits admitted at the open record hearing:
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 2 of 9 '
FINDINGS
1. The Applicant requested a zoning map amendment to rezone 1.96 acres of land
("Anderson parcel") from SR-4.5 (Single-Family Residential, maximum density
4.53 dwelling units per acre) to SR-6 (Single-Family Residential, maximum
density 6.05 dwelling units per acre); and a plat alteration to incorporate the
rezoned property into the approved Morgan's Place subdivision (SU-2000-6) and
divide it into six single-family residential lots and associated improvements. The
subject property is located at 23519 98t' Avenue SE, Kent, Washington and is
identified as King County Tax Parcel No. 1822059137. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
pages 1-2,Exhibit 1,Attachment A.
2. The subject property and adjacent properties to the west and north are zoned
SR-4.5. Adjacent properties to the south (Morgan's Place subdivision) and east
are zoned SR-6. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2, Exhibit 3.
3. The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the subject
property and all surrounding properties as Single-Family, six units per acre (SF-
6)1. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2.
4. The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan contains the following goals and policies
that are relevant to the rezone application:
Goal LU-8: The City of Kent adopts a 20-year housing target of 7,500 new
dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King County through
' an interlocal agreement on housing targets in the unincorporated area within
Kent's Potential Annexation Area.
Policy LU-8.1: Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to
accommodate both city and county housing targets within the Potential
Annexation Area. Average net residential densities throughout the Potential
Annexation Area should be a t least four u nits per a cre in o rder to adequately
support urban services.
Policy LU-8.3: Locate housing opportunities within close proximity to
employment, shopping, transit, and human and community services.
Goal H-1: Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide range of housing
options throughout the community that are accessible to community and human
1 services, employment opportunities, and transportation and by being sensitive to
the environmental impacts of the development.
Please note that the Comprehensive Plan designation has an"SF"prefix, whereas the Zoning Code
designation has an "SR" prefix
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
' Page 3 of 9
Goal TRA: Coordinate land use and transportation planning to meet the needs of
the City and the requirements of the Growth Management Act.
Policy TR-1.2: Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent
with transportation projects to improve affected roadways.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 5-7. The proposed rezone supports these policies
in that the property is served by existing urban services and is close to
commercial areas and community services. Development of the property will
require mitigation of impacts to the transportation system. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
pages 5-7.
5. The subject property was annexed to the City of Kent on February 28, 1995
(Beck Annexation, Ord. 3210). Prior to annexation, the King County zoning
designation of the property was R-6 (Residential, six dwelling units per acre).
Upon annexation the City of Kent zoned the property R 1-9.6 (equivalent to
current SR-4.5 zoning designation). The reason for the "downzone" upon
annexation was to address concerns of residents regarding traffic and
neighborhood character. At the time of annexation the neighborhood was
characterized by single-family residential development on lots ranging from one
to five acres. Since that time, significant single-family residential development
has occurred, as well as improvements to the sanitary sewer infrastructure.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 8-9, Exhibit 3.
6 Surrounding development consists of single-family residences, some on large
lots and some within higher-density subdivisions, and plats in various stages of
completion. The Haupt and Supra short plats (16 lots total) are under
construction to the southwest of the subject property. The completed Strawberry
Lane and Swan Vista subdivisions are east of the subject property and contain
development that is similar to what is proposed. The approved but undeveloped
Morgan's Place subdivision is south of the subject property. Through the
requested rezone and plat alteration, the Applicant proposes to incorporate the
Anderson parcel into the Morgan's Place subdivision. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
pages 1, 2 & 8, Exhibit 3.
7. The Hearings Examiner granted preliminary plat approval of the Morgan's Place
subdivision on September 17, 2003. The preliminary plat approval authorized the
development of 35 single-family residential lots on 9.78 acres. Subsequent to
preliminary plat approval the Applicant acquired the Anderson parcel and on
February 13, 2 004 received approval of a minor plat alteration to relocate the
Morgan's Place stormwater pond onto the Anderson parcel. With the requested
major plat alteration the Applicant proposes to increase the total number of lots
within Morgan's Place from 35 to 46. Five of the additional lots would be located
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 4 of 9
in the area of the original stormwater pond and six of the additional lots would be
located on the Anderson parcel. The requested rezone would allow consistent lot
sizes throughout the plat.2 Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1-3, Exhibit 2,
Attachment A; Testimony of Mr. Gilbert; Testimony of Mr. Rykels.
8. Although the gross acreage of the Anderson parcel suggests a development
potential of 11 lots under the requested SR-6 zoning (1.96 acres x 6.05 dwelling
units per acre = 11.86), the actual development potential of the parcel is limited
by the Morgan's Place stormwater pond and protected wetland buffers. With the
requested rezone and plat alteration the Applicant proposes to divide the
Anderson parcel into six single-family residential lots. Denial of the rezone would
likely reduce the number of lots on the Anderson parcel to four, but would not
affect the additional lots proposed within the original plat boundaries. Those five
I additional lots could be developed In accordance with SR-6 standards.
Consequently, the impact of the rezone would be approximately two lots. Exhibit
1, Staff Report, page 2, Testimony of Mr. Gilbert.
9. With approval of the rezone and plat alteration, the gross density of the Morgan's
Place subdivision (including the Anderson parcel) would be 3.9 dwelling units per
acre. Testimony of Mr. Gilbert.
10. The internal street system of the Morgan's Place subdivision includes an
extension of South 237th Street, which would provide an east-west corridor
between 94th Avenue South and 98th Avenue South through the adjoining Haupt
and Supra short plats, and 97th Avenue South, a new internal north-south road.
With the plat alteration, the Applicant proposes to extend 97th Avenue South
through the Anderson property to the northern property line, and construct a half-
street connection to the west along the northern property line. The half-street
would connect to the future DM subdivision, which, if approved, would rovide a
second means of access to 94th Avenue South. The connections to 94 Avenue
South are significant because the intersection of 94th Avenue South and James
Street is controlled by a traffic signal, facilitating left turns onto James Street.3
The internal roads would be constructed to Residential Street standards and
would include sidewalks. Frontage improvements would be constructed on 98th
Avenue South. Walkway improvements would extend beyond the plat boundary.
Exhibit 2, Staff Report, pages 7, 14-17; Exhibit 2, Attachments A and B;
Testimony of Mr. Gilbert; Testimony of Mr. Rykels; Testimony of Mr. Gill.
Z SR-4 5 zoning regulations require a minimum lot size of 7,600 square feet. SR-6 zoning regulations
require a minimum lot size of 5,700 square feet. KCC 15.04.170.
1 3 The intersection of 98th Avenue South and James Street does not have a signal. See Testimony of Mr.
Gill.
Findings, Conclusions &Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 5 of 9
11. Both 98th Avenue South and 94th Avenue South are substandard under the City's
road standards. "Residential streets" such as 98th Avenue South should have a
right-of-way width of 50 feet, a street width of 28 feet, and planter strips,
sidewalks and other improvements; and "residential collector arterials" such as
94th Avenue South should have a right-of-way width of 56 feet, a street width of
36 feet, and planter strips, sidewalks and other improvements. Currently, 98th
Avenue South has a right-of-way width of approximately 40 feet and a street
width of 18 to 20 feet. The street accommodates two narrow lanes of traffic but
does not include the required improvements. Ninety-fourth Avenue South is in a
similar condition. It has a right-of-way width of approximately 30 feet and a street
width of 18 to 20 f eet. The a xtent o f required improvements varies. Exhibit 2,
Staff Report, pages 3-4.
12. Two of the issues raised in public comment on the rezone and plat alteration
applications were (1) traffic on 94th Avenue South and 98th Avenue South and (2)
the risk of accident at the intersection of 98th Avenue South and James Street. As
described in Finding of Fact No. 11, 94th Avenue South and 98th Avenue South
are s ubstandard. Traffic b acks u p o n 9 8th A venue S outh a t t he i ntersection of
James Street because there is no traffic signal. One resident requested that the
Applicant be required to install a traffic signal at the intersection. Testimony of
Ms. Sturtz, Mr. Hoel, Ms. Scarcella and Mr. Labrecque.
13. The City has no current plans to widen 94th Avenue South, 98th Avenue South or
James Street. However, the proposed road configuration, which was approved
as part of the original Morgan's Place subdivision, would provide traffic
alternatives by allowing residents to choose between 94th Avenue South and 98th
Avenue South. The 94 Avenue South option would allow for controlled left turns.
Emergency vehicle access in the area would be enhanced by having two street
connections. Testimony of Mr. Gill.
14. The City reviewed the three-year accident history of the intersection of James
Street and 98th Avenue South. The rate of reported accidents during that time
period (approximately 25) is not unusual. Testimony of Mr. Gill.
15. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City of Kent acted as
lead agency for review of environmental impacts caused by the proposal. The
City issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the original
Morgan's Place plat on July 24, 2003, and a Revised MDNS (RMDNS)
incorporating the plat alteration and rezone on August 2, 2004. The RMDNS
contains conditions addressing traffic mitigation and wetland protection. The
Applicant must either construct those improvements called for in a Traffic Impact
Study or pay a fair share towards the City's South 224th Street/South 228th Street
Corridor Project. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3, Exhibit 2, Attachment F.
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 6 of 9
16. With the conditions of the RMDNS, the traffic generated by the rezoned
Anderson parcel and altered subdivision would satisfy the City's concurrency
requirements. Testimony of Mr. Gill.
17. Notice of the open record hearing was posted on the property, mailed to
I properties within 300 feet of the site and published in King County Journal in
accordance with City ordinances. Exhibit 1, Attachment C.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hold an open record hearing on this quasi-
judicial rezone and to issue a written recommendation for final action to the Council,
pursuant to RCW 35A.63.170 and Chapters 2.32 and 15.09 of the Kent City Code.
Criteria for Review
Section 15.09.050(C) of the Kent Zoning Code sets forth the standards and criteria the
' Hearing Examiner must use to evaluate a request for a rezone. A request for a rezone
shall only be granted if:
' a. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
b. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be
compatible with development in the vicinity;
C. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the
vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be
mitigated;
d. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current
zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone;
e. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general
welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
Conclusions based on Findings:
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Findings
■ of Fact Nos. 4 and 5.
j 2. The proposed rezone is compatible with surrounding development.
Findings of Fact Nos. 5, 6 and 9.
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 7 of 9
3. The proposed rezone would not unduly burden the transportation system
in the vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which
cannot be mitigated. Although 94m Avenue South and 98th Avenue South are
substandard, the traffic generated by two additional lots would not unduly burden
the transportation system. The Morgan's Place subdivision will create an east-
west corridor between 94th Avenue South and 98th Avenue South. This corridor
should improve traffic conditions by allowing residents of 98th Avenue South the
option of accessing James Street through a signal-controlled intersection. The
increase in traffic caused by the additional lots was addressed in the RMDNS.
With the RMDNS conditions the City's transportation concurrency requirements
are satisfied. Findings of Fact Nos. 10-16.
4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the
current zoning district. The changed circumstances include an increase in
housing density in the vicinity of the site and improvements to sewer
infrastructure. Although 94th Avenue South and 98th Avenue South are still
substandard, frontage improvements will be required as properties fronting those
streets develop. There will be frontage improvements and off-site walkway
improvements associated with development of the Morgan's Place subdivision.
Findings of Fact Nos. 5, 10 & 11.
4. The proposed rezone would not adversely affect the health, safety and
general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent. Residents in the vicinity of
the site provided much comment on the potential impacts of the rezone.
However, the evidence was insufficient to conclude that there would be adverse
health and safety impacts associated with the proposed SR-6 zoning. The rezone
would allow only a slightly higher density of residential development. Whether the
zoning is SR-4.5 or SR-6, development of the property would add traffic to the
local street system. The additional quantity of impact caused by the SR-6 project
density can be mitigated through operation of development regulations and
conditions of subdivision approval. It must be emphasized in this regard that
environmental review was conducted pursuant to SEPA on both the rezone and
the plat alteration and no unmitigated adverse impacts were identified. Findings
of Fact Nos. 8, 12-16.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner
recommends that the application for a rezone of King County Tax Parcel No.
1822059137 from SR-4.5 to SR-6 be APPROVED.
i
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 8 of 9
r
DATED this 2nd day of September 2004.
1
+r
LeAnna C. Toweill
Deputy Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
ch:S.lPermit\Planlrezone1200312033756-20034findings doc
r
r
r
r
r
r
i
r
r
Findings, Conclusions & Decision
r Hearings Examiner for the City of Kent
Anderson Rezone
#RZ-200304/#RPP4-2033756
Page 9 of 9
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING LLC REAL ESTATE TRADE
AGREEMENT - AUTHORIZE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Public Works Director recommends authorizing
the Mayor to sign the Real Estate Trade Agreement between Meeker Street Law
Building LLC and the City of Kent upon the concurrence of the language therein by the
Public Works Director and the City Attorney.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Director's memorandum and real estate agreement
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount$
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember W moves, Councilmember P M seconds
to authorize the Mayor to sign the Real Estate Trade Agreement between the Meeker
Street Law Building LLC and the City of Kent upon the concurrence of the language
therein by the Public Works Director and the City Attorney.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION: �✓
Council Agenda
Item No. 7C
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Don E. Wickstrom, P.E. Public Works Director
Phone.253-856-5500
K E O T Fax: 253-856-6500
W A S H I N G T O N Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA.98032-5895
DATE: October 4,2004
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom,Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Real Estate Trade Agreement with Meeker Street Law Building LLC
MOTION. Recommend authorizing the Mayor to sign the Real Estate Trade Agreement
between Meeker Street Law Building LLC and the City of Kent upon the concurrence of
the language therein by the Public Works Director and the City Attorney.
SUMMARY:
Authorize the Mayor to sign the Real Estate Trade Agreement Between Meeker Street Law
Building LLC and the City of Kent.
BUDGET IMPACT: No Unbudgeted Fiscal/Personnel Impact
BACKGROUND:
The City will be widening 4`h Avenue from Harrison Street to Smith Street in con3unction with
its Snuth Street and 4d'Avenue intersection improvement project which is part of the package of
street improvements associated with the Kent Station development. To do so we need to acquire
a portion of the property owned by the Meeker Street Law Building LLC. Their property lies in
the northeast quadrant of the 4`h Avenue and Harrison Street intersection and is utilized as spill
over parking for their Meeker Street Law building complex. Their parking lot abuts the City's
municipal parking lot to the north and to the east. As shown in the attachment the city needs a
strip land there from approximately 15 feet in width and totaling 1,760 square feet. In lieu of
selling the property to the City the Meeker Street Law Building LLC wants to trade it for the
1 equivalent square footage of property off the City's easterly abutting parking lot. Further in lieu
of reconstructing and re stripping both parking lots they are agreeable to granting temporary
easement over the city property deeded to them for continued use of the parking lots as presently
exist provided the city grants them temporary use of 13 parking stall with the City's parking lot.
Said temporary easement and temporary use of parking stalls would expire upon the city
constructing and re stripping their lot to provide the 13 lost stalls or upon the redevelopment of
their property to some use other then a parking lot. Both the Public Works Department and City
Administration concurs with the proposed trade and recommend the Council approve same.
Mayor White and Kent City Council 1
We have taken the liberty of placing this item on the October 5 h Council meeting agenda. We
did so in order to expedite the construction of the improvements. As it is before any construction
can start,due to the fact that federal monies are involved in this project we must secure federal
concurrence that all right of ways have been obtained. Once the feds have certified same only
then will they authorize us to proceed to construction. Since conversion of the overhead utilities
to underground must be accomplished first prior to the road work and with PSE ready to go to
work we need the feds to certify the right of way as soon as possible not to delay PSE from
starting their work.
Mayor White and Kent City Council 2
1 ,
REAL ESTATE TRADE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING LLC AND THE CITY OF KENT
1 This contract controls the terms of the trade of real property.
This Agreement is entered into by the CITY OF KENT,a Washington municipal corporation,
("City"), and Meeker Street Law Building LLC,a Washington limited liability company("Meeker
Law Building"), for the trade of real property under threat of condemnation
1. PROPERTY. Both parcels of real property being traded are used for parking lot purposes
and contain no structures The City is currently the owner of the real property described in Exhibit A
attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Meeker Law Building is currently the owner of
the real property described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated by this reference
2. PURPOSE OF TRADE. The City will be constructing transportation improvements along
Fourth Avenue South and needs the real property owned by Meeker Law Building for the
construction of those improvements To accommodate these improvements,the City will trade to
Meeker Street Law Building the real property described in Exhibit A along with a reciprocal parking
easement in exchange for Meeker Law Building trading to the City the real property described in
Exhibit B along with a temporary construction easement
3. CONSIDERATION. The real property in Exhibits A and B along with the respective
I easements are of equal value and no other consideration will exchange hands other than the real
property itself and the promises contained herein.
