The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 02/01/2005 1 1 1 1 �AG EN DA;,; 1 City of Kent 1 City Council Meeting 1 Agenda 1 , 1 1 February 1 , 2005 1 Mayor Jim White 1 Julie Peterson, Council President , .. Councrlmembers 1 Tim Clark Debbie Raplee Ron Harmon Les Thomas 1 Deborah Ranniger Bruce White O KENT WASHINGTON 1 City Clerk's Office ' KENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS KEN T February 1, 2005 WASHINGTON Council Chambers MAYOR: Jim White COUNCILMEMBERS: Julie Peterson, President ' Tim Clark Ron Harmon Deborah Ranniger Debbie Raplee Les Thomas Bruce White COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA 5:30 p.m. Item Description Speaker Time 1. Landsburg Mine Update Bill Wolinski 10 min 2. Habitat Conservation Plan Update Bill Wolinski 10 min 3. Kent Station Update Nathan Torgelson 40 min ********************************************************************************* ' COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA ' 7:00 p.m. 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. State of the City Address 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 6. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of Previous Meeting —Approve B Payment of Bills—Approve C East Hill Skate Park Land Donation—Accept D. Fourth Quarter Parks Fee-in-Lieu of Funds—Accept and Amend Budget E. King County Youth Sports Grant—Accept and Amend Budget F. Service Club Park Donations—Accept and Amend Budget G. Kent Pool Funding—Approve ' H Kingsley Glen Infrastructure Improvements Bill of Sale—Accept 1. 2004 Second Half Budget Amendment Ordinance—Adopt (Continued on Back) COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CONTINUED ' J. Goods and Services Agreement, Ergonomics for Police Records Department— Authonze t K. Wildwood Ridge I Final Plat—Approve L. Part One—Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments; and Part Two—2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments M • E xcjs{d Abs«ce 7. OTHER BUSINESS ' None 8. BIDS A. Public Works Tenant Improvement Project Centennial Center B. Kent Reservoirs Seismic Strengthening Project—Award Bid ' 9. REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES, STAFF AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES 10. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION AND AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION ' A. Pending Litigation 12. ADJOURNMENT tNOTE: 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. fD r�iN„nnn Owe > Tw m �•� m nn °-a° y n a�n n Ho mr- �•P J�C'O O �^,OT i F O. _ J N w 3 v, .., Too DOF N - < w T C ° °; � n � " C3fm^f on • ioc a3- c , OD 3 8 m a a w T a w a F < o ^ a? i n no 3 J ° w •< m'O J Sc a 0 0 C J w a w ° O < n,mmw � 3aro•o GT m n ° J cZq 0 0 m r m m •p n aoc D CD mx lit T3 T n h mx m Cn CrM M." o. nN T R1 0 W c 0, O d m f O v O n w n O n D 0 4 , O a.• c co c wwc ® m O t1 cN o j m 3 ct 3 00 S F o m N A m 3 3 3 c < d cr • CD w Z =m oz. T y ��0� �c`_O n nslw h gnu wCL nn no " go n� D F9 1 ^ mac ^ P � 3 � � 3 �N from 3 3 000 - � ° a� � O �� mc�^ � m W mT� rTo 3nmFF33m _ - mnn m n ww, N O O w `� a• Q. 'a? o c�•e o? Tcc�� e a°� :^• " Fz'3 � aa.J <<no• � v3 (� QF �3S3N cT, m� "' • wo.. am� na�3 m 3�'a C � na�'o c, a -mmav� wc ow �m 3 4 cm ^aJmomw _ " ro r wT< ^ c '^ m Amon -nQ � u ;zr 3JT s� amo ° � FJ .T. n,a^ o Jm " pia 3 ^aT: m :5- '- d> zT� � am ° wOry� n�o°iomm -'O9,o dw To'gT o? nom � z• P<' ?^ m o,� �onJ yam=jM >aS .0 3 3n�ofD O �n > j o w 3 3 03 0 Mn � o =nv ��m Mn m ? nmccJ ' .Cy nwisno n A b mJ .miJNID � (D '�o am rM 3not wn< :oTDw O0D-;< > ' p m 7 m S3 0. 3 2 M T'. O-O ° O" m Ow � Coo-p c c a 3 ° S 3 0 `D N w _a- O_c c Ta N a� = fD =°- N3 ' F c mro�o, 3o °dn ° 4y � uc3a' Noy°—' n� • ° Jmm � vo ^ r=o Fdca— cc, a� c fi d N o J o r1 J ^V ' 1-0 b�no wam3no �a .0ONco : c < np o O wmJ ? mZ, c° a c °m� « m m =no m >o SD so ?rNo 0 O O-j n m aN m Coo T CL m T vo r^o a r'e 'sJ p 0 D•3 J w m D JC';O 1 n< •c 1 o m yam`° i CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time, make known the subject of 1 interest, so all may be properly heard. A) FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF T..� .L�cQar/ B FROM THE PUBLIC t PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A) EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH 1 B) STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS i i CONSENT CALENDAR 6. Citv Council Action: 0o Councilmember CSC moves, Councilmember seconds to approve Consent Calendar Items A through I� km All( G Discussion IAction 6A. Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of January 18, 2005. 6B. Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the bills received through January 15 and paid on January 15 after auditing by the Operations Committee on January 18, 2005. Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount 1115105 Wire Transfers 1931-1943 $ 938,938.44 1115105 Prepays & 572691 1,546,507.87 1115105 Regular 573251 1,242,610.76 $3,728,057.07 Approval of checks issued for payroll for December 16 through December 31, 2004 and paid on January 5, 2005: Date Check Numbers Amount 115105 Advices 173975-174629 $1,179,974.30 1/5/05 Checks 281233-281474 204,336.91 $11384,311.21 Council Agenda Item No. 6 A-B • KEN T Kent City Council Meeting WASHINGTON January 18, 2005 The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Peterson. Councilmembers present Clark, Hannon, Ranniger,Raplee, Thomas and White. (CFN-198) CHANGES TO AGENDA A From Council,Administration, or Staff. (CFN-198) Martin removed pending litigation from the Executive Session, leaving only labor negotiations. B. From the Public. (CFN-198) Continued Communications Item A was added to the agenda. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS A. Home Street Bank Donation Presentation. (CFN-122) Fire Chief Schneider introduced Home Street Bank representatives, who represented the City with a check in the amount of$2,500 for the Fire Department's Fall Prevention Program. B. National Night Out Award. (CFN-122)Judi Mauhl, Police Department Public Education Specialist, announced that Kent placed sixth in the nation and has received a plaque in recognition. C. Economic Development Update. (CFN-198) Nathan Torgelson, Economic Development Manager, announced receipt of a grant to do a feasibility study on creating a not-for-profit center for advanced manufacturing. CONSENT CALENDAR CLARK MOVED to approve Consent Calendar Items A through J White seconded and the motion carried. 1 A. Approval of Minutes. (CFN-198) The minutes of the regular Council meeting of January 4, 2005 were approved. tB. Approval of Bills. (CFN-104) Payment of the bills received through December 15 and paid on December 15, 2005 after auditing by the Operations Committee on January 4, 2005 were approved. Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount 12/15/04 Wire Transfers 1900-1915 $2,984,148.13 12/15/04 Prepays & 571310 950,038.64 12/15/04 Regular 572007 1,145,230.81 $5,079,417.58 Approval of payment of the bills received through December 31 and paid on December 31, 2004 after auditing by the Operations Committee on January 4, 2005. 1 Kent City Council Minutes January 18, 2005 Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount I 12/31/04 Wire Transfers 1916-1930 $1,039,179.59 12/31/04 Prepays & 572008 189,971.66 12/31/04 Regular 572690 2,221,891.26 $3,450,942.51 Approval of checks issued for payroll for December I through December 15, and paid on r December 20, 2004: Date Check Numbers Amount 12/20/04 Advices 173319-173974 $1,213,283 08 12/20/04 Checks 281000-281227 204,680.10 12/20/04 Interim Checks 281228-281232 481.70 $1,417,963.18 C. Renton Technical College Agreement. (CFN-122) The Mayor was authorized to sign the agreement with Renton Technical College which will provide Adult Basic Education(ABE) and GED instruction and testing at the City of Kent Corrections Facility. D. Kent Reporter Contract. (CFN-198) The 2005 Kent Reporter contract was approved and the Mayor was authorized to sign the contract. E. Government Relations Services Contract. (CFN-1216) The Consultant Services Agreement with Outcomes by Levy for 2005 government relations consulting services was j approved and the Mayor was authorized to sign the agreement. F. Local Hazardous Waste Management Program Grant. (CFN-738) The Seattle-King County Department of Health, Local Hazardous Waste Management Program grant amendment in the amount of$56,147.55 was accepted. G. Local Improvement District No. 358, Pacific Highway South High Occupancv Vehicle Lanes,Final Assessment Roll. (CFN-1292) February 15, 2005 was set as the hearing date for the LID 358 assessment roll. H. Easement to Puget Sound Energy for Underground Utility Facilities at Kent Station. (CFN-171) The Mayor was authorized to execute the respective document(s) granting an easement to Puget Sound Energy, Inc. for underground utility facilities at Kent Station. I. Sale of Surplus Vehicles and Equipment. (CFN-136) The City Council declared the , equipment described in the Public Works memorandum of January 3, 2005 as surplus and authorized disposal of same. J. Home Street Bank Donation. (CFN-122) The Home Street Bank's Corporate Giving Program donation in the amount of$2,500 for the fall prevention/risk reduction equipment was accepted. 2 Kent City Council Minutes January 18, 2005 IREPORTS Public Safety Committee. (CFN-198) Ranniger noted that the Committee will meet at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 20th. Planning and Economic Development Committee. (CFN-198) Clark noted that due to the holiday, the Committee will meet at 4:00 p.m. on Monday, February 28th. # Parks & Human Services Committee. (CFN-198) Ranniger noted that the Committee will meet at 4:00 p.m on Thursday, January 20th. Administrative Reports. (CFN-198) Martin reminded Councilmembers of the Executive Session of approximately 10 minutes regarding labor negotiations, with action anticipated after the Executive Session. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS A Critical Areas Ordinance. (CFN-198) Bob O'Brien, 1131 Seattle Street, stated that there are no studies on available science as discussed at a recent workshop on the critical areas ordinance. EXECUTIVE SESSION The meeting recessed to Executive Session at 7:17 p.m. and reconvened at 7:44 p.m. (CFN-198) ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION Labor Negotiations. (CFN-198) RANNIGER MOVED that the Mayor be authorized to sign a three-year labor agreement with the Firefighters Union, pending the City Attorney's review of the contract for form and authorizing any related budget adjustment Clark seconded and the motion carried. ADJOURNMENT At 7:44 p.m., THOMAS MOVED to adjourn. Harmon seconded and the motion carried. (CFN-198) 2" Brenda Jacober, C City Clerk 3 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: EAST HILL SKATE PARK LAND DONATION—ACCEPT 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the land donation from Olympus Assisted Living, LLC, approve the expenditure of funds in the East Hill Skate Park budget for closing and lot line adjustment costs, and authorize the Mayor to execute the land donation agreement, upon approval by the City Attorney. The agreement with Olympus Assisted Living, LLC states that the City shall pay escrow fees, except those fees which are expressly limited by Federal Regulation. Escrow fees include taxes for the current year, rents, interest, water and other utility charges, if any, and shall be pro-rated as of the date of closing. Closing costs are estimated at $1NO. Arbor Village Assisted Living Community is owned and operated by Olympus Assisted Living LLC. Olympus donated one acre of land at Arbor Village, which is adjacent to city-owned property and future site of the East Hill Skate Park. In exchange for the donation, the park's master plan was re-designed to include certain amenities requested by the residents of Arbor Village. The land donation is valued at $90,000 3. EXHIBITS: Land donation agreement 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.) 5. FISCAL IMPACT Expenditure? X Revenue? _ Currently in the Budget? Yes No X If no: Unbudgeted Expense: Fund P20045 Amount $1,000.00 (estimate) Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $ 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6C REAL ESTATE DONATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN OLYMPUS ASSISTED LIVING LLC AND THE CITY OF KENT This Agreement is entered into by the CITY OF KENT, a Washington municipal corporation, (hereafter the "City"), and OLYMPUS ASSISTED LIVING L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company(hereafter "Olympus"), for the donation of real property. WHEREAS, the City operates and maintains public parks and facilities in Kent, Washington, and is in the process of preparing a master plan for a community park located at the comer of SE 240th Street and 116`h Avenue SE (working title: "East Hill Community Skate Park"); and WHEREAS,Olympus owns and operates Arbor Village Assisted Living located adjacent to the future East Hill Community Skate Park. Olympus also owns the real property legally described in the attached Exhibit A(the"Property")adjacent to the future East Hill Community Skate Park; and r WHEREAS, Olympus is willing to donate the Property to the City in exchange for the City providing amenities within the East Hill Community Skate Park as requested by the residents of Arbor Village Assisted Living and agreed to by the City. The parties enter into the following Agreement to memorialize the terms of the donation of the Property: 1. CONSIDERATION. Olympus shall convey to the City fee simple title to the Property legally described in the attached Exhibit A and the Access Easement legally described in the attached Exhibit B,both of which are incorporated herein,in exchange for the City providing amenities within the East Hill Community Skate Park as requested by Olympus as shown on Exhibit C attached and incorporated by this reference. 2. CONTINGENCIES. This Agreement is contingent upon the following: (a) Acceptance of its terms by the Kent City Council. (b) Olympus approving the proposed master plan of the future East Hill Community Skate Park as shown in the attached Exhibit C within ten (10) days of mutual acceptance. (c) Olympus and the City obtaining a lot line adjustment,at the City's expense, such that the Property becomes part of the lot currently owned by the City,King County Tax Parcel Number 202205-9051,and planned for the East Hill REAL ESTATE DONATION AGREEMENT—Page 1 of 5 (between City of Kent and 01ympusAssisted Living,LLC) (JanuaryR,2005) Community Skate Park. The parties shall cooperate with each other to obtain the lot line adjustment. Should any of the contingencies of this section not be met prior to Closing, then this Agreement shall terminate. 3. CONVEYANCE AND CONDITION OF TITLE. The title to the real property in Exhibit A shall be conveyed by Olympus to the City at Closing by Statutory Warranty Deed, free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, or defects except those described in Section 4 below. Olympus shall also convey to the City at Closing the Access Easement attached as Exhibit B. 4. TITLE INSURANCE. At the time of Closing, Olympus 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 the City in an amount of $90,000.00 for the Property,and insuring the real propertybemg conveyed by Olympus is 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 suchdefects or encumbrances, this Agreement shall terminate. The City shall have no right to specific performance or damages as a consequence of Olympus's inability to provide insurable title 5. 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,rfany,shall be pro-rated as of c date of Closing unless otherwise agreed. 6. CLOSING DATE. With the understanding that time is of the essence for this Agreement, this transaction shall be closed by March 1,2005,which shall also be the termination date of this Agreement unless said Closing date is extended in writing by mutual agreement of the parties. When notified,the City and Olympus will deposit,without delay, in escrow with Pacific Northwest Title, 116 Washington Avenue North,Kent,Washington 98032-0864,all instruments and monies required to complete the transaction in 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. 7. POSSESSION. The City shall be entitled to possession upon Closing. REAL ESTATE DONATION AGREEMENT—Page 2 of 5 (between City of Kent and Olympus Assisted Living,LLQ (January 24,2005) 8. OLYMPUS'S REPRESENTATIONS. Olympus makes the following representations, (a) 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 (b) that the real property in Exhibit A is not encumbered by any leases. 9. ENVIRONMENTAL REPRESENTATIONS. Olympus represents that to the best of its knowledge it is not aware of the existence of, or has caused or allowed to be caused, any environment condition (including, without limitation, a spill, discharge or contamination) that existed as of and/or prior to the Closing date or any act or omission occurring prior to the Closing date,the result of which may require remedial action pursuant to any federal,state or local law or may be the basis for the assertion of any third party claims, including, claims of governmental entities. This provision shall survive the Closing and be in addition to the obligations for breach of a representation or warranty as may be set forth herein. 10. INDEMNITIES. Olympus agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City against and in respect of, any and all damages, claims, losses, liabilities,judgments, demands, fees,obligations,assessments,and expenses and costs,including,without limitation,reasonable legal, accounting,consulting,engineering and/or other expenses which may be imposed upon or incurred by the City,or asserted against the City,by any other party or parties(including,without limitation, a governmental entity), ansmg out of or in connection with any breach of the representations made in Sections 8 and 9 of this Agreement. This indemnity shall survive the Closing. 11. THE CIWS OBLIGATIONS AFTER CLOSING. The following are the City's obligations after Closing of this transaction: (a) The City shall provide the labor, materials, and equipment necessary to complete the construction of the future East Hill Community Skate Park project and shall obtain all necessary permits. (b) The City agrees it shall make every reasonable effort to complete construction of the future East Hill Community Skate Park, subject to available funds,within one (1) calendar year of this Agreement. REAL ESTATE DONATION AGREEMENT—Page 3 of 5 (between City oJKentand Olympus Assisted Living,LLQ (January 24,2005) 12. DEFAULT AND ATTORNEY'S FEES. (a) If either party defaults hereunder, the other party shall have the rights and remedies available at law or in equity. (b) In the event of litigation to enforce any of the terms or provisions ' herein, each party shall pay all its own costs and attorney's fees. 13. 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 14. NOTICES. All notices required or pennitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be sent U.S.certified mail,return receipt requested,or by facsirmle transmission addressed as set forth below: (a) All notices to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: John Hodgson, Director Parks, Recreation, and Community Services 220 4th Avenue South Kent, Washington 98032-5895 Fax No. (253) 856-6050 (b) All notices to be given to Olympus shall be addressed as follows: Fax No. Either party may, by written notice to the other, designate other address for the giving of notices. 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 with this section. 15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement,including all incorporated exhibits, , constitutes the full understanding between Olympus and the City. There have been no verbal or other agreements that modify this Agreement. REAL ESTATE DONATION AGREEMENT—Page 4 of 5 (between City of Kent and Olympus Assisted Living,LLC) (January 24,2005) 1 16. BINDING EFFECT. This Agreement shall be binding upon parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 17. DATE OF MUTUAL ACCEPTANCE. For the purposes ofthis Agreement,the date of mutual acceptance of this Agreement shall be the last date on which the parties to this Agreement have executed this Agreement as indicated below. 18. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party may assign this Agreement or their rights 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 OF KENT OLYMPUS ASSISTED LIVING,LLC. By: By: Print Name: Jim White — Print Name: Its: Mavor Its: Dated: Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Kent Law Department PCn1411FS'[4wYi1011lTlkrMlp�.O1bWi REAL ESTATE DONATION AGREEMENT—Page 5 of 5 (between City of Kent and Olympus Assisted Ltvmg,LLC) (January 24,2005) r ' EXHIBIT A PROPERTY CONVEYED TO CITY OF KENT THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W M , KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON,DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: DESCRIBED HEREAFTER BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE j NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION,THENCE S01001'58"W,ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, 13 23 FEET, THENCE S86033'09"E 52.68 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NONTANGENT, 70 00 FOOT RADIUS, CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE RIGHT, FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER BEARS S07144'47"W;THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 51027'42", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 62 87 FEET, THENCE S27052'36"E 97.30 FEET; THENCE S19026'35"E 75 70 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NONTANGENT, 95.00 FOOT RADIUS, CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE RIGHT, FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER BEARS S72°25'05"W;THENCE, SOUTHERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE,THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27013'47", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 4515 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 220 00 FOOT RADIUS, CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE LEFT, FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER BEARS S80021'8"E, THENCE SOUTHERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11036'59",AN ARC DISTANCE OF 44 60 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 5 00 FOOT RADIUS, CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE LEFT, FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS S88001'53'E, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90048'10",AN ARC DISTANCE OF 7 92 FEET, THENCE N87013'43"E 83 81 FEET, THENCE N61040'38"E 23.96 FEET TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 116T"AVENUE S E ,THENCE N00054'37"E,ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 279 52 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20, SAID POINT BEARING N88045118"W, A DISTANCE OF 31 50 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE N88°45'18"W, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, 288 39 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 43,079 SQ. FEET OR 99 ACRES .�li .� �bp" 97 • .ems ••oE%)STE*E.•'�-l� AL LAN®� r EXPIRES 1/-19-ZaZl EXHIBIT B AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Property Management City of Kent 220 - 4th Avenue South Kent WA 98032 Grantor: Olympus Assisted Living L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company Grantee: City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation Abbreviated Legal Description: Additional Legal Description on page 4 (Exhibit A) of Document. Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No. Project Name: East Hill Community Skate Park Document Date: ACCESS EASEMENT THIS INSTRUMENT by and between OLYMPUS ASSISTED LIVING L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company ("Grantor") and the CITY OF KENT, a Washington municipal corporation("Grantee"). WITNESSETH that Grantor for and in consideration of mutual benefits derived and/or other valuable consideration receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by Grantor, do grant, bargain, sell, convey, and confirm to Grantee, its successors and/or assigns, an easement for ingress and egress for the purpose of transporting Grantee's personnel and equipment over, through, across and upon the following described property situated in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows ("Easement Area") SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED ACCESS EASEMENT(Limited Liability Company) -Page I of 3 No obstructions of any kind whatsoever shall be allowed within the Easement Area that Nvould impede the ingress and egress for the purposes herein defined. Grantee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to enter the Easement Area and immediate adjacent incidental areas to remove obstructions and to maintain the Easement Area for its intended use. Grantor shall retain the right to use the surface of this easement, including the immediately adjacent incidental areas, so long as that use does not interfere with the uses described in this document. Grantee shall at all times exercise its rights under this easement in accordance with the requirements of all applicable statutes, orders, rules and regulations of any public authority having jurisdiction. Grantee accepts the easement area in its present physical condition, AS IS. Grantee does hereby release, indemnify and promise to defend and save harmless Grantor from and against any and all liability, loss, damage, expense actions and claims, including costs and reasonable attorney's fees incurred by Grantor in connection therewith, arising directly or indirectly on account of or out of the exercise by Grantee, its servants, agents, employees and contractors of the rights granted in this easement. This easement shall be a covenant running with the land forever and shall be binding on the Grantor's successors, heirs, and assigns. GRANTOR: Olympus Assisted Living, L.L.C. By- Print Name: Its: DATE: (Notary Acknowledgment on Next Page) ACCESS EASEMENT(Limited Liability Company)-Page 2 of 3 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) On this of ,2005,before me a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, personally appeared to me known to be the and of a limited liability company that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free and voluntary act of said limited liability company, for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said instrument. -Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington residing at My appointment expires APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kent Law Department ACCESS EASEMENT(Limited Liability Company)-Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A ACCESS EASEMENT THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20,TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST,W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 20; THENCE S00°54'36"W,ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, 330.01 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 20, THENCE N88045'18"W, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, 31 50 FEET TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF 116T"AVE SE AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF KENT BY DEED RECORDED IN KING COUNTY UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9904143156, THENCE S00°54'36"W,ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 279 52 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S61°40'38"W 23.96 FEET; THENCE S87°13'43"W 83 81 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY WITH A 5.00 FOOT RADIUS CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°48'10•,AN ARC DISTANCE OF 7 92 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 220 00 FOOT RADIUS CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THENCE NORTHERLY,ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°36'58", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 44 60 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 95 00 FOOT RADIUS CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE LEFT THENCE NORTHERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°13'47", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 45 15 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS N72°25'04"E FROM THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE, THENCE N19026'40"W 40.14 FEET, THENCE S70°33'20"W 19 99 FEET, THENCE S19°26'40"E 39 49 FEET TO A POINT ON A 75.00 FOOT RADIUS CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE RIGHT, FROM WHICH POINT THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS S72025'04"W,THENCE SOUTHERLY,ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°13'47", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 35 64 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 240 00 FOOT RADIUS CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE SOUTHERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11'36-58", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 48 66 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE AND THE BEGINNING OF A 25 00 FOOT RADIUS CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY,ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 86041'52", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 37 83 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY;THENCE S88039'59"E 105 05 FEET TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID 116T" AVE SE; THENCE N00°54'36"E, ALONG SAID WESTERLY MARGIN, 37 87 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 5591 SQUARE FEET. c+ ®� • e 1✓ 8 LsLA�O�F 071REs 11-I$-2,00(0 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: FOURTH QUARTER PARKS FEE-IN-LIEU OF FUNDS—ACCEPT AND AMEND BUDGET 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the fee-in-lieu of funds from contractors in the amount of$31,200 and authorize the expenditure of funds in the Basketball Court Development and Clark Lake budgets. Between October and December 2004,the City received a total of$31,200 from developers who voluntarily paid fees in lieu of dedicating park land to mitigate the development of single family homes in two subdivision. Bakke Development Inc. paid $11,350 for Wildwood Ridge Development and KBS Development Corporation paid $19,350 for Garrison Greens Development. 3. EXHIBITS: Finance revenue report 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 P20074 Amount $11,850 P20049 Amount $19,350 Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund P20013.56730 Amount $31,200 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6D a a ' N O 1 O ' N ^ I C !6 m ' c p O � I �I m Y N Y a � m Y N � N n O 1 � o > r r u � � � m N �y C' elf b O O C N •i m O c a an I !d m of o of o i o { o oI f aE a :i a� 0 hCD C o O N �v a d v � N a 3 C v O v c a m • '� cw a' n n d _ O a! = ram - a � i° rc o f° a o a o a) ml Q m ai c y o > N cr bl 00 LL 4 - a Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: KING COUNTY YOUTH SPORTS GRANT—ACCEPT AND AMEND BUDGET 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the $17,000 Youth Sports Facility Grant from King County and authorize the expenditure of funds in the East Hill Skate Park budget. The City has been awarded a King County Youth Sports Facility Grant from King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks to purchase and construct climbing boulders at the new East Hill Skate Park. The boulders will be designed for children/beginners and will be located near the adult/advanced climbing features. 3. EXHIBITS: King County Youth Sports Facility contract 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.) 5. FISCAL IMPACT Expenditure? X Revenue? Currently in the Budget? Yes No X If no: Unbudgeted Expense: Fund P20045.63500.530 Amount $17,000 Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund P20045.56718 Amount $17,000 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6E King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Parks and Recreation Division King Street Center Budding KSC-NR-0700 201 South Jackson Street r Seattle,WA 981D4.3856 206-296-4232 December 24,2004 Perry Brooks,Project Manager Kent Parks and Recreation 220 4th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032- RE: East Hill Skatepark Climbing Wall Contract#D34961D $17,000 Dear Mr. Brooks: Congratulations again on your King County Youth Sports Facility Grant award. Enclosed are two copies of a contract. Please return both copies with authorized signatures and completed exhibits. You will also be receiving exhibits by email if you have not already. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions regarding the contract procedures. r You will receive a contract with an"Authorization to Proceed"once they have been executed on our end. King County Parks and Recreation is pleased to be working with you on this exciting community project. I can be reached at 206.263.6267 or butch.lovelace(a,metrokc-eov should you have any questions All the best, ! Butch Lovelace r King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Parks and Recreation Division YOUTH SPORTS FACILITY GRANT CONTRACT-2005 Department/Division: Natural Resources and Parks / Parks Division Agency: Kent Parks and Recreation Project Title: East Will Skatepark Climbing Wall Contract mount: �1 un e: 1638 Contract Period From: January 1,2005 To December 31,2006 Contract Number. D34961D THIS CONTRACT is entered into by KING COUNTY(the"County"),and Kent Parks and Recreation(the "Agency").,whose address is 220 4th Avenue South,Kent,WA 98032-1 WHEREAS,King County is the manager of the Youth Sports Facility Grant(YSFG)Program; VVHEREAS, the grant recipient is either a public agency or a non-profit organization whose land or facility will provide recreational or athletic opportunities primarily to youth under 21 years of age; WHEREAS, King County has selected the identified agency to be awarded a Youth Sports Facility Grant to assist in capital improvements for increased recreational opportunities; WHEREAS, the grant recipients and/or landowner on whose property will receive these improvements will develop, program, operate,and maintain the facility to address a recreation need in King County; WHEREAS, King County has the authority under KC Ordinance 10454 to enter into agreements for ' the use of King County funds by public agencies and/or non-profit organizations to provide a service to the public, 1 This form is available in alternate formats for people with disabilities upon request. 1 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: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Agency shall provide services and comply with the requirements set forth hereinafter and in the following attached exhibits,which are incorporated herein by reference: ❑ Scope of Services Attached hereto as Exhibit I ❑ Budget Attached hereto as Exhibit 11 T-inq-1-ne Attached hereto as Exhibit TIT ❑ Invoice Voucher Attached hereto as Exhibit IV ❑ Design Documents Attached hereto as Exhibit V ❑ Insurance Certificate Attached hereto as Exhibit VI ❑ W-9 Attached hereto as Exhibit VII ❑ Use Agreement Attached hereto as Exhibit VIll ❑ Personnel Inventory Report(K.C.C. 12.16) NA ❑ Affidavit of Compliance(K C.0 12.16) NA ❑ Assurance of Compliance/Section 504 NA 2. DURATION OF CONTRACT This Contract shall commence on the 1 st day of January•2005,and shall terminate on the 31 st day of December 2006, unless extended or terminated earlier,pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Contract. i 3. ]PREMISES This grant project is located in: Kent, Washington 4. PARTIES All communication,notices,coordination,and other tenets of this agreement shall be managed by: On behalf of King County: Butch Lovelace,YSFG Program Manager King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks 201 South Jackson St, Suite 701 Seattle, WA 99104-3855 _ Email: butch.lovelace(a)metrokc LOVE Phone: 206.263.6267 2 On behalf of: Mr.Perry Brooks,Project Manager ' Kent Parks and Recreation 220 4th Avenue South Kent,WA 98032- 253-856-5114 pbrooks@ci.kent.wa.us 5. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT A. The County shall reimburse the agency for satisfactory completion of the services and regnirements specified in this_Contract after thr agency eihmitc n :ncr,:cP arm all accompanying reports as specified in the attached exhibits. The County will initiate authorization for payment after approval of corrected invoices and reports. The County shall make payment to the Agency not more than LO days after a complete and accurate invoice is received. B. The Agency shall submit its final invoice and all outstanding reports within 15 days of the date this Contract terminates. If the Agency's final invoice and reports are not submitted by the day specified in this subsection,the County will be relieved of all liability for payment to the Agency of the amounts set forth in said invoice or any subsequent invoice. , 6. OPERATING BUDGET When a budget is attached hereto as exhibit II,the Agency shall apply the funds received from the County under this Contract in accordance with said budget. The Agency shall request prior approval from the County for an amendment to this Contract when the cumulative amount of transfers among the budget categories, i.e. Project Tasks, is expected to exceed 10% of the Contract amount. Supporting documents necessary to explain fully the nature and purpose of the amendment must accompany each request for an amendment. 7. COMMUNICATION The Agency shall recognize King County Parks as a fiscal sponsor for the grant project in the following manner: A. Plaque: At the time of project completion or dedication, which ever comes first,the Agency shall install on or near the facility a 4" X 6"plaque provided by the County that notes King County as a fiscal sponsor. B. Events: The Agency shall invite and recognize King County Parks at all events promoting the project during construction,and at the final project dedication. C. Written material: The Agency shall recognize King County Parks as a fiscal sponsor in all / brochures, banners, posters, and other promotional material. 