4. CONTINGENCIES. This Agreement is contingent upon
(a) Acceptance of its terms by the Kent City Council
1 (b) Review and approval by the City of the title report on the real property in Exhibit B
within fifteen(15)days of mutual acceptance
(c) Review and approval by Meeker Law Building of the title report on the real property
in Exhibit A within fifteen(15)days of mutual acceptance
(d) Should any of the contingencies of Section 4 not be met prior to closing,then this
agreement shall terminate
REAL ESTATE TRADE AGREEMENT—Page 1 of 5
(between City ofKent and Meeker Law Budding) (August 24,2004)
i
5. EASEMENTS. The following easements will be executed at Closing.
(a) Meeker Law Building currently uses the real property in Exhibit B for parking lot
purposes, including thirteen(13)parking stalls The real property in Exhibit A that Meeker Law
Building will be receiving from the City is currently used for parking lot purposes,but does not
contain thirteen(13)parking stalls As part of the consideration for thus Agreement,the City will
grant Meeker Law Building an easement,the form of which is attached as Exhibit C,to access and
use thirteen(13)parking stalls owned by the City adjacent to the area in Exhibit A Meeker Law
Building will also grant the City an easement, included in Exhibit C, to access and use the area
within Exhibit A for parking lot purposes
(b) During the construction of the transportation improvements the City needs to be able
to use,as a temporary construction site,aportion of Meekerlaw Building's real property adjacent to
the area in Exhibit B. As part of the consideration for this Agreement,Meeker Law Building has
agreed to grant the City a Temporary Construction Easement, the form of which is attached as
Exhibit D
6. CONVEYANCE AND CONDITION OF TITLE. The title to the real property in Exhibit
B shall be conveyed by Meeker Law Building to the City at closing by Statutory Warranty Deed,free
and clear of all hens, encumbrances or defects except those described in Paragraph 7 below The
title to the real property in Exhibit A shall be conveyed by the City to Meeker Law Building at
closing by Statutory Warranty Deed,free and clear of all liens,encumbrances or defects except those
described in Paragraph 7 below
7. TITLE INSURANCE.
a) At the time of closing,Meeker Law Building shall cause Pacific Northwest Title,116
Washington Ave North,Kent,Washington 98032-0864,at MeekerLaw Buildng's expense,to issue
a standard form owner's policy of title insurance to the City in an amount of$5000 00 for the real
property in Exhibit%and insuring the real property being conveyed byMeeker Law Building free of
encumbrances and defects For purposes of this Agreement, the following shall not be deemed
encumbrances or defects- rights reserved and federal patents or state deeds, building or use
restrictions consistent with current zoning,and utility and road easements of record If title cannot
be made so insurable prior to the Closing date, unless, the City elects to waive such defects or
encumbrances,tins Agreement shall terminate The City shall have no right to specific performance
or damages as a consequence of Meeker Law Building's inability to provide insurable title
b) At the time of closing,the City shall cause Pacific Northwest Title, 116 Washington
Ave North,Kent,Washington 98032-0864,at the City's expense,to issue a standard form owner's
policy of title insurance to Meeker Law Building in an amount of$5000 00 for the real property in
Exhibit A, and insuring the real property being conveyed by the City free of encumbrances and
defects. For purposes of this Agreement, the following shall not be deemed encumbrances or
defects•rights reserved and federal patents or state deeds,building or use restrictions consistent with
current zoning,and utility and road easements ofrecord Iftitle cannot be made so insurable prior to
REAL ESTATE TRADE AGREEMENT—Page 2 of 5
(between City ofKent and Meeker Law Building) (August 24,2004)
the Closing date,unless, Meeker Law Building elects to waive such defects or encumbrances,this
Agreement shall terminate. Meeker Law Building shall have no right to specific performance or
damages as a consequence of the City's inability to provide insurable title.
8. CLOSING COSTS AND PRO-RATIONS. The cost of escrow shall be paid by the City,
except those fees which are expressly limited by Federal Regulation. Taxes for the current year,
rents, interest, water and other utility charges, if any, shall be pro-rated as of the date of closing
unless otherwise agreed
9. CLOSING DATE. With the understanding that time is of the essence for this Agreement,
this trade shall be closed by October 29, 2004, which shall also be the termination date of this
agreement unless said closing date is extended to writing bymutual agreement ofthe parties. When
notified, the City and Meeker Law Building will deposit, without delay, in escrow with Pacific
Northwest Title,116 Washington Avenue North,Kent,Washington 98032-0864,all instruments and
momes required to complete the transaction to accordance with this Agreement Closing,for the
purpose of this Agreement,is defined as the date that all documents are executed and those that are
to be recorded are recorded
10. POSSESSION. Each party shall be entitled to possession upon Closing
11. MEEKER LAW BUILDING'S REPRESENTATIONS. Meeker IawBuildingrepresents:
(a) that he has no knowledge or notice from any governmental agency of any violation of
laws relating to the real property in Exhibit B; and
(b) that the real property in Exhibit B is not encumbered by any leases
12. THE CITY'S REPRESENTATIONS. The City represents
(a) that it will maintain the real property in Exhibit A in its present or better condition
until the date of closing;
(b) that it has no knowledge or notice from any governmental agency of any violation of
laws relating to the real property in Exhibit A,and
(c) that the real property in Exhibit A is not encumbered by any leases
13. PROPERTY ACCEPTED IN "AS IS" CONDITION. The City acknowledges that it
accepts the property described in Exhibit B "as is" and that it has received no representations or
warranties from Meeker Law Building as to the condition of this property other than that contained
in Section I 1 of this Agreement Meeker Law Building acknowledges that it accepts the property
described in Exhibit A"as is"and that it has received no representations or warranties from the City
as to the condition of this property other than that contained in Section 12 of this Agreement
REAL ESTATE TRADE AGREEMENT—Page 3 of 5
(between Cuy ojKent and Meeker Law BuildmW (4ugw124, 2004)
14. DEFAULT AND ATTORNEYS FEES.
(a) DEFAULT. If either party defaults hereunder, the other party shall have the rights ,
and remedies available at law or in equity.
(b) ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS ,in-In the
event of litigation to enforce any of the terms or provisions herem,each party shall pay all its own
costs and attorney's fees
15. NON-MERGER. The terms, conditions, and provisions of this Agreement shall not be
deemed merged into the deed, and shall survive the Closing and continue in full force and effect
16. NOTICES. All notices required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and
shall be sent U S.certified mail,return receipt requested,or by facsimile transmission addressed as
set forth below
(a) All notices to be given to City shall be addressed as follows.
Don Wtckstrom,Director
Public Works Department
220 4th Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032-5895
Fax No (253)856-6500
(b) All notices to be given to Meeker Law Building shall be addressed as follows
Bruce Anderson i
Anderson&Associates
P O Box 3821
Bellevue,WA 98009-3821
Fax No (425)646-8206
Either party may,by written notice to the other,designate such other address for the giving of
notices as being necessary All notices shall be deemed given on the day such notice is personally
served,or on the date of the facsimile transmission,or on the third day following the day such notice
is mailed in accordance vnth this paragraph.
17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This agreement,including all incorporated exhibits,conshtates
the full understanding between Meeker Law Building and the City There have been no verbal or
other agreements that modify this Agreement ,
REAL ESTATE TRADE AGREEMENT—Page 4 of 5
(between City of Kent and Meeker Law Building) (August 24,2004)
1
18. BINDING EFFECT. Tlus Agreement shall be binding upon parties hereto and their
respective hens, successors and assigns.
19. DATE OF MUTUAL ACCEPTANCE. For the purposes of this Agreement,the date of
mutual acceptance of this Agreement shall be the last date on which the parties to tlus Agreement
have executed this Agreement as mdicated below.
20. ASSIGNMENT. Neitherpartymayassign this Agreementor theirnghts hereunder without
the other party's prior written consent.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date set
forth below
CITY: MEEKER LAW BUILDING:
CITY OF KENT
t By By.
Print Name J1M WHITE Print Name.
Its- Mayor Its
Dated: Dated
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By-
Kent Law Department
pV>,"LL&sopmFuesWMTra&Ap B-2494ac
1
j
REAL ESTATE TRADE AGREEMENT—Page 5 of 5
(between City of Kent and Meeker Law Butldu"g) (Augmt 14,2004)
EXHIBIT `A'
THE WEST 16 00 FEET OF LOT 18, BLOCK 7, YESLER'S FIRST ADDITION i
TO THE TOWN OF KENT,ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 64, IN KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4
EAST, W M.
CONTAINING 1,760 SQUARE FEET.