3 8. PUBLIC ACCESS The Agency shall to the greatest extent reasonably possible make the project available for use by the general public without unreasonable requirements for use. Fees for use of the project shall be no greater than those generally charged by public operators of similar facilities in King County. 9. GREEN BUILDING King County is committed to promoting and using green building practices in construction projects. Though not required,King County strongly encourages practices that conserve resources, use recycled content materials,maximize energy efficiency,and otherwise consider environmental, economic and social benefits in the design and construction of a building project. CM4 IRUE AND ACCUUN The Agency shall establish and maintain a system of accounting and internal controls which complies with applicable, generally accepted accounting principles, and governmental accounting and financial reporting standards in accordance with Revised Code of Washington(RCW)Chapter 40.14. 11. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS A. The Agency shall maintain accounts and records, including personnel, property, financial, and programmatic records and other such records as may be deemed necessary by the County to ensure proper accounting for all Contract funds and compliance with this Contract. B. These records shall be maintained for a period of six(6)years after termination hereof unless permission to destroy them is granted by the Office of the Archivist in accordance with Revised Code of Washington(RCW)Chapter 40.14. C. The Agency shall inform the County in writing of the location, if different from the Agency address listed on page one of this Contract, of the aforesaid books, records, documents,and other evidence and shall notify the County in writing of any changes in location within ten (10)working days of any such relocation. 12. RIGHT TO INSPECT King County at its discretion reserves the right to review and approve the performance of Agency with regard to this Contract. 13. COMPLIANCE WFM ALL LAWS AND REGULATIONS The Agency, in cooperation and agreement with the owners of the Premises,shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances and regulations in using funds provided by the County including, to the extent applicable, those related to "public works," payment of prevailing wages and competitive bidding of contracts. The Agency specifically agrees to comply and pay all costs associated with achieving such compliance without notice from King County, and that King County, does not waive this section by giving notice of demand for compliance in any instance. Tlie Agency shall indemnify and defend die County should it be sued or made the subject of an administrative investigation or hearing for a violation of such laws related to this Agreement. 4 l Id. CORRECTIVE ACTION A. If the County determines that a breach of contract has occurred or does not approve of the i aforementioned performance, it will give the Agency written notification of unacceptable performance. Agency then agrees to take corrective action within a reasonable period of time,as defined by King County in the aforementioned written notification. B. The County may withhold any payment owed the Agency until the County is satisfied that corrective action has been taken or completed. 15. TERMINATION A. This Contract may be terminated by the County without cause, in whole or in part, prior to aye spcciliod in Section 11, by providing the Agency tendays advance written notice of the termination. B. If the termination results from acts or omissions of the Agency, including but not limited to misappropriation, nonperformance of required services, or fiscal mismanagement, the Agency shall return to the County immediately any funds, misappropriated or unexpended, which have been paid to the Agency by the County. + 16. FUTURE SUPPORT The County makes no commitment to support the services contracted for herein and assumes no obligation for future support of the activity contracted herein except as express]}' set forth in this Contract. 17. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION The Agency agrees to indemnify and hold King County harmless as provided herein. Accordingly, The Agency agrees for itself, its successors, and assigns, to defend indemnify, and hold harmless King County, its appointed and elected officials, and employees from and against liability for all claims, demands,suits, and judgments, including costs of defense thereof for injury to persons,death, or property damage which is caused by,arises out of, or is incidental to any use of or occurrence on the Project that is the subject of this Contract or The Agency's exercise of rights and privileges granted by this Contract,except to the extent of the County's sole negligence. The Agency's obligations under this section shall include: A. The duty to promptly accept tender of defense and provide defense to the County at The Agency's own expense; B. Indemnification of claims made by The Agency's employees or agents;and + C. Waiver 6f The Agency's immunity under the industrial insurance provisions of Title 51 RCW. but only to the extent necessary to indemnify King County, which waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. In the event it is necessary for the County to incur attorney's fees, legal expenses or other costs to enforce the provisions of this section, all such fees, expenses and costs shall be recoverable from The Agency. 5 In the event it is determined that RCW 4.24.115 applies to this Contract, The Agency agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and save the County, its officers, officials, employees and agents from any and all claims, demands, suits, penalties, losses damages judgments, or costs of any kind I whatsoever for bodily injury to persons or damage to property(hereinafter"claims"),arising out of or in any way resulting from The Agency's officers,employees,agents and/or subcontractors of all tiers, acts or omissions, performance of failure to perform the rights and privileges granted under this Contract, to the maximum extent permitted by law or as defined by RCW 424,115, now enacted or as hereafter amended. A hold harmless provision to protect King County similar to this provision shall be included in all Contractor or Subcontractor Agreements entered into by Agency in conjunction with this Contract. 18. INSURANCE A. Liability Insurance. Requirements Notwithstanding any other provision within this Agreement, Grant recipient shall procure and maintain the following Minimum Limits of Insurance for the duration of the term and shall require their contractors to procure and maintain: 1. Commercial General Liability. (to include Products-Completed Operations) insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the Concessionaire's use of the premises at the County Park site. General liability insurance shall be as broad as that provided by Commercial General Liability"occurrence"form CG0001 (Ed. 11/85). The insurance limits shall be no less than One Million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence and Two million dollars ($2,000,000) in the aggregate for bodily injury and property damage 2. Automobile Liability. Insurance Services form number CA 00 01 (Ed- 1180) any auto. If the grant includes the use of automobiles,the Limit of Liability shall be no less than One Million dollars($ 1,000,000)per occurrence. 3. Workers Compensation/Stop Gan. If the recipient or its contractors bas employees, parties shall provide Statutory Workers Compensation coverage and Stop Gap Liability for a limit no less than One Million dollars($1,000,000) 4. Professional Liability. If the grant includes the use of Professional Services, a Per Claim/Aggregate Limit of$ 1,000,000.shall be provided. R. If the grant involves the construction of a capitol project or involves the purchase of equipment greater than$5,000. in value,Grant Recipient shall provides'`All Risk"Builders Risk or Property" coverage for the full replacement value of the project/property built/purchased. King County shall be listed as a Loss payee. C. King County and its officers, officials, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insured with respect to liability arising out of activities performed by the grant recipient and its contractors. Additional Insured status shall include Products-Completed Operations. D. To the extent of the grant recipient or its contractor's negligence,their insurance respectively shall be primary insurance with respect to the County, its officers, employees and agents. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the County, and its officers, officials, - 6 employees or agents shall not be subjected to contribution in favor of the Grant recipient or its contractors insurance and shall not benefit their in any way. ' Grant Recipient and Contractors insurance shall apply separately to each insured against i whom a claim is made or a lawsuit is brought,subject to the limits of the insurer's liability. E. Coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits except by the reduction of the applicable aggregate limit by claims paid, until after thirty(30) days' prior written notice has been given to and change in coverage accepted by King County. F. The insurance provider must be licensed to do business in the State of Washington and maintain a Best's rating of no less than A VIH. The Grant Recipient must provide a Certificate of Insurance and Additional Insured Endorsement to the(Exhibit VII),and upon written request of the County, provide a duplicate of the policy as evidence of insurance protection. Grant recipient shall responsible for the maintenance of their contractors insurance documentation. G. If the Agency is a Municipal Corporation or an agency of the State of Washington and is self-insured for any of the above insurance requirements, a certification of self-insurance shall be attached hereto and be incorporated by reference and shall constitute compliance with this section. 19. NONDISCRIMINATION AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY A. Nondiscrimination in Employment Provision of Services King County Code Chapter 12.16 is incorporated by reference as if fully set,,forth herein and such requirements apply to this Contract. During the performance of this Contract, neither the Agency nor any party subcontracting under the authority of this Contract shall discriminate or tolerate harassment on the basis of race, color, sex,religion, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, age, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability in the employment or application for employment or in the administration or delivery of services or any other benefits under this Contract. B. Nondiscrimination in Subcontracting Practices King County Code Chapter 12.17 is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein and such requirements apply to this Contract. During the solicitation, award and term of this Contract, the Agency shall not create barriers to open and fair opportunities to participate in County contracts or to obtain or compete for contracts and subcontracts as sources of supplies, equipment, construction and services. In considering offers from and doing business with subcontractors and suppliers, the Agency shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, marital status,sexual orientation or the presence of any mental or physical disability in an otherwise qualified disabled person. C. Fair Employment Practices King County Code Chapter 12 18 is mcorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein and such requirements apply to this Contract. During the performance of this Contract,neither the Agency nor any party subcontracting under the authority of this Contract shall engage in unfair employment practices. 7 D. Compliance with Laws and Regulations The Agency shall comply fully with all applicable federal, state and local laws,ordinances, executive orders and regulations that prohibit discrimination. These laws include, but are not limited to, RCW Chapter 49.60, Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act,and the Restoration Act of 1987. E. Sanctions for Violations Any violation of the mandatory requirements of the provisions of this Section shall be a material breach of contract for which the Agency may be subject to damages, wilhholding payment and any other sanctions provided for by the Contract and by applicable law. F. ReoortinQ 1. The Agency entering into a contract or agreement with King County valued at$25,000 L or more shall submit with this Contract a total Personnel Inventory Report providing employment data for minorities,females,and persons with disabilities. Subject to the provisions of KCC Chapter 12.16.060,the Agency's Personnel Inventory Report shall be effective for two years after the date on which the report was submitted. 2. The Agency entering into a contract with King County valued at more than$25,000,or contracts which in the aggregate have a value to the Agency of more than $25,000 should submit an Affidavit of Compliance in the form provided by the County, demonstrating commitment to comply with the provisions of KCC Chapter 12.16 in accordance with paragraph A of this Section XV. 20. SECTION 504 AND AMERICANS WITH DISASTLMES ACT The Agency shall complete a 504/ADA Self-Evaluation Questionnaire fo- all programs and services offered by the Agency (including any services not subject to this Contract) and shall evaluate its services,programs and employment practices for compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,as amended ("504") and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 , ("ADA"). The Agency shall complete a 504/ADA Assurance of Compliance, and corrective action plan as needed for structural,programmatic,and/or service changes necessary at each of its premises within the State of Washington to comply with 504 and the ADA,an it is attached as an exhibit to this Contract and incorporated herein by reference. r 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST KCC Chapter 3.04 is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth hence,and the Agency agrees to abide by all conditions of said chapter. Failure by the Agency to comply with any requirement of said KCC Chapter shall be a material breach of contract. 22. POLITICAL ACTIVITY PROHIBITED None of the funds, materials, property, or services provided directly or indirectly under this Contract shall be used for any partisan political activity or to further the election or defeat of any candidate for public office. 8 i 23. EQUIPMENT PURCHASE,MAINTENANCE,AND OWNERSHIP A. The Agency shall be responsible for all such property, including the proper care and maintenance of the equipment. ' B. The Agency shall establish and maintain inventory records and transaction documents (purchase requisitions, packing slips, invoices, receipts) of equipment purchased with Contract funds. 24. NOTICES Whenever this Contract provides for notice to be provided by one(1)party to another,such notice shall be: B. Directed to the person specified in Section IV of this Contract. Any time within which a party must take some action shall be computed from the date that the notice is received by said patty. 25. ASSIGNMENT The Agency shall not assign any portion of rights and obligations under this Contract or transfer or assign any claim arising pursuant to this Contract without the written consent of the County Said consent must be sought in writing by the Agency not less than fifteen(15)days prior to the date of any proposed assignment. 26. CONTRACT AMENDMENTS Either party may request changes to this Contract. Proposed changes that are mutually agreed upon shall be incorporated by written amendments to this Contract. 9 27. ENTIRE CONTRACTMAIVER OF DEFAULT The parties agree that this Contract is the complete expression of the terms hereto and any oral or written representations or understandings not incorporated herein are excluded. Both parties recognize that time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Contract. Waiver of any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver or breach of any provision of the Contract shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of the Contract unless stated to be such through written approvpl by the County,which shall be attached to the original Contact KING COUNTY AGENCY FOR King County Executive Signature Date NAME(Please type or print),Tide Date 10 1 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: SERVICE CLUB PARK DONATIONS —ACCEPT AND AMEND BUDGET 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the $8,500 from Kent Sunrise Rotary Club and $1,824.72 from Kiwanis Club of Kent and authorize the expenditure of funds in the Service Club Park budget. The 58,500 from Kent Sunrise Rotary Club and $1,824.72 from Kiwanis Club of Kent are partial payments from original pledges made in 1999 to support the construction of Service Club Park. To recognize their contributions, play fields will be named for each club. The park will be under construction this year. 3. EXHIBITS: Revenue report t4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services 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. 6F R55GADD6 City of Kent 1/5/2005 Page 1 Journal Entry/Budget Change uoc#: 28486 Ledger Type: AA Journal Entry Doc Type: JR Batch#: 50690 Explanation: PP&D Deposit#3 Park Donations GIL Date: 1/5/2005 Automatic Reversal? No Created by: JBROOM Last Changed by: JBROOM Line# B Unit Object Subsidiary Subledger Debit Amount Credit Amount Account Explanation Reference 1 0 P20024 56710 1,B24.72- Service Club Park/Krwanis Club 20 P20024 56710 8,500 00- Service Club/Sunnse Rotary 40 1 11110 0010 1,82472 Service Club Par"wanes Club 50 1 11110 0010 8,50000 Service Club/Sunnse Rotary 60 1 11110 0010flp n Journal Entry Totals: -+&A24-7f -1e;g24-32= 10153`t.-3-a io,53N-1z j -} t-Authorized by: Finance-Reviewed by: L Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: KENT POOL FUNDING—APPROVE 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve the allocation of up to $25,000 to the Kent Pool General Operating Budget from the Youth/Teen Utility Tax Account and that up to $25,000 be allocated from the Facility Division Emergency Capital Repairs Account for repairs to the Kent Pool. Furthermore, that the funds be allocated only if needed, following financial concurrence from the Finance Director and Parks Director. The City took back operation of the Kent Pool from King County in 2003. At that time, an agreement was made with Aquatic Management Group (AMG) to operate the pool. The County fulfilled a commitment to pay $25,000 each year of 2003 and 2004 to fund the operation and maintenance of the pool. In 2004 the County funding ended. AMG is requesting financial support from the City to pay for general maintenance and emergency repairs of the aging pool. 3. EXHIBITS: AMG Profit and Loss Statement through November 2004 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks & Human Services Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.) 5. FISCAL IMPACT Expenditure? X Revenue? Currently in the Budget? Yes X No If no: Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount$ Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $ 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6G 6:39 AM Aquatic Management broup-news 12107104 Accrual Basis Profit & Loss January through November 2004 Jan 04 Feb 04 Mar 04 Apr 04 May 04 Jun 04 Utilities 21998 21998 B 19 23297 1965 15965 Total Expense 8,38693 8,409.93 16,847.50 10,483.67 8=83 12,828 30 Net Ordinary Income -2,407.00 1,38148 -5,726 93 -12,519 53 2,&M52 8,16420 Other IncomWExpense Other income Interest Income 0.16 77.49 0.15 3.55 45675 0.34 Vending commissions 53950 268.75 44357 374.50 39438 382.47 Total Other Income 539.66 34624 443.72 3T8 05 851.13 382.81 Other Expense Capital Expenses(reimbursable) 4,70142 1,452.15 7,629.98 000 000 000 Total Other Expense 4,70142 1,452.15 7,629.98 000 000 000 Net Other income -4,161.76 -1.105.91 -7,1B6 26 37805 85113 38281 Net Income ,6.%8.76 275.57 -12,913.19 42,141.78 3,743.96 8.547,01 Page 2 of 4 Aquatic Management Group-KM 12107/04 i r Accrual Basis Profit $ Loss `T l? January through November 2004 Jul 04 Aug 04 Sep 04 Oct 04 Nov04 TOTAL Ordinary Income/Expense Income Gift Certificates 0.00 MOD 0.00 0.00 0.00 204 00 Lessons/Classes 34,165.11 23,748.54 13,962.28 16,437 89 13,93169 218,458.94 Retail Sales 7,693.36 8,608.59 7,27263 4,435.61 5,95412 72.93638 Sales Adjustments Other adjustments 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 000 -0 05 Returns,Refunds&Allowances 424A7 -1,135 24 -1.158 05 -69 20 22235 -2,749 11 Sales Adjustments-Other -249.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25560 Total Sales Adjustments -373.54 -1,13524 4,158.05 -69.20 22235 -2.493.56 Swim Team Practice 1,974.90 1,57170 000 7,01155 040 28,651 W Total Income 43,459.83 32,793 59 20,076.86 27,823.64 20,10816 317.759 62 Cost of Goods Sold fig Chemicals 40089 223.20 925.06 271.99 000 3,317.59 Electricity 1,543.38 1,641.84 1,560.75 1,630.25 0.00 16,47288 Gas 2,534.79 2,211.53 1,63319 2,818.76 0.00 36,143 DO Ice Cream Products 611.00 157.00 30300 14650 0.00 2,219.50 Instructors wages&taxes 14,442 78 14,042.87 10,W8.18 13,536.83 9,78400 115,200.52 Payroll taxes 1,93460 1.931.79 1,601.04 2,105.0D 1,52131 15,963 03 Pool Manager 2,884.62 2,884 62 2,88462 4,326.93 2,88462 26,596 18 Water 1,436.78 1,307.38 1,210.33 1,113.28 1,15908 13,D96 92 Total COGS 25,788 83 24,400.23 20,98617 25,949 54 15.349 01 229,009 62 Gross Profit IT,67100 6,39336 -90931 1,67430 4,75915 86,75000 Expense Advertising 22336 32473 000 714.95 0.00 1,505 04 Bank Service Charges 73632 97382 644.82 557.07 45705 5,66794 Employee Benefits 000 000 7935 493.20 0,00 788.25 Equipment Rental 7.62 0.00 1958 979 000 13684 insurance 7,421.70 0.00 000 000 O.DD 7,421.70 Interest Expense Finance Charge O.00 O.00 375 575 000 050 Total Interest Expense 0.00 0.00 3.75 5.75 OAO 950 Licenses and Permits DOD 421.00 OAO 000 ODD 42100 Malntenancs&cleaning 000 000 352.51 38831 2037 3,657.75 Management Fees 6,000 00 6,OD0 00 6,000 DO 6,00000 6,ODO.00 66,000 00 miscellaneous 69835 000 000 O.DO 000 1,09835 Office Supplies 560.56 28075 316.76 22968 21825 5,09363 Professional DevelopmaR 24.00 0.00 1,24600 000 000 1,893.65 Repairs 4,31416 1,D84 28 43514 25285 0.00 20,286 88 Supplies 411.81 595.65 69970 1,46553 10879 5,72857 Taxes 000 000 0 OD 1,14185 000 1,14185 Telephone 37391 0 00 123.41 363.36 000 1,978 62 Travel&Ent EMertalnment 2933 000 29.97 0.00 0.00 20821 Total Travel&Ent 29.33 ODD 2997 000 000 208 21 Papa 3 of 4 6 39 AM Aquatic managemenr urvu fs—mew, 12JO7104 Accrual Basis Profit $ Loss January through November 2004 Jul 04 Aug 04 Sep 04 Oct 04 Nov 04 TOTAL Utilities 191 D5 000 319.30 15965 000 1,67043 Total Expense 20,992.1B 9,68023 10,27229 11,78199 6,80446 124,708.21 Net Ordinary Income -3,321.18 -1,286.87 -11.181.60 -9,907.69 -2,045.31 -35,958 21 Other IncomelExpense Other Income Interest Income 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.37 0A0 540.15 Vending commissions 000 0.00 499.71 000 35469 3,25757 Total Other Income 034 000 499.71 1.37 35469 3,79772 Other Expense Capital Expenses(reimbursable) 0 DO 000 542.65 468.00 000 14,794 20 Total Other Expense D.DO 0 DO 542.65 468.00 000 14,794.20 Net Other Income 034 000 -42 94 -466 63 35469 -10,9%48 tNet Income -3,320.84 -1,286.87 41,224.64 -10,374.32 -1,69062 -46,954.69 Page 4 of 4 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: KINGSLEY GLEN INFRASTRUCTURE IMRPOVEMENTS BILL OF SALE—ACCEPT 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the Bill of Sale for Kingsley Glen Infrastructure Improvements submitted by Gary Allen for continuous operation and maintenance 1,389 feet of street improvements and 1,854 feet of storm sewer. Bonds to be released after the maintenance period. This project is located at 144" Avenue SE at SE 278`b Street. 3. EXHIBITS: Vicinity map 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director (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 t AE MERIDIAN KEN KNGLE W SITE w 0 z N W � N W Lj w ro It SE 288TH ST. 5� VICINITY MAP i� T u Kingsley Glen 14,e Avenue at SE 278`h Street Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 ' Category Consent Calendar ' 1. SUBJECT: 2004 SEND HALF BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE— ADOPT 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of Ordinance No. 3737for budget adjustments made between August 1, 2004 and December 31, 2004 and extension of a line of credit to the Community Block Grant Development Fund and the Golf Course ' Fund to cover year-end expenditures. ' Authorization is requested to approve the technical gross budget adjustment ordinance totaling $56,112,501 for budget adjustments made between August 1, 2004, and December 31, 2004. The net amount, excluding transfers and internal service charges ' is $48,659,809. Please note, $56,096,872 was previously approved by Council. These were primarily for projects and bonds. The short term loans to the Community Block Grant Fund and the Golf Course Fund are intended only to provide temporary cash to cover year-end expenditures. ' 3. EXHIBITS: Ordinance 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.) ' 5. FISCAL IMPACT Expenditure? Yes Revenue? Yes Currently in the Budget? Yes No X If no: Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Parks Projects Amount $13,625 Fund Economic Dev. Corp. Amount $2,000 ' Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Parks Projects Amount $13,625 ' 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds ' DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda ' Item No. 6I ORDINANCE NO. i AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,Washington, amending the 2004 Budget for adjustments made between August 1, 2004, and December 31, 2004, and authorizing a short term loan from the General Fund to the Housing and ' Community Development Fund (CDBG) and to the Golf Course Fund to cover year-end expenditures. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,WASHINGTON,DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION].—Bud�zetAdjustments The 2004 City budget is amended to include budget fund adjustments as summarized and set forth in Exhibit "A," which is incorporated into this ordinance. 1 SECTION 2. — Housing & Community Development Fund and Golf Course Fund—Short Term Loans. There is hereby ratified and established,as part of the 2004 ' budget, short-term loans from the General Fund to the Housing and Community Development Fund (CDBG) and the Golf Course Fund in an amount not to exceed $200,000 each to cover year-end expenditures. These funds may only be used as needed. SECTION 3. — Severabdity If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. 1 2004-Budget Adjustment- ' Second Half SECTION 4.—Ratification Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. ' SECTIONS.—Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. ' JIM WHITE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK ' APPROVED AS TO FORM: ' TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of February, 2005. APPROVED: day of February,2005. ' PUBLISHED: day of February, 2005. , 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 i Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) , BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK 2 2004-Budget Adjustment- , Second Ha ff . i ' City of Kent Budget Adjustment Ordinance Adjustments August 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004 ' Exhibit A Adjustment Fund Title Ordinance 001 General Fund 582,706 110 Street Fund 45,000 1 130 Lodging Tax Fund 140 Youth/Teen Fund 150 Capital Improvement Fund (45,000) 160 Criminal Justice Fund (247,514) 170 Environmental Fund 180 Housing & Comm Dev Fund 240.184 ' 190 Other Operating Projects Fund 729,533 210 Voted Debt Service Fund 220 Non-Voted Debt Service Fund ' 250 Spec Assess Debt Service Fund 830,000 310 Street Capital Projects Fund 14,546,180 320 Parks Capital Projects Fund 930,104 330 Other Capital Projects Fund 21,550,367 340 Technology Capital Projects 350 Facilities Capital Projects 1,263,169 410 Water Operating Fund 440 Sewerage Operating 15,685,772 480 Golf Operating 510 Fleet Services Fund 520 Central Services Fund 530 Fire Equipment Fund 540 Facilities Management Fund 560 Insurance Fund 620 Firefighters Pension Fund 680 Agency and Clearing Fund 701 Kent Economic Dev Corp 2,000 Total Gross Budget Change 56,112,501 ' Less: Internal Service Funds Other Transfers (279,213) Internal Transfers (7,173,479) Subtotal (7,452,692) ' Total Net Budget Change 48,659,809 ' Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: GOODS AND SERVICES AGREEMENT, ERGONOMICS FOR ' POLICE RECORDS DEPARTMENT—AUTHORIZE 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorize the Mayor to sign the Goods and Services Agreement with Watson Furniture. Watson Furniture has been selected to provide and install four ergonomic workstations in the Records division of the Kent Police Department. 3. EXHIBITS: Memo dated 8/9/04 from D. Santos, Support Services Manager; bids from three vendors; and Goods and Services Agreement i4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee 1/20/05 (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 moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda ' Item No. 6J 1 ' POLICE DEPARTMENT Ed Crawford, Chief of Police • Phone 253-856-5888 KENT Fax 253-856-6802 ' Address 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent,WA 98032-5895 DATE: January 20,2005 TO: Public Safety Committee FROM: Chief Ed Crawford SUBJECT: Authorization for Goods and Services Agreement for Ergonomic Workstations MOTION: I move to recommend authorizing the Mayor to sign the Goods and Services Agreement with Watson Furniture, and placing this on the Consent Calendar for the February 1, 2005 Consent Calendar SUMMARY: Watson Furniture has been selected to provide and install four ergonomic workstations in the Records division of the Kent Police Department. ' EXHIBITS: Memo dated 8/9/04 from David Santos, Support Services Manager Quotation from Watson Furniture 1 Quotation from Alster Communications Quotation from Tab Northwest BUDGET IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: ' Kent City Council Watson Furniture Agreement February 1,2005 POLICE DEPARTMENT , David Santos, Sup.Svcs. Manager Phone 253-856-5810 Fax 253-856-6802 K E N T Address ' w.s H i N a T o w 220 Fourth Avenue S.Kent,WA.98032-5895 Memorandum , DATE: 8-9-04 TO: Chief Ed Crawford VIA- Deputy Chief Chuck Viller , Captain Mike P FROM: Support Services Manager David Santos RE: Ergonomic Workstations Gentlemen, Attached are the estimates from two venders in regards to ergonomic workstations. The First ' quote from Watson Furniture is for just under$50,000,this includes four stations with all the options offered by the company. Watson Furniture systems are similar to Valley Com in style and function, each station has its own lighting,heating and filtered air. The second, TAB Northwest,comes in at$18,900, but this is for one workstation being adjustable,the other three workstations are fixed height. TAB Northwest is similar to our existing style of workstations, except that the monitor and keyboard are adjustable.It has lighting but no heat or filtered air. Having managed this group for a length of time it is clear to me that the Watson Furniture option offers the most in style and function,I believe most of, it not all of the issues that have been ' expressed over the years would be addressed with these workstations. The cost between the two is similar(extending pricing for TAB to 4 workstations),but Watson Furniture clearly offers more in function and comfort, not to mention accessibility to PC's by IT. It is my recommendation that we secure funding and more forward with the purchase of Watson Furniture systems. If you have any questions about any of the workstations or their functionally please let me know. I have attached brochures for each company to their estimates. �LuQ1 fLocal Law Enforcement Block Grant FY2004 Kent Police Department Ergonomic Work Stations for Records Staff The Kent Police Department(KPD)was awarded the Bureau of Justice FY 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant. The City of Kent's allocation for FY 2004 is $22,915. The City's required 10%match equals 2,546. The total grant project amount equals $25,461. The KPD has designated this funding to the Supporting Law Enforcement-Procuring equipment,technology,and other material directly related to basic law enforcement functions purpose area Ergonomic workstations for the Records Unit will be purchased with this grant funding. The Police Department Records Staff are the public's primary resource for police department information Police officers also rely on Records personnel to support them during the course of their work day. The Police Department Records Unit staff share workstations while covering the front counter of the police department on a 24 hours/7 days per week basis. The long hours sitting at a workstation completing intensive computer and phone answering assignments require proper ergonomics to support productivity and staff health. Estimates on ergonomic workstations with the proper mechanisms for the police department records staff range from$10,000-15,000 per workstation. These workstations contain adjustable desk surfaces so the Records Specialists can work sitting or standing. Some products also include a digital height gauge to allow workers to easily replicate the positions that best fit their needs This funding should cover the cost of two of the four necessary workstation upgrades. QUOTATION ' Watson>Furniture Group No.: 050111LD2 26246 Twelve Trees Lane NW Date: 1/1112005 Poulsbo, WA 98370 Expiration Date: 4/12(2005 (360) 394-1300 , To: Kent Police Department PROJECT: Dispatch Consde Furniture Attn:D avid Santos Synergy Center Lilt System Email: dsantos(a),ci.kentwa.us _Quantity Description Unit Extension 4 ea. Synergy 90*Positions with Center Lift(3030) $7,988.00 $31,952.00 Single and Dual Configuration Includes: Electronically Adjustable Primary Worksurface Center Work Surface Holds 3-21"Flat Screens ' POWERED Keyboard Platform with Manual Positive/Negative Tilt Keyboard Platform Holds Keyboard&Mouse Unified Frame Construction 42"High Arched Panels 22"Deep Cavities(Holds up to 5 CPTs Per Position) Front&Rear Access to Extension Cavities Pull-Out CPU Shelves (Front or Back) 1 ea.MOTO Pencil,Box,File Pedestal(Locking) 36"Wide Overhead Storage w/Notched Height Legs(DP3 &DP4 Only) Wedge Design- Interconnetive Wire Management System , 4 ea. Total Comfort System w/Heated Foot Rest(TCS) $1,997.00 $7,998.00 Includes: Single Point Interface for all envunnmentalc ontrols Digital Readout for Primary Surface from 27"to 44"high Digital Readout for Input Platform from 5"below to 5"above Primary 2ea Mobile Filtererd Air Delivery Fans lea Heated Foot Rest ADA switch Additional task light on-off capabibty 4 ea. JOLT Halogen Task Lights(Dimmable w/TCS) $138.00 $552.00 1 ea. Delivery&Installation(Based Live Cut-Over( $5,500.00 Subtotal $45,992.00 ' 1 ea. WA Sales Tax @ 8.8% $4,0W.30 GRAND TOTAL $50,039.30 1. Taxes are utcluded State and Local taxes will apply unless proof of exemption rs prowded unth the P Q , 2. 50%Deposit unth order,Net 30 days from Shdpment of Product 3. Chairs are for representational purposes only. 4. Lead time 60-90 days alter receipt of purchase order issued to Watson FLrruture Group. Completed Ordr Consists of signed Contract or Purchase Order,Signed draunngs,Signed a lor Selection Sheet and Depot KentPD-Syner9yjds , 1 QUOTATION Watson Furniture Group No.: 040806LD1 26246 Twelve Trees Lane NW Date: 8/6/2004 Poulsbo, WA 98370 Expiration Date: 11/512004 (360) 394-1300 To: Kent Police Department PROJECT: Dispatch Console Furniture Attn: David Santos Synergy Center Lift System Email" dsantos@cikentwa.us Quantity Description Unit Extension 4 ea. Synergy 90•Positions with Center Lift (3030) $7,988.00 $31,952.00 Single and Dual Configuration Includes: Electronically Adjustable Primary Worksurface Center Work Surface Holds 3-21" Flat Screens POWERED Keyboard Platform with Manual Positive/Negative Tilt Keyboard Platform Holds Keyboard&Mouse Unified Frame Construction 42" High Arched Panels 22" Deep Cavities (Holds up to 5 CPU's Per Position) Front &Rear Access to Extension Cavities Pull-Out CPU Shelves (Front or Dack) 1 ea. MOTO Pencil, Box, File Pedestal (Locking) 36" Wide Overhead Storage w/Notched Height Legs (DP3 &DP4 Only) Wedge Design -Interconnetive Wire Management System 1 ea. Delivery ds Installation(Based Live Cut-Over) $5,500.00 Subtotal $37,452 00 1 ea. WA Sales Tax @ 8.8% $3,295.79 GRAND TOTAL $40,747.78 Optional Items: 4 ea. Total Comfort System w/Heated Foot Rest(TCS $1,997.00 $7,988.00 Includes: Single Point Interface for all environmental controls Digital Readout for Primary Surface tom 27"to 44"high Digital Readout for Input Platform from 5"below to 5"above Primary 2ea Mobile Filtererd Air Delivery Fars lea Heated Foot Rest ADA switch Additional task light on-off capability 4 ea. JOLT Halogen Task Lights(Dimmable w/TCS) $138.00 $552.00 1. Taxes are included State and Local taxes will apply unless proof of exemption is provided wdh the P.O. 2. 5096 Depositu,ith order;Net 30 days from Shipment of Product. 3 Chairs are for representational purposes only 4 Lead time 60-90 days after receipt of purchase order issued to Watson Furniture Group Completed Order Consists of signed Contract or Purchase Order, Signed drauiings, Signed Color Selection Sheeta nd Deposit KentPD-Synergy.)ds p, TSp, , W 'DISPATCH STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING Client anf !' 0 ' Contact Name: A, ",/o S Phone( AS's ) Email Address: ,�(�iC r ;, ke. f .