Gam', 0
Av
•'�rf STEoy •-`
�qt LAl'ti�
i
1
1
' EXHIBIT'B'
' RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION TO THE CITY OF KENT
' THAT PORTION OF LOT 20, BLOCK 7 OF YESLER'S FIRST ADDITION M
KENT AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 64 RECORDS OF
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
' NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4
EAST, W M DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
' COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF N. FOURTH AVE
AND HARRISON ST, THENCE N0104226"E,ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF
SAID N. FOURTH AVE, 30.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION
OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 7, THENCE N89°41'38•E, ALONGTHE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 7 AND ITS WESTERLY PROLONGATION,
71.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND, THENCE N44017'58W 3191 FEET THENCE
' N0104226°E 87.03 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20; THENCE
S89041'37'W, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 14 03 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF
SAID N. FOURTH AVE AS CREATED BY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE 708685-
1 1, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE S01°42'26•W, ALONG SAID EAST
LINE, 100 00 FEET, THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST LINE
S44017'58"E 13.89 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 7, THENCE
' N89041'38"E, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 27 00 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
' CONTAINING 1,756 SQUARE FEET
KNO
0 wasy�yc ,
• of
' '1L LAp9
.� I I-I •zco�
zoo y�-
EXHIBIT "C" '
AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO. '
City of Kent
Attn• Property Manager
220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, Washington 98032 ,
Grantor: City of Kent,a Washington municipal corporation '
Grantee : Meeker Street Law Building LLC,a Washington limited liability company
Abbreviated Legal Description: Pin Of Section 24 T22N R4E '
Additional Legal Description: See Exhibit l and Exhibit 2 attached
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No. 982570-0535 and 982570-0520
RECIPROCAL PARKING EASEMENT '
THIS INSTRUMENT made this day of , 2004, by and between '
the CITY OF KENT, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington (the "City'l and the
MEEKER STREET LAW BUELDING LLC, a limited liability company of the State of
Washington(the"Meeker Law Building'] '
1. Puu ose The City owns the real property legally described in Exlubit 1,wluch is
incorporated by this reference, and used as a parking lot. Meeker haw Building owns the real '
property legally described in Exhibit 2, which is incorporated by thus reference, and which is
used as a parking lot. The purpose of this Reciprocal Parking Easement is to grant the City and
the Meeker Law Building the right to use portions of the parking lots on the other party's real ,
property and to establish an allocation of parking stalls,
2. Grant to City. The Meeker Law Building, for and in consideration of mutual '
benefits derived and/or other valuable consideration,receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by
the Meeker Law Building, does grant to the City, its successors and/or assigns, an easement for
public use of and access to the parking lot area described in Exhibit 2. The Meeker Law '
RECIPROCAL PARKING EASEMENT-Page 1 of 4
(between Meeker Street Law Building and City of Kent) (September 16,2004) ,
Building reserves the right to also use the easement area, so long as that use does not
' unreasonably interfere with the use of the City.
3. Grant to Meeker Law BuiIdms. The City, for and in consideration of mutual
benefits derived and/or other valuable consideration,receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by
City, does grant to the Meeker Law Building, its successors and/or assigns, an easement for use
of and access to thirteen parking stalls within the area described in Exhibit 1 and ideatifie d in
Exhibit 3. The City shall retain the right to use the easement area, so long as that use does not
unreasonably interfere with the use of the Meeker Law Building.
' 4. Maintenance The City shall maintain the parking lot described in Exhibit 1,with
the exception that Meeker Law Building may paint signage on the thirteen stalls referenced in
section 3. above The Meeker Law Building shall maintain the parking lot described in Exhibit
2.
5. Terms of Use. The City and Meeker Law Building shall at all times exercise them
rights under this Reciprocal Parking Easement in accordance with the requirements of all
applicable statutes, orders, rules and regulations of any public authority having junsdictim The
City and Meeker Law Building accept the easement areas in their present physical condition, as
is.
6 Indemnification Meeker Law Bwldmg does hereby release, indemnify and
promise to defend and save harmless City from and against any and all liability, loss,damage,
expense actions and claims, including costs and reasonable attorney's fees incurred by City in
connection therewith, ansing directly or indirectly on account of or out of the negligent exercise
by the Meeker Law Building, its servants, agents, employees, and contractors of the nghts
granted in this Reciprocal Parking Easement The City does hereby release, indemnify and
Promise to defend and save harmless Meeker Law Building from and against any and all
liability, loss,damage, expense actions and claims,including costs and reasonable attorneys fees
incurred by Meeker Law Building in connection therewith, ansing directly or induectly on
account of or out of the negligent exercise by City, its servants, agents, employers and
' contractors of the rights granted in tlus Reciprocal Parking Easement.
7. Run with the Land. This Reciprocal Easement shall be a covenant running with
the land forever and shall be binding on the City and Meeker Law Building,their successors and
assigns. Provided, however, that the parties agree to execute and record with King County a
Release of this Reciprocal Parking Easement under the following circumstances:
' a) if and when the City stripes Meeker Law Building's real property descnbe d in
Exhibit 2 so that it includes thirteen parking stalls and Meeker Law BuAdmg is
' given access to those thirteen parking stall through either an access easement or
an access route on Meeker Law Building's real property approved by the City,or
RECIPROCAL PARKING EASEMENT-Page 2 of 4
(between Meeker Street Law Building and Cuy of Keno (September 16,2M)
b) if and when Meeker Law Building is in the process of re-developing the real ,
property described in Exhibit 2 to a use other than a parking lot.
MEEKER STREET LAW BUIDING,LLC CITY OF KENT: '
By: By
Print Name: Print Name. Jim White '
Its• Its: Mayor
Date: Date:
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) '
):ss.
COUNTY OF KNG )
I hereby certify that on the day of ,2004, I know or have
satisfactory evidence that is the person who appeared before me,and
said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he is authorized to '
execute the instrument on behalf of the MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING LLC., a
Washington limited habihty company, as its , and such execution to
be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned m the foregoing '
instrument.
-Notary SWA&W p,ivh,e AuBox- i
IN WTINESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year Butt
above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC,m and for the State of Washington ,
residing at
My appomtment expires '
RECIPROCAL PARKJKG EASEMENT-Page 3 of 4
(between Meeker Sired Law Building and City of Kent) (September 16,2004) '
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
}.ss.
COUNTY OFKING )
' I hereby certify that on the day of , 2004, I know or have
satisfactory evidence that JIM WHITE is the person who appeared before me, and said person
' acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the
instrument on behalf of the CITY OF KENT as its Mayor,and such execution to be the free and
voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned m the foregoing instrument
-Notary Saal Alun.tpptar A'Yhm I5u Bax-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year
first above Ymnen
NOTARY PUBLIC,in and for the State of Wasbmgton
rzsidhng at
My appointment expues
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING,LLC.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
' Kent Law Departrnent
RECIPROCAL PARKING EASEMENT-Page 4 of 4
(between Meeker Street Law Budding and City ofK,,V (September l6,2004)
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT 1 ,
NEW LEGAL DESCRIPTON '
T.L.982570-0520
LOTS 18, 17 AND 18, EXCEPT THE WEST 16.00 FEET THEREOF, BLOCK 7,
YESLER'S FIRST ADDITION TO THE TOWN OF KENT, ACCORDING TO THE
PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 64, IN KING
COUNTY, WASHINGTON; SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF '
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH,
RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.
CONTAINING 18,032 SQUARE FEET OR 0.41 ACRES. ,
to �..
rMurs l t-t S T. *`{
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT 2
THE WEST 16.00 FEET OF LOT 18,BLOCK 7,YESLER'S FIRST ADDITION
TO THE TOWN OF KENT,ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 641 IN KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24,TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4
EAST, W.M.
CONTAINING 1,760 SQUARE FEET.
d
l
qt LAt��
cxrlRtf
-. . V SIM • •
•
114 } i i • r
'4 J
,
' I ir.'I ����.t 6i• :n.rr..E J' I I f.n.. 117 '�, I
cob
_ ejo
• I rr�-w - _ 1 II I
ell
itx
J JJ v
EXHIBIT D
AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO'
City of Kent
220 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Attn Property Management
' Reference Number of Related Document
Grantor(s)• MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING,LLC.
' Grantee(s): CITY OF KENT,a Washington municipal corporation
Abbreviated Legal Description: Ptn Of Sec 24 T22N R4E
' Additional Legal Descnption is on Page_of Document
Assessor's Parcel No : 982570-0535
Project Name- Downtown ITS Project-Smith Street and 4's Avenue
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
(Limited Liability Company)
THIS AGREEMENT made this day of , 2004, by and between
MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING,LLC.,a Washington limited liability company hereinafter
called "Grantors" and CITY OF KENT, municipal corporation of King County, Washngton,
hereinafter called"Grantee"
WNWESSETH That Grantor(s),for and in consideration of valuable consideration,grant,
bargain, sell, convey, and confirm unto the Grantee, its successors or assigns, a Temporary
Construction Easement to be used only during the installation of a sidewalk and appurtenances
behind the sidewalk through and across the following described property situated in King County,
Washington(the"Easement Area')'
See Attachment"A"incorporated herein
' The Temporary Construction Easement shall remain in force for one (1) year after
construction of the sidewalk and the appurtenances behind the sidewalk have begun.
Temporary Construction Easement—Page t of 3 (September 16,2004)
(between Meeker Street Law Building,LLC,and City ojKent)
The Grantee shall have the right,without prior institution of any suit or proceeding at law,at
such times as may be necessary to enter upon the Easement Area for the purpose of construction of
the sidewalk and appurtenances behind the sidewalk or making any connections therewith,without
incurring any legal obligation or liability therefore,provided that the constructing of the sidewalk
and appurtenances shall be accomplished in such a manner that the existing improvements and land
contours shall not be disturbed or destroyed or in the event that they are disturbed or destroyed,they
will be replaced in as good a condition as they were immediately before the property was entered
upon by the Grantee Grantee also agrees that it shall not erect a fence between the Easement Area
and the remainder of Grantor's real property
This Temporary Construction Easement shall be a covenant running with the land and shall
be binding on the Grantor's successors,heirs,and assigns for one(1) year after construction of the
sidewalk or appurtenances has begun
MEMBER ,MEMBER
STATE OF WASFIINGTON )
)ss. ,
COUNTY OF KING }
On this day of ,2004,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public '
in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared
a Member of MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING, LLC, a
Washington limited liability company, the company that executed the foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said company,and for
the uses and purposes therein mentioned,and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute the
said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation ,
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written
Print Name
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
residing at
My Commission Expires
Temporary Construction Easement-Page 2of 3 (September lb,2DO4)
(between Meeker Street Law Building,LLC, and City of Kent) ,
! STATE OF WASHINGTON }
)ss
! COUNTY OF KING )
On this day of ,2004,before me,the undersigned,allotaryPubhc
! in and for the State of Waslungton, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared
a Member of MEEKER STREET LAW BUILDING, LLC., a
Washington Imuted liability company, the company that executed the foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said company,and for
the uses and purposes therein mentioned,and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute the
said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation.
! WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written
! Print Name
Notary Public in and for the State of Washmgton
residing at
My Commission Expires
EP�Cn4TnM9WpmF,l3w87sTaTCDwWw t dw
E
E
E
E
E
1
!
Temporary Construction Easement—Page 3of 3 (September 16 2004)
! (between Meeker Street Law Building,LLC, and City of Kent)
E'
r EXHIBIT D
ATTACHMENT "A" '
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ,
THAT PORTION OF LOT 20, BLOCK 7 OF YESLER'S FIRSTADDITION TO t
KENT AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 64 RECORDS OF
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE ,
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE
EAST, W M. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF N. FOURTH AVE
AND HARRISON ST, THENCE N0104226"E,ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF
SAID N. FOURTH AVE 30 00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF '
THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 7;THENCE N89141'38'E, ALONG THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 7 AND ITS WESTERLY PROLONGATION,
71.00 FEET, THENCE N44017'58'W 24.96 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND: THENCE
N01'42'26"E 92.03 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20:THENCE
S89041'37'W,ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 5.00 FEET, THENCE S0104226W
87.03 FEET, THENCE S44017'58"E 6.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 448 SQUARE FEET. ,
Nrasy�
o
%e
C s �o.• •lw
•�lSTE¢•�¢ ,
LAB
1
i
1
1
1
t
' Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5, 2004
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CONTRACT— AUTHORIZE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: On July 29, 2004, the City's Lodging Tax Advisory
Board unanimously recommended that the City enter into a one-year, $18,000 contract
for tourism services with the Kent Chamber of Commerce. With this funds, the Kent
Chamber would maintain and modify the Kent hotels web site, mail marketing
materials to interested parties, staff the 1-800 Kent Lodging phone number, partner with
Seattle Southside Visitor Services and research how Kent can better position itself to
capture tourism dollars, tourism opportunities and additional hotel/motel stays.
Partnering between the Southside Visitors Center and the Kent Chamber is consistent
with the City's tourism strategy to increase occupancy in Kent hotels and motels.
3. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Background information on Kent Chamber tourism
contracts; Exhibit 2: Proposed contract with Kent Chamber
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee (2-1)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
t 5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue?
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount $
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
The City of Kent estimates that it will collect about$121,000 in lodging tax revenues in 2005 In
addition, at the end of 2004 the City will have a fund balance and unallocated funds of over$65,000 in
lodging tax revenues Consequently, it is estimated that the City will have more than enough resources
to fund this contract and the SSVS contract.
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember �l moves, Councilmember seconds
to approve a one-year, $18,000 contract for tourism services with the Kent Chamber of
Commerce.
DISCUSSION:
' ACTION: M � W
Council Agenda
Item No. 7D
1 Item No.
' Exhibit 1
Background Information on Other City-Chamber Contracts
and Past City of Kent—Kent Chamber contracts
At the request of the Kent hotel industry, in 1998 the Kent City Council authorized a 1% excise tax
on hotel and motel room stays. Per state law, cities can use this revenue to promote tourism and
increased lodging stays in their communities.
In 2000,the City contracted with the Kent Chamber for the first time using lodging tax dollars. The
contract in 2000 was for$64,000 for start-up development, and included conducting a survey of
government travel planners, conducting personal interviews with Kent hoteliers, creating a contact
list for Washington State and federal government markets, and working on start-up design for the
website and for a Kent hotels brochure.
iSince 2001, contracts with the Kent Lodging Association have included funds for web site hosting,
consulting, content administration and management system and search engine marketing, for
printing and distribution of the Kent hotels brochure, for operations of the 1-800 number, for
advertising in various tourism publications, and for staffing. Decreasing contract amounts reflect a
decrease in advertising and discontinuation of or reduced printing of the Kent hotels brochure. The
2005 contract would not include Kent hotels brochure printing or advertising.
Past City of Kent contract amounts with the Kent Chamber for tourism services•
1 2000 $64,000 2003 $53,910
2001 $64,625 2004 $31,670
2002 $57,530 2005 $18,000 (proposed)
The Kent Chamber of Commerce is not a visitor or tourism bureau, and visitor services are not part
of their usual mission. The Kent Chamber, however, is the front door of the Kent community.
1 Consequently, the Kent Chamber is always willing to assist a tourist or business traveler even though
it is not a revenue generating activity and it is staff and time intensive. By contracting with the City
of Kent using lodging tax dollars, the Chamber is able to represent all Kent hotels and tourist
Iattractions, not just those that are Chamber members.
The City of Burien, SeaTac and Tukwila each give $20,000 to the Southwest King County Chamber
of Commerce (SKCCC). For Burien, 100% of the money is from the general fund and the Chamber
puts on a community event and participates in a downtown committee. For SeaTac, 50% of the
money is from the general fund and 50% from lodging tax dollars, and the Chamber does referrals to
Seattle Southside Visitor Services and staffs an economic development committee. For Tukwila,
100 percent of the money is from lodging tax dollars and the Chamber does referrals to Seattle
Southside Visitor Services.
Exhibit 2
1 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
THIS CONTRACT is made by and between the CITY OF KENT,a Washington municipal
corporation (hereinafter the "City"), and KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, a Washington
non-profit corporation(hereinafter the "Kent Chamber").
iRECITALS
1. It is the City's intent to increase occupancy at Kent hotels and motels, to promote
Kent as a site for corporate meetings and events,and to promote tourism opportunities in Kent. The
City desires that Kent Chamber perform certain services to assist the City in this program.
NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein,it is agreed by
and between the parties as follows:
tI. DESCRIPTION OF WORK
1 1.1 Kent Chamber shall perform the work described in the Scope of Services attached
hereto as Exhibit "A"and incorporated herein by this reference.
II. PAYMENT
2.1 The City shall pay Kent Chamber an amount not to exceed $18,000.00 during the
iduration of this Contract(January 1, 2005 through December 31,2005) for the services performed
as set forth in Exhibit"A." This is the maximum amount to be paid for the services contemplated in
Section I of this Contract, and such amount shall not be exceeded without prior written authorization
of the City in the form of a negotiated and executed Addendum to this Contract.
2.2 The payment of funds to the Kent Chamber as established in this Contract shall be
made on or following the dates set forth below following appropriate documentation of the work
performed pursuant to the Scope of Services set forth in Exhibit"A"as follows:
Payment of$4,500.00 on March 31, 2005; June 30,2005; September 30,2005;and
December 31, 2005
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY
OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE- 1 (September 29,2004)
2.3 The City, or its authorized representative, shall have the authority to inspect, audit,
and copy on reasonable notice and from time to time any records of Kent Chamber regarding its t
billings,payments,or work under this Contract to verify matching funds and expenditures made for
the work performed herein.
2.4 In the event the Scope of Services is modified or changed so that more or less work or
time is required by Kent Chamber, 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.
III. DURATION OF WORK
The City and Kent Chamber agree that work will begin on the services described in Section I
herein on upon execution of this Contract and shall continue until December 31,2004; unless this
Contract is earlier terminated as provided for herein.
IV. TERMINATION
4.1 Funding Limited. If the City receives reimbursement by any federal, state,or other
source for the services described in Section I herein, and that funding is withdrawn, reduced, or ,
limited in any way,the City may summarily terminate this Contract. Termination shall be effective
ten (10) calendar days after Kent Chamber's receipt of the written notice by certified mail In the
event of termination, the City shall pay for all services performed by Kent Chamber to the effective
date of termination, as described in a final report submitted to the City. After termination, the City ,
may copy all records and data within Kent Chamber's possession pertaining to the services described
in Section I,which may be used by the City without restriction and without liability or legal exposure
to Kent Chamber.