�. U S Fax Delivery Address: ^J yeti �re cur .S-sk>s� ke4 ►,.9 vgo�� ' Desired LutaR*m Date: .2rd f� !'rah:1U n.ra fv— (%rdard Lead 7WM at 60-70 Dan firm S ofurftm , after Rempt of Comae!Order.) COMPLETE ORDER: Watson Furniture Group requires all of the below!terns before an Order can be turned into Production to secure the Ship Date. The'Complete Order"includes: • Signed Purchase Order or Contract ' • 50%Deposit with Order,Net 30 Days • Signed Floor Plan Drawing Signed 3-Dimensional Drawing(s) • Signed Color Selection Sheet • Signed Statement of Understanding j WARRArl Y: Delivery and Instaallation(of Watson consoles only)will be done by factory trained installes. If installation not caompked by a Factory Trained Installer, Warranty is Yoid. Watson Furniture Group products are warranted to be free from defects in material and workmanship for a period of three(3)years(based on 24 hour use)from date of Invoice Warranty includes all parts,shipping,and installation of any defective Watson part (Please see Warranty Statement) ' CHANGE ORDERS: Once a Complete Order has been turned into Watson Furniture Gawp,the client will have S , business days to make any changes to the layout of the furniture,the colors of the frxnbre or the order in general. After 5 days,Watson may charge a Change Order Fee of a minimum of M. At this time,a revised Quote and revised drawings will be Issued. The Revised Drawings will have to be signed by the customer as approved and returned to Watson wih an Watson Fu nhme Group 26246TwdmTreesnoneNW • PWsbo WA 98M (SM 426-1202 • (360)394-13W ♦ Fax(360)394-1323 ♦ watwrAxn xv Dorn ' updated Purchase Order or'a Change Order. The five(5)day grace period will begin again with acceptance of Revised Drawings and Quote. 1 Watson Fumiture Group will plan the Delivery and Lutailation of Dispatch Console Fumba based on Date given by the Customer above The date given is In understanding that the room where the furniture wig be installed will be ready for Delivery and Installation of Corsole Furniture. If the room is not ready by speciW date,Watson will need to have at least four(4)weds notice to Re-Schedule the Delivery and Installation of Dispatch Console Furniture. If four(4) weeks notice is not given,the customer must inform Watson if they want to Accept Delivey of Furniture and store themselm,or if they would like Watson to store the furniture for them. Watson will charge a weekly storage fee of a minimum of$3300 which will be added to the Final Imroioe. I understand and agree to the Above Stated Terms. Client Date 1 1 it 1 i � 1 � 1 1 woven F,more Group 26246 Twelve Tn=lane Nw ♦ Pwsbo,wA ge7o (Wu)4as 12oz 0 (36o)39+130o ♦ FaX(36o)394-132 . watm iMkmcan NTSON `W ' DISPATCH TO ' TENT POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR ' DISPATCH CONSOLE FURNITURE 3-YEAR ALL-INCLUSIVE WARRArm CERTIFICATE Watson wan-ants to the original Customer for a period of three(3)years from the date of acceptance,that the Products it manufactures are free from defects in craftsmanship and materials found in normal usage of the products during the warranty period. Should any failure to conform to this warranty appear to a Product during the applicable warranty period, Watson shall,upon prompt notice,repair or replace the affected part or parts All separate component parts not manufactured by Watson (keyboard mechanisms, power and data devices,Total Comfort System, Lighting,Wrist and Foot Rests etc.)will also be covered under this warranty. When a local dealer or service shop cannot handle service of the workstation system,the manufacturer will send a factory representative to the installation. This warranty does not apply to: Normal wear and tear, console fumiture installed by a non-factory trained installer, products subjected to improper use or conditions,damage resulting from; misuse, negligence,accident or alterations. Except as stated above,Watson makes no express or implied warranties as to any product and in particular makes no warranty of fitness for any particular product except for use as standard communication console furniture. Product repair or replacement is the culDWs , exclusive remedy for any and all product defects. The remedies provided above are the Customers sole remedies for any failure of Watson to comply with its obligations regarding workmanship of its products. EXTENDED WARRANTY TERMS AVAILABLE. PLEASE CONTACT WATSON DISPATCH FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. , Date Installed and Accepted: Installation Performed By: t Customer Approval: Aster Communications 6703 154 h Place SE Bellevue,WA 98006 800-365-1272 Quotation for City of Kent Police Department Attention: David Santos Thank you for your interest in Watson Dispatch Furniture. As the representative for Watson,we are pleased to provide the following quotation. ' Dispatch Consoles 4 each Synergy 90 degree Positions with Center Lift (3030) $8,500.00 each Sub-total for four positions $34,000.00 Single and Dual Configuration Includes:Electronically Adjustable Primary Worksurface Center Work Surface Holds 3-21"Flat Screens POWERED Keyboard Platform with Manual Positive/Negative Tilt Keyboard Platform Holds Keyboard&Mouse Unified Frame Construction 42"High Arched Panels 22"Deep Cavities(Holds up to 5 CPU's Per Position) Front&Rear Access to Extension Cavities Pull-Out CPU Shelves(Front or Back) 1 ea.MOTO Pencil, Box,File Pedestal (Locking) 36" Wide Overhead Storage w/Notched Height Legs(DP3 &DP4 Only) Wedge Design-Interconnetive Wire Management System 1 each Delivery& Installation (Based on Live Cut-Over) $6,000.00 Sub -total with positions,delivery and installation$40,000.00 WA State Sales Tax @ 8.8%$3,520 00 Grand Total without options $43,520.00 The following page will list available options. City of Kent ' Page Two Options , 4 each Total Comfort System w/Heated Foot Rest(TCS) $2,199.00 each Includes: Single Point Interface for all environmental controls r Digital Readout for Primary Surface from 27"to 44"high Digital Readout for Input Platform from 5"below to 5" above Primary 2ea Mobile Filtererd Air Delivery Fans lea Heated Foot Rest ADA switch Additional task light on-off capability 4 each JOLT Halogen Task Lights(Dimmable w/TCS) $150.00 each This price is good for 30-days. , Taxes as shown unless other arrangements are made between City of Kent and the State of Washington. , 50%Deposit with order;Net 30-days from Shipment of Product. Lead time 60-90 days after receipt of purchase order issued to Alster Communications. Completed Order Consists of signed Contract or Purchase Order, Signed drawings, Signed Color Selection Sheet and Deposit. Thank you again for your interest in Waston Dispatch Furniture. Please call with any Questions. Steve Stouffer Alster Communications 6703 154th Place SE Bellevue,WA 98006 , 800-365-1272 voice 425-747-4021fax www.alster.com • �+�+ ++� cuuv uJ._A LJJOJ01703 IHC NUKIMWLtI h'Atat bl o , otin;gItIonor y(or 06 k ■ Quotation 14-,iun-04 Client Kent Police Department Attu.-> Davc Santos Project--> Furniture Phnne—a 253-856-5810 FaY---> 253-856-6802 Unit Total Description Model Price Investment Four Station Furniture Ctuster 42"1-1 Fabnc Parncls,frames connectors, $ 5,506.56 $ 5,506.56 end caps,with electrical power assembly Worksurfaces,keyboard trays,pedestal,pencil 3 5,050.44 $ 5,05044 drawers,lateral cabinets and grommets ' Overhead storage and sbelves and task lights, $ 1,335.24 $ 1,33524 t Parts Sub-Total $ 11,892.24 Freight $ 2,000.00 Inside Delivery and Installation _$ 4,800.00 Total —$ 18,692.24 Y S1r pCv. JaAB Crain TAB Northwest 33400 13th Place South Federal Way,WA 98003 Customer Acceptance X 253/83 8-6194 Phone Quote is good for 60 days,local lax not included. 253!838.1563 Fax g03/333,9098 Toll free 611412004 1^ra,n c�tab,rw corn • KENT W AS MINQTON GOODS & SERVICES AGREEMENT between the City of Kent and 1 Watson Furniture Group ' THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation , (hereinafter the "City"), and Waton Furniture Group organized under the laws of the State of Washington, located and doing business at 26246 Tweleve Trees Lane NW, Poulsbo, Wa.98370, Phone(360)394-1300 (hereinafter the "Vendor"). AGREEMENT I. DESCRIPTION OF WORK. Vendor shall provide the following goods and materials and/or perform the following services for the City: Police Records Ergonomic Furniture. Build and install ergonomic furniture for Police Records in accordance with the Quotation dated January 11, 2005, which is attached and incorporated as Exhibit A. Vendor acknowledges and understands that it is not the City's exclusive provider of these goods, materials, or services and that the City maintains its unqualified right to obtain these goods, materials, and services through other sources. II. TIME OF COMPLETION. Upon the effective date of this Agreement, Vendor shall complete the work and provide all goods, materials, and services within 90 days . III. COMPENSATION. The City shall pay the Vendor an amount not to exceed Fifty thousand thirty nine dollars and thirty cents ($50,039 30), including applicable Washington State Sales Tax, for the goods, materials, and services contemplated in this Agreement The City shall pay the Vendor the following amounts according to the following schedule: GOODS& SERVICES AGREEMENT- 1 (Over Q10 000 00 including W,SST) 50% Deposit with order Net 30 upon completion If the City objects to all or any portion of an invoice, it shall notify Vendor 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 A. Defective or Unauthorized Work. The City reserves its right to withhold payment from Vendor for any defective or unauthorized goods, materials or services If Vendor is unable, for any reason, to complete any part of this Agreement, the City may obtain the goods, materials or services from other sources, and Vendor shall be liable to the City for any additional costs incurred by the City "Additional costs" shall mean all reasonable costs, including legal costs and attorney fees, incurred by the City beyond the maximum Agreement price specified above. The City further reserves its right to deduct these additional costs incurred to complete this Agreement with other sources, from any and all amounts due or to become due the Vendor. B. Final Payment: Waiver of Claims. THE MAKING OF FINAL PAYMENT SHALL CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF CLAIMS, EXCEPT THOSE PREVIOUSLY AND PROPERLY MADE AND IDENTIFIED BY VENDOR AS UNSETTLED AT THE TIME REQUEST FOR FINAL PAYMENT IS MADE. IV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The parties intend that an Independent Contractor- Employer Relationship will be created by this Agreement and that the Vendor 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. VI. CHANGES. The City may issue a written change order for any change in the goods, materials or services to be provided during the performance of this Agreement. If the Vendor determines, for any reason, that a change order is necessary, Vendor must submit a written change order request to the person listed in the notice provision section of this Agreement, section XIV(D), within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date Vendor knew or should have known of the facts and events giving rise to the requested change. If the City determines that the change increases or decreases the Vendor's costs or time for performance, the City will make an equitable adjustment. The City will attempt, in good faith, to reach agreement with the Vendor on all equitable adjustments. However, if the parties are unable to agree, the City will determine the equitable adjustment as it deems appropriate The Vendor shall proceed with the change order work upon receiving either a written change order from the City or an oral order from the City before actually receiving the written change order. If the Vendor fads to require a change order within the time allowed, the Vendor waives its right to make any claim or submit subsequent change order requests for that portion of the contract work. If the Vendor disagrees with the equitable adjustment, the Vendor must complete the change order work; however, the GOODS &SERVICES AGREEMENT-2 (Over UO 000 00 includinv W.SST) Vendor may elect to protest the adjustment as provided in subsections A through E of Section VII, Claims, below. The Vendor accepts all requirements of a change order by: (1) endorsing it, (2) writing a separate acceptance, or(3) not protesting in the way this section provides. A change order that is accepted by Vendor as provided in this section shall constitute full payment and final settlement of all claims for contract time and for direct, indirect and consequential costs, including costs of delays related to any work, either covered or affected by the change. VII. CLAIMS. If the Vendor disagrees with anything required by a change order, another written order, or an oral order from the City, including any direction, instruction, interpretation, or determination by the City, the Vendor may file a claim as provided in this section. The Vendor shall give written notice to the City of all claims within fourteen (14) calendar days of the occurrence of the events giving rise to the claims, or within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date the Vendor knew or should have known of the facts or events giving rise to the claim, whichever occurs first . Any claim for damages, additional payment for any reason, or extension of time, whether under this Agreement or otherwise, shall be conclusively deemed to have been waived by the Vendor unless a timely written claim is made in strict accordance with the applicable provisions of this Agreement. At a minimum, a Vendor's written claim shall include the information set forth in subsections A, items 1 , through 5 below. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A COMPLETE, WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED SHALL BE AN ABSOLUTE WAIVER OF ANY CLAIMS ARISING IN ANY WAY FROM THE FACTS OR EVENTS SURROUNDING THAT CLAIM OR CAUSED BY THAT DELAY. A. Notice of Claim. Provide a signed written notice of claim that provides the following information: 1. The date of the Vendor's claim; 2. The nature and circumstances that caused the claim; 3. The provisions in this Agreement that support the claim; 4. The estimated dollar cost, if any, of the claimed work and how that estimate was determined; and 5. An analysis of the progress schedule showing the schedule change or disruption if the Vendor is asserting a schedule change or disruption. B. Records. The Vendor shall keep complete records of extra costs and time incurred as a result of the asserted events giving rise to the claim. The City shall have access to any of the Vendor's records needed for evaluating the protest. The City will evaluate all claims, provided the procedures in this section are followed. If the City determines that a claim is valid, the City will adjust payment for work or time by an equitable adjustment. No adjustment will be made for an invalid protest. C. Vendor's Duty to Complete Protested Work. In spite of any claim, the Vendor shall proceed j promptly to provide the goods, materials and services required by the City under this Agreement. GOODS&SERVICES AGREEMENT-3 (Over R10 000 00 zncludinQ Wssn D. Failure to Protest Constitutes Waiver. By not protesting as this section provides,the Vendor also waives any additional entitlement and accepts from the City any written or oral order (including directions, instructions, interpretations, and determination). E. Failure to Follow Procedures Constitutes Waiver. By failing to follow the procedures of this section, the Vendor completely waives any claims for protested work and accepts from the City any written or oral order(including directions, instructions, interpretations, and determination). jVIII. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. VENDOR MUST, IN ANY EVENT, FILE ANY LAWSUIT ARISING FROM OR CONNECTED WITH THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN 120 CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE DATE THE CONTRACT WORK IS COMPLETE OR VENDOR'S ABILITY TO FILE THAT SUIT SHALL BE FOREVER BARRED. THIS SECTION FURTHER LIMITS ANY APPLICABLE STATUTORY LIMITATIONS PERIOD. IX. WARRANTY. This Agreement is subject to all warranty provisions established under the Uniform Commercial Code, Title 62A, Revised Code of Washington. Vendor warrants goods are merchantable, are fit for the particular purpose for which they were obtained, and will perform in accordance with their specifications and Vendor's representations to City. The Vendor shall correct all defects in workmanship and materials within one (1) year from the date of the City's acceptance of the Contract work. In the event any part of the goods are repaired, only original replacement parts shall be used—rebuilt or used parts will not be acceptable. When defects are corrected, the warranty for that portion of the work shall extend for one (1) year from the date such correction is completed and accepted by the City. The Vendor shall begin to correct any defects within seven (7) calendar days of its receipt of notice from the City of the defect. If the Vendor does not accomplish the corrections within a reasonable time as determined by the City, the City may complete the corrections and the Vendor shall pay all costs incurred by the City in order to accomplish the correction. X. DISCRIMINATION. In the hiring of employees for the performance of work under this Agreement or any sub-contract, the Vendor, its sub-contractors, or any person acting on behalf of the Vendor or sub-contractor 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 Iavailable to perform the work to which the employment relates. Vendor 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. XI. INDEMNIFICATION. Vendor 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, ansing out of or in connection with the Vendor'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 Vendor's work when completed shall not be grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification. IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE VENDOR'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. GOODS & SERVICES AGREEMENT-4 (Over S10 000 00 includinv W.SST) The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. XII. INSURANCE. The Vendor 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. XIII. WORK PERFORMED AT VENDOR'S RISK. Vendor 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 Vendor's own risk, and Vendor 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. XIV. 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 i 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 attorney's fees incurred in defending or bringing such claim or lawsuit, in addition to any other recovery or award provided by law; provided, however, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the City's right to indemnification under Section XI of this Agreement. J 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 1 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 terms 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 Vendor. , 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. GOODS& SERVICES AGREEMENT-5 (Over SIO 000 00 encludinv W,SST) 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 Vendor agrees to comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, rules, and regulations that are now effective or in the future become applicable to Vendor'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. VENDOR: CITY OF KENT: By. By. (signature) (signature) Print Name- Print Name: Jim White Its Its Mayor (Tithe) DATE: DATE: NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: VENDOR: CITY OF KENT: Lisa Botterweich Dave Santos Watson Furniture Group City of Kent 26246 Tweleve Trees Lane NW 220 Fourth Avenue South Poulsbo, Wa. 98370 Kent, WA 98032 (360)394-1300 (telephone) (253) 856-5810 (telephone) (360)394-1323 (facsimile) (253) 856-6802 (facsimile) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kent Law Department Watsonfurn rturegroupPol ice i i GOODS&SERVICES AGREEMENT-6 (Over 910 000 00 tnrludmi, W,SST) t 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 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. i By signing below, I agree to fulfill the five requirements referenced above. Dated this day of 200_. r By: For: r Title: , Date: r r EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS- 1 of 3 CITY OF KENT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY i 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. 1 1 i EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS-2 of 3 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 Company, 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) , 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_ By: For: Title: Date: EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS-3 of 3 EXHIBIT B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICE CONTRACTS Insurance The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurame 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 agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors A. Minimum Scope of Insurance Contractor shall obtain insurance of the types described below: 1. Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non-owned, hired and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary,the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage. 2. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal injury and 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 11 85. There shall 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 to the work performed for the City using ISO additional insured endorsement CG 20 10 11 85 or a substitute endorsement providing equivalent coverage. 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 limit for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per accident 2. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000 each occurrence. $1.000,000 general aggregate and a$1,000,000 products-completed operations aggregate limit. r 70'd 7dioi EXHIBIT B (Continued ) C. Other Insurance Provisions The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions l for Automobile Liability and Commercial General Liability insurance: 1, The Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respect the City. Any Insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City ' shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 1 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 notice 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 additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The City reserves the right to receive a certified copy of all required insurance policies. The'Contractor's Commercial General Liability insurance shall also contain a clause statuig 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.VII. 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 fuirush separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the same insurance requirements as stated herein for the Contractor. Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar I. SUBJECT: WILDWOOD RIDGE I FINAL PLAT—APPROVE 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve the Final Plat Mylar for Wildwood Ridge One and authorize the Mayor to sign the Mylar. Don Leabo proposes to subdivide approximately 2.17 acres into 13 single-family residential lots. The property is located at 26706 106`h Avenue SE. 3. EXHIBITS: Memo with conditions and map t4. RECOMMENDED BY: Community Development & Public Works Staff (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.) 5. FISCAL IMPACT Expenditure? No Revenue? No Currently in the Budget? Yes No If no: Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount S Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount S 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds tDISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 6K COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager W's"'"°'O" Phone:253-856-5454 Fax 253-856-6454 Address* 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent,WA 98032-5895 DATE: January 25, 2005 TO: MAYOR JIM WHITE, COUNCIL PRESIDENT JULIE PETERSON AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON,AICP,PLANNING MANAGER THROUGH: MAYOR JIM WHITE SUBJECT: WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE FINAL PLAT(#FSU-2000-3/KIVA#2042339) MOTION: Approve the final plat mylar for Wildwood Ridge One and authorize the Mayor to sign the mylar SUMMARY: Don Leabo proposes to subdivide approximately 2.17 acres into 13 single- family residential lots The property is located at 26706 106`h Avenue SE. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: On April 16, 2003, the Hearing Examiner issued Findings, Conclusions and a Decision granting preliminary approval of a 13-lot subdivision, with 13 conditions The applicant has complied with the conditions required prior to recording S\PermrtlPlanllongplats\200012042339-FSU-2000-3cc DOC Enclosure Conditions of approval—Heanng Examiner i WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 On April 16, 2003, the City of Kent Hearing Examiner approved the Wildwood Ridge One (Leabo-Curran) long plat with the following conditions: A. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The owner/subdivider shall implement all mitigation measures required by the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the proposed Leabo (Quail's Perch) Preliminary Plat, file#ENV-2000-61. B. PRIOR TO RECORDING THIS SUBDIVISION 1. The Owner/Subdivider shall pay all Charges in Lieu of Assessments and/or Latecomer Fees, if any, prior to recording the plat. 2. The Owner/Subdivider shall submit and receive approval of engineering drawings from the Department of Public Works, and shall then either construct or bond for the following a. A gravity sanitary sewer system to serve all lots. The City sewer system shall be extended from the existing City sanitary sewer system and shall be sized to serve all off-site properties within the same service area. In addition, the sanitary sewer system shall be extended across the entire subdivision to serve adjacent properties within the same service area as detailed by the City Engineer. The proposed sanitary sewer extension is not entirely within the control of the Owner/Subdivider. The Owner/Subdivider shall provide off-site public sanitary sewer easements before the final plat is recorded, if the City Engineer determines it is necessary. The septic system serving the existing home(s) within the proposed subdivision - if any - shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health Department Regulations. b. A water system meeting domestic and fire flow requirements for all lots. The City water main extension system shall be extended from the existing City water system and shall be sized to serve all off-site properties within the same service area. In addition, the water main WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 extension shall be extended across the entire subdivision as needed to serve adjacent properties within the same service area. Existing wells— if any - shall be abandoned in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Ecology. C. Detailed Drainage Plans meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards, and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #5-3, Detailed Drainage Plans. Initial guidance is given in the conditions which follow: (1) The Owner/Subdivider has proposed to construct a public off-site detention pond system in accordance with the Kent Construction Standards to mitigate for potential impacts to both stormwater runoff quantity and quality for both this subdivision and the proposed Bakke Subdivision. Should the Bakke Subdivision not develop concurrently (plans submitted and bonding approved) with this subdivision, then an application for plat alteration or amendment shall be submitted to the City and reviewed in accordance with city ordinances. The detention pond storage volume and release criteria shall be that for the Hill; the pre-development condition shall be assumed to be grass only unless otherwise determined by the Department of Public Works. Active storage volume requirements shall be met above the elevation of the seasonal high water table. Documentation of this elevation through on-site sods data shall be provided with the Detailed Drainage Plans (2) As development occurs within this subdivision, roof downspouts for each roofed structure (house, garage, carport, etc.) shall be directed to Roof Downspout Infiltration Trenches, or Perforated Stubouts, meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards, and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #5-5, Roof Downspout Infiltration Trench Systems, Downspout Dispersion System, and Perforated Stubout Connections. These roof downspout conveyance and infiltration systems shall include overflow pipes connected to an approved conveyance system. The Detailed Drainage Plans will include an approved detail for the Roof Downspout Infiltration Trench, or Perforated Stubout, and will provide for private stormwater stubouts to Page 2 of 9 WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE , (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 each lot for future connection from the Roof Downspout Infiltration Trenches, or Perforated Stubouts. The face of the recorded plat shall contain the following restriction: AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE, RESIDENCES CONSTRUCTED ON LOTS OF THIS , SUBDIVISION MUST PROVIDE ROOF DOWNSPOUT INFILTRATION TRENCH (PERFORATED STUBOUT) SYSTEMS PER DETAILS SHOWN ON THE APPROVED STORMWATER PLANS. (3) A downstream analysis is required for this development, and it shall include an analysis for capacity, erosion potential, and water quality from the point of discharge from the site downstream a distance of at least one quarter mile or to the point where stormwater discharges at the outfall to the Upper Mill Creek Detention Facility, whichever distance is further. See City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #5-4, Downstream Analyses, for the specific information required for downstream analyses. (4) The Owner/Subdivider shall submit Landscape Plans for within and surrounding the detention pond to Planning Services and to the Department of Public Works for concurrent review and approval prior to, or in conjunction with, the approval of the Detailed Drainage Plans. These Landscape Plans shall meet the minimum requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards, and the stormwater management landscaping requirements contained within City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #5, Landscape Plans. (5) The Owner/Subdivider shall execute Declaration of Stormwater Facility Maintenance Covenants for the private portions of the drainage system prepared by the Property Management Section of the Department of Public Works. See City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #5-17, Declaration of Stormwater Facility Maintenance Covenants, for information on what is contained within this document. d. An open-to-the-air public stormwater treatment system in accordance with the requirements of the Kent Construction Standards, and published City of Kent Development Assistance Brochures dealing with stormwater treatment, to mitigate for Page 3 of 9 WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 jpotential impacts to stormwater runoff quality. Acceptable stormwater treatment facilities meeting this requirement in their preferred order include: infiltration after pretreatment; biofiltration swales; wet ponds; extended detention ponds; and created wetlands. See City of Kent Development Assistance Brochures #5- 1, through #5-15, for additional information on stormwater treatment requirements. (1) The stormwater treatment system shall be within the approved public stormwater management tract. (2) Easements for biofiltration swales across private lots will not be acceptable to meet this requirement. (3) The Owner/Subdivider will provide the City with a public stormwater management easement for this off-site facility prior to recording the final plat, unless otherwise determined * by Public Works. i e. Stormwater quantity and quality control facilities required for this subdivision should be combined with those required for the planned nearby Bakke Subdivision (and for the potentially planned Henderson Subdivision) and Silver Creek Estates according to the preliminary drainage report dated 6/15/02. Requirements relating to joint construction, bonding, and operation and maintenance requirements shall be determined through discussion with the Kent Department of Public Works following development of detailed drainage plans. f. Per previous agreement with the Public Works Director, a portion of the stormwater detention pond may be located on City of Kent property containing the Upper Mill Creek Detention Facility. Appropriate compensation shall be required for use of this property. The compensation amount shall be determined by the Property Management Division of the Kent Public Works Department. g. Wetland hydrology shall be maintained within the existing wetlands and created wetlands by routing stormwater to the upslope portions of the relevant wetlands Provisions for this routing shall be shown on the detailed drainage plans. h. A Detailed Grading Plan for the entire subdivision meeting the requirements of the Uniform Budding Code, the City of Kent Construction Standards, and City of Kent Development Assistance Page 4 of 9 WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 Brochure #1-3, Excavation and Grading Permits & Grading Plans. Initial guidance for these plans is given below: (1) These plans shall include provisions for utilities, roadways, retention 1 detention pond, stormwater treatment facilities, , and a building footpad for each lot. (2) These plans shall be designed to eliminate the need for processing several individual Grading Permits upon application for Building Permits. i. A Temporary Erosion I Sedimentation Control Plan for the entire j subdivision meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards, and the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. These plans must reflect the Detailed Grading Plan discussed above, and Planning Services approved Detailed Tree Plan. j. A Final Wetland Mitigation Plan shall be submitted and approved by the City of Kent. This Final Wetland Mitigation Plan shall be consistent with KCC Chapter 11.05 and the Approved Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan, completed by B-twelve Associates, Inc., dated August 8, 2002, except that the stormwater detention facility shall maintain a minimum 25-foot buffer from the adjacent wetlands between which it is located. Buffer averaging will be required in accordance with Kent City Code Chapter 11.05 wherever 50-foot buffers are reduced to 25-feet. k. Street Improvement Plans for 106t Avenue Southeast. These Street Improvement Plans shall meet the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards and Development Assistance Brochure #6-2, Private and Public Street Improvements, for a street designated as a Residential Street by the City of Kent Master Plan of Roadways. Initial guidance for the necessary street improvements is given below. (1) Vertical combined concrete curbs & gutters, a 5-foot wide planter strip, and 5-foot cement concrete sidewalks on the east side of the street. (2) A minimum of 24-feet of asphalt pavement as measured t from the west edge of the pavement to the face of curb on the east side of the street. Page 5 of 9 ` WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 (3) 25-foot radius curb return at the intersection with SE 268th Street. (4) A street lighting system designed, constructed and maintained by the IntoLight Division of Puget Sound Energy; electrical bill shall be paid for by this developments Home Owner's Association. (5) Public stormwater collection, conveyance, detention and treatment facilities. (6) Street Trees installed within the 5-foot wide planting strips. These Street Trees will be located at least 30-feet from street lights, and the species shall be selected from the Approved Street Tree List contained within City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #14, City of Kent Street Trees. I. Street Improvement Plans for the new public street serving both the subject subdivision and the proposed Bakke Subdivision (presumably Southeast 268th Street). The design of this street shall be closely coordinated with that of the Bakke Subdivision and the Henderson Short Plat. The Street Improvement Plans for this subdivision street shall be designed in conformance to the requirements for a Residential Street as required by City of Kent Construction Standards, and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #6-2, Private and Public Street Improvements, for a street 28 feet wide. Initial guidance for these street improvements is given below: (1) Vertical combined curbs & gutters, a 5-foot wide planter strip, and 5-foot wide cement sidewalks along the north side of the street across the entire plat frontage. (2) A minimum of 28-feet of asphalt pavement, measured from face of curb to face of curb, PROVIDED that the Bakke Subdivision goes forward, otherwise a minimum half-street section of 20-feet of asphalt pavement as measured from the face of curb to the south edge of the pavement. (3) A street lighting system designed, constructed and maintained by the IntoLight Division of Puget Sound Energy; electrical bill shall be paid for by a Home Owner's Association. Page 6 of 9 WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA 4RPP3-2004581 (4) A public stormwater drainage system, including provisions for collection, conveyance, detention, and treatment facilities. (5) Curb return radii of 25-feet at the intersections of all existing and proposed public streets, including 107th Place Southeast, PROVIDED that the Bakke Subdivision goes forward. (6) A temporary cul-de-sac, or an approved turnaround shall be provided near the easterly limits of the public street, or the new plat street shall be extended southerly into the Bakke Subdivision and terminate with a permanent cul-de-sac, PROVIDED that the Bakke Subdivision goes forward. The easterly terminus of the new street shall be designed to provide a future connection to 108th Avenue SE. (7) Street Trees installed within the 5-foot wide planting strips. These Street Trees shall be located at least 30-feet from street lights, and the species shall be selected from the Approved Street Tree List contained within City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #14, City of Kent Street Trees. M. Street Improvement Plans for the new Private Residential Street proposed within Tract A, and connected to Southeast 268th Street. The Street Improvement Plans for this street shall be designed in conformance to the requirements for a Private Residential Street as required by City of Kent Construction Standards, and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #6-2, Private and Public Street ■ Improvements and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure s # 6-8, Street Improvement Plans for a street at least 20-feet wide. Initial guidance for these street improvements is given below: (1) A minimum of 20-feet of asphalt concrete pavement. (2) A 5-foot wide paved walkway constructed along one side of the private street. This sidewalk shall be designed to serve at least Lots 6 through 12 of this subdivision. (3) An approved cul-de-sac, or turnaround at its north terminus, unless otherwise determined by the City Fire Marshal. Page 7 of 9 WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 (4) A private stormwater drainage system, including provisions for collection, conveyance, detention, and treatment facilities where applicable. (5) Unless additional asphalt concrete pavement width is provided for parking, all minimum width private streets serving more than two lots shall have pavement markings and traffic signs installed which clearly designate these private streets as Fire Lanes, where no parking will be permitted. (6) The private street, including sidewalk(s) shall be centered within a private roadway tract or easement that is at least 2- feet wider than the total width of the private street and sidewalk combination. n. Street Light Plans for 106th Avenue Southeast, and for Southeast 268th Street meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards, and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #6-1, Street Lighting Requirements, for a PSE-owned street lighting system maintained at Home Owner Association expense. 3. The Owner/Subdivider shall submit and receive approval of a Detailed Tree Plan, meeting the requirements of the Kent Zoning Code, and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #3, Detailed Tree Plans. Grading Plans cannot be approved by the Department of Public Works without an approved Detailed Tree Plan. 4. The Owner/Subdivider shall dedicate or deed all public rights-of-way, and otherwise convey all private and public easements necessary for the construction and maintenance of the required improvements for this subdivision development. 5. After construction, the wetland and buffer areas of the off-site wetland mitigation area (Bakke Subdivision) shall be isolated from intrusion and/or disturbance using landscaping, or other appropriate screens, as well as an approved permanent wildlife-passable fence. In addition, Wetland Information Signs approved by the Department of Public Works shall be placed at the wetland buffer edge to inform and educate owners and nearby residents about the value of wetlands Page 8 of 9 WILDWOOD RIDGE ONE (aka Leabo-Curran) #SU-2000-3 KIVA#RPP3-2004581 Should the Bakke subdivision not go forward, then the Owner/Subdivider will have to acquire the necessary off-site easements necessary for the wetland mitigation, or to provide for an on-site wetland mitigation area. , 6. The owners of those lots who use Tract A for access shall each have an undivided interest in Tract A. The owners of those lots are solely responsible for the maintenance of that private street constructed within Tract A. 7. Prior to release of any construction bonds, and prior to the approval of any Budding Permits within the subject subdivision, the Department of Public Works must receive and approve As-Built Drawings meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards, and City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure #E-1, As-Built Drawings, for: Streets; Street Lighting System; Water; Sewer; Stormwater Drainage Facilities; and all off-site improvements where the locations and/or elevations are deemed critical by the Department of Public Works. 8. A fee-in-lieu of park dedication shall be paid by the owner/ subdivider in conformance with KCC 12.04.780 To mitigate for impacts of this proposal on parks and recreation, the applicant will be required to pay a fee in lieu of dedication of land pursuant to Section 12.04.780 KCC. The fee In lieu of a donation of five percent for open space parkland is $8,625 based on current tax assessments from the King County Assessor's office records for the year of 2003. C. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT ON ANY LOT IN THIS SUBDIVISION, THE OWNER/ SUBDIVIDER SHALL: 1. Record the Plat. 2. Construct all of the improvements required in Section A, above, including installing the approved final wetland mitigation plan. 3. Pay all environmental mitigation fees, latecomers fees and fees-in-lieu-of. L 4. Receive approval of the required As-Built Drawings for Street, Street Lighting, Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Management Facilities. $•\Permit\Plan\longplats\20002042339-2000-3conditions doc Page 9 of 9 WILDWOOD RE)GE, ONE SU-2000-3 KIVA#2042339 A Portion QJ NE 1/4, S.W.1/4, and SE 1/4, S.W.1/4, Sea A Twp. 22 N, Rge. 5 E, W.M. City of Kent,King County.WuN gton (Private Easements 0*) SILVER CREEK ESTATES SHORT PLAT .22 9 9 SP-2003-15 I70 I WW I ISEEWEEnR EASEMENT NOTE N SEE OTE 1 u THISN BELEL OW I PRIVATE DRAINAGE 4EAS�EIMEINTi7 9 p Q 29 lz a Cba 2 z 32 TRAcr.A. 3 0 9 m W 7 TAMSUEE NOTESKEET BELL oW O w 15 3 R U i I 1 a I a I 10' PRIVATE----I ~� SEM I L*"S�ITNEOE �,�� NO 1 12 13 o n � O N z I i — — —SE 2WTH ST. Al — — _ N8M — - 1gO28'STW T 30.r N1IU6-40-W 3137V 801 11 �0 Q�v�FE.Ayp�90 DALEIr 72-MORROW 5 AUBURN WAY_N..7E, INC. Ni4IF AUBURN WASHINGTON 86002 PHONE (2535333-2200 (FAX)333-2206 - o N � s fF 22oE2 Eo �i` ENONEERNO-SL RVEM0 sip c/STEa SO Q LAND PLANNNO M{ ¢ L LAND �neerMrot�d g E�MIEk 0�1PR 05 04171 08 NOV 04 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: PART ONE—DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN UPDATE, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENTS; AND PART TWO — 2004 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing regulations along with the 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendments as recommended by the Planning & Economic Development Committee, and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinances. 3. EXHIBITS: 1/26/05 2004 staff memo with attachments A-N (2004 Annual amendments), PEDC staff memo 11/30/04, Minutes of 12/6/04 PEDC, and attachments A-1 (DSAP) respectively 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Planning & Economic Development Committee (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 moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 61, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES K E N T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager WASHINOTON Phone 253-856-5454 Fax 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent,WA 98032-5895 January 26, 2005 To: Mayor Jim White, Council President Julie Peterson And City Council Members From: William Osborne, Long Range Planner Through: Mayor Jim White Subject: Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing regulations and 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan &Zoning Map amendments MOTION: Approve the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing regulations along with the 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendments as recommended by the Planning & Economic Development Committee, and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinances. SUMMARY: At their December 6`h and January 19th meetings, the Planning & Economic Development Committee recommended to the full Council a modified approval of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing regulations along with the 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Map r amendments. Details of the approvals are discussed below. BUDGET IMPACT:None BACKGROUND: The Planning & Economic Development Committee recommendations on the Downtown Strategic Plan Update and implementing regulations are as follows: 1. Approve DSAP document dated 11/8/04 2. Approve Attachment B (list of figures) 3. Approve Attachment C figures, but replace & incorporate with figures in Attachments D, E and F 4. Attachment D, Figure III-2• Delete "and unsightly" 5. #1 Map Change — north of James between Ist & 5th: Urban Center/DCE — south 8 4 acres; Low Density Multifamily/MR-T 16—north to Cloudy and 5 parcels north of Cloudy between 4th & 5th #2 Map Change—one parcel depth both sides of Central between Smith & Gowe: GC-MU 6. Zoning Code Text Amendments: a. Require Downtown Design Review in all districts including North Frame District; b. Eliminate minimum lot size requirement for MFR in all DSAP districts; C. Raise surface parking cap to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f. non-residential use in the East Frame District; • Require 25% residential component of overall gross floor area, • Include 2-year sunset clause to re-evaluate. d. Raise surface parking cap to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 s.£ non-residential in the West Frame District; • Include 2-year sunset clause to re-evaluate. The Planning & Economic Development Committee recommendations on the 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Map amendments are as follows: PROPosALA: MILLENIUM-KANGLEY BUILDING: CPA-2004-4(A)/CPZ-2004-3 (ENV-2004- 53(A)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 26056— 11CH Avenue Southeast Applicant (Agent): Joel Kessell, Engineered Solutions, LLC Existing Designation Requested Change Board P&ED Committee Recommendation Recommendation Comprehensive APPROVAL OF SF-6 (Single-Family NS (Neighborhood APPROVAL OF Plan LAND USE MIXED-USE Ma MU 6 units/acre) Services) MIXED-USE(MU) NCC (Neighborhood APPROVAL OF APPROVAL OF ZONING Districts SR-6(Single-Family Convenience OFFICE, OFFICE, MIXED-USE Map 6 05 units/acre Commercial) MIXED-USE(O- (O-MU) PROPOSAL B: KENT OFFICE BUILDING: CPA-2004-4(B)/#CPZ-2004-4 (ENV-2004-53(B)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 20651 — 84th Avenue South/East Valley Highway Applicant(Agent): Edi Linardic, LDG Architects Existing Designation Requested Change Recommendation Recommendation Board P&E Committee Comprehensive MIC (Manufacturing/ Plan LAND USE Industrial Center) C(Commercial) APPROVAL APPROVAL Ma ZONING Districts M2 (Limited GWC (Gateway APPROVAL APPROVAL Map Industrial) I Commercial) PROPOSAL C: LOTTO/TOPPANO: CPA-2004-4(C)/CPZ-2004-5 (ENV-2004-53(C)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 11644 Southeast 240th Street Applicant (Agent): Chris Ferko, Barghausen Existing Designation Requested Change Board P&ED Committee Recommendation Recommendation Comprehensive SF-6 (Single-Family NS (Neighborhood Plan LAND USE 6 unitsfacre) Services) DENIAL APPROVAL Ma Zoning Districts SR-6 (Single-Family NCC(Neighborhood Convenience DENIAL APPROVAL,WITH Map 6 05 units/acre) Commercial CONDITIONS Conditions on the Lotto/Toppano proposal: 1) gasoline service stations are prohibited; 2) future development of the property shall include a 25-foot wide aesthetic and pedestrian connectivity buffer with Type I landscaping provided adjacent to the north and east property lines; 3) development of the property shall be consistent with Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policies LU-14.5 and LU-14.8, and City Council Meeting 1/4105 Page 2 of 3 building facades oriented to the north and east property lines shall include architectural design variation, such as fenestration, accents, overhangs, modulation, colors, and/or materials to avoid long, monotonous uninterrupted walls or roof planes. PROPOSAL D: MUTH: CPA-2004-4(D)/CPZ-2004-6 (ENV-2004-53(D)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 21320 — 42nd Avenue South Applicant (Agent): Richard Rawlings, Polygon, LLC Board P&ED Committee Existing Designation Requested Change Recommendation Recommendation Comprehensive AG-R (Agricultural SF-1 (Single-Family DENIAL WITHOUT WITHDRAWN BY Plan LAND USE Map Resource Land) 1 unit/acre) PREJUDICE APPLICANT ZONING Districts A-10 (Agricultural, SR-1 (Single-Family DENIAL WITHOUT WITHDRAWN BY Map 1 10 acres/unit) 1 1 unit/acre) I PREJUDICE APPLICANT WO/pm S\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2004\2041242-CPA-2004-I_CCMtg_020105 docd Ene (DSAP)PEDC Staff Memo 11/30/04 Minutes of 12/6/04 PEDC Attachment A LUPB Staff Report 1111104 cc Fred N Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Attachment B Draft Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Charlene Anderson,AICP,Ping Mgr Attachment C 1998 DSAP List of Figures(Original) Tom Brubaker,Legal Dept Attachment D 1998 DSAP Figures(Original) Parties of Record(Attached) Attachment E 2004 Draft Revised Figures Project File Attachment F Downtown Projects Past,Present and Planned(1998-2009) AttachmentG August 17"Attachment Description Memo Attachment H SEPA Adoption Notice&Addendum Attachment I RCW 35A 63 071&072 (Annual amendments)Attachment A P&EDC Staff Memo 1/13/05 Attachment B Minutes of 1/19/05 P&EDC Attachment C P&EDC Staff Memo 11/30/04 Attachment D Minutes of 12/6/04 P&EDC Attachment E LUPB Staff Memo 11/11/04 Attachment F Minutes of 11/22/04 LUPB Attachment G City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure 6-3(Access Management) Attachment H Urban Land Institute,Ten Principlesfor Reinventing America's Suburban Strips,pages 8-9 Attachment 1 Puget Sound Regional Council,2002 Regional Growth Centers Report Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center Attachment J Maps of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Attachment K Summary Matrix of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Attachment L SEPA Adoption Notice and EIS Addendum Attachment M Env Review Report—Decision Document(Env-2004-53) Attachment N RCW 35A 63 011&072 City Council Meeting 1/4105 Page 3 of 3 I 40"ChAffAfrI A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N Satterstrom,AICP,Director • PLANNING SERVICES KE N T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager WAS H' GTON Phone 253-856-5454 Fax 253-856-6454 Address 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent,WA 98032-5895 January 13, 2005 To. Chair Tim Clark and Planning & Economic Development Committee Members From: William Osborne,Long Range Planner Regarding: A. Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update#CPA-2004-1 and B. Proposed 2004 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments #CPA-2004-4(A-D)/#CPZ-2004(3-6) MOTION: Approve/Deny/Modify the recommendations of the Land Use & Planning Board regarding 1) the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update, including implementing Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map and Text amendments, as modified by the Planning & Economic Development Committee on December 6, 2004, and 2) the four applications for 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendments; and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinances SUMMARY: At the January 4, 2005 public meeting, the City Council requested additional analysis specifically regarding the Lotto/Toppano Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposal (CPA-2004- 4(C)/CPZ-2004-5), for the property located at 11644 Southeast 240th Street. The three (3) issues raised by the Council for specific consideration were: • Three (3) acres of Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning at the site, rather than four(4) acres as proposed in the original application, • Provision of a buffer of indeterminate distance between an expanded commercial zone and the adjacent single-family residential zone, and • Use of design review (regulations and process) to control for negative aesthetic and land use impacts. As a point of reference, the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update, including Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map and Text amendments, and the four applications for 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendments together represent the allowable 2004 annual update and should be considered and decided together by the Council At the December 6ch special meeting, the Planning & Economic Development Committee unanimously recommended approval of a modified Board recommendation on the DSAP update and implementation and unanimously recommended approval of all but the Lotto/Toppano 2004 Annual amendment (2,1 vote) Reference the December 20, 2004 staff memos in the January 4 Council agenda packet. BUDGET IMPACT:None BACKGROUND: As of January 6, 2005, the applicant for the Lotto/Toppano proposal submitted a memo and site plan for the record indicating a willingness to accept certain conditions in order to receive a staff endorsement for approval of the Lotto/Toppano proposal(see Attachment B). iThe November 15, 2004 staff report on the 2004 Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Map Amendments includes consideration of the proposed four acre and existing two acre NCC- designated area. As noted in the report (pages 21-23) and the staff presentation, staff believes the existing NCC development regulations do not provide for the intended neighborhood- oriented characteristics for neighborhood commercial development, that previous Council 1 decisions set a precedent of zoning two acres for NCC at the site, and that neither existing conditions nor development regulations have changed sufficiently to satisfy the standards of review [Kent City Code 12 02.050(2) & 15.09.050(C)(4)] for granting an amendment. Staff noted also in the public hearing that future reconsideration of all commercial zoning district development regulations might address the issue; consistent with Comprehensive Plan Goal LU- 14, and Policies LU-14 5 and 14.8 (see page 18) Staff believes the issues and conditions posed most recently by the applicant and Council for consideration would be considered more appropriately in a comprehensive manner for general zoning text amendments outside of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment process Should Council choose to consider inclusion of such conditions as part of an action taken at this time, the Council should provide findings establishing the uniqueness of this property in view of other properties with the same zoning,per Kent City Code 12.02.070. WO/pm S 1Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments12004\2042937-cpa20044a-d-PEDCspecmtgc doc Eric December 20,2004 staff memos to Council 12)DSAP&20114 Annual CPA's Minutes of 1216104 P&EDC meeting LUPB Staff Report for Public Hearing of November 22,2004 Barghausen memo and proposed buffer site plan(1/6105) cc Fred N Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager Parties of Record(Attached) Project files Planning&Economic Dev Committee Special Meeting 1l13/05 Page 2 of 2 ,qrmm. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 19,2005 COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Chair Tim Clark,Ron Harmon, Bruce White The special meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:15 P.M. Approval of November 29,2004 Minutes Member White MOVED and Member Harmon SECONDED to adopt the minutes as amended with the following corrections 1) Changing the Critical Areas Ordinance motion to indicate that Member Harmon made the initial motion rather than Chair Clark and 2) changing the statement made by Member White to say "Member Whzte suggested that an environmentally sensitive development company such as Polygon Development would be a good place for a study to demonstrate an environmentally sensitive project. " Motion Passed 3-0. Approval of December 6, 2004 Minutes Member White MOVED and Member Harmon SECONDED a motion to adopt the minutes as amended with the following correction 1) Changing a motion with regards to the Muth Amendment to indicate that Member White SECONDED that motion rather than Member Clark. Motion passed 3-0. Critical Areas Ordinance(CAO) ZCA-2002-4 Ms Marousek reiterated the history of the CAO presenting two options to the Committee. CD Director Fred Satterstrom presented a third option proposed by the State Department of Ecology, suggesting this issue be tabled until the Planning and Economic Development Committee's February meeting, to give the State enough time to work with the development community and city staff in reaching a mutual consensus, and holding a new hearing for consideration of this third option. Chair Clark submitted the following correspondence for the record: 1) One letter from Mr. Huffman with Master Builder's Association of King & Snohomish Counties dated 1/19/05 established as Exhibit Number 29; 2) Two letters from John Mauro with the Livable Communities Coalition established as Exhibit Numbers 22 & 23; 3) One letter from Don Shaffer, Kent C.A.R.E.S. established as Exhibit Number 28; 4) One letter from Council Member Les Thomas established as Exhibit #27, describing the rationale for his support of Option 2 suggesting a textual change concerning Best Available Science Ron Hannon MOVED and Bruce White SECONDED a motion to accept the documents into the record. Motion passed 3-0. Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association submitted a letter for the record established as Exhibit Number 29 in support of Option 2 and Joe Schuler, 277`h St SE voiced concerns with , flooding issues connected with his property located along Mill Creek on 277`n John Mauro, Director of Livable Communities Coalition spoke about why the CAO does not follow Best Available Science or the Growth Management Act mandates. He indicated that neither option would adequately protect critical areas and questioned the long term impacts to the city, including the potential for an eroding quality of life. He stated that the coalition supports buffer averaging not buffer reductions; mitigation must achieve no-net-loss so the replacement ratios are far below what is recommended by the State; penalties for violations need to be increased. Rita Bailie, 20607 101" Ave SE, Kent, WA, spoke about tax issues related to public cost if cntical areas are not protected and stated that she would possibly consider Option 3. Robert O'Brien, 1131 Seattle SE, Kent, WA voiced his opposition to this ordinance and would like to see more science applied. He stated that housing costs will rise if buffers are increased. John Welch, 11405 SE 196`', Kent, WA stated that he owns ten acres on Panther Lake. He stated that increasing buffer widths would create adverse economic impacts for the city. He spoke to GMA infill mandates. He stated that he would evaluate Option 3 after provisions have been made for primary stakeholders, citizens and property owners to be involved in the review process. Richard Robohm Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office, 3190 160'h Ave. SE, Bellevue recapped points from his November 29 testimony before the PEDC. He stated that the ordinance is based on best available science which has been thoroughly reviewed. He spoke about the benefit of wetland buffers for water quality and wildlife habitat purporting that increasing buffers by 25 feet would provide minimal protection for some functions. Seeing no further speakers, Chair Clark declared the public hearing closed. After deliberations, Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a motion to hold a new public hearing in consideration of Option 3, at the February meeting of the P&EDC; meanwhile allowing the State Department of Ecology and Community Trade and Economic Development time to meet with interested parties and with staff in an effort to reach consensus 1 on the proposed wetland regulations. Any revised alternatives will be made available to the public for review in advance of the February meeting. Motion CARRIED 3-0. 1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) Planner William Osborne submitted two faxed documents for the record from Don Shaffer,Kent C.A.R E S. received on January 18'h and January 19th 2005; with the first concerning the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process and the second concerning the DSAP update and the Kent Urban Center Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept these documents into the record. Motion CARRIED 3-0. Lotto/Toppano Amendment CPA-2004-4(C)/CPZ-2004-5 Planner William Osborne stated that City Council at their January 4'meeting requested that staff consider reducing the proposed NCC zoning for the subject site from 4 to 3 acres, provisions for a buffer of an indeterminate distance (up to fifty feet) between the expanded commercial zone and the single family residential zone, and use of design review. Osborne presented proposed amendments to the original Lotto/Toppano amendment. Chair Clark submitted two letters from Barghausen Consulting Engineers for the record established as Exhibit Numbers 4 & 5. Chair Clark declared the Public Hearing Open. Chris Ferko, Barghausen Engineers, 18215 72nd Ave. S, Kent, WA as the applicant proposed a condition for approval of a 25-foot buffer along the north and east property lines to include Type 1 vegetative screening landscaping located between the future commercial development and the future Kent Highlands PUD, He indicated the willingness to discuss all architectural design options for the project as a condition. Mr. Ferko spoke about the awkward split zoning on the site needing correcting, the provision made for a pedestrian connection between the proposed PUD and the subject site were it developed with a commercial component and the prohibition they have proposed against development of a gas station on site even though zoning would this use He stated that the single access point on 116'h hinders development of this site as infill and is a unique consideration in regards to comp plan policies which encourage infill of existing commercial sites. Planning&Economic Development Committee Meeting O1/19/05 Page 2 of 3 GM Young, 11624 SE 5'h, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA voiced support of this amendment as the applicant has worked to reach a compromise with the neighbors and to meet the clty's requirements. He stated that he supports development of the four acre site. Seeing no further speakers, Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. Mr. Osborne addressed the details of the Lotto/Toppano proposal with the committee. City Attorney Tom Brubaker discussed the legal implications of applying conditions to a rezone. He stated that the law provides for conditional rezones where there is a good solid basis for it. Chris Ferko submitted a letter for the record established as Exhibit #7, outlining 3 proposed , conditions for consideration by staff as part of their application. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept and approve the Lotto Property rezone application with the following conditions as therein amended in the letter of January 19, 2005; 1) gasoline service stations are prohibited; 2) the future development of the property shall include a 25-foot wide buffer with Type 1 landscaping provided adjacent to the north and east property lines with a contingency made for pedestrian connections between the commercial and residential development; 3) and development of the property shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policies LU-14.5 and LU-14.8, for the portions of the building facing the north and east sides of the property and shall include architectural design variation, such as fenestration, accents, overhangs, modulation, colors, and/or materials to avoid long, monotonous uninterrupted walls or roof planes. Motion PASSED 3-0. Member White MOVED and Member Harmon SECONDED a Motion to forward the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Amendment and the 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments which includes the Lotto/Toppano amendment proposal as approved by the P&EDC to the next Full City Council meeting of February 1, 2005. Motion PASSED. Adiournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:50 pm Pamela Mottram, Admen Secretary,Planning Services S ftrmalPlanTlammngCommrttee12005WinuieslOI1905mm.doe Planning&Economic Development Committee Meeting 01n9105 Page 3 of 3 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Jim White, Mayor Phone 253-856-5700 Fax: 253-856-6700 Address 220 Fourth Avenue S. K E N T Kent,WA 98032-5895 WASHINGTON November 30,2004 To: Chair Tim Clark And Planning & Economic Development Committee Members From: William Osborne, Long Range Planner Through: Mayor Jim White Regarding: Proposed 2004 Comprehensive Plan And Zoning Map Amendments #CPA-2004-4(A-D)1#CPZ-2004(3-6) MOTION: Approve/Deny/Modify the recommendations of the Land Use & Planning Board regarding the four applications for 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendments, and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinances. It is my pleasure to forward to you the recommendations of the Land Use and Planning Board regarding the 2004 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments. These recommendations are presented to you from the Board's November 22nd public hearing as per RCW 35A.63.071 and .072. The proposed amendments were introduced to the Board for discussion and questions in an October 13`I' workshop. Staff also introduced these proposals to the Council at a November 16111 workshop. The City received a total of four requests for Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and corresponding Zoning Map changes (see the attached staff report and maps), classified as Proposals A through D: Proposal A: MILLENIUM-KANGLEY BUILDING: CPA-2004-4(A)/CPZ-2004-3 (ENV-2004-53(A)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 26056— 116T"Avenue Southeast Applicant (Agent): Joel Kessell, Engineered Solutions, LLC Existing Designation Requested Change Staff Board Recommendation Recommendation Comprehensive Plan LAND Use SF-6(Single-Family NS(Neighborhood DENIAL APPROVAL OF Map 6 units/acre) Services) MIXED-USE(MU) ZONING Districts -Fa SR-6(Single-Family NCC (Neighborhood APPROVAL OF Map 6 05 uncle-Fa Convenience DENIAL OFFICE,MIXED-USE Commercial) I I (0-MU PROPOSAL B: KENT OFFICE BUILDING: CPA-2004-4(B)I#CPZ-2004-4(ENV-2004-53(B)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 20661 — 84'h Avenue South/East Valley Highway Applicant(Agent): Edi Linardic, LDG Architects Existing Designation Requested Change Staff BoardRecommendation Recommendation Comprehensive MIC (Manufacturing/ Plan LAND USE C(Commercial) APPROVAL APPROVAL Map Industrial Center) ZONING Districts M2 (Limited GWC(Gateway APPROVAL APPROVAL Map Industrial) Commercial) PROPOSAL C: LOTTO/TOPPANO: CPA-20044(C)/CPZ-2004-5 (ENV-2004-53(C)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 11644 Southeast 240th Street Appllcant(Agent): Jerome Carpenter, Inslee, Best Doezie & Ryder, P.S. Existing Designation Requested Change Staff Board Recommendation Recommendation Comprehensive SF-6 (Single-Family NS (Neighborhood Plan LAND Use DENIAL DENIAL Map 6 units/acre) Services) ZONING Districts SR-6 (Single-Family NCC(Neighborhood Map 6 05 unitslacre) Convenience DENIAL DENIAL Commercial) I I I I PROPOSAL D: MUTH: CPA-2004-4(D)/CPZ-2004-6 (ENV-2004-53(D)) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 21320—42nd Avenue South Applicant(Agent): Richard Rawlings, Polygon, LLC Existing Designation Requested Change Staff Board Recommendation Recommendation Comprehensive AG-R (Agricultural SF-1 (Single-Family DENIAL WITHOUT DENIAL WITHOUT Plan LAND USE Resource Land) 1 unit/acre) PREJUDICE PREJUDICE Ma ZONING Districts A-10 (Agricultural, SR-1 (Single-Family DENIAL WITHOUT DENIAL WITHOUT Map 10 acres/unit) I 1 unitfacre) I PREJUDICE PREJUDICE WO/pm S 1Permit\PlanlCompPlanAmdments12004\2042937-cpa2004-4a-d-PEDCmtg doe Enc. Attachment A W PB Staff Report for Public Hearing of November 22,2004 Attachment B City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure 6-3(Access Management) Attachment C Urban Land Institute,Ten Principlesfor Reinventing America's Suburban Strips,pages 8-9 Attachment D Puget Sound Regional Council,2002 Regional Growth Centers Report Kent Manufaciunngflndusirral Center Attachment E Maps of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Attachment F Summary Matnx of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Attachment G SEPA Adoption Notice and Addendum Attachment H Env ReviewReport—Decision Document Attachment I RC W 35A 63 071&072 CC. Fred N Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager Parties of Record(Attached) Project files Planning&Economic Dev.Committee Special Meeting 1216/04 Page 2 of 2 t PLANNING& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES .47Wk DECEMBER 6, 2004 COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon,Bruce White L The special meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4.00 P.M. Approval of Minutes Committee Member White Moved and Committee Member Harmon Seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the November 15, 2004 meeting. Motion Carried 3-0. Annual 2004 Comprehensive Plan &Zoning Map Amendments #CPA-2004-4(A-D)J#CPZ-2004(3-6) Chris Ferko, Barghausen Engineers, 18215 72nd Ave. S, Kent, WA 98032 proposed amending their Lotto proposal to include a conditional restriction prohibiting development of gasoline service stations on the subject site and requesting a conversion of the Single Family zoned two acre parcel to NCC in order that a use be developed to best serve the community Mr Ferko urged the Committee to consider forwarding to the Council a recommendation for approval of this application Russell Hanscom, 9523 S 237`h Place, Kent, WA, as executive director of Arbor Village, an 89 apartment retirement home and assisted living community, spoke on behalf of the residents in stating that they support an increase in zoning to four acres and a commercial development for the subject site with regard to the Lotto Amendment. Planner Bill Osborne stated that this year's four comprehensive plan amendment proposals need to be considered together with the DSAP update as part of the annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. Mr Osborne described each of the four comprehensive plan amendment application proposals, stating that the Land Use and Planning Board is recommending. Approval of the Millenium Kangley Building Amendment proposal for Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan designation and Office/Mixed Use Zoning District designation, Approval of the Kent Office Building Amendment proposal, Denial of the LottolToppano Amendment proposal, and Denial Without Prejudice of the Muth Amendment proposal. IMr. Osborne submitted a letter from Chris Ferko with Barghausen for the record. Mr. Osborne spoke about staff's concerns with development standards for NCC zoning and special permitted uses. Mr. Osborne addressed questions raised by the Committee Members with respect to the Millemum-Kangley Building amendment proposal located on 1160' Avenue Southeast. Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom addressed Member Clark's questions with respect to alternative plan or zoning designations for the subject site. Mr. Osborne stated that the applicant submitted a revision request subsequent to his initial application submittal requesting a change in the Comprehensive Plan Designation to Mixed Use and a Zoning Designation change to Office/Mixed-Use; Staff and the Land Use and Planning Board are recommending Approval of the revised application. Mr. Osborne addressed questions raised by Member White with respect to the development rights issue related to the Muth Amendment and staffs recommendation of Denial without Prejudice. In response to an inquiry by Member White, Assistant City Attorney Kim Adams Pratt stated her office is of the opinion that once King County acts on this property, the applicant would not have to wait to resubmit this proposal with the annual comprehensive plan updates in September 2005 because the Kent City Council can declare an emergency to look at issues considered to be of community wide significance outside of the annual Comprehensive Plan cycle. It appears this application could be of community-wide significance because of the City's interest in the Johnson Creek improvements She stated that the Legal staff believes it premature to approve this amendment until King County makes a decision concerning this site. Harmon MOVED and White SECONDED a Motion to accept the letter submitted from Chris Ferko with Barghausen Engineers and the literature on the Downtown Strategic Action Plan for the record. Motion CARRIED. Mr Satterstrom addressed questions raised by the Committee with regard to the Lotto/Toppano proposal, citing staff s rationale for their recommendation for this year's proposal. Steve Mullen, Transportation Engineering Manager spoke to the Committee's concerns with respect to traffic flow and access issues for the Lotto/Toppano proposal Mr. Satterstrom addressed Member White's concerns with respect to what uses could be developed if the site were increased to four acres with the exclusion of service stations He cited durable business type of retail uses, convenience type of commercial uses, personal and professional services would be allowed, Mr. Satterstrom addressed Member White's concerns with respect to how the City will work with the developer to diminish impacts to surrounding single family developments. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use Planning Board's recommendation of Approval with reference to Proposal A- Millenium Kangley Building Amendment. Motion CARRIED. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation of Approval for Proposal B — Kent Office Building Amendment. Motion CARRIED. Member Harmon MOVED and Member Clark SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation of Denial for Proposal C-Lotto/Toppano Amendment Motion CARRIED 2 to 1 with White opposed. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation of Denial without Prejudice for Proposal D-Muth Amendment. Motion CARRIED, Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to approve the recommendation of the Land Use and Planning Board regarding the four Applications of the 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance. Motion CARRIED 2 to 1 with White opposed. #CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update , Osborne submitted two exhibits for the record, a letter from Fred High with Kent School District regarding enrollment impacts on ten acres of multifamily zoning and a letter submitted December 6 from Joseph Blattner with Tarragon addressed to the Planning and Economic Development Committee supporting DCE zoning north of James Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the exhibits to the record. Motion CARRIED. Mr. Osborne stated that he would like the Committee to include Attachment F, a list of downtown projects from 1998 — 2009 as part of their motion. He stated that the Land Use and Planning Board recommends approving the Downtown Strategic Action Plan document dated November 8, 2004, Attachment B-List of Figures, approve the figures themselves and accepting substantive changes to two maps. Mr. Osborne described that zoning code text amendments include applying Downtown Design Review to all districts, including the North Frame District, eliminating minimum lot size requirement for multifamily residential in all DSAP districts; raising surface parking cap to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 s f non-residential in East and West Frame Districts with the requirement of 25%residential component of overall gross floor area and inclusion of a 2-year sunset clause to re-evaluate. Bruce Anderson, Bellevue, WA stated that he wishes to pursue a retail development project on a viable commercial site located in the West Frame District that will complement the Kent Station and that this site would not be conducive to residential development due to its proximity to the freeway and railroad tracks. Planning&Economic Committee Meeting 12/6/04 Page 2 of 3 Fred High, Assistant Superintendent of Kent School District, 12033 SE 256`' St., Kent, WA and Tal Guppy, Principal of the Neely O'Brien Elementary School, 6300 S 236"',Kent,WA described the effects that more multifamily residential development would have on the school district. Mr Guppy stated that it has been the school district's consensus that multifamily residential creates financial impacts for the district. Mr. High submitted a letter for the record Mr Guppy responded to questions raised by Member Harmon with respect to how the school has worked with transitional students so that they can continue their education in the school without interruption. He stated that the district employs a family advocate who supports those families and introduces them to community resources. Member Hannon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a motion to adopt the letter submitted by Mr. High, Assistant Superintendent of the Kent School District for the record. Motion CARRIED 3-0. Mr. Osborne and Mr. Satterstrom addressed questions raised by the Committee with respect to the 4.5 parking spaces cap with the 25% residential component, the 2-year sunset clause and redevelopment versus new development opportunities in both the East and West Frame Districts. Member Harmon stated that he favors the removal of the 25% residential development requirement with a 2-year sunset clause from the West Frame District with Member White concurring adding that he would support removal of this requirement from the East Frame District as well. Member Hannon proposed amending the MR-G to MR-TI6 north of James,with Member White concurring. Member Hannon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion for Item #5 to change MR-G from Cloudy to 5"'and north of Cloudy between 4"' and 5t' to MR-T16 Motion CARRIED 2 -1 with Chair Clark opposed. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion for Item##6C to raise surface parking cap to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f. non-residential in the East and West Frame Distncts and applying the 25% residential component of overall gross floor area only to the East Frame District, exempting the West Frame District. Motion CARRIED 2 to 1 with Chair Clark opposed. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to approve the modifications of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing regulations as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board to include replacement of Figure IV-3 with Attachment F-Downtown Projects 1998- 2009, to include the previously stated modifications under Items 5 and 6-C, and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance. Motion CARRIED 3-0. Chair Clark clanfied that these items will go before Council in January. CPA-2004-5 Urban Density Study Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that a resolution is needed declaring an emergency to pursue revisions of the Comprehensive Plan outside of the annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle to ensure compliance with regard to density in Urban Growth areas. Member White MOVED and Member Hannon SECONDED a Motion to approve a resolution declaring an emergency to pursue revisions of the comprehensive plan to ensure compliance with Chapter 36.70A RCW regarding density in an urban growth area Motion CARRIED 3-0. Adiournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:20 pm Pamela Mottram, Admen Secretary, Planning Services S lPermf6P1a0P1ammng Commulee12004%Aftnutesti20604pe-min doe Planning&Economic Committee Meeting 12/6/04 Page 3 of 3 Arrmpf. go I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT j Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, C D Director PLANNING SERVICES Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager Phone�253-856-5454 KEN T Fax 253-856-6454 W A S H I N Ol O N Address 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent,WA 98032-5895 November 15, 2004 � TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: WILLIAM D OSBORNE, LONG-RANGE PLANNER RE. 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS #CPA-2004-4(A-D) /#CPZ-2004-(3-6) Land Use & Planning Board Public Hearing — November 22, 2004 INTRODUCTION The City received four (4) applications this year submitted by private property owners for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map. At the Land Use & Planning Board workshop held October 13th1 staff Introduced each proposed amendment to the Board for discussion and questions Planning Services staff facilitated a Land Use & Planning Board tour of the sites on October 9th The four (4) proposed amendments have been classified as Proposals A through D. This staff report includes a detailed analysis of the merits of each proposal, maps of each site and a staff recommendation, based upon the following standards of review STANDARDS OF REVIEW Sections 12 02 050 and 15 09 050(C) of the Kent City Code outline the standards of review, which must be used by staff and the City Council in analyzing proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use !� Map and Zoning District Map amendments Proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map are to be examined based on the following criteria, 1. The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare, and 2. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the Plan that warrant an amendment to the Plan; and 3. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements of the Plan Proposed amendments to the Zoning District Map are to be examined based on the following criteria: 1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 2. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be compatible with development in the vicinity; and 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; and 4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone; and 5. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City. The staff review and recommendation for each of the proposals is presented separately Background information about the subject site and the intent of each proposal are provided, followed by staff review Staff review includes the citation of relevant Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies and comments on the relationship of each proposal to cited goals and policies, organized into sections by Element. The Standards of Review listed above for Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning amendments are then addressed for each proposal prior to the recommendation. A map depicting each proposal is included in Attachment D, and a summary matrix of the proposals is also provided as Attachment E. PROPOSAL A MILLENIUM-KANGLEY BUILDING #CPA-2004-4(A)/#CPZ-2004-3 (KIVA#2042950) #ENV-2004-53(A) (KIVA#2042947) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 26056 - 116th Avenue Southeast Applicant (Agent): Joel Kessell, Engineered Solutions, LLC Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND SF-6 (Single-Family 6 NS (Neighborhood USE Map units/acre) Services ZONING Districts Map SR-6 (Single-Family 6.05 NCC (Neighborhood units/acre) Convenience Commercial Background: The 0.68 acre Site consists of one (1) tax parcel and is located at the northeast corner of 116th Avenue Southeast and Kent-Kangley Road Southeast, and contains no structures. The terrain of the Site can be characterized as generally flat, mostly covered with gravel, and having groundcover vegetation along the east and southeast. The parcel Is currently designated as Single-Family Residential, Six (6.05) Units per Acre for land use and zoning (SF-6 and SR-6, respectively), as are most parcels abutting the northern and eastern boundaries of the Site. To the south of the Site across Kent-Kangley Road, parcels are designated Mixed Use (MU) for land Use, and Community Commercial — Mixed Use (CC-MU) for zoning. Parcels located directly across 116th Avenue SE from the Site are designated as Single-Family Residential, Eight (8.71) Units per Acre for both land use and zoning (SF-8 and SR-8, respectively). The southwest corner of the Kent-Kangley/116th Avenue SE Intersection Is designated for low-density multi-family residential for both land use and zoning (LDMF and MR-G, respectively), Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 2 of 27 Issues: Site access restrictions, on-site parking (and possible vehicular queuing), site ' drainage and utilities locations are some of the issues of concern. The fact that Kent-Kangley Road is also a State Route (S.R. 516) means that vehicular access of the Site is restricted. To maintain traffic flows on Kent-Kangley Road/S.R. 516, the preferred access would be on 116th Avenue SE, but the north boundary of the Site is less than one hundred fifty feet (150') north of the intersection. The City of Kent Public Works Development Assistance Brochure, Access Management (DAB 6-3) (see Attachment A, page 6), establishes a minimum corner clearance standard of three hundred feet (300'), with driveways being allowed only when alternative access is not available. The status of a water feature indicated by the City geographic information system (GIS) as bisecting the Site could also affect site access and developable area. A sanitary sewer service connection crossing Kent-Kangley Road will be required. RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS & POLICIES LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains goals and policies relating to neighborhood commercial development, activity centers and commercial, facilitating multi-modal transportation, and protection of wetlands The Plan distinguishes between small neighborhood service areas and larger activity center areas. Overall (LU) 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 Kent residents. Goal LU-2 Establish a land use pattern throughout the Potential Annexation Area that will facilitate a multi-modal transportation system and provide efficient public facilities. Ensure that overall densities in the Potential Annexation Area are adequate to support a range of urban services. Policy LU-2.1 Establish transportation levels-of-service which will help guide development into desired areas. Policy LU-2.2 Concentrate development in order to promote public transit. Policy LU-2.4 Give funding priority to capital facility projects which are consistent with the City's Land Use Element. Goal LU-3 Focus both city and regional household and employment growth in the designated Urban Center. Policy LU-3.2 Focus office employment growth in the Urban Center as a percentage of overall mixed-use development. Goal LU-6 Designate Activity Centers in portions of the City and in the Potential Annexation Area. Allow in these areas a mix of retail, office, and residential development. Policy LU-6.1 Locate Activity Centers in areas which currently contain con- centrations of commercial development with surrounding medium- density housing. Intensify these areas to support public transit to increase housing options. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 3 of 27 Policy LU-6.2 Allow residential uses in Activity Centers. Develop residential uses as part of a commercial area in a mixed-use development or on a stand- alone basis in designated areas. Goal LU-7 Develop Activity Centers in such a way as to facilitate pedestrian, cyclist,public transit, and vehicular circulation. Policy LU-9.4 Locate housing opportunities with a variety of densities within close proximity to employment, shopping, transit, and where possible, near human and community services. Goal LU-13 Promote orderly and efficient commercial growth within the existing commercial districts in order to maintain and strengthen existing commercial districts, to minimize costs associated with the extension of facilities, and to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another. Goal LU-14 Determine the size, function, and mix of uses in the City's commercial districts based on regional, community, and neighborhood needs. Policy LU-14.2 Provide opportunities for residential development within existing business districts to provide support for shops, services, and employment within walking distance. Policy LU-14.5 Encourage commercial design elements which will minimize impacts to surrounding established residential uses for all new development and redevelopment in the existing Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. Ensure that projects are pedestrian-oriented and developed with minimum parking provisions. Policy LU-14.6 Discourage expansion of Neighborhood Service land uses in areas where the adjacent land use designation is predominately single-family. Policy LU-14.7 Promote redevelopment of existing commercial properties by limiting the conversion of residential land uses to commercial land uses. Policy LU-14.8 Ensure that commercial and mixed-use developments adjacent to existing single-family residential areas are compatible in height and scale. Establish guidelines for design of edges where commercial and mixed-uses abut single-family use and medium- and low-density residential. Goal LU-24 Encourage well designed, compact land use patterns to reduce dependency on the automobile, and thereby improve air and water quality and conserve energy resources. Establish mixed-use commercial, office, and residential areas to present convenient opportunities for travel by transit, foot, and bicycle. Policy LU-26.2 Protect wetlands not as isolated units, but as ecosystems, and essential elements of watersheds. Base protection measures on wetland functions and values, and the effects of on-site and off-site activities. Staff Comment LLand Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 4 of 27 The Comprehensive Plan articulates policies to discourage expansion of Neighborhood Services , land uses in areas where the adjacent land use is predominantly single-family residential (Policies LU-14.6 and LU-14.7). Also, the Comprehensive Plan includes policy language (Goals LU-3 and LU-13, and Policies LU-3 2, LU-13.3 and LU-13.4) to encourage orderly and efficient commercial growth in existing commercial districts, particularly in Kent's designated Urban Center (Downtown). Additionally, a 2001 Urban Land Institute publication entitled Ten Principles for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips (see Attachment B) previously provided to the Board, recommends limiting expansion of commercial zones when existing commercially-zoned land is underdeveloped. The buildable lands inventory for housing (population growth) might also need to be revised to reflect a decrease in capacity of approximately four (4) single-family detached units. In response to the standards of review, the application cites positive goals and policies in specific reference to Activity Centers (Goals LU-6 and LU-7, and Policy LU-6 1). The application also claims the Site is not predominantly surrounded by single-family residential land use. Staff comments that , a significant amount of area to the west, north, northeast and east of the Site is in single-family residential use — a few adjacent dwelling units include day care operations — but these operations are not intensively"commercial" in zoning or use. While one could certainly argue that the Comprehensive Plan contains goals and policies favoring the qualities of the area around the intersection of 116a' Avenue SE and Kent-Kangley Road as an "Activity Center," this area does not currently carry such a designation. An important consideration in the designation of Activity Centers is the existence of a concentration of commercial development and surrounding medium-density housing (Policy LU-6.1). The descriptive parameters for an , existing 'concentration of commercial development and surrounding medium-density housing' have not been established by the City; but could be considered In the future. This application provides compelling testimony about the context surrounding the Site, particularly of the relationship between land uses and the recently completed and planned future road improvements of 116tt' Avenue SE near the Kent-Kangley Road intersection. Given these conditions, staff agrees in principle with the claim that single-family residential development is not desirable at this location. Development of an automobile-oriented use permitted under NCC Zoning, however, would be less desirable and more impacting on public health and safety — generating more traffic circulation, air quality, and pedestrian safety issues (Goals LU-7 and LU-24, Policy LU-14.5) Moreover, the key theme in the Land Use Element goal and policies regarding the development of Activity Centers is the inclusion of housing, whether as part of mixed-use developments or on a stand-alone basis (Goal LU-6, and Policies LU-6.1 and LU-6.2, and LU-10.1). The application suggests subsequent office development of the Site. Such a use would likely be less impacting than the uses allowed in NCC Zoning. Office-Mixed Use Zoning (O-MU) would allow for the intended use described in this application, while restricting the uses allowed in other commercial zones. COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to the aesthetic impacts of commercial development, on- and off-site Improvements, circulation patterns, and vehicular and pedestrian access: Goal CD-1 Establish street and circulation patterns that encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use. Goal CD-2 Incorporate amenities and features along neighborhood residential and commercial streets that accommodate safe motor vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 5 of 27 Policy CD-2.1 Establish, particularly in conjunction with new development, distinctive crosswalks at major street intersections in neighborhood mixed-use centers, commercial corridors, transit stops, in proximity to parks, and school sites. Policy CD-2.3 Design intersections with appropriate signage and traffic control devices to safely accommodate pedestrian, bicyclists, and vehicular traffic. Construct intersections with the minimum dimensions and ' turning radii necessary to maintain established levels of service per the concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act. Goal CD-3 Establish site design standards that encourage pedestrian and bicycle 1 use. Consider equally during site design all modes of transportation access, including pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and motor vehicle. Policy CD-3.1 Establish design standards which ensure that commercial, industrial, residential, and public building sites provide convenient, direct access for pedestrians and bicyclists. Policy C13-3.3 Encourage development to orient around existing and proposed transit stops and to provide pedestrian amenities and convenient access to the transit stops. Goal CD-4 Design new commercial projects to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motor vehicles. Policy CD-4.1 Encourage site and building access that considers the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists by providing the most direct pedestrian access from sidewalks and parking areas to building entrances while minimizing conflicts with motor vehicle traffic. Policy CD-4.5 Locate motor vehicle parking at the rear of buildings to help block the view of the parking from the street and to enable more convenient access to the front of the buildings. Where it is not possible to provide parking behind a building, parking may be located along the side. ' Signage for parking should be a recognized standard to be distinguishable for motorists, unless otherwise specified in district design guidelines. Policy CD-5.2 Where possible, encourage developers to infill buildings along vacant sections of the street edge to improve the environment for pedestrians. Goal CD-6 Provide scale, layout, and character of commercial development which is complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood and accommodating to pedestrians. Policy CD-7.1 Work with the business community and neighborhood residents to make aesthetic and functional improvements to commercial areas. ' Improved image and appeal will increase sales potential and enhance the character of the City. Policy CD-15.1 Whenever possible, encourage a land use pattern wherein churches, stores, services,parks,jobs, entertainment, transportation, and schools are within walking distance of a person's place of residence. Staff Comment Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 6 of 27 The application cited several goals and policies supporting pedestrian-oriented commercial frontage. Development consistent with the proposed designation change might improve the appearance of the existing underdeveloped Site, which currently stores used vehicles for sale. However, automobile-onented land uses discussed in the staff comment on applicable Land Use , Element goals and policies would also be allowed under NCC Zoning — in conflict with several Community Design Element goals and policies (Goals CD-1, CD-2, CD-3, CD-4, and CD-6, and Policies CD-3.1 and CD-4.1). The Site acreage and limited access from 1161h Avenue SE would , likely minimize aesthetic impacts, and NCC Zoning does provide opportunities for development of an integrated, walkable community, with commercial uses in close proximity to moderate density residential use. It should be noted again however, that NCC Zoning would also allow uses typically generating high numbers of automobile trips: gas station (with special use permit), sit-down restaurant, commercial drive-thru (excluding fast food, i.e. bank with Conditional Use Permit) and convenience store. The , Site layout will be influenced by the single restricted access driveway on 1161h Avenue SE. Due to the designation of Kent-Kangley Road (State Route 516) as a road of statewide significance, and the proximity of the north parcel boundary to the 11 Wh Avenue SEIKent-Kangley Road intersection, , ingress and egress of the Site will be restricted to right-in and right-out turning movements. An automobile-oriented use would impact pedestrian safety, aesthetics and exacerbate existing traffic issues in the vicinity. HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT The Human Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan, contains a policy relating to accessibility of services—including the medical office suggested by the applicant: Policy HS-1.4 Encourage services to become accessible to all members of the ' community. Staff Comment Accessibility to human services for the entire community is generally positive in view of the Comprehensive Plan. The large number of considerations of "accessibility" and "human services" are beyond the scope of this Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Map designation , amendment proposal. Thus, the proposed amendment, as a non-project action, will not be analyzed strictly for the use suggested by the applicant— a medical office building Further, if any level of approval of the amendment proposal for this Site is adopted by ordinance, such circumstances do not confer nor construe any approval(s) for project-level permit applications subsequently filed. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to coordination of development and road improvements, and the relationship between commercial land use and the transportation system: Policy TR-1.1 Locate commercial, industrial, multifamily, and other uses that generate ' high levels of traffic in designated activity centers around intersections of principal or minor arterials or around freeway interchanges. Policy TR-1.2 Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent with transportation projects to assure that transportation facility capacity is sufficient to accommodate the new development, or a financial commitment is in place to meet the adopted standard within six years, ' before allowing it to proceed. Land Use and Planning Board Public Heanng November 22,2004 Page 7 of 27 Policy TR-1.5 Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible. Policy TR-1.7 Insure the transportation system is developed consistent with the anticipated development of the land uses, and acknowledge the ' influence of providing transportation facilities to accelerate or delay the development of land uses, either by type or area. Policy TR-1.8 Promote land use patterns which support public transportation and insure the development includes transit-friendly features. Policy TR-3.4 Utilize adopted Access Management techniques to preserve the flow of traffic on the road system while providing adequate access to adjacent land uses. These could include: limit the number of driveways (usually one per parcel); locate driveways away from intersections; and connect parking lots and consolidate driveways to create more pedestrian- oriented street design and encourage efficiency of both land uses and the adjacent transportation system. Policy TR-4.1 Insure reliable traffic flow and mobility on arterial roads, especially on regional through routes, while protecting local neighborhood roads from increased traffic volumes. Policy TR-4.2 Where overflow traffic from the regional system significantly impacts neighborhoods,protect the residential area. ' Policy TR-5.3 Arterial improvements inside or adjacent to neighborhoods should employ Context Sensitive Design strategies to balance the mobility needs of the community with neighborhood cohesiveness. Policy TR-5.4 Encourage pedestrian and bicycle connections between residential developments, neighborhood commercial centers, recreation areas, and to serve as an alternative to automobile use. Goal TR-7 Improve the non-motorized transportation system for both internal circulation and linkages to regional travel, and promote the use of non- motorized transportation. Policy TR-7.2 Use incentives or regulations to encourage new construction to promote pedestrian and bicycle connections to schools, parks, community centers, public transit services and facilities, and neighborhoods and other services. Policy TR-7.8 Whenever practical, using incentives or regulatory means, encourage bicycle storage facilities with adequate lighting at residential development projects, park and rides lots, employment and industrial centers, schools, Activity Centers and retail areas. Policy TR-8.2 Emphasize transit investments that provide mobility and access within the community and make it possible for citizens to access local ' services and support local businesses while reducing auto-dependent travel. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 ' Page 8 of 27 Goal TR-9 Pursue funding for transportation improvements from all potential sources in an efficient and equitable manner. Policy TR-9.1 Allow for funding of growth-related traffic improvements proportionately by impact fees or other mechanisms that apportion , costs in relation to impact charged to new development. Staff Comment The additional trip generation impacts from development consequent to a Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning designation could cause significant deterioration of arterial , level-of-service, and automobile-oriented commercial development would likely attract most of its market from outside the neighborhood via automobile trips. An Office-Mixed Use (O-MU) Zoning designation would likely generate traffic impacts from trip ends more specific to an office use ' suggested in the application — rather than a convenience store use allowed under NCC Zoning. The vehicular access issue is addressed above in the staff comments on Community Design. APPLYING THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, , safety, and general welfare. [KCC 12.02.050(1) & 15.09.050(C)(5)] Staff Comment Designating the 0.68 acre subject parcel Neighborhood Services and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) would allow development that would significantly impact adjacent residents, particularly if the development served automobiles — as with gas stations, convenience stores, and drive-thru banks. These potential impacts include increased traffic generation, access conflicts, reduction of residential privacy, as well as aesthetic (noise, light and glare) conflicts Single-family residential development at this location is not necessarily desirable —nor has the land development market been responsive to the current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designation. A Mixed-Use ' (MU) Comprehensive Plan designation with an Office-Mixed Use (O-MU) Zoning District designation would be less impacting on the public health, safety, and general welfare. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the Plan that warrant an amendment to the Plan. [KCC 12.02.050(2) & 15.09.050(C)(4)] ' Staff Comment The most significant changes of circumstance in regards to this proposed designation amendment is that road improvements have been, and will be made by the City of Kent Public Works Department for 11e Avenue SE. The west boundary of the subject parcel is anticipated to yield ten (10) feet width for 116'h Avenue SE right-of-way improvements. The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations for properties extending east from the southeast corner of Kent-Kangley Road and 116`h Avenue SE were recently amended from Commercial/Neighborhood Convenience Commercial to Mixed-Use (MU) Comprehensive Plan Land Use, and Community Commercial, Mixed-Use (CC-MU)Zoning. , The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements of the Plan. [KCC 12 02 050(3) & 15.09.050(C)(1)] ' Staff Comment The designation of Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC)Zoning at this Site could impose , significant unavoidable negative impacts likely to diminish the levels-of-service of adjacent roads. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing , November 22,2004 Page 9 of 27 Additionally, any commercial redevelopment of the Site would require to connect to utilities across Kent-Kangley Road. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. [KCC 15 09 050(C)(2)] ' Staff Comment Rezoning the 0.68 acre parcel to Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) would allow development that could significantly impact adjacent residents and adjacent roads — depending on the subsequently developed use. These potential impacts include increased traffic generation, access conflicts, reduction of residential privacy and safety for adjacent day care operations, as well as land use and aesthetic (noise, light and glare) conflicts. The potential scope and extent of these impacts are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated. [KCC 15 09.050(C)(3)] Staff Comment Given arterial traffic speeds and a lack of pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the Site, the City would require significant improvements for pedestrian travel and public transit use upon development of the Site. The trips generated by an automobile-oriented use allowed by Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning could cause greater impacts on the transportation system. An office use, as suggested in the application, would generate a relatively ' small number of trips. ' Recommendation: Staff recommends DENIAL of the request to redesignate the subject 0.68 acre parcel as proposed to Neighborhood Services (NS) Land Use and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning. However, if proposed, staff would recommend approval for a ' Comprehensive Plan Map designation change to Mixed-Use (MU), with a Zoning District Map designation change to Office-Mixed Use (O-MU)for the Site. PROPOSAL B KENT OFFICE BUILDING #CPA-2004-4(B)i#CPZ-2004-4 (KIVA#2042938) ' #ENV-2004-53(B) (KIVA#2042937) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 20651 ' — 84th Avenue South/East Valley Highway Applicant (Agent): Ed! Linardic, LDG Architects Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND MIC C (Commercial) USE Map (Manufacturing/Industrial Center ZONING Districts Map M2 (Limited Industrial) GWC (Gateway Commercial Background: The 6.26 acre Site consisting of two (2) tax parcels is located southwest from the intersection of 84th Avenue South (East Valley Highway) and South 208th Street, extending south along the west side of 84th Avenue S to slightly less than four hundred feet (400') from South 212th Street. The northern parcel of the Site includes a portion of the S 208th Street roadway. The terrain of the Site is generally flat and is almost entirely impervious, with a large single-story structure (approximately 92,000 gross square feet — King County Assessor) and asphalt parking Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22, 2004 Page 10 of 27 surface located thereon. The Site and most parcels in the vicinity north of S 212th Street are ' designated for Manufacturing/Industrial Center land use (MIC) and Limited Industrial (M2) zoning. The parcels directly south (a McDonald's restaurant) and southeast (including a strip mall and drive- thru espresso stand) across 84th Avenue SE of the Site are designated for Commercial (C) Land ' Use and Gateway Commercial (GWC)Zoning. Issues: Limiting expansion of non-industrial commercial land uses in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center, the Center designation as requested by the City in the early 1990s and designated by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), is an important concern (see Attachment C, 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center, page 4) Access to 84th Avenue S will be restricted or prohibited, with a possible requirement of off-site revisions for S 208th Street , (private) to address the anticipated increase in traffic volumes at the traffic signal on 84th Avenue S. A buffer associated with an inventoried wetland located on the McDonald's parcel to the south might encroach on the Site. RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS & POLICIES LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains goals and policies relating to commercial development, manufacturing/industrial centers, facilitating regional freight mobility, and , protection of wetlands. Designated Manufacturing/Industrial Centers are intended to maintain the existing manufacturing and industrial land uses and promote freight mobility. Overall (LU) 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-13 Promote orderly and efficient commercial growth within the existing , commercial districts in order to maintain and strengthen existing commercial districts, to minimize costs associated with extension of , facilities, and to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another. Goal LU-15 Preserve a portion of the Valley Floor Industrial Area as a , Manufacturing/industrial Center for manufacturing and related land uses. Policy LU-15.1 Define the Manufacturingf/ndustrial Center as that area within which the ' most intensive manufacturing, industrial and warehouse uses should locate. Ensure the boundaries reflect accessibility to truck and rail corridors. Policy LU-15.2 Discourage and limit land uses other than manufacturing, high technology and warehousing within the boundaries of the Manufacturingllndustrial Center. Goal LU-16 Plan and finance in the Manufacturingflndustrial Center those transportation and infrastructure systems which can accommodate high-intensity manufacturing, industry and warehouse uses. , Staff Comment The recently updated Comprehensive Plan articulates policies to preserve the designated ' Manufacturing/Industrial Center (Goal LU-15, and Policies LU-15.1 and LU-1.2) by discouraging Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing , November 22,2004 Page 11 of 27 and limiting uses neither associated with manufacturing, high technology nor warehousing. While the buildable lands inventory for industrial use (employment growth) would also need to be analyzed to reflect any anticipated changes for employment, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) would not be opposed in principle to a change as proposed in this application. The designation would allow department store retail. COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to the aesthetic impacts of commercial development, on- and off-site improvements, circulation patterns, and vehicular and pedestrian access: Goal CD-1 Establish street and circulation patterns that encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use. Goal CD-2 incorporate amenities and features along neighborhood residential and commercial streets that accommodate safe motor vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use. Policy CD-2.3 Design intersections with appropriate signage and traffic control devices to safely accommodate pedestrian, bicyclists, and vehicular traffic. Construct intersections with the minimum dimensions and turning radii necessary to maintain established levels of service per the concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act. ' Policy C13-2.7 in general, construct sidewalks on both sides of all new streets. In industrial districts, sidewalks may not be appropriate, unless significant pedestrian traffic is projected, the absence of a sidewalk poses a public safety risk, or the streets are on existing or planned transit routes. Goal CD-3 Establish site design standards that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. Consider equally during site design all modes of transportation access, including pedestrian, bicycle, transit and automobile. Policy CD-3.1 Establish design standards which ensure that commercial, industrial, ' residential, and public building sites provide convenient, direct access for pedestrians and bicyclists. Policy CD-3.3 Encourage development to orient around existing and proposed transit stops and to provide pedestrian amenities and convenient access to the transit stops. Goal CD-4 Design new commercial projects to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motor vehicles. Policy CD-6.2 Encourage developers of large-scale retail stores to provide smaller- scale retail shops with separate entrances along the perimeter of the building to provide interest, easy access, and more diverse shopping opportunities. Policy CD-6.4 Encourage ground floor building fagade treatments and activities that generate pedestrian interest and comfort Large windows, canopies, arcades, plazas and outdoor seating are examples of such amenities. Policy CD-7.1 Work with the business community and neighborhood residents to make aesthetic and functional improvements to commercial areas, Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22, 2004 Page 12 of27 Improved image and appeal will increase sales potential and enhance ' the character of the City. Staff Comment Given the height and scale of the existing building and the size of the Site in relation to its surroundings, the proposal is not likely to introduce development that is incompatible in design (height, bulk, and scale) and intensity of use. Any aesthetic impacts will likely relate to the treatment of vehicular access from 208`h Street, as well as ensuring safe and attractive improvements for pedestrian and bicycle access. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT , The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to coordination of development and road improvements, and the relationship between industrial and commercial land uses and the transportation system. Policy TR-1.1 Locate commercial, industrial, multifamily, and other uses that generate high levels of traffic in designated activity centers around intersections ' of principal or minor arterials or around freeway interchanges. Policy TR-1.2 Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent with transportation projects to assure that transportation facility capacity is sufficient to accommodate the new development, or a financial commitment is in place to meet the adopted standard within six years, , before allowing it to proceed. Policy TR-1.4 Manage access along all principal and minor arterial corridors, and access points to residential, commercial, and industrial development. Consolidate access points during development review, as part of road improvement projects, or as part of land use redevelopment projects. Policy TR-1.5 Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible. Policy TR-1.7 Promote land use patterns which support public transportation. , Policy TR-1.8 Promote land use patterns which support public transportation and insure the development includes transit-friendly features. Goal TR-2 Provide a balanced transportation system that recognizes the need for major road improvements to accommodate multiple travel modes. Create a comprehensive street system that provides reasonable circulation for all users throughout the City. Policy TR-2.2 Coordinate implementation of street construction standards for each functional classification with policies in the Transportation Element to provide attractive, safe facilities that complement the adjacent land use. ' Goal TR-3 Reduce disruptions which degrade the safety and reasonable functioning of the local transportation system. Policy TR-3.3 Establish a network of heavy commercial freight routes to insure the mobility of goods and services, as well as of people, and to improve the reliability of freight mobility. , Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 13 of 27 Policy TR-3.5 Work with major institutions, Activity Centers, and employers via Commute Trip Reduction Program and the promotion of alternatives to single occupancy vehicle (SOt) use to reduce congestion and enhance safety. j Goal TR-7 improve the non-motorized transportation system for both internal circulation and linkages to regional travel, and promote the use of non- motorized transportation. ' Policy TR-7.4 Establish a network of bicycle routes within the City to connect those land uses likely to produce significant concentrations of bicycle usage. 1 Work with interested parties in the planning of such a network. Policy TR-7.6 Whenever practical, provide safe access for pedestrians and bicyclists to transit stops. Policy TR-7.8 Whenever practical, using incentives or regulatory means, encourage bicycle storage facilities with adequate lighting at residential development projects, park and rides lots, employment and industrial centers, schools, Activity Centers and retail areas. Staff Comment The existing office development and the extensive amount of surface parking space on the Site is underutilized. Access to 84`h Avenue S (East Valley Highway) would be restricted or prohibited. The additional trips generated impacting the existing intersection of S 208`h Street and 841h Avenue S (East Valley Highway) would need to be addressed with signalization improvements as well as off-site street improvements for the privately-owned S 2081h Street. iAPPLYING THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW The amendment will not result rn development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare. [KCC 12.02.050(1) & 15.09.050(C)(5)] Staff Comment A 6.26 acre parcel designated for commercial land use and zoning would allow for more intensive use of an underutilized office building, or subsequent redevelopment of the Site. The amendment would not result in development having significant adverse impacts on the public health, safety, and general welfare The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the Plan that warrant an amendment to the Plan. [KCC 12.02.050(2) & 15.09.050(C)(4)] Staff Comment The Site has been in office use since it was developed in 1968 (King County Records). The designation of the Site from manufacturing/industrial use to commercial use is not anticipated to significantly reduce the capacity of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)-recognized Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center as an engine for economic development and international trade. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements of the Plan. [KCC 12.02.050(3) & 15.09.050(C)(1)] Staff Comment Land Use and Planning Board Public Heanng November 22, 2004 Page 14 of 27 The existing use of the Site is non-conforming with the Manufacturing/Industrial Center designation. , The eventual redevelopment of the Site to Gateway Commercial (GWC) Zoning could provide synergistic benefits by encouraging redevelopment of an underutilized office building site. Several of the above listed goals and policies are supportive of locating commercial activity in close proximity to manufacturing and freight distribution uses. Other goals and policies listed above indicate that considerable weight should be given to the protection of adjacent industrial uses from negative impacts associated with intensive commercial development. GWC zoning is intended to serve the purpose of these particular Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies— to limit the intensity and negative impacts of commercial development on adjacent industrial uses. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. [KCC 15 09.050(C)(2)] , Staff Comment Rezoning the Site to Gateway Commercial (GWC)would allow commercial development that would ' respect the character and scale of adjacent industrial uses, although the uses would have to respect the functions of the designated Manufacturing/Industrial Center. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the ' property with significant adverse impacts wh1ch cannot be mitigated. [KCC 15 09.050(C)(3)] Staff Comment , Improvements to the intersection of S 208`h Street and 84th Avenue S, extending to serve the Site are anticipated to improve access Given arterial traffic speeds and a lack of pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the subject site, the City would require improvements for pedestrian travel and public transit use upon development of the site. The subject site could be developed to commercial use in a manner consistent with the proposed designations, as well as in a character fitting the , surrounding non-commercial uses. Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of this request to designate the subject parcel as proposed to Commercial (C) Land Use and Gateway Commercial (GWC) Zoning. PROPOSAL C LOTTO/TOPPANO , #CPA-2004-4(C)!#CPZ-2004-5 (KIVA#2042961) #ENV-2004-53(C) (KIVA#2042960) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 11644 , Southeast 240ei Street Applicant (Agent): Jerome Carpenter, Inslee, Best, Doezie & Ryder, P.S. , Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND SF-6 (Single-Family 6 NS (Neighborhood ' USE Map unit/acre) Services ZONING Districts Map SR-6 (Single-Family 6.05 NCC (Neighborhood , unit/acre) Convenience Commercial Background: The four (4) acre Site, recently created from a lot line adjustment affecting a reduction of a 7.92-acre parcel, consists of one tax parcel located at the northeast corner of , Southeast 240`" Street and 116'h Avenue Southeast. A two (2) acre square at the southwest corner of the parcel was zoned Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) and the remainder of the parcel has been zoned Single-Family Residential, 6.05 Units per Acre (SR-6) since June 2002, when the City Council reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and established initial zoning for the DeMarco Annexation area. The Site is generally flat, containing a Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing ' November 22,2004 Page 15 of27 number of temporary and permanent structures associated with an existing commercial landscaping nursery use. The street frontage of SE 2401h Street is currently constructed to existing street standards, while the street frontage along 116'h Avenue SE north of SE 2401h Street is not currently improved to its design standards. The Site and parcels to the north, east, south, west and southeast generally are zoned SR-6, although approximately 3.2 acres located directly south of the site at the southeast corner of the intersection of SE 240'h Street and 1161h Avenue SE are zoned NCC. A parcel at the southwest corner of the intersection also is zoned NCC, although intended to be developed as a park. As noted above, the southwest portion of the subject site parcel is currently zoned NCC The subject site and parcels in the vicinity are underdeveloped in regard to current land use and zoning designations. Prior to annexation into the City of Kent in 2001, the Land Use and Zoning district designations for ' an eight (8) acre parcel containing the Site changed with the adopted Year 2000 King County Comprehensive Plan Update (Map Amendment #19). The King County Land Use designation changed from Urban Residential High to Commercial Outside of Centers, and the Zoning designation changed from R-18 (18 dwelling units per acre) to Neighborhood Business. These designations were adopted by King County for the purpose of recognizing the existing commercial (nursery) use on-site (see King County Comprehensive Plan (December 2002), Chapter 2— Urban Land Use, page 2-14). The DeMarco Annexation comprehensive plan amendment and initial zoning process considered several options that would have effectively adopted equivalent Kent designations for the entire eight (8) acres. In summary, these options were not recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board for adoption — and the City Council adopted a reduced-area (2 acres) Neighborhood Convenience Commercial Zoning District at the northeastern corner of SE 240'h Street & 1161h Avenue SE. ' Issues: The conditions of the Site and vicinity parcels were considered during the DeMarco Annexation comprehensive plan amendment and initial zoning (AZ-2001-1) process. Split designations for the parcel that includes the present Site were adopted by the Kent City Council in May 2002 after thorough consideration of public comment. Staff analysis from the DeMarco Annexation Zoning Staff Report, issued on May 21, 2001, relating to the intersection bounding the subject site of this amendment proposal reads: "[D]esignating additional commercial parcels other than the existing commercial property at the southeastern corner of this intersection [SE 240'h Street & 116'h Avenue SE] would create additional land use pressure to further erode the residential character of this area, ' and could jeopardize the policy for "corner store" retail. The surrounding neighborhood generally is single family residential, including low densities of one or three dwelling units per acre to the southeast and southwest of the annexation. A zoning designation of MRT-16 at the northeastern corner would bolster the viability of the neighborhood business designation at the southeastern corner, would promote additional homeownership opportunities, would promote a land use pattern that supports public transportation, and also would create a buffer from the impacts of the intersection on the lower density neighborhoods to the north and east. It also encourages developing the three parcels designated MRT-16 as a unified development proposal with better management of the sensitive areas on the sites." Concern about expanding the amount of commercial area at the intersection of SE 240'h Streettl16"' Avenue SE was addressed by limiting the neighborhood commercial designation of the subject site to two (2) acres. A lot line adjustment effected a reduction in size of the site from the subject 7.92 acres last year to four (4) acres this year, with the remaining 3.92 acres included in an application for a single-family residential planned unit development (PUD). RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS & POLICIES Land Use and Plammng Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 16 of 27 LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains goals and policies relating to neighborhood commercial development, activity centers and commercial, facilitating multi-modal transportation. The Plan distinguishes between small neighborhood service areas and larger activity center areas. Overall (LU) 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 Kent residents. Goal LU-2 Establish a land use pattern throughout the Potential Annexation Area that will facilitate a multi-modal transportation system and provide efficient public facilities. Ensure that overall densities in the Potential Annexation Area are adequate to support a range of urban services. Policy LU-2.1 Establish transportation levels-of-service which will help guide development into desired areas. Policy LU-2.2 Concentrate development in order to promote public transit. Policy LU-2.4 Give funding priority to capital facility projects which are consistent with the City's Land Use Element. Goal LU-3 Focus both city and regional household and employment growth in the ' designated Urban Center. Policy LU-3.2 Focus office employment growth in the Urban Center as a percentage of overall mixed-use development. Goal LU-6 Designate Activity Centers in portions of the City and in the Potential Annexation Area. Allow in these areas a mix of retail, office, and residential development. Policy LU-6.1 Locate Activity Centers in areas which currently contain con- centrations of commercial development with surrounding medium- density housing. Intensify these areas to support public transit to increase housing options. , Policy LU-6.2 Allow residential uses in Activity Centers. Develop residential uses as part of a commercial area in a mixed-use development or on a stand- alone basis in designated areas. Goal LU-7 Develop Activity Centers in such a way as to facilitate pedestrian, , cyclist, public transit, and vehicular circulation. Policy LU-9.4 Locate housing opportunities with a variety of densities within close proximity to employment, shopping, transit, and where possible, near ' human and community services. Goal LU-13 Promote orderly and efficient commercial growth within the existing , commercial districts in order to maintain and strengthen existing commercial districts, to minimize costs associated with the extension of facilities, and to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 17 of 27 ' Goal LU-14 Determine the size, function, and mix of uses in the City's commercial districts based on regional, community, and neighborhood needs. 1 Policy LU-14.2 Provide opportunities for residential development within existing business districts to provide support for shops, services, and employment within walking distance. Policy LU-14.5 Encourage commercial design elements which will minimize impacts to surrounding established residential uses for all new development and redevelopment in the existing Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. Ensure that projects are pedestrian-oriented and developed with minimum parking provisions. Policy LU-14.6 Discourage expansion of Neighborhood Service land uses in areas where the adjacent land use designation is predominately single-family. Policy LU-14.7 Promote redevelopment of existing commercial properties by limiting the conversion of residential land uses to commercial land uses. Policy LU-14.8 Ensure that commercial and mixed-use developments adjacent to existing single-family residential areas are compatible in height and scale. Establish guidelines for design of edges where commercial and mixed-uses abut single-family use and medium- and low-density residential. Goal LU-24 Encourage well designed, compact land use patterns to reduce dependency on the automobile, and thereby improve air and water quality and conserve energy resources. Establish mixed-use commercial, office, and residential areas to present convenient opportunities for travel by transit, foot, and bicycle. Staff Comment Kent City Code Section 15.02.010, Establishment and designation of districts, provides the following purpose statement for the Neighborhood Convenience Commercial Zoning District (NCC): t `it is the purpose of the NCC district to provide small nodal areas for retail and personal service activities convenient to residential areas and to provide ready access to everyday convenience goods for the residents of such neighborhoods. NCC districts shall be located in areas designated for neighborhood services in the comprehensive plan." ' This proposal, particularly in regards to the scale of neighborhood-oriented commercial use, is more consistent with the cited Land Use Element Goals and Policies than in past proposals, primarily through the reduction of the size of the Site (see CPA-2003-4(B), Lotto). Specifically, this proposal conflicts less with Goal LU-13, which encourages "orderly and efficient commercial growth ..in order to maintain and strengthen existing commercial districts, to minimize costs associated with the extension of facilities, and to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another." Yet, the existing Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning districts in the vicinity of the Site have still not been developed since their designation. Expanding the area of this zoning district at the northeastern corner of SE 240"' Street & 116t' Avenue SE beyond the existing two (2) acre portion bypasses the initial step of redeveloping commercial uses in an area already designated for Neighborhood Services, and could therefore be seen as conflicting with Policies LU-14.6 and LU- 14.7. Additionally, a 2001 Urban Land Institute publication entitled Ten Principles for Reinventing Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 18 of 27 America's Suburban Strips (see Attachment B) previously provided to the Board, recommends , limiting expansion of commercial zones when existing commercially-zoned land is underdeveloped. The buildable lands inventory for housing (population growth) might also need to be revised to reflect a decrease in capacity of approximately twelve (12) single-family detached units. Policy LU- ' 14.8 focuses on the "design of edges" and "compatibility of height and scale" where commercial uses and adjacent residential (whether single-family or multifamily) uses meet. Aesthetic and privacy conflicts are anticipated with the height, bulk and scale of commercial development, which , is also discussed briefly in the Community Design Element section. The potential for the development of a mix of commercial uses appropriately located in proximity to residential uses, is desirable in the view of several Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. If the area around the intersection of SE 240t' Street & 116' Avenue SE is designated as an Activity Center, this will be especially true (Goals LU-6 and LU-7, Policies LU-6.1, LU-6.2, and LU-9 4). At present, the development regulations and standards of the City do not provide meaningful differentiation of Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning from Community Commercial (CC) Zoning — particularly in regards to the scale of development, permitted uses and mixing of uses to include residential. Future consideration of Activity Centers may address some of the issues relating to differentiation of the appropriate scale of commercial development based on zoning, and whether the commercial area serves a regional, local, or neighborhood market. COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to the aesthetic Impacts of commercial development, on- and off-site improvements, circulation patterns, and vehicular and pedestrian access: Goal CD-1 Establish street and circulation patterns that encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use. ' Goal CD-2 Incorporate amenities and features along neighborhood residential and commercial streets that accommodate safe motor vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use. Policy CD-2.1 Establish, particularly in conjunction with new development, distinctive crosswalks at major street intersections in neighborhood mixed-use centers, commercial corridors, transit stops, in proximity to parks, and school sites. Policy CD-2.3 Design intersections with appropriate signage and traffic control devices to safely accommodate pedestrian, bicyclists, and vehicular traffic. Construct intersections with the minimum dimensions and turning radii necessary to maintain established levels of service per the concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act. Policy CD-3.3 Encourage development to orient around existing and proposed transit , stops and to provide pedestrian amenities and convenient access to the transit stops. Goal CD-4 Design new commercial projects to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motor vehicles. Policy CD-4.1 Encourage site and building access that considers the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists by providing the most direct pedestrian access from sidewalks and parking areas to building entrances while minimizing conflicts with motor vehicle traffic. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 19 of 27 4 Policy CD-4.5 Locate motor vehicle parking at the rear of buildings to help block the view of the parking from the street and to enable more convenient access to the front of the buildings. Where it is not possible to provide parking behind a building, parking may be located along the side. Signage for parking should be a recognized standard to be distinguishable for motorists, unless otherwise specified in district design guidelines, Goat CD-6 Provide scale, layout, and character of commercial development which is complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood and accommodating to pedestrians. ' Policy CD-7.1 Work with the business community and neighborhood residents to make aesthetic and functional improvements to commercial areas. Improved image and appeal will increase sales potential and enhance the character of the City. Policy CD-15.1 Whenever possible, encourage a land use pattern wherein churches, stores, services,parks,jobs, entertainment, transportation, and schools are within walking distance of a person's place of residence. Staff Comment I This proposal may introduce development that is incompatible in design (height, bulk, and scale) and use intensity with neighboring residential uses, in conflict with Goal CD-6, but the size of the Site provides for a more reasonable layout. Any aesthetic impacts will likely be compounded by the ' treatment of vehicular access and parking; limiting these impacts should be addressed through Goal CD-4, and Policies CD-4 1 and CD-4.5. Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning provides opportunities for development of an integrated, walkable community of commercial uses in close proximity to moderate density residential use. However, NCC Zoning also allows for development of convenience stores and gas stations — neither of these uses are associated primarily with pedestrian-accessibility, and may create impacts contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan regarding commercial development. The existing two (2) acre NCC-zoned portion has reasonable vehicular access (see testimony of City of Kent Public Works Director Don Wrckstrom in Kent City Council Meeting minutes, May 21, 2002, and electronic communication dated May 15, 2002 from City Transportation Engineering Manager Steve Mullen to City Planning Manager Charlene Anderson regarding access — cued in CPA-2003-4(8), Lotto), yet is scaled to encourage pedestrian access to and from the existing residential neighborhood TRANSPOR,rAT1oN ELEMENT The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to coordination of development and road improvements, and the relationship between commercial land use and the transportation system: Policy TR-1.1 Locate commercial, industrial, multifamily, and other uses that generate high levels of traffic in designated activity centers around intersections of principal or minor arterials or around freeway interchanges. Policy TR-1.2 Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent with transportation projects to improve affected roadways. Policy TR-1.5 Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible. Policy TR-1.7 Promote land use patterns which support public transportation. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22, 2004 Page 20 of 27 Policy TR-1.8 Create land uses in the downtown and commercial areas which better ' support transit and reduce peak-hour trip generation. Policy TR-4.1 Maximize traffic flow and mobility on arterial roads, especially on regional through routes, while protecting local neighborhood roads from increased traffic volumes. Policy TR-4.2 Provide a balance between protecting neighborhoods from increased ' traffic and reducing accessibility for the City-wide road network. Policy TR-4.3 Balance the dual goals of providing accessibility within the local street system and protecting neighborhoods. Where overflow traffic from the regional system significantly impacts neighborhoods, protect the residential area. Policy TR-4.9 Reduce the disruptive impacts of traffic related to major institutions, activity centers, and employers via trip-reduction efforts, access/egress controls, and provision of alternatives to SOV use. Policy TR-7.2 Whenever practical, use incentives or regulations to encourage new construction to promote pedestrian and bicycle movements to pathways, transit services and arterials. Staff Comment The additional trip generation impacts from increasing the size of a commercial designation by two hundred-percent (200%), from two (2) to four (4) acres could cause deterioration of arterial level-of- service. The vehicular and pedestrian access issues, particularly noting the opportunities for the existing two (2) acre NCC-zoned corner portion, are addressed above in the staff comments on Community Design. APPLYING THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare. [KCC 12.02.050(1) & 15.09.050(C)(5)] Staff Comment ` Designating the two (2) acre subject portion of the parcel Neighborhood Services and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) would allow development that would impact , adjacent residents, although the development would likely be neighborhood-oriented. The potential impacts include increased traffic generation, access conflicts, reduction of residential privacy, as well as land use (if the commercial development is automobile-oriented adjacent to residential use) , and aesthetic(noise, light and glare) conflicts. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the Plan that warrant an amendment to the Plan. [KCC 12.02.050(2) & 15.09.050(C)(4)] Staff Comment The applicant has asserted the inadequacy of the existing two-acre commercial designation for meeting current standards for driveway spacing from signalized intersections on minor arterials and for feasibly developing NCC uses. The applicant has also stated the City Council did not take into account locations of the existing structures and operations when it designated the two-acre commercial area in 2002. Furthermore, the applicant asserted the July, 2003 adoption of Ordinance No. 3648 provided new information and changed circumstances in that the ordinance amends land uses, development standards, design techniques, signage and landscaping requirements in the NCC zoning district. During the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 21 of 27 process, staff found no new information substantiating a change in conditions or circumstances ' since the Site was designated as Single-Family Residential, Six Units per Acre (SF-6 Land Use/SR- 6 Zoning) per the DeMarco Annexation Zoning Ordinance (#3605), adopted in May 2002. Staff also argued that the refinement of NCC zoning standards in 2003 did not provide new information or changed circumstances relevant for establishing additional neighborhood commercial zones. Rather the standards reaffirmed the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan related to neighborhood commercial areas as small scale, pedestrian- and neighborhood-oriented areas. Since the 2003 application, the applicant has succeeded in adjusting the lot line of the parcel containing the existing NCC-zoned portion of the Site. The applicant also recently demolished the single-family detached unit formerly located on the Site. These changes alone do not merit amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations for the Site. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements of the Plan. [KCC 12 02.050(3) & 15.09.050(C)(1)] Staff Comment The subject site, as proposed, totaling four (4) acres of commercially-designated property could encourage neighborhood-oriented development. However, NCC Zoning allows automobile-oriented development that could impose significant unavoidable negative impacts likely to diminish the value of neighboring parcels as residential uses. The intensity of commercial development encouraged by the amendment would be more appropriately located in Activity Centers, as noted in Policy LU- 6.1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. [KCC 15.09.050(C)(2)] Staff Comment Rezoning the remaining subject portion of the four (4) acre parcel to Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) could allow automobile-oriented development that would significantly impact adjacent residents. These potential impacts include increased traffic generation, access conflicts, reduction of residential privacy, as well as land use and aesthetic (noise, light and glare) conflicts. The scope and extent of these impacts, in consideration of maintaining quality residential neighborhoods, are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. If the development regulations and standards for NCC Zoning clearly limited such automobile-oriented uses and instead allowed development consistent with the vision of Activity Center goals and policies, the proposal would be more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Further consideration of differentiating commercial zoning and development standards by regional, local, and neighborhood market areas is needed to ensure development appropriate to the vision of the Comprehensive Plan (Goal LU-14). The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the Lproperty with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated. [KCC 15.09 050(C)(3)] Staff Comment ' Given arterial traffic speeds and a lack of pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the subject site, the City would require significant improvements for pedestrian travel and public transit use upon development of the site. The applicant's claim that the existing two (2) acre corner portion (currently zoned NCC) does not have sufficient frontage to locate 'convenient' driveway access for commercial use does not agree with testimony from the City of Kent Public Works Department given during the public hearing on DeMarco Annexation zoning in May 2002. Goal CD-3 calls for establishing ". .site design standards that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. Consider equally during site design all modes of transportation access, including pedestrian, bicycle, transit and automobile." Neighborhood Services Land Use and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial Zoning are intended to emphasize pedestrian-scaled commercial development design, while accommodating the automobile. A four (4) acre parcel entirely Land Use and Planrmg Board Pubhc Hearing 1 November 22, 2004 Page 22 of 27 designated for commercial development should encourage development at a scale similar to the NCC district located at the southeast corner of Southeast 240`h & 1161h Avenue Southeast. , However, the impacts of automobile-oriented uses permitted in NCC would have adverse impacts on the transportation system. Recommendation: Staff recommends DENIAL of this request to redesignate the subject two (2) acre portion of the parcel as proposed to Neighborhood Services (NS) Land Use and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) Zoning PROPOSAL D MUTH #CPA-2004-4(D)/#CPZ-2004-6 (KIVA#2042984) #ENV-2004-53(D) (KIVA#2042982) Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 21320 , —42nd Avenue South Applicant (Agent): Richard Rawlings, Polygon, LLC Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND AG-R (Agricultural SF-1 (Single-Family 1 USE Map Resource Land) unit/acre ZONING Districts Map A-10 (Agricultural, 10 SR-1 (Single-Family 1 , acres/unit) unit/acre Background: The 15.35 acre Site consists of two (2) tax parcels and is located at the southeast corner of South 212th Street and 42nd Avenue South. The terrain of the Site can be characterized ' as flat, with a substantial amount of delineated wetland area in the west. Current zoning for the property recognizes its status as agricultural land of commercial significance. The development rights for the entire Site were purchased by King County in the early 1980s. Issues: Resolution of the ownership of development rights, and possible changes thereto for the Site will be necessary for the City to consider this application further. Although the applicant has identified stormwater detention as the sole desired use of the property, the buildable lands inventory for housing (population growth) would also need to be revised to reflect a potential increase in capacity. ' RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS & POLICIES LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains goals and policies relating to agricultural resource land protection, recognition of natural systems, protection of wetlands, and provision of public services. Overall (LU) 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 Kent residents. ' Goal LU-21 Foster recognition of the significant role played by natural features and systems in determining the overall environmental quality and livability of the community. Goal LU-22 Coordinate with appropriate individuals and entities to create a long- , term, sustainable relationship among local and regional natural resource protection entities, for future growth and economic Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 23 of 27 development, through enhancement of wildlife, fisheries, and recreational opportunities; protection of cultural resources; protection of water quality in wetlands, aquifers, lakes, streams, and the Green River; provision of open space and screening to reduce impacts of development,protection of environmentally sensitive areas to preserve life, property, water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, and retention of the unique character and sense of place provided by the City's natural features. Policy LU-22.1 Provide incentives for environmental protection and compliance with environmental regulations. Foster greater cooperation and education among City staff, developers, and other citizens. Determine the effectiveness of incentives by establishing monitoring programs. Policy LU-22.2 Continue to evaluate programs and regulations to determine their effectiveness in contributing to the conservation and recovery of ESA listed species. Policy LU-22.3 Continue to participate in regional and WRIA planning efforts to support the conservation of listed species. Goal LU-23 Protect and enhance environmentally sensitive areas via the adoption of City regulations and programs which encourage well-designed land use patterns such as clustering and planned unit development. Use such land use patterns to concentrate higher urban land use densities and intensity of uses in specified areas in order to preserve natural features such as large wetlands, streams, geologically hazardous areas, and forests. Goal LU-24 Encourage well designed, compact land use patterns to reduce dependency on the automobile, and thereby improve air and water quality and conserve energy resources. Establish mixed-use commercial, office, and residential areas to present convenient opportunities for travel by transit, foot, and bicycle. Goal LU-25 Ensure that the City's environmental policies and regulations comply with state and federal environmental protection regulations regarding air and water quality, hazardous materials, noise and wildlife and fisheries resources and habitat protection. Demonstrate support for environmental quality in land use plans, capital improvement programs, code enforcement, implementation programs, development regulations, an site plan review to ensure that local land use management is consistent with the City's overall natural resource goals. ' Policy LU-26.2 Protect wetlands not as isolated units, but as ecosystems, and essential elements of watersheds. Base protection measures on wetland functions and values, and the effects of on-site and off-site activities. Policy LU-26.3 When jurisdictional boundaries are involved coordinate wetland protection and enhancement plans and actions with adjacent jurisdictions and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 24 of 27 Policy LU-26.4 Maintain rivers and streams in their natural state. Rehabilitate degraded , channels and banks via public programs and in conjunction with proposed new development. Policy LU-28.1 Encourage enhancement of existing environmental features such as rivers, streams, creeks, and wetlands. Policy LU-28.2 Promote the creation and preservation of natural corridors adjacent to areas such as the Green River, Soos Creek, and other streams and wetlands within the City of Kent for fish and wildlife habitat, open space and passive recreation. Whenever possible,preservation of these lands should link other pro-perties with similar features to create a natural corridor. Goal LU-30 Ensure the conservation and enhancement of productive agricultural land via regulation, acquisition, or other methods. Staff Comment , No comment. COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains a policy relating to the appropriate public acquisition of open space. Goal CD-18.1 Where appropriate, identify and acquire an open space system that links, parks, greenbelts, wildlife habitats, stream corridors, wetlands, , and other critical areas. impacts on the environmental functions of critical areas shall be considered in the development of open space system links. Staff Comment No comment. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to coordination of development and road improvements, and the relationship between residential land use and the transportation system. Policy TR-1.2 Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent with ' transportation projects to assure that transportation facility capacity is suffic-ient to accommodate the new development, or a financial , commitment is in place to meet the adopted standard within six years, before allowing it to proceed. Policy TR-1.5 Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so that , land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible. Policy TR-1.7 Insure the transportation system is developed consistent with the , anticipated development of the land uses, and acknowledge the influence of provid-ing transportation facilities to accelerate or delay the development of land uses, either by type or area. ' Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 25 of 27 Goal TR-10 Coordinate transportation operations, planning, and improvements with the State, the County, neighboring jurisdictions, and all transportation planning agencies to ensure the City's interests are well represented in regional planning strategies,policies and projects. Staff Comment No comment. CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT The Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to coordination of the finance and development of public infrastructure improvements. Policy CF-1.3 To ensure financial feasibility, provide needed public services and facilities that the City has the ability to fund, or that the City has the authority to require others to provide. Policy CF-1.5 Coordinate the review of non-City managed capital facilities plans to ensure consistency with the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. Policy CF-2.3 Coordinate with other jurisdictions and providers of services and facilities to ensure that the provision of services and facilities are generally consistent for all Kent residents, businesses, and others enjoying City services and facilities. Goal CF-15 Ensure that public utilities services throughout the City, its Potential Annexation Area (PAA) and other areas receiving such services are adequate to accommodate anticipated growth without significantly degrading the levels-of-service for existing customers. Staff Comment No comment. PARKS&OPEN SPACE ELEMENT The Parks & Open Space Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains several goals and policies relating to coordination of the finance and development of public infrastructure improvements. Policy P&OS-1.2 Acquire and preserve habitat sites that support threatened species and urban wildlife habitat, in priority corridors and natural areas with habitat value such as the Green River Corridor, the Green River Natural Resources Area (GRNRA), North Meridian Park, Soos Creek, Mill Creek, and Clark Lake Park. Goal P&OS-2 Preserve and provide access to significant environmental features, ' where such access does not cause harm to the environmental functions associated with the features. Policy P&OS-2.2 Acquire, and where appropriate, provide limited public access to environmentally sensitive areas and sites that are especially unique to the Kent area, such as the Green River, Soos Creek, Garrison Creek and Mill Creek corridors, the Green River Natural Resources Area (GRNRA), and the shorelines of Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, Lake Fenwick, and Clark Lake. Staff Comment Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 26 of 27 1 No comment. APPLYING THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare. [KCC 12.02.050(1)& 15.09.050(C)(5)] Staff Comment See following comment. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the Plan that warrant an amendment to the Plan. [KCC 12.02.050(2) & 15 09 050(C)(4)] Staff Comment The City Council recently established the existing land use and zoning designation. The AG-R designation recognized the fact that the development rights on the parcel had previously been purchased by King County for agricultural and open space preservation. To date, there has been no change to the ownership of the development rights. Therefore, redesignation of this property is premature. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements of the Plan. [KCC 12.02 050(3) & 15.09.050(C)(1)] Staff Comment See previous comment. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. [KCC 15.09.050(C)(2)] ' Staff Comment See previous comment. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the , property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated. [KCC 15.09.050(C)(3)] Staff Comment See previous comment. Recommendation: Staff recommends DENIAL without prejudice of this request to redesignate the subject 15.35 acre parcel as proposed until the issue of development rights ownership is resolved by the applicant. If there are any questions prior to the hearing, please contact William Osborne at (253) 856-5437. WO1pm S 1Perm1t1P1an1CompPlanAmdments1200412042937-cpa2004-4a-d-LUPBpubhrgll2204.doc Eric: Attachment A City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure 6-3(Access Management) Attachment B Urban Land Institute,Ten Principles for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips,pages 8-9 Attachment C Puget Sound Regional Council,2002 Regional Growth Centers Report Kent Manufacturrng/lndustrtal Center Attachment D Maps of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Attachment E Summary Matnx of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Land Use and Planntng Board Public Hearing November 22,2004 Page 27 of 27 LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES ' NOVEMBER 22,2004 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Johnson, Vice Chair Greg Worthing, Steve Dowell, Dana Ralph,Elizabeth Watson, Kenneth Wendlmg, BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: David Malik, Excused STAFF MEMBERS: Charlene Anderson, William Osborne, Pamela Mottram, Larry Blanchard, Kim Adams Pratt The meeting was called to order by Chair Johnson at 7 00 P.M in City Council Chambers. 1 Approval of Minutes Greg Worthing MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED a motion to approve the minutes of October 25, 2004. Motion CARRIED. Added Items/Communications/Notice of Upcoming Meetings Planning Manager Charlene Anderson introduced Larry Blanchard with Public Works Operations as interim Public Works Director following Don Wickstrom's retirement on December 1. 1 Ms Anderson stated that a special Planning and Economic Development Committee will be scheduled for December 6 at 4 00 pm in Council Chambers regarding the Downtown Strategic Action Plan and the Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments. 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Proposals Planner William Osborne submitted the following exhibits for the record concerning the Mill enium-Kangley Building proposal 1. A letter dated November 3, 2004 from Sarah Artley with MeadowCreek Land Consulting, acknowledging their interest in an Office zoning district rather than an NCC zoning district for their proposal 2. A letter dated November 16, 2004 submitted by Joel Kessell with Engineering Solutions indicating that an evaluation of their property indicated that no stream flows across or adjacent to the subject site of their proposal. 3. A letter dated November 15, 2004 from Sara Artley with MeadowCreek Land Consulting, indicating that they wish to withdraw their application for NCC and proceed with a request for an Office Mixed Use zoning district and a Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan Designation for the property. Mr Osborne submitted the following exhibits for the record with regard to the Lotto/Toppano proposal. 1. A letter dated November 15, 2004 from Chris Ferko, AICP, Senior Planner with Barghausen Engineers submitted on behalf of their client listing their primary reasons supporting approval of their proposal. 2. A letter submitted November 22,2004 from Chris Ferko with Barghausen supporting their proposal. Mr. Osborne defined the Standards of Review by which the annual comprehensive land use and zoning district map amendments are considered and described the locations of the four proposal sites. CPA-2004-4(A)Millenium-Kangley Building Mr Osborne stated that the Millemum-Kangley Building proposal seeks a designation change for 68 acres located at the northeast comer of 116'h Avenue Southeast and Kent Kangley Road (SR-516). He stated that the existing designations for the property are Single Family Six Units per Acre, Single Family Residential, SF-6 and SR-6. The proposed designations as of the application submitted in September were for Neighborhood Services Comprehensive Plan Designation and a Neighborhood Community Commercial zone. He described the zoning surrounding the subject site. Mr. Osborne stated that staff analyzed this proposal based on those designations but considered the proposed specific use that the applicant suggested which was an office building Staff has included in its analysis an Office Zoning district with a Mixed Use Land Use Designation. 1 Mr Osborne stated that staff identified issues of concern with this site related to access, traffic impacts, parking and vehicle queuing for drive-through or convenience store use if this site were zoned NCC. Mr. Osborne stated that there is a drainage feature identified in Kent's geographic information system and that site utility improvements would need to be made across Kent Kangley Road for this property to develop as commercial or office use. Mr. Osborne stated that the Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies discourage the conversion of single family residential use to commercial, specifically Land Use Policy 14.6 which discourages the expansion of neighborhood services land uses into single family land use. Mr. Osborne stated that staff recommends DENIAL of the Neighborhood Services Land Use and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial Zoning Designation as originally proposed by the applicant. Staff would support a designation change to Mixed Use for the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation and an Office Mixed Use Zoning Designation CPA-2004-4(B) Kent Office Building Mr Osborne stated that this proposal seeks to change the designation for 6.25 acres located on 940' Avenue South or East Valley Highway from Manufacturing Industrial Center Comprehensive Plan Designation and Limited Industrial Use for the zoning district to a Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial and a zoning district designation of Gateway Commercial. He descnbed the surrounding zoning and land use designations. Mr. Osborne stated that the subject site has a 92,000 square foot office building located on it with a , significant amount of surface parking, consisting mainly of impervious surface. He stated that staff has spoken with the Puget Sound Regional Council staff who voiced no concerns for a proposed comprehensive plan and zoning commercial designation unless there were community concerns. Mr. Osborne stated that any impacts including traffic concerns can be addressed through development review. He stated that direct access to East Valley Highway would be restncted or prohibited with offsite street improvements possibly required from the intersection of 200 He stated that an inventoried wetland would not be impacted. Mr. Osborne stated that staff recommends APPROVAL of this request. CPA-2004-4(C)Lotto/Toppano Mr Osborne stated that this proposal seeks to increase a two-acre corner parcel of property zoned Neighborhood Convenience Commercial to four acres. The existing designation for the subject site is Single Family Six Units per Acre for the land use and zoning This proposal seeks a Neighborhood Services Comprehensive Plan Designation and a Neighborhood Convenience Commercial Zoning district Mr. Osborne described the site as L-shaped with a nursery located on the site as an existing use, stating that , this site has been the subject of a lot line adjustment to decrease the subject site from 8 acres (as proposed last year for NCC zoning) to 4 acres for this year's proposal. He described the zoning surrounding the subject site. Mr. Osborne stated that the issues identified in the analysis of this proposal include concerns with impacts of large lot commercial on single farmly residential neighborhoods, determined last year to be inappropriate for 7 92 acres He stated that the existing comer two acres has been deemed sufficient in the past and the Comprehensive Plan Policy 14 6 explicitly discourages neighborhood services land uses expansion into single family residential. Mr. Osborne stated that driveway access would be prohibited on Southeast 2400i Street with restricted access ' from 116d'Avenue Southeast. He stated that although traffic impacts are a concern,they would be addressed at the development review stage Mr Osborne stated that this proposal made some strong arguments and included some conceptual site plans that staff did not necessarily consider in its review of the proposal. Mr Osborne stated that staff recommends DENIAL of this request as the City is to discourage expansion of neighborhood service land uses into residential neighborhoods. He stated that existing conditions have not changed since the DeMarco Annexation comprehensive plan amendment and initial zoning process when the existing two-acre corner portion was designated, unless the Board believes a lot line adjustment to reduce the site from eight to four acres is a change that should be considered. CPA-2004-4(D)Muth ' Mr. Osborne stated that this proposal seeks to change the designation of approximately 15.5 acres of property located at the corner of 42nd Avenue South and Orillia Road or South 2120' from Agricultural Resource Land with a Zoning Designation of A-10 (10 acres per unit)to Single Family one unit per acre. Land Use and Planning Board Hearing 11/22/04 Page 2 of 6 Mr Osborne stated that the City's Geographic Information System indicates that most of the property is an inventoried wetland. He stated that the applicant has provided the Public Works Department with an approved wetland delineation report and map, indicating that the western portion of the subject site has wetlands on it, with an upland portion to the east which is dry. Mr Osborne stated that the City's Public Works Department has been working on a proposal to restore or enhance Johnson Creek by providing a water retention facility in that area, so that Johnson Creek will provide better flow enhancement for the Green River. Mr Osborne stated that staff is recommending DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to development righs issues and until the City obtains evidence that this issue has been resolved Mr. Osborne stated that King County has owned development rights for the property since 1982 when those development rights were purchased for an Agricultural Lands Preservation Program and that those development rights have not been purchased by the applicant Mr. Osborne stated that the City is essentially waiting on King County to make a decision regarding the development rights He stated that if King County removes the designation for Agricultural Resource Land and proceeds with the sale of development rights to the applicant, the City would consider this amendment proposal more completely. Mr. Osborne addressed concerns raised by Steve Dowell and Greg Worthing regarding access issues for the Kent Office Building proposal and wetland issues related to the Muth proposal. Chair Johnson declared the Public Hearing Open. Millenium-Kan2ley Testimony: Joel Kessell, 5700 100`h St. SW, Suite 630-166,Lakewood,WA explained that the applicant has agreed to change their initial request from Neighborhood Services Land Use and NCC zoning to Office Mixed Use Land Use designation and an Office with Mixed Use Overlay zoning to meet the needs for the development they desire on the subject site He stated there was no stream on the site. Kent Office Building Testimony Gary Volchok, 16400 Southcenter Parkway, Suite 100, Tukwila, WA 98188 stated that the subject site housing the Kent Office Building, formerly built and used by Boeing, needs to be rezoned in order to bring this site into compliance with its existing use and to allow the building's owner to change the building's use in the future more readily. He spoke about the need for access to the property, indicating that a good amount of parking exists under the current zoning which could diminish under a redevelopment project on that site. Mr. Volchok stated that he concurs with staffs analysis of this site reiterating that he would like this property's zoning to align with the zoning of those properties to the south,north and east of the subject site Lotto/Touaano Testimony Russell Hanscom, 9523 S. 237`h Place, Kent, WA stated that he has worked as Executive Director of the Arbor Village Senior Living Facility located at 24121 116`h Avenue Southeast for over four years and is informed that the majority of residents support an increase in zoning to expand the subject site for a shopping center they could utilize. He stated that the residents do not believe that increased traffic flow would adversely effect the safety around our community. Mr. Hanscom questioned how the City can recommend approving a rezone for a two acre site directly in front of Arbor Village to Commercial as they did last year yet deny a rezone for the two acres across the street from the retirement home He stated that the residents support the applicant's request. Chris Ferko, Barghausen Consulting Engineers said that he is a consultant and part of a project team who includes Eric LaBrie with ESM Consulting Engineers and David Markley with Transportation Solutions on behalf of the owners Mike Lotto and Angelo Toppano. ' Mr. Ferko stated that this application request strives to achieve an appropriate balance for development of the subject site with good infill. He stated that the subject site as well as the three comers at the intersection are Land Use and Planning Board Hearing 11/22/04 Page 3 of 6 zoned Neighborhood Commercial, citing development scenarios under the existing zoning configuration. He spoke about the access limitations based on the existing zoning. Mr. Ferko stated that more opportunities exist to develop four acres versus two acres with the types of neighborhood uses that Neighborhood Commercial zoning intends and allow more flexibility for a developer , to provide for access to and from 240'1'and 116`h. He spoke about concerns that staff had raised concerning the potential for adverse impacts on the site were it to be developed with a large scale commercial development. Mr. Ferko stated that his team supports staff s desire to amend the NCC zoning standards, use tables and development standards so that they are more neighborhood friendly. He stated that he believes this request provides a good opportunity to obtain the types of neighborhood uses that the Comprehensive Plan and the , Zoning Code support versus what other development potential could provide within the existing framework Eric LaBrie, ESM Consulting Engineers, 720 South 3481h St., Federal Way, WA 98003 spoke on issues outlined in a memorandum submitted by Dawn Finlay with Inslee, Best, Doezie & Ryder, P S. dated November 22, 2004 Mr. LaBrie spoke about the Ten Principals for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips which, in part, had been included as an attachment to the staff report He submitted the Preface of the Ten , Principles article for the record, established as Exhibit #3. Mr LaBrie spoke about significant changed circumstances affecting this property stating that we are requesting to expand this two acre site to four acres in order that we may plan for adequate buffering. He identified changed circumstances as a lot line adjustment, comprehensive plan and zoning change last year at the opposite corner, and a proposed PUD , around the subject site. David Markley, Transportations Solutions Inc., 8250 165`h Avenue NE„ Suite 100, Redmond, WA stated that his firm was retained to evaluate the transportation impacts associated with this proposed re- designation of the comprehensive plan and associated rezone. He explained how his firm evaluated trip generation, driveway spacing compatiblility,Levels of Service and Trip Lengths. Mr Markley said that the final analysis comes doom to level of service stating that the intersection immediate to the site operates at a Level of Service C and will remain at that level in the future with or without this comprehensive plan amendment. He stated that their firm calculated that the Level of Service would improve slightly with the proposed rezone even though a few more trips would be generated as most of those trips are directionally oriented north and east and do not affect the intersection the way a residential development would. Marlene Kelly, 23908 114`h Place Southeast,Kent,WA stated that she represents her neighborhood which bounds the subject site. She voiced concern that their neighborhood property valuations would decrease with development of a gas station or mini-mart with its neon lighting and would like staff to consider what impacts a development would have on an already busy intersection of 116'h and 240t". Tom Bankord, 23702 116'h Avenue Southeast,Kent, WA stated that he resides in the first residence north of the existing nursery. He voiced opposition to the four acre rezone request stating that traffic conditions would detenorate along 116"' which currently is heavily traveled.. He stated that he would like to see access to the site located off of 240"and the addition of a left turn signal. Gary Young, 11624 SE 5`h, Suite 200,Bellevue,WA 98005 stated that he believes development of a mini- mart or gas station should be avoided for the subject property. He stated that staff should consider the four acres at the same time giving special attention to the traffic flow in that area based on the proposed added conditions, saying that he believed a nght-in and Tight-out off of 240'h would help to relieve pressure off 116`h Mr. Young stated that this site needs to be developed with adequate buffering for the surrounding residential development. He stated that it is likely that a better development could occur on a four acre site. Muth Testimony ' Richard Rawlings, 11624 SE 5'h Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98005 stated that he supports the proposed amendment to the comp plan and rezone The Muth property consists of approximately 15 acres purchased by the County in 1982 as part of a program the County was embarking on to collect agnculturally Land Use and Planning Board Hearing 11/22/04 Page 4 of 6 viable property in the valley. He stated that the County then sold the property subject to agricultural 1 restrictions or vested development rights. He stated that the property has limited access with approximately half of the property consisting of a wetland with a stream running through the property. He stated the he would not consider this property to be commercially viable. 1 Mr Rawlings stated that once the property became part of the agricultural program, the City of Kent applied an appropriate zoning and comp plan designation to support that. He stated that during the construction of the Riverview Planned Unit Development, they purchased the Muth property believing the site consisted entirely of wetlands and with the intent to provide some wetland enhancements if suitable. Mr. Rawlings stated that in working with the Public Works Department, they were asked if they would be willing to help with an easement on a portion of the property so that the steam channel originally developed as an irrigation or drainage ditch could be restored or changed to form a more natural system as part of a larger program the Public Works Department is embarking on for this basin. He stated that they have conceded to work with Public Works to complete this project including offering to fund some of the work. Mr Rawlings stated that the proposed amendment would support a regional storm water detention facility that would serve most of the hillside as well as some other properties Developing this facility responds to the Green River Management Plan that requires the city to detain a 100 year storm for seven days with no release, creating huge volumes of water and requiring a large piece of property which this site could provide. Mr Rawlings stated that this proposed amendment could help the City obtain the necessary property for stream relocation and restoration with some possible wetland enhancement. Mr. Rawlings stated that the agricultural restriction for King County impedes them from carrying through on their efforts to work with the City He stated that in speaking with the County, they are reluctant to remove properties from the agricultural program. but given this specific piece of property, they have indicated if it was in Kent's interest to take control of the property and develop it for the stream relocation and storm water facility that they wouldn't necessarily stand in the way of that. Mr. Rawlings stated that the City of Kent sent them a Notice of Intent to Condemn the Property,which is the mechanism needed to remove King County's restriction from the title He stated that the current zoning on the property doesn't support the type of activities we are proposing, specifically the regional storm detention facility. He stated that the intent of the Comp Plan and rezone proposal is to obtain a zone such as SR-1 to support a public facility and that he is optimistic that the County impediment can be removed within the next 30 to 60 days, to allow this property to continue through with the comp plan and rezone analysis process. Mr. Rawlings stated that notwithstanding staff s recommendation to deny this proposal, he would request that the Board consider this request on its merits with a recommendation to allow this proposal to continue through the process towards a Council Hearing, supporting it with the caveat that the title restriction needs to be cleared up before it becomes affective. Gary Young, 11624 SE 5`h, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98005 concurred with Richard Rawlings comments and appealed to the Board to support those comments so that they will be able to assist the city with their storm drainage efforts. Seeing no further speakers, Steve Dowell MOVED and Elizabeth Watson SECONDED a Motion to Close the Public Hearing. Motion CARRIED Chair Johnson declared the public hearing closed Assistant City Attorney Kim Adams Pratt stated that she wished to clarify issues with respect to comments made by Richard Rawlings concerning the Muth property She stated that City Attorney Tom Brubaker has been working with Polygon to help them find a solution with King County. She stated that the Legal Department considers the application to be premature at this time, as they are not confident that matters with King County are completed to the point where Legal feels confident this issue will be resolved in 30 to 60 days Ms. Pratt defined Planning staffs recommendation of Denial Without Prejudice to mean that this proposal could be revisited without a denial hindering a future application The application could be considered again prior to the annual Comprehensive Plan amendments in September 2005 if Council thought this amendment request was of city-wide significance, as certainly the Public Works issues could be,therefore, it could be dealt with outside the annual cycle Land Use and Planning Board Hearing 11/22/04 Page 5 of 6 After deliberating, Steve Dowell MOVED and Elizabeth Watson SECONDED a Motion to Approve CPA- 2004-4(A) Millemum-Kangley Amendment request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use to Mixed Use and the Zoning Designation to Office with a Mixed Use Overlay as recommended by staff. Motion CARRIED. After deliberating, Steve Dowell MOVED and Greg Worthing SECONDED a Motion to Approve CPA- 2004-4(B) Kent Office Building Amendment request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use to Commercial Land Use and the Zoning Designation to a Gateway Commercial Zoning Designation as recommended by staff. Motion CARRIED. Mr Osborne addressed questions raised by the Board Members regarding the CPA-20044(C) Lotto/Toppano Amendment and after deliberations, Steve Dowell MOVED and Elizabeth Watson SECONDED a MOTION to Deny CPA-2004-4(C) Lotto/Toppano Amendment request for reasons as stated in the Planning Department report document. Motion CARRIED. Mr. Osborne and Ms. Kim Adams Pratt addressed concerns raised by Board Member's Dowell, Ralph, Worthing and Watson with respect to the Muth property. After deliberations, Elizabeth Watson MOVED to move forward with the designation to SF-I on the 15.35 acre parcel. Motion DIED for lack of a second. Greg Worthing MOVED and Steve Dowell SECONDED a Motion to accept staffs recommendation for Denial without Prejudice on CPA-2004-4(D)for the Muth property amendment Motion CARRIED 5 to I with Elizabeth Watson opposed. Election of Officers Chair Johnson declared nominations open Steve Dowell MOVED and Elizabeth Watson SECONDED a Motion to nominate Jon Johnson to the position of Chair. Motion CARRIED Steve Dowell MOVED and Kenneth Wendling SECONDED a Motion to nominate Greg Worthing to the position of Vice Chair. Motion CARRIED Seeing no further nominations, Steve Dowell MOVED and Elizabeth Watson SECONDED to close the nominations. Motion CARRIED. Steve Dowell MOVED and Elizabeth Watson SECONDED to elect Jon Johnson to the position of Chair. Motion CARRIED. Elizabeth Watson MOVED and Dana Ralph SECONDED to elect Greg Worthing to the position of Vice Chair. Motion CARRIED. Jon Johnson and Greg Worthing accepted the positions as appointed Adiournment Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9.00 p.m. � Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager Secretary of the Board S IPermillPlanILUPB120041MmutesII12204mrn doc Land Use and Planning Board Hearing 11/22/04 Page 6 of 6 CITY OF KENT DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE NT BR 6.3 I W�]"(Y4iOM • OC�IU ACCESS MANAGEMENT The City of Kent has developed a Comprehensive Transportation Roadways, indicating existing and proposed streets and their functional classifications. The Cityof p on Plan and a Master Plan of Kent has also adopted the City of Kent Construction Standards which contain the basic elements of access management. This document provides some background information on access management and also provides guidelines for access management decisions. agement What is Access Mana ement? Access management is the process of balancing the access. Access management provides access to land development while simultaneously preserving the safe and efficient flow of traffic on the roadway system. It applieng s traffic agjcs of engineering traffic movement and land the location, design and operation of access drives (driveways) serving activities along the roadway. It evaluates the suitability of Providing principals to land development. It addresses the basic questions —when and where access should be located; Y access to a given road, as well as the suitability of a site for how it should be designed; and the procedures needed to implement the program. In a broad con it is resource management, since it is a way to anticipate and prevent safety problems and traffic, congestion. text, Access management includes; 1 the importance of each roadway to City mobility; (2)defining allowable levels of access classifying roadways based upon functional criteria which reflect classification of roadway, including criteria for the spacing of intersections and driveways with and without traffic signals; 3 applying a for each g ( ) appropriate geometric design criteria and traffic engineering analysis to the allowable accesses; and (4)adoptin a Procedures. In the City of Kent, the highest levels of acce design ropriate Principal Arterials, and the least access control ss location andsign are applied t is applied to local Re ul de and administrative sidential Streets. Wh Do We Use Mana ement Access? David Solomon, in his "Accidents on Public c—`ds, July 1964, recognized the need for access management as indicated b t Main Rural Highways Related to Speed, Driver, and Vehicles," "When conventional highways areY he following; comr»erciai driveways and the safety record es good.As he highways gon new rights-of-way, et lolder he traffic few builds up, roadside businesses develop, more and more commercial driveways a accident rate gradually increases." t, an volume Y re cut, and the . Page 1 of 8 Solomon concludes, "This demonstrates the impor tance of maintaining control of access when either two-land or multi-lane highways are built on new locations. Increased numbers of either intersections or driveways alone will also increase the accident rate. Intersections should be restricted to those essential for the highway, and the right (of direct) access from abutting businesses should be severely limited." While Solomon's article referred to rural highways, the same principal that an increase in the number of driveways results in an increase in the number of crashes (currently,the transportation and traffic communities use the word "crashes or collisions" in lieu of the word "accidents") on suburban and urban streets as well. In addition to the increase in the number of crashes, increasing the number of street intersections and/or driveways along a street also results in a loss of capacity for theo public traffic adwsy or the This condition is most often referred to by drivers as, "traffic congestion", "poor "moving parking lot." What Are The Symptoms of Poor Access Mana ement? ess management include The symptoms of poorpoor traffic flow and congestion;numerous brake light activation's by drivers in gh collision rates and a large number of collisions; p pressures through lanes; unsightly strip development; neighborhoods disrupted by cut-through rough traffic, p to widen an existing street or to build a bypass; and a decrease in property Mana ement? WhatA ac nSeres uts�ln�fewer locations atsions- and less traffic conflicts occur, and drivers cyclist conflicts. Longer Safety: Fewer and l hichvers have driveway spacing time to respond to one access conflict at a time. Conflicts between turning vehicles an vehicles in the traffic stream is reduced. other traffic is reduced. Variation _w in the speeds of - Pedestrians and bicyclists have fewer and less complex conflict areas ith autos. . . ced Efficiency: Less stop-and-go traffic; reduced traffic delay; increased and preserved Turbulencedu the fuel consumption; and preservation of investment in the roadway system. elays and well as traffic stream is educed because of less stops foced and the r entering or existingre is less "stop-and-go" traffic.Traffic vehicles. Roadway travel times are icles behind capacity is increased; effec time ely removes one or more laneshfrom selrvice. Fuel hconsmption it must also stop, this t reduced, and s preserved since the affic flows and trafficreduced capac capacity of thle roadwaylis ma ntamned�n the roadway system The need for costly and disruptive arterial widening or the construction of bypasses are greatly reduced or entirely eliminated. I Page 2 of 8 Livable Communities: Enhances community character;preserves neighborhood integrity; preservation of private investment in abutting properties; and lower vehicular emissions. Community character is enhanced, both visually and functionally by a functionally designed street system. Land use patterns and land values are preserved. Cut through traffic is eliminated or greatly reduced. The resulting low traffic volumes and slower speeds contribute to safe and tranquil residential areas. Arterial streets can be designed to carry high traffic volumes safely and efficiently. Investment in commercial office and retail development does not become obsolete due to deterioration in the quality of service on arterial streets and a shrinking market value as travel times and delays increase until the point where bypass roadways are built and traffic volumes drop on the original arterial street. rHow Can We Manage Access? The City of Kent manages access by using the following tools: medians, auxiliary lanes,signal ispacing, number of driveways, driveway location and design, driveway separation, corner clearance, joint & cross access; and reverse or alternative frontage. t Medians: Wide nontraversable medians provide shelter for vehicles making left turns to and from the street. They also provide refuge for pedestrians attempting to cross wide streets. Consequently, collision rates on major streets with wide nontraversable medians have been found to be substantially lower than undivided streets or streets having a continuous Two Way Left Turn Lane (TWLTL). Medians can also be landscaped as part of a corridor beautification program. As with driveways, the spacing and design of median openings is important to the safe and efficient operation of the street. Safety benefits are reduced when median openings have inadequate storage for left turns, or when the openings are too close together. Narrow nontraversable medians (typically C curbs) provide shelter for vehicles making left turns to and from the street and prevent unsafe left turns onto the street. Narrow nontraversable medians do not provide all of the benefits of wide nontraversable medians, but require only very-minor_physical_changes in the street to accommodate their construction. Narrow nontraversable medians also require less right-of-way and may be used more often where rights-of-way are limited. Auxiliary Lanes: Left-turn and right-tum lanes minimize the conflict between turning vehicles and vehicles attempting to continue in through traffic lanes. They also provide storage space where vehicles can safely wait to perform the turn maneuver. This results in smoother traffic flow, increased capacity and greatly increased safety. Signalized Intersection Spacing: Long uniform intersection spacings on arterial streets facilitate the use of traffic signal timing plans which can respond to peak and off-peak traffic flow conditions. Long and uniform spacings improve the progress of traffic flow and increases the number of vehicles that flow the traffic signal on a given green light timing. Capacity of the intersection and the arterial street is increased, fuel consumption and traffic emissions are decreased and traffic safety in improved. 1 Page 3 of 8 umber of Driveways: •"---�`-- , the Public Streethe totalas number Of,e numb dnvew, sing much,eW Possible Sin er of drfve�,a Ys alo their co ay unlen gle-famfl Ys that each g a Public stye na, , Co "s the Y residential lots Parcel et at, the effi demonsfra fe thammercial Y can demonstrate should haveciency of Parcel has heir devPropertfes should a need baseampl e• are be be limited functio front etoPment be I'Mite d upon l d to have ns, then the tWo(or generates d to a sin °t Constraint ve only a on Drive, parcel should e , Public street,ore than 2,pppl e driveway antes beyond aY Cocatio be limited to With vehicles andn and best act different stre per daysWhe can may baesily enter into arid locatfo ess on the to et cfas ' n a n and sif<cations and nd exit x'er classificatfo adequate'able to a site. If deli n of street. radius see°n- drive gn affects , drive time to stop Ifddy'ng vehicles �ays are not the abflft rnaY hav will be unable eway widths , and rnolorfsts 4n perly located y of a dnver to safel there is a to use more tha to maneuvers e tao narrow stre ma exiting vehlcf the enerin are atfernpffnn one traffic lane in and comfy have an inadequate have radius es a vehicle will hav g , leave the n order to Make th Y on and off fuate turning nd/or ddv e to wait f driv con fusing ande►,vay widf n a thro ewaY and the drily e desired fern the street and a hazard for h are excessive h lane of traffic ew, Width In addition 1Jrivers Pedestrians , the large e On the other h is too narrow ' if need time to respond , bicyclfsis xPanse of Infer hand, if the the d yew, their ve pond to vehicle IS, motorists. Section area canubing ew, hicles ac hrcles entering eYs is cordin streets Paralion standardsas speed lungs-Therefore, the leaving the • and W are more nd drivin m�ntrrium disc street and t0 safe! streets. Why they are stringent for g speeds increase tan needed Y more stringent on Collector ial street etshan t -his is x'hY d between dDrlveW ctor stre hey are f eway driv ey separation than the or collector include ehavior n°r spacing standards Y are for re street ' and vehicle d dards are residential driveways, the von do Ynarnics, Of MO torist nand classiffcationconsideratio frorn traffic en bicyclist, an a of trucks, driv , driving s ns In establish' 9�neenng Principles Corner Clearance. d Aedesfrtan Co. licts•expectahCY, and the Sep 9 separation Ples to e: Co of adjacent Stre standards ndards he nearest cccle nce fs a separation and red reef and ara the_ traffic access distanC n of fro oPeratio connection e from an intersect-rn Corner ns at intersectio n' or drivewa protect the parcels. tons, as Y. Cornerctfon of assure a development wring an adequate as the sa fe team a Public or the that these Pro lot ty and nce standards Preserve street Potential and market v fze adjacent streets.Properties do not aluewfth app opr of pence ofaccess a good signal, for exam If a drive,- exPerfe e co to and exit fr Ple, the Y fs located tooecce of Cornerpr°perties ter clearance will °m, the site, vehicles sto cloS Problerns as It will als SS PPed for ghtto an f traffic vole o help a red it ma ntersectian which 1 es grow On Y Prevent successful entryhas a trafl<C into or page 4 of q Joint and Cross Access: Joint and cross access requirements consolidate driveways serving more than one parcel and provide circulation between adjacent parcels.This allows vehicles to circulate between adjacent businesses without having to re-entering public streets. Joint access requirements are used to connect major developments and to reduce the number of driveways that would otherwise be required to serve abutting parcels. Joint driveways are also used to improve driveway spacing or separation, and sometimes permits more than one driveway to serve a single parcel where separation standards would not otherwise permit more than one driveway. This permits intensive development along a corridor while maintaining traffic operations and safe and convenient access to businesses. Property Owners unable to meet minimum driveway separation standards are typically required to provide for joint and cross access easements whenever feasible.Abutting properties under different ownership are encouraged to comply, but are generally not required to comply until they develop or redevelop their property. Flexibility is needed on an administrative level to work with the unique circumstances of each development site. The City of Kent, for example, relaxes the minimum driveway separation standards for properties that agree to consolidate accesses, or to provide for a joint access driveway. Reverse Frontage or Alternative Access: When land is subdivided for small commercial or residential uses, the lots abutting arterial streets should not be allowed direct vehicular access to the arterial street. Instead, an interior street which provides access to the arterial street should be required. This eliminates the conflicts between high-speed traffic and traffic entering and exiting at closely spaced driveways. Access to the arterial street is provided at a location which can meet separation and corner clearance standards, and which can then be designed to safely handle the traffic generated by the development. When a parcel has frontage on more than one public street, and one of those streets has a higher street classification and function than the other street, then the property should be required to obtain access solely from the street having the lower (or lowest) classification and function.When one of the public streets is an arterial street , and the other street is of a lower classification, such as a collector street, then access to the arterial street should not be permitted. Minimum storage, stacking space, or queue lengths: In designing driveways, adequate storage (or driveway queue length) must be provided on commercial sites to prevent entering vehicles from having to stop in the public streets, and to prevent exiting vehicles from blocking internal circulation aisles. This problem is most evident with drive-in service developments that generate high traffic volumes and require motorists to wait in their vehicles while being served, or until service begins. Such developments shall be carefully analyzed to assure that the Site Plan provides adequate storage. Specific storage areas shall be determined on an individual basis; however minimum storage lengths are required to be provided before any crossing or turning conflicts can be permitted. Page 5 of 8 The City of Kent Access Management Standards I. Minimum Driveway to Driveway Separation Standards; measured from closest edge of driveway to closest edge of driveway: a. ' For parcels abutting a Residential Street: 15-feet b. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Street: 50-feet. c. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Arterial Street: 200-feet. d. For parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Street: 100-feet. e. For Parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Arterial Street: 200-feet. f. For Parcels abutting a Minor Arterial Street: 200-feet. , g. For parcels abutting a Principal Arterial Street (when alternative access is not available only): 300-feet. 2. Minimum Corner Clearance Standards; measured from the nearest edge of driveway to the point of curvature for the curb return on the adjacent street intersection: a. For parcels abutting a Residential Street:50-feet. b. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Street: 100-feet. c. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Arterial Street: 200-feet. d. For parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Street: 50-feet. e. For Parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Arterial Street: 100-feet. f. For Parcels abutting a Minor Arterial Street: 200-feet. g. For parcels abutting a Principal Arterial Street(driveways are permitted only when alternative access is not available): 300-feet. h. For parcels adjacent to a traffic signal controlled intersection: 300-feet is the desired minimum separation from the intersection, and shall be used unless an approved Traffic Study successfully demonstrates that the affective area of the subject intersection is less than 300-feet from the intersection. 3. Driveway Design Standards: a. Residential Driveway Approaches shall be constructed as shown in Standard Detail 6 5(a) from the City of Kent Construction Standards. b. Commercial Driveway Approaches shall be generally constructed as shown in Standard Detail 6-5(b)from the City of Kent Construction Standards, except that the required radius and minimum (and maximum) driveway throat width combination shall be determined by a Vehicle Maneuvering Diagram provided by the Applicant for the appropriate Design Vehicle. C. Wherever feasible, a 5.0-foot wide planting strip located between the front of the sidewalk and the back of curb is desired to provide a visual cue to drivers as to where the driveway is located along the street, and to reduce the amount of sidewalk work required to meet ADA requirements. 4. General Access Provisions: a. In general, all properties abutting public streets are permitted at least one safe access to the public street system. b. On properties with multiple public street frontages, the City reserves the right to restrict vehicular access solely to the public street having the lower roadway classification, and/or to the safest access location. c. Development proponents wanting more than one driveway access to a public street will be required to justify the second driveway on the basis of development generated trips.A general rule of thumb based upon created trips and used by the City of Kent is that developments creating less than 4,000 trips per day will be limited to a single driveway. Page 6 of 8 d. Where the driveway location does not meet minimum City separation criteria, or where a safe driveway location can't be found, the City requires appropriate mitigation measures to Provide for as safe a driveway as is feasible. 5• Common Mitigation Measures for Developments Which Can't Meet the Minimum Drivew Driveway, or Driveway to Intersection Separation Criteria: ay to a. Moving the proposed driveway as far from the closest driveway, or intersection, as possible. This is the minimum mitigation measure that will be accepted by the City, and in some instances this is not an adequate mitigation in and by itself. b. Along arterial streets, the creation of a new deceleration lane/right-turn pocket is often acceptable to provide a safe pullout for turning vehicles. This often requires significant off- site street improvements, and occasionally the purchase of additional ri adjacent properties in order to construct those improvements. ght-of--way from ' C. Acquiring across-easement for ingress and egress from an adjoining property, and then using an existing driveway for the new development. d. Acquiring a binding agreement from an adjoining property to remove an existing adjacent 1 driveway in order to meet the minimum driveway to driveway separation criteria; and then removing that superfluous driveway. Depending upon the trip the subject development and the traffic volumes on the subject street, this mitigationtics of measure (the removal of an existing driveway) may be considered adequate mitigation even when the full driveway to driveway separation distance that results doesn't fully meet the minimum driveway separation criteria. 6. The minimum protected queue (or on-site storage lane length)must be provided for of vehicles indicated below to prevent any potential turning conflicts within their lengths.number These are the minimum lengths that will be permitted unless an approved Traffic Study includes a site and project specific queuing study showing that either more or less storage length is required to serve the subject development: a. For single-lane drive-in banks: storage to accommodate a minimum entering queue of 6 vehicles for a single window; banks having two windows need to accommodate a minimum entering queue of at least 9 vehicles per window; and banks having more 4 or more windows shall have storage to accommodate a minimum of 13 vehicles for each service lane. b. For vehicle wash facilities: facilities having have a mi a single service bay shall provide entering storage to accommodate a minimum of 12 vehicles; facilities having multi-bay designs shall nimum entering storage space of at least 6 vehicles for each service bay. C. For fast-food restaurants with drive-in window service: entering storage to accommodate a minimum of 8 vehicles per service lane shall be provided, but a minimum of 15 vehicles is suggested. Storage lengths for fast food restaurants is measured from the order board to the first service window. d. For service stations: a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate a minimum of 2 vehicles shall be provided between the pump islands and the public right-of- way, unless Expresso stands with drive-through windows are included on the site, in which case the minimum Expresso stand storage requirements will prevail. e. For shopping centers (50,000 square feet or more of gross leasing area):a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate a minimum of 4 vehicles shall be Provided before any crossing, or turning conflicts can be permitted between the arking lot and the public right-of-way. Shopping centers having 100,000 square feet or more of gross leasing area shall provide a site and project specific queuing analysis to determine their appropriate entering and exiting storage lengths. p Page 7 of 8 f. For all commercial developments (less than 50,000 square feet of gross leasing area): a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate at least 2 vehicles shall be provided between the parking lot and the public right-of-way before any crossing or turning conflicts can be permitted. Note: the City may require a site and project specific queuing analysis to determine the appropriate storage lengths when the commercial development includes one or more drive through facilities. g. For all Expresso stands with drive-through windows: entering and exiting storage lengths shall accommodate a minimum of 4 vehicles per window; but provisions for at least 15 vehicles is strongly suggested.. ' h. For pharmacies with drive-through windows: entering and exiting storage lengths shall accommodate a minimum of 5 vehicles per window. NOTE: Unless otherwise approved by the Transportation Engineering Section of the , Department of Public Works, each vehicle above shall be deemed to have a length of 25-feet for the purpose of calculating minimum storage lengths. i T E i Last revised on May 2, 2001 Page 8of8 ,�• h t +' •t.r. `". l,' ;.ref y`i ?�r +• � � t- - t, w • � , -t' ',Yb •�ti` �� 'e�E ' � 1 � .`` - nor`. �• eM • �Y ` `t; `e s - µ - • .,, • - l '1.,, " y � S r ARM kfing ,Nook. Inv , Ago&AMman ba Michael D. Beyard, MichaeL PawtWewicz Bank o f America! , Old --Op The Urban Land Institute gratefully acknowledges the financial support project. of Bank of America in underwriting this ! n 1 , I •1 1 • 1 1. 1 1 1 . 1 1 1• // 1 1 .1 1 / 1 1 1 1' 1' 1 . '• / 1 I • 1 1 1 / 1 / 1 1• 1 1•1 '1 1 1 I 1• I 1 I 1 ' / 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 • ♦. i [ q.� r La .w•+}�,,,(y V�ti ��. Y rNsx ♦I ':'fir y'�' ,.1"!� i 1 1 1. ' S •5i4,'�` T "'�Y�sai 4(i + wll/Y"a:�.1'�r 4r i'.L FF•c `ti'F� �j��„�,•S�'A C+f°r*r- 1 • 1 r a`J 1. ID4}-�y ` -7 ` ( • 1 1 1 1. 1 . r • `--•��q=e• .�..� - .s rs r' y`.4 vl ,v�nr�r. ,�`E, 13��... • i4�i�.,tti e � ,-. � ,.+ i .�r t :F. 1 ta' 4+l�y�J�!`>xe��.- n�..Ga�` /F yt'�`x'isLq�✓Y '�',i3 yat�� 11 • .1• •r r 1�{x"d' S L a;+ry.ii iy.£ F`.,{�c".+� Yxr ` w r� �y�L.q ;Y�Sa�Yit FIY�l 1 1 1 1 1 -All A i "'Kt'- wr+�r� �^e • -rye n }a• I Y: fy1+�`+�r++��-tom'�a`3��s.'�'r kA,a i -.I,u; N 4a r`F �Y.•t' ` •�s�a� - 1 111 1 1 1 :t � It'Jf ri rf, .g,.� a S� w, � J, � s.4�5 ♦Lvi'' yt i�/. + "� �. M zJ h.,y ts.{y uC S s `( +ys.a r 4r.'� 4�}Kiv rs • A .ra� r >! 1 1 1 1' 1 / 1 L.,G r:�.v.,�4 •1p { , Y y f p^'y Mry t`T� f4 rs•? x� ,CfSYJ.� • - 1 r• .Y"La "t9i'� �u�( A as f.yk t �A 4S 1�+Y s.0 i' t� a Va r�E , -0te>� 11) sue' `+r+z^•� 4 r ., rnl tr—•�i d J v x < � + q y g r i t . +�� ;1j ( - ✓J �hf S 1�...`�+ 'S, -. 'Tt;�Ld x> ^R _ xa a w+!RJiI jl`•-. 1 •. 1 1 1 YI Y +v � �• y �} a 5 t.r .y n. __ L .w. r iS •F }' t> `• "r 1. !w r f s.t. . .�.•Z i t t f I � ( f 6 '• / 1 / �Cr ib 4� yt i�.i r4 kU +.il r�'i�jF� v�.Ef�i 3. '' 41'i f,�'s R'Y;$s sc��♦ _.# •St • • 1 I 1 1 1 1• I. �• � 4y 1 Y � i J.. :._ �+ }� �� r4,w ♦a 2V,t tY�' +' r F .•.it 1 1 1 i i It1.�2�ISa `yrj" 1�. �44 iY � ''I'�e } 17�i,` '��i+< ` TyYe�r7� Fes,. e ry�r�� f� 1 • I • �r r:41" r'C• A Jr[ =rk ,3",Y,x11 x + t f • ^ �d`' • E •1 1 1 ry: +1� In }♦ i - +Ms ,a. 'r TLR.+ '^+ St r I J �w r 1Z.F'1RIr'� „b_ rIt (e F 7. •R >r ♦ ,r�• "" w iY t e+ X •i`w y: «I m�'S,k�t'y. c (5�� 'C�� ' {4♦`{��C Wpa�i�i . ��' .'�� at •'� r f J., �`rti•u„� rxC'4� ill ``'.:C•41j {.fi waitth..1, t fj 44 •1y."�i a(� a. r .riR r.Y.•4 y �..L7s� i f •.�}af� 's,�J. ..\ 'p•i. I:ail°Ia �1 r_r ':� 1 1 1 5:�":'�s �/�LY•i�.IS`'iY�.>Zrf 'L:� t:> ! .+ 1 (� _ .!n.� a.a. 1-.�N ��~' rs �r�.�¢i rirm.�ea��r Yr. •.,[, "� �- � r� .La s ..�s s „<r'.. � ��riu•-mea�sv^r"�.acl.�'-- a+� yi/�' �:�f�( ^J r )+. '+r .m*'3y�+{ � �h�+Jf it ��s^y?_r r��.3�t.T"Ytf.Lr�/+•^`I- 'I' f a ' ",r>y-z�J, i Ly� a.N lx P„`�, r r•''.,�.:'+n.:� �•'�i-.' Y s ea ✓h- r• �4:-'tt �i!"Ni s r^d'•ilT- � 1 I - r a ' / / -1 1 1.1. 'f , re- '�"�.vz,(.�Hn, `4``"+4 °�` !K'y'��r�M�:•a I- � I/ / 1 1 1 •/ it Mti� 3'��'fn��V ��''-f y '4��<<. 1 1 1 0.�.�s"s'v f-fir`S• �y- F �3 '~+'y.�t• r� 1 1 / 1 lk '`L�f"'T�^, �C �k � '..�Cv�{Siy �F4`�e " .2•r a cst 3fl r 7f -i`'.�- �i's•�i/>•-. r— �t`rs ECti,' ♦ `.1. :y. ...['.� �+yTrfs,xrt+ -�.f d- � i � i2 �u Fr xh-1 i 1Y ?y t < �.r.. �( t f� r .na �]• vxr a A'm 13.I f .t '"w '-�g-( 4 a ai7iLYx}1 r: Xri'� ��•IlvR�f �"i.V+;s•.iK 1 .`ti;�i$'tl.o F ;,€ax. t z F1s'�,r +1?u AR V'Y -vqy Y.2i6Y --.r� fig' A� � P y�Cit ♦ �r �� '� 4 r'bWs Y$s�� 4 F�.M�L ri"� r'f'E C+ ,�� J'C-R*a'Jyt�� /i V`�/�t .�[f � Tr�� •.cam N 7 3,y.� � � d 3,�., - rt C i q- xi^., 3,+wStiv � + IFY�t:l \n'�fr r r�+ $Y ->}• �9i' "yl•,�i vs'�'St �' W7;ya� v ^ r� f,�`+"��i�l.:�'" .. ^��s;�i�p�V i � eS2�'�ra�`r/'^.� ^+,r's n Y�4r��"r�t' } S..'YSxJ``r <° i L� C a� 5 t.S3 •t(..�m f�r\ t,T �; (' i�'"V��A4�'.`f"��F� e+ . �T^ Cf M Yt•. ie r%�le4>f t tc 2: :- f `i'1'' ,�—'^tix ifi in f:�ig�. `r'r•', x'I S(a !� s, ,r �i'Ff 1 1 •.. nJs> t tq Y i ..�F xS 1 7"+ � r�... ♦ y(r tF+.i, t raV +s' tie rnQ[�j t Fty3l.w }•1 11 L�.rr:)�S if• 1fewl hi.�^` 1 `C}� .fL "i+L�-tikdn` + ,j r,}ii yL. -- .<t i." a' '6f i �.: wf i r r "� i /a > tq,.5• '* £ r U ! i ty jp <r. x {h +,/. •♦ �Ja 'h�Y �h 'F Y .iS t ryYY'IA'p �' '�ll n 9 f 7t O Sfj Roj / z zk. ♦ti�fi ",,yy�v -+ %' �S f r Y"I` s}•Y°' .9 {s Ptv i4" l ID ' - ° a kl.^T s•} r.. .+f Y A r. -�r'F •`^,.v rY. ?4''+gt•V ° ^1. `�f?��'��tr<lg��rv�a Y��nr�7�f r!~f z� � .SJia•'2, T +h f'.�wiCt + T fih '�: l,-*"�z•YjF 4r.1 L ir,^. Y�'�rf y��f�LY ��•,R.1, r ,+�� 1, x�� r= i 'tr ., ,{Y n> t�` � 'K re � � 4 � l�.a 7 L �', �i r�h� Y�,h i. •, .`�,.,a 4µ+Tf.. /.nry a,,.• �f s� fV Fi f`? rf � vx'�f' � A/yf. ..fi3. � k ( 1 r r K '� _6' �(' iFJt�•��r � v 4! }'rY o xi x c. ti i., r: w�A � F•-'ti `L � L yl��{ ` .� t 1 «'. �i� a ,, rl sip z Sh t 4 �3 �,t+ au %-r F• -a. ! ( w i3 y♦ a. fr �� {i .:�� 3J y f� t e "'"^'F�I�� yy' tl' ` I s'r.� �� N! r i f f y to h t A s ,�,,,++.�� v 6� ' �• �.... F�� h/w . um-aa.f r+ say*-...e, ,f��r+r f ' r _ Z �., y. l�` . »f r, .:f.. h �� rr �E�� . rrsf�s,it �+•rr-sx�,m,.6rb,,.�n, .`wS�J,�:nf�sye��,: E pi n` fJ1�,Ys v'J''t�"-! _ .i.'� ./!"!"Cx,T-"' a b.••� '� '` -!+ r3..'.'¢?x".-e f=..1�,J � A$c /•uR ¢..rrj'F� :f- -, .t��A rwi y_,y Y^�^.'� ..:Y t�M% f g�[ M1fy rat V� nE yc,�. y '..0 vr,.t FF•z�?x!r'�.. .!i :vmn ' -"}+f•-krG•.•i}f+ ��E ,k s�.F ,r, r' 1�7Y f"'f+ PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report KENT MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIAL CENTER Community Context The Kent Valley has one of the longest histories of modern settlement in the central Puget Sound region. The first white settlers arrived in 1853, and soon established farms near what is now downtown Kent, which was originally incorporated as a one square mile town in 1890. Over time, the surrounding area i experienced a succession of agricultural phases,from early hop and dairy production,to small truck farms just prior to World War II. Commercial logging was also irnportant in the late 19th Century,with the Kent Lumber Company and other sawmills clearing and processing timber from East and West Hill ' forests. Transportation improvements, including heavy rail lines, the Seattle-Tacoma Interurban Rail Line, and hard-surfaced roadways for automobiles, encouraged the growth of new businesses and residents throughout the Kent Valley and on its surrounding hillsides. By the 1960s, valley lands had become highly attractive to industrial developers due to the flat terrain, the availability of transportation, and the proximity to Seattle, Tacoma, and SeaTac Airport. By the 1970s, warehousing and distribution bad become increasingly important as part of Kent's industrial development. In the past few decades, Kent has been transformed from a small, primarily residential and agricultural community into an employment and population center for South King County. Located midway between Seattle and Tacoma along the Interstate 5 corridor, Kent is the region's sixth largest city with 2000 estimates of 59,331 jobs and a population of 79,524. Kent City Wide Saptiot;,r Area(square miles) 29.4 Population(2000) 79,524 Population per square Employment(20W) 59,331 Employees per square mile 2 018 Housing units(2000). 32,498 Employees per housing urn t,g Source. us Census Bureau, Washington State Employment Security Department TN S • �� 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 1 City of Kent Employment GoV. 3% l Const/Res Education 7% 3%, FIRES 15% WTCUi 29%, Manuf. Retail 31% 12% 1 Employment in the city of Kent is dominated by Manufacturing (31%) and Wholesale trade, Transportation, Communication, and Utilities (29%). Manufacturing and WTCU together provide 60% Of all employment for the city. Also, Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and Services provide 15% of the city's employment. 12%of the city's employment is from Retail sector. Comprehensive Plan Kent's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1995, was the first full update of the City's planning regulations since 1977. The plan outlines policies for supporting the city's growth in accordance with the Growth Management Act. The citywide plan is organized around a set of 14 broad planning goals,which include detailed policies addressing the following areas: Urban Growth, Transportation, Public Facilities, Housing, Urban Design, Human Services, Economic Development, Natural Resource Industries, Open Space and Recreation, Historic Preservation, Environment, Property Rights, and Permits. Chief among the city's plans for its future is the revitalization of its downtown. The City plans to direct a major portion of its near-term growth into the center. Working with an intedurisdictional task force in King County, Kent's plan is built upon the 20 year growth target of accommodating 7,520 additional households and 11,500 additional jobs. See the aerial photo on the following page for a depiction of the Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center. 2002 Regional Growth 'Centers Report Kent Manufacturing Industnal Center - - Page 2 r r y r atr �H'� . �.rbvr^,� '•��''. < .. ...�,T tF ,� �,i t �, ri ky its i �r t 't i w. �.ii yt � t 7 464i 'r.�F7 - �[ ' w'�`��y' �N xJ+�,�•y`< •NF�i *r �� Y � . +:,mow: s ?•., �. �� n r tk�s �! �1: L +�r•^ C aw "�` 'd� M 'y t�tL�E Y+Y`A�'F r� �4t, :`�l�`�.i lit ,�. ��•SrJ y''' � 4 �rl x� ^a y..• , P ��,IF ...} r �...� = 7s..� � s�-�F•'+�i8�r' '�< nrrxfa N.7yw rt E� .y�"�G IkWTr74`» o ' +�� '.;J t .(x= _ �t� 'G4#RA e+14e Y....a `�,ip Es:3'� +,.7=�`„ice, �..• �,NSy��_!. +�LLC ;h='a'�;� " ' •Y t��'T mil' ' •$'l1 ; J��i e Kfnr �jw' . y�J` r �y{: � " � -� �r q��' '• } k'"t �y. i[�: 'tP� 'b i f�`�k .�� 4V 6 j ,�.:� ,^�7"i��it� � ��[k(f.+ r'er.,�'��'� j�r� •R' ' li1t'e ff iF 't... a t►yC y69iw NO'jtF het N =12 � )� r��i�.^�Gu+h.<�I• "' G- �f Ey ��+�(�' 'r S�,r�," � ��A is�!f'�� _.��' „�, sf�y'� �'`�y�•-u, �r a s , ��u'J+..''SJ# ?!Ya ��,IL' t r • SC• 'Cr�'fa'Fr�'�}`4��X`{d�.y�"F +' 1 y ��i��5r Z +{ A�:.N " i s ��' r ��4 .�{�.` "C" t�✓ :' '1' R+�t' t' i� ,rt', �'.nu~ u y any~ � �, ��''4 of Manufacturing/Industrial Center Backqround ; The Kent Manufacturing/Industriat Center(MIC) is located in the Kent Valley just north of downtown Kent. The center is generally bounded by SR-167(Valley Freeway)on the east and south, SW 43`d Street on the north, and West Valley Highway on the west. The Kent center is part of a larger industrial area known as the Kent North Valley Industrial Area. The larger industrial area consists of over 6 square miles, with over 35,000 employees in Kent alone. The Kent MIC (covering 2,355 acres, or about 3.7 square miles) comprises about the eastern half of the Kent North Valley Industrial Area. The Kent MIC is planned and zoned for more intense development than the remainder of the larger Kent industrial area. The Boeing Company is a major property owner and business presence on industrial lands immediately west of the Kent MIC. Boeing's Kent Space Center and 240-acre Pacific Gateway Business Park are located just across West Valley Highway. IManufacturing Industrial Center Planning and Implementation Vision 2020 includes policy support for coordinated planning in the region's manufacturing/industrial centers. Appendix 1 ("Center Characteristics and Descriptions') of the plan includes the following language addressing these centers: Manufacturing/industrial centers are major, existing regional employment areas of intense, concentrated manufacturing and industrial land uses which cannot be easily mixed at higher densities with other uses. To preserve land at these centers for manufacturing, industry and related uses, large retail uses or non-related offices are discouraged Provision of adequate public facilities and services, including good access to the region's transportation system, is very important to the success of manufacturing/industrial centers. In 1992 the city of Kent formally designated its manufacturing/Industrial Center, stating the center would be a concentration of manufacturing land uses and employment, and would be served by transit. The city established a target of 10,000 employees and designated the center in its comprehensive plan. The center boundaries are shown on the Land Use Plan Map (Figure 4.7 of the comprehensive plan). The plan includes the following goals and policies which support the center:define the boundaries of the center to encompass- the=most-intensive-manufacturing-and-warebousq-uses;--ensure the boundaries reflect accessibility to truck and rail corridors; limit non-manufacturing uses in the center,provide transportation and utility infrastructure to accommodate high-intensity manufacturing uses in the center, preserve land for manufacturing and related uses;and enhance transit service to and within the center. The city has not prepared a specific sub-area plan for its manufacturing/industrial center. Population, Housing, and Employment , Population, housing, and household data were derived from the 1990 and 2000 censuses. The Kent MI center experienced a slight increase in population and a drop in housing units and households over the past 10 years. Between 1990 and 2000 the center's population grew from 190 to 197, housing units declined from 109 to 78, and the number of households decreased from 103 to 75. Population density increased slightly over the decade, from 62 persons per square mile in 1990 to 64 in 2000. Housing unit density dropped for the period, from 35 to 25 units per square mile. And household density dropped, from 33 per square mile in 1990 to 24 in the year 2000. With the number of housing units declining and employment growing over the 1990-2000 period, the ratio of jobs per housing unit increased strongly, from 128 jobs per housing unit in 1990 to 207 jobs per housing unit in 2000. Given the city's policy 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 4 focus and objectives for 1 are general! rnanufacturin industrial Y discouraged in the g/industrial centers trial activity, Kent Manufacturin 0,these trends are g Cener Posrtrve. Residential uses since they are adversely affected b Department of Em � ` Between 1995 and ployment Sccurit Y i j3et 2( ern to Y data were used to evaluate half these • P ywhol in the center increased y 16e1n 10 under 3S% Jobs were in the wholesale, transportation P Yment trends in Kent center. were!n the manufactu ' Y I6/� from 13,931 to services ),retail n nng sector. P rtationI communication a 1 ti 164, In the year (S� (7/) The remainin o and utilities sector and other(1/ • g ]5/were s , while just King Coun , ) plif between construction(8% tY s Countywide planning manufactunng/industrial center, Policies established a now exceeded the goal b goal o The Kenf MI center achieved this 1eve1 bo o0ethe Y 60/. employees for each Y�r 1990, and has i Nlanu Aacturfnggnd j Po u)ation,`yoLsin stria!Center ' ., and E►n'fo Population 1990• I'ers 2o00 °�Per square mile 190 Housing units 62 197 tiousin9'Mils per square mite 109 Households 78 35 Households Per s 25 square mpe 103 EnVloYment 33 75 EmAbyees per square mite 13,931 24 ern Pees per housing16,164 unit 4.526 Sour •ETPtoYmeni data is for 199 i27 207.23 81 5.251 re: U,S Census(1990,2000).We ,sh n 91on State Deparlmenl of Employment Secunty,Puget Sound Regional Cain mn(oacfuringRridustriaf Center ment b"Sector— ;_ Sen4ces _ Rate# 4 8% FIRE 1.0% WTCV 0.1 % Manuracturing 51.3% Go"emment/education 34.6% Consiruction/resouresg 0.3% Sowoe:Washington Slate Deparlmenl 7.9% of Employ S-Cunly 2002 Re gional GroMh Centers Re Port Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 5 Land Use,Character& Urban Form The Kent center has 55 blocks, each with about 36 acres. The center in composed primarily a one story manufacturing and warehouse. Kent center includes 458 parcels covering some 1,651 acres, with an average parcel size of 3.6 acres. Ma Umccturitigllndustrial Cehter; ^. , Cha`racte'r and'Man Form.•" "'- 1,970 Total area(acres) 55 Number of blocks 358 Average block see(gross aces) 458 Number of parcels Average parcel size(net acres) 36 21.6 Road network(linear miles) Freight railroad network(rinear miles) 11.4 Source. King CounlyAssessof,Puget Sound Regional Council Developable land contained in parcels makes up 70%of the center's total land area. The road network in Kent center consists of nearly 22 miles of streets, while the center is served by 11.4 miles of freight railroad tracks. These include tracks owned and operated by Union Pacific railroad and Burlington t Northern Santa Fe Railway. Current land use information was obtained from King County assessor's office records. Current land use in Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center is predominantly warehousing, with industrial use comprising 13%and commercial uses accounting for another 7%. The remaining 23% of the center contains a mix of open space, office,residential, government/military,and vacant areas. Kent Manufacturing/Inilu'stiial Existing L'arid Use, ' percentage 0.06% Agriculture CiviciQuasi-public 6 93%. Commercial -- 0.79% Parks/Open Space 13.06% Industrial Rwidenual-Muta Family 0.13°A 0. % Office 0.5353% Parking 1.261% Residential-Single Family 1.86% Government/Military 5.42% Unknown(No Data) Vacant 67.52% Warehousing 100%. -Total Source: King County Assessor's Records,Puget Sound Regional Council See the map on the following page for a depiction of current land uses in the the Kent Mararfacturing Industrial Center. gage s 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center, 1 Kent Manufacturing Center(Current Land Use) i i �. �I }.� !_r`r . J._��]I1+�/�-�(y�(��g71 f �r•_�_ '' 'r�'.Y+ I {= i �r� -y.a.. ' }'_ :_•�+:iG �� t b••_�� '_ i}•-�.�;'�':� :k:J Cmc ud gaai.Pol6e lr t 1 RI;H c.rrrr.+.Rd 4 , ,' ,'"•l- �`1 I I �.�y~' FSj 4 1 Fo.r,l Va+\.OHnSpRe M,edu.f •I �• 1 �'i_,- xl�. �2M�\ ° f"� •' �r'f�l�R:^- �,hy,�.,.. all i..ia Muh find And.Nut Or.l.ud Q,aCW r I y' 71w7 P..hR _ 5 ` S,R4fw6Rod.d'ul + ;f ' ty ,� I.- t -� I s e r`,'��,��•, t TAANO Ga..I..n.rr�YJro,� ,.Zi-��r ,L# •-1` is �' ` ,- 212t11 a _ �a ?- ,--_ r- 1 _-^1i4, 51 2000" ' — - "• !" `rF 'i yr t_ '. _t :t''6,,,;:. 7� � '• __ `.Y• �t ,�- -! } �' /-��1Jyyyy � � 1 it �f�,a�feiji2�'.`I_��'__ _ • }L 1,.� t ',v`.:! '''• •r _ '• % '!.f41:9t' ,�-T j..1 � , ,'. ,.-1 a .ta- - i i r De 1 �-�20D(��•rryl:•,-.AD��-'Fe�t'� -Irr,'i.',,;:, _ .r r'„t!�"']-:•� '*:r,=,-�;- ��'�'.,' - . ' -_},' 1 I''el li.. ='{Lt '7j—�,.�.tr:�'1}�il r-f•,r�� i :' r .! — k r I 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report Kent Manufacturing industrial Center Page 7 Planned future land use was derived from the land use element of the city of Kent's comprehensive plan, which designates the entire Kent manufacturing/industrial center for manufacturing use. The center will contain intense manufacturing and warehouse uses with access to truck and rail corridors. The City of Kent intends to improve its manufacturing base by not only defining and preserving areas to serve as its economic and employment core, but by creating better access in terms of commuting and transporting goods. Its policies for manufacturing and industrial areas discourage and limit land uses other than manufacturing and warehouse in the area designated as its Manufacturing Industrial