4.2 Termination for Failure to Prosecute Work or to Complete Work Satisfactorily. If
Kent Chamber 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 Contract,then
the City may, by written notice to Kent Chamber, give notice of its intention to terminate the Kent
Chamber's right to proceed with the work. On such notice, Kent Chamber shall have ten (10)
calendar days to cure,to the satisfaction of the City or its representative,or the City shall send Kent
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY
OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-2 (September29,2004)
Chamber a written termination letter which shall be effective upon Kent Chamber's receipt of the
' written notice by certified mail or personal delivery.
4.3 Rights Upon Termination. In the event of termination, the City shall pay for all
services performed by Kent Chamber 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 Kent Chamber's possession pertaining to this project which may be used by the City without
restriction.
V. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES
The parties intend that an i ndependent c ontractor-employer r elationship w ill b e
created by this Contract. No agent, employee, representative, or sub-contractor of Kent Chamber
shall be or shall be deemed to be the employee, agent,representative, or sub-contractor of the City.
Kent Chamber will control and direct the performance and details of its services. The City is
interested only in the results obtained under this Contract. 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-contractor of
1 Kent Chamber. Kent Chamber will be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of
Kent Chamber's agents,employees,representatives, and sub-contractors during the performance of
this Contract. The City may,during the term of this Contract,engage other independent contractors
to perform the same or similar work that Kent Chamber performs hereunder.
1 VI. 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 comply with City Administrative Policy 1.2, Minority and Women
Contractors, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit`B."
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY
OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-3 (September 29.2004)
1
1
VII. INDEMNIFICATION
Kent Chamber 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 Kent Chamber's performance
of this Contract,except for that portion of the injuries and damages caused by the City's negligence.
The City's inspection or acceptance of any of Kent Chamber'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 Kent Chamber and
the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Kent Chamber's liability
hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Kent Chamber's negligence.
TT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE
INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE KENT CHAMBER'S WAIVER
OF IMMUNITY 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.
VIII. INSURANCE
Kent Chamber shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Contract,insurance against
claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may anse from or in connection with the
performance of the services hereunder by Kent Chamber,its agents,representatives,employees,or
sub-contractors. Before beginning work on the project described in this Contract, Kent Chamber
shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing:
1. Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no
less than$1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for personal
injury, bodily injury and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be limited to: blanket
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY
OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-4 (September 29,2004)
1
contractual; products/completed operations/broad form property damage; explosion, collapse and
iunderground(XCL)) if applicable; and employer's liability; and
2. 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 Kent
Chamber.
The City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability
insurance policy,with respect to the services performed by or on behalf of Kent Chamber 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.
Kent Chamber'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.
Kent Chamber'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.
f
f
f
f
f
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY
OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-5 (September 29,2004)
f
IX. ENTIRE AGREEMENT ,
The written provisions and terms of this Contract,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 whatsoever,this Contract or the Contract documents. The entire agreement between the
parties with respect to the subject matter hereunder is contained in this Contract and any Exhibits
attached hereto. All of the above documents are hereby made a part of this Contract and form the
Contract documents as fully as if the same were set forth herein.
X. MODIFICATION
No waiver, alteration, or modification of any of the provisions of this Contract shall be
binding unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the City and Kent
Chamber.
XI. ASSIGNMENT
Any assignment of this Contract by Kent Chamber without the written consent of the City
shall be void. If the City shall give its consent to any assignment, this paragraph shall continue in
full force and effect and no further assignment shall be made without the City's consent.
XII. WRITTEN NOTICE
All communications regarding this Contract shall be sent to the parties at the addresses set ,
forth below, unless notified to the contrary. Any written notice hereunder shall become effective
upon personal service or 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 Contract or such other address
as may be hereafter specified in writing:
CITY OF KENT: KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE:
Nathan Torgelson Marcelle Pechler
Economic Development Manager Executive Director
City of Kent Kent Chamber of Commerce
220 Fourth Ave. S. 524 West Meeker St., #H-1
Kent, WA 98032 Kent, WA 98035-0128
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY
OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-6 (September 29,2004)
XIII. NON-WAIVER OF BREACH
The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of any of the covenants and
Tagreements 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.
IXIV. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES
If any dispute arises between the City and Kent Chamber under any of the provisions of this
iContract,jurisdiction of any resulting litigation shall be filed in King County Superior Court,King
County,Washington. This Contract shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Washington. Each party shall be solely responsible for its costs, expenses, and
attorney's fees incurred in any litigation arising out of the enforcement of this Contract.
t
XV. DUPLICATE ORIGINALS
This document is executed in duplicate originals.
iIN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have executed this Contract on the day and year first
above written.
CITY OF KENT KENT CHAMBER
By. By:
Its: Its:
Date: Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
l
Tom Brubaker,Kent City Attorney
P'CnWIlBS�i�pWlPAp9,�F P�OpAy,
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY
OF KENT AND KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-7 (September 29,1004)
1
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 Agreement
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 Agreement to adhere to. An affirmative
response is required on all of the following questions for this Agreement to be valid and binding. If
any contractor, subcontractor or supplier willfully misrepresents themselves with regard to the
directives o utlines, i t w ill b e c onsidered a b reach o f c ontract and it will be at the City's sole
determination regarding suspension or termination for all or part of the Agreement;
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 Agreement 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 Agreement the prime contractor will provide a written statement to all
new employees and subcontractors indicating commitment as an equal opportunity employer.
4. During the time of the Agreement I, the prime contractor,will actively consider hiring and
promotion of women and minorities.
5. Before acceptance of this Agreement, 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 , 200_.
By:
For:
Title:
Date:
EEO DOCUMENTS - 1 j
(Contract btwn.Kent Chamber and City) (September 19, 1004)
1 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 Agreements 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 Agreement.
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 DOCUMENTS-2
(Contract btwn.Kent Chamber and City) (September 29, 2004)
1
1
CITY OF KENT
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
This form shall be filled out AFTER COMPLETION of this project by the Contractor awarded the
Agreement.
I, the undersigned, a duly represented agent of Canpaiy, j
hereby acknowledge and declare that the before-mentioned company was the prime contractor for the
Agreement known as that was entered into on the_ 1
(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 Agreement.
Dated this day of , 200_ j
By:
For:
Title:
Date:
EEO DOCUMENTS-3
(Contract btwn.Kent Chamber and City) (September 29, 2004)
EXHIBIT A
Scope of Services
Web Site: hosting, content administration, modification and search engine marketing
Deliverable: report at each Lodging Tax Advisory Board Meeting and with each quarterly
invoice on number of hits by month; Modified website by no later than December
31, 2005
Advertising : maintain 1-800 toll free number, and mail individual travel collateral
Deliverable: report at each Lodging Tax Advisory Board Meeting and with each quarterly
invoice on number of 1-800 calls and requests for traveler collateral material by
I month
Research and Development: Research how Kent can better position itself to capture
tourism dollars and opportunities and additional hotel/motel stays
Deliverable: Report by December 31,2005 (submit with final quarterly invoice)
Tourism Services: staff time attending to services above, attending Lodging Tax Advisory
Board Meetings, coordination with Seattle Southside Visitor Services
Deliverable: Attend all Lodging Tax Advisory Board meetings
i
I
I
I
EEO DOCUMENTS-4
(Contract btwn Kent Chamber and City) (September 29,2004)
Kent City Council Meeting
Date October 5. 2004
Category. Bids
1. SUBJECT: KENT CENTENNIAL PARKING GARAGE SEISMIC RETROFIT
AND STRENGTHENING
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The bid opening was held on September 9, 2004, with
four bids received. The apparent low bid was submitted by Summit Central
Construction in the amount of$322,900.00, excluding Washington State Sales Tax
(WSST). The Engineer's estimate is $320,000.00, excluding WSST.
The Parks Director recommends authorizing the Mayor to enter into an agreement with
Summit Central Construction to complete the installation of steel braced frames with
Fluid-viscous dampers, epoxy grout crack injection, retrofit of fiber-reinforced plastic
at level 2 ramp; and retrofit of concrete at selected locations in the Centennial parking
garage.
3. EXHIBITS: Bid tab
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
If no:
Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount$
Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember-&434 moves, Councilmember elp_� seconds
authorize the Mayor to enter into an agreement with Summit Central Construction in
the amount of$322,900.00, excluding sales tax, for the seismic retrofit and
strengthening of the Centennial parking garage.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 8A
CITY OF KENT PARKS FACILITIES
BID TAB
September 17, 2004
PROJECT: Centennial Parking Garage Seismic Retrofit & Strengthening
BIDDER
Summit Central Const. $322,900
1 Diamaco, Inc. $433,680
Regency NW Const. $491,000
Briere & Associates $600,200
REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
C. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
D. PUBLIC WORKS
E. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
F. PARKS AND HUMAN SERVICES OMMITTEE
p
G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES
t
KENT
1 WttMINtYYt OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 7,2004
Committee Members Present: Chair Tun Clark,Julie Peterson,Bruce White
One(1) item was added to the agenda,namely the Mid-Year Staff Adjustment
The meeting was called to order by Tun Clark,Chair at 4:01 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATED AUGUST 17, 2004
Bruce White moved to approve the minutes of the August 17, 2004, Operation Committee
meeting. The motion was seconded by Julie Peterson and passed 3-0.
APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS DATED AUGUST 31, 2004
Finance Director Bob Nachlinger presented the vouchers for August 31, 2004,for approval.
Julie Peterson moved to approve the vouchers dated August 31, 2004. Bruce White
seconded the motion, which passed 3-0.
KENT SENIOR ACTIVITY CENTER DONATION
Senior Center Recreation Facility Manager Lea Bishop presented the Kent Senior Center
Donation. Ms. Bishop advised that Harvey Cox, resident and patron of the Kent Senior
Activity Center, recently passed away and graciously donated $20,000.00 to the center. Ms.
Bishop advised that upon acceptance Kent Senior Center staff will use the funds to purchase
fitness equipment for the new work out room at the Center, which the Facility converted from a
classroom.
Bruce White moved to recommend accepting the $20,000.00 donating from the Harvey
Cox estate to purchase fitness equipment for the Kent Senior Center, amending the
Memorial and Miscellaneous Budget. Julie Peterson seconded the motion, which passed
3-0.
i
1
2
Operations Committee Minutes
September 7,2004
Page: 2
2004 PC REPLACEMENT
Information Technology Director Stan Waldrop and Technical Services Manager Paul Dunn
presented the 2004 PC Replacement. Mr. Dunn stated that the City has approximately 620
desktop computers on a 4-year replacement cycle, which means replacing 155 computers this
year. This will eliminate the City's 155 oldest computers and maintain an adequate desktop
computing environment to operate the City's business and productivity applications. The
desktop computers eliminated will be the 600 Mhz through 866 Mhz processor models. The
City's desktop computer standard is Hewlett-Packard which are purchased under the Western
States Contracting Alliance contract. This pricing is typically used as a base and further
discounts are negotiated based on the quantity and model ordered. The proposed model will be
a Pentium IV—2.8 GHz computer with 512 MB RAM that offers remove manageability. Mr.
Dunn advised that the CIP Computer Replacement Plan Budget—estimate is $106,654, which
does not include monitors. The Operations Committee bad numerous questions regarding the
proposed PC replacement.
Julie Peterson moved to recommend that the Council authorize the Mayor to sign
purchase orders for replacement computers and vendor services not to exceed $123,344.
Tim-Clark seconded the motion, which passed 3-0.
TOURISM CONTRACT WITH KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Economic Finance Manager Nathan Torgelson presented the Tourism Contract with Kent
Chamber of Commerce and introduced members of the Lodging Tax Advisory Board. Mr.
Torgelson advised that on July 29, 2004, the City's Lodging Tax Advisory Board (LTAB)
unanimously recommended that the City of Kent enter into a one (1) year (2005) $18,000
contract with the Kent Chamber of Commerce for tourism services. This contract would
complement the proposed contract with Seattle Southside Visitor Services (SSVS). Many
tourist and business travelers who are unaware of SSVS will still seek out the Kent Chamber
for their traveling resources. Under this contract, the Chamber would continue to serve as this
resource to travelers. The Kent Chamber would partner with SSVS, maintain and modify the
web site, mail marketing materials to interested parties, staff the 1-800 Kent Lodging phone
number, and research how Kent can better position itself to capture tourism dollars,
opportunities and additional hotel/motel stays. Mr. Torgelson advised that no general fund
dollars would be used for this contract as it would be paid entirely from the Lodging Tax
Board. The City of Kent estimates that it will collect about $121,000 in lodging tax revenues
in 2005. Numerous questions were discussed regarding the proposed contract. Julie Peterson
requested history of past six (6) years of the Kent Chamber of Commerce's records regarding
the City.
2
3
Operations Committee Minutes
September 7,2004
Page: 3
Julie Peterson tabled the $18,000 one-year (2005) contract for tourism services with the
Kent Chamber of Commerce using lodging tax dollars to the September 21, 2004,
Operations Committee meeting.
CONTRACT WITH SEATTLE SOUTHSIDE VISITOR SERVICES
Economic Finance Manager Nathan Torgelson presented the Contract with Seattle Southside
Visitor Services. Mr. Torgelson advised on July 29, 2004, the City's Lodging Tax Advisory
Board (LTAB) unanimously recommended that the City of Kent enter into a three (3) year
interlocal agreement with Seattle Southside Visitor Services (SSVS) for $300,000, in addition
to a one time charge of $25,200 to update the Seattle Southside Vacation Planner. Seattle
Southside Services is a program offered jointly by the cities of SeaTac and Tukwila that
competitively markets South King County as an ideal travel destination. Kent hotels, tourist
attractions, events, retail destinations and City venues would be featured in SSVS marketing
materials, including the vacation planner and the website. Mr. Torgelson advised that
partnering with SSVS is consistent with the City's tourism strategy as articulated in the City of
Kent Economic Development Strategic Plan 2003-2008. This partnership with Seattle
Southside was initiated by the City of Kent and has been the subject to numerous LTAB
meetings and presentations. SSVS' total budget for 2005 is proposed at $840,000; Kent's
portion of that budget would be $100,000, which amount provides for SSVS to hire a business
community marketing liaison for Kent Mr. Torgelson advised that no general fund dollars
would be used for this contract. The City of Kent estimates that it will collect about$121,000
in lodging tax revenues in 2005.
Julie Peterson moved to recommend a three (3) year interlocal agreement with Seattle
Southside Visitor Services for tourism and marketing services using lodging tax dollars.
Bruce White seconded the motion,which passed 3-0.
MID-YEAR STAFFING ADJUSTMENT
Chief Administrative Officer Mike Martin presented the add-on item of the Mid-Year Staffing
Adjustment with Finance Director Bob Nachlmger presently a Power Point presentation for the
item. Mr. Martin advised that approximately six (6) months ago we asked the City Council to
approve a temporary increase to the staffing in the permit center to cover a temporary increase
in building activity. The increase seem not to be temporary and has continued and increased.
The authorization for that temporary staffing is ending and we have experienced a 10%decline
in the service level that we have maintained for our customers. The proposal adds nine (9)
positions to Community Development, Public Works and Fire in the building process to bring
our service level back to what we consider an adequate level. Our goal is that this proposal be
revenue neutral and we are anticipating increased activity as well as fee increases to
j accomplish this. The effect of this proposal is an increase to the expenditure budget of
3
4
Operations Committee Minutes
September 7,2004
Page: 4
I
approximately $786,000 with and offsetting increase to the revenue budget of the same
amount. Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom, Public Works Director Don
Wickstrom, and Fire Chief Jim Schneider each addressed the Committee regarding the
positions being sought. Julie Peterson advised that the City has made effective permitting a
high priority and does not want to have the effective policies lapse. Tim Clark inquired as to
the huge difference between commercial and residential permit processing. Bruce White
advised that he is not opposed to the increase in staff, however, he would like to talk with
members of the development community who may be affected by higher permit fees. Julie
Peterson requested a presentation at the next Council workshop.
Julie Peterson moved to recommend that the City Council approve the amendment to the
Annual Budget and authorize the increased staffing and fees for the Permitting Process.
Tim Clark seconded the motion, which passed 2-1.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
Renee Cameron
Operations Committee Secretary
I
1
I
1
4
PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 19,2004
COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Chair Tim Clark,Ron Harmon, Bruce White
The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M with Chair Clark acknowledging
Member White's absence.
Approval of Minutes
Committee Member Harmon MOVED and Committee Member Clark SECONDED a motion to
approve the minutes of the June 14, 2004 meeting. Chair Clark stated that the Committee would
await Member White's concurrence on the MOTION upon his arrival.
#ZCA-2004-1 MANUFACTURED HOUSING
Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that this issue is the result of new State legislation to
allow manufactured housing in any single family or residential zoning district. She stated that the
Land Use and Planning Board recommended approval of this zoning amendment at a hearing held
in June. Ms. Anderson described the requirements for siting manufactured homes.
Ms. Anderson stated that the Board and Staff recommends an option allowing specific types of
designated manufactured homes in all residential zoning districts with other mobile or manufactured
homes to be allowed only in mobile home parks per current code.
Members Clark and Harmon expressed their concerns with regard to foundations and roof
specifications. Member Harmon opined that as this legislation is not effective until July 1, 2005
staff should evaluate this issue further.
Ms. Anderson deferred to Building Official Bob Hutchinson who addressed the Committee's
concerns regarding structural issues, design standards and the administration and enforcement of
Federal Standards.
In response to Committee inquiry, Ms. Anderson stated that neighboring cities such as Auburn,
Renton and Federal Way are complying with the new State legislation by allowing manufactured
homes in residential areas
Tom Sharp, PO Box 918, Maple Valley, WA expressed his consternation that manufactured
homes would be incompatible in existing single family neighborhoods due to differing construction
standards. Mr. Sharp stated that the City would benefit by forming a task force to study this issue
prior to making a final decision.
Paul Morford, P.O. Box 6345, Kent, WA voiced lus concern with construction standards as they
' apply to modular factory built housing. He explained that although modular housing is considered
more affordable, it costs less to construct a stick built home in Kent even though it takes longer to
construct a stick-built home than to site a modular home. Mr. Morford stated that modular homes
are not aesthetically pleasing when placed next to existing houses.
Mr. Morford suggested that if the City streamlined their permitting process so that single family
building permits could be issued in a reasonable time, no one in Kent would want to purchase
modular homes.
Bob Hutchinson addressed Mr. Sharp's concerns as defined by Member Clark with respect to third
party inspections, design standards and what the State's responsibility is with regard to enforcing
quality construction.
Ms. Anderson addressed questions raised by Member Clark concerning roof pitches and Bob
Hutchinson addressed questions raised by Member Harmon concerning provisions for accessible
doorways for the disabled. Chair Clark advised staff to review this issue further and bring it back to
the Committee in October.
1
Ordinance to Amend References for Abatement of Daneerous Buildings in the Uniform
Housing Code&Uniform Code
Building Official Bob Hutchinson stated that this is a proposed housekeeping ordinance to amend
those references found within the Uniform Housing Code and the Uniform Code for the Abatement
of Dangerous Building to direct readers to the correct provisions of the now current International
Residential Code, International Building Code and International Mechanical Code.
Member Harmon MOVED and Chair Clark SECONDED a motion to recommend that the City
Council adopt the proposed ordinance which amends the reference of the Uniform Housing Code
and the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings to refer to the International
Building Code, International Mechanical Code and the International Residential Code. Motion
CARRIED 3-0 with Committee Member White's concurrence.
Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 4:50 p.m.
Pamela Mottram,
Admin Secretary,Planning Services
S 1Permr11P1anlPfannmg CommuleeVO04V4inutes1071904pc-min dot
Planning&Economic Committee Meeting 7/19/04
Page 2 of 2
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
1 August 19,2004
COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Debbie Raplee, Les Thomas,Deborah Ranniger,Chair
• The meeting was called to of der by Deborah Ranniger at 5:03PM
• Tim Clark served on the committee due to Debbie Raplee's absence
• Chair Ranniger asked for additions or changes to the agenda There were none.
1 1. Approval of Minutes of July 15,2004
Les Thomas moved to approve the minutes of the June 17,2004 meeting.
The motion was seconded and passed 3-0.
2. 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant(LLEBG)-ACCEPT
Chief Ed Crawford reviewed the history of this type of grant and the proposed use of the
current grant.
Les Thomas moved to recommend the Council authorize the Kent Police Department
to accept the 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant in the amount of$25,461.00
and placing this on the Consent Calendar for the September 7,2004 Council Meeting.
The motion was seconded and passed 3-0.
3. Homeland Security Update—INFORMATION ONLY
Chief Ed Crawford,Chair of the King County Emergency Management Advisory
Committee,reviewed some key elements of the Homeland Security grant funding
and introduced Captain Mike Painter.Mike Painter,Chair of the Regional Homeland
Security Sub-Committee,updated the committee members on the current Region 6 funding
process,timelines,and opportunities
j4. Mitigation Plan Update—INFORMATION ONLY
Battalion Chief Pat Pawlak reviewed the City of Kent's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan for
the committee members and stated that Washington State Emergency Management is
reviewing the Mitigation Plan,will give suggestions in any deficient areas and it will then
be presented to the Kent City Council in the form of a resolution for adoption. Chief.hm
Schneider introduced Kimberly Resor to the committee members and thanked her for her
work on the Mitigation Plan.
5. Regulating Motorized Wheeled Transportation Devices Ordinance-ADOPT
City Attorney Tom Brubaker reviewed the alternatives provided to certain sections of the
proposed ordinance as directed at the last Public Safety Committee meeting.
See.9.144.070. Noise
Tim Clark moved to remove this section from the proposed ordinance. Motion failed
Debbie Ranniger moved to accept Alternative No. 1. Les Thomas seconded the
motion. The motion passed 2-1.
' Sec.9.44.040. Age of Operator
Les Thomas moved to recommend the minimum age of sixteen (16) Motion failed.
Tim Clark moved to recommend the current proposed language with a minimum age
of thirteen(13). Debbie Ranniger seconded the motion. The vote was tabled by Chair
Ranniger until other sections were discussed.
i
t
Sec.9.44.020. Prohibited areas.
Tim Clark moved to accept Alternative No.1. Debbie Ranniger seconded the motion
and made an amendment to Sub 1 to read,"Improved or natural surface recreational
trails,except paved trails". Les Thomas seconded the amendment. The motion passed
3-0.
The discussion returned to Sec.9.44.040. Age of operator.
Tim Clark moved to accept the current proposed language of thirteen(13). Debbie
Ranniger seconded the motion. The motion passed 2-1.
Sec.9.44.030. Times of operation.
Tim Clark moved to accept Alternative No.2 and made an amendment to Sub A by
removing"powered by a liquid fuel motor",to remove Sub B and to amend Sub C by
removing"or reflector".
Les Thomas asked for consideration of an alternative to Section 9 44.130. Violation—
Penalty,which was approved at the last meeting.
Tim Clark moved to recommend the Ordinance as approved and present it to City j
Council. Debbie Ranniger seconded the motion. The motion passed 2-1.
The meeting adjourned at 6:37 PM.
Jo Thompson
i
Public Safety Committee Minutes 2
July 15.2004
I PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES
August 2, 2004
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Committee Chair Bruce White, Committee
Member Debbie Raplee and Committee Member Ron Harmon
The meeting was called to order by Committee Chair Bruce White at 5:10 P.M.
' Approval of Minutes Dated July 19,2004
Committee Member Debbie Raplee moved to approve the minutes of July 19, 2004. The
motion was seconded by Ron Harmon and passed 3-0.
Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan—Set Hearing Date
1 Don Wickstrom said this is a yearly update of our Transportation Improvement Plan, it is
a planning tool that allows these projects to be eligible for funding. Cathy Mooney,
Senior Transportation Planner explained the plan. Cathy stated that in recent years the
TIP had become more optimistic. Committee Member Raplee asked about the Grade
Separation project and the Railroads contribution. Don Wickstrom said federal law says
the Railroad only has to contribute 5%of the total project.
I Ron Harmon moved to recommend the City Council set a Public Hearing on August
17t" for the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan for the period 2005-2010.
The motion was seconded by Debbie Raplee and passed 3-0.
Municipal Transportation Infrastructure Funding Resolution
Don Wickstrom said as a result of recent Initiatives and Supreme Courts decisions cities
including Kent have lost significant funding sources for street and street related
infrastructure improvements. This resolution is seeking legislature to pursue local
funding for cities.
Debbie Raplee moved to recommend to City Council passage of a resolution seeking
State legislature action on providing local funding for municipal transportation
infrastructure. The motion was seconded by Ron Harmon and passed 3-0
S. 272°d/277`h Street Corridor—Proposed LID for Previously Omitted LID 351
Properties-Authorize
Don Wickstrom said at the time LID 351 was formed various properties that had recently
been developed or were in the process of developing at the time executed Environmental
Mitigating Agreements to participate in the funding of the new corridor project but were
not included in the LID. Some of these properties were plats so now we have 133
properties, $350,000 worth of assessments. A two step hearing process before council is
proposed, with the first step being on the action of whether or not to include these
omitted properties in a supplemental final assessment role. If council action were to do
so then a second hearing on the confirmation of the supplemental final assessment role
' would be held. Per both hearings only the omitted properties would be notified and
heard. If Council concurs with the Public Works Department recommendation then the
first public hearing would not be held until March 2005.
1
2
Ron Harmon moved to authorize the Public Works Department to pursue the
inclusion of previously omitted properties within LID 351. The motion was
seconded by Debbie Raplee and passed 3-0.
Pacific Highway HOV Lanes Proposed LID Adopt Resolution of Intent
Don Wickstrom said As part of the Pacific Highway HOV Lane project 16 properties
have signed no protest LID covenants for street frontage improvements in conjunction
with building their developments. More recent developments along Pac Hwy have either
constructed their frontage improvements or paid the City the equivalent amount to
include same into the city project, the Public Works Department feels it is only fair to
follow up on these obligations. Two letters have been sent out and 7 out of the 16
responded wanting to go ahead with the LID.
Debbie Raplee moved to recommend that the City Council pass the Resolution of
Intent for the formation of an LID for the Pacific Highway HOV Lanes project.
The motion was seconded by Ron Harmon and passed 3-0.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 P.M.
Janet Perschek
Administrative Assistant
J�
J�
I
1
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
(A) PENDING LITIGATION
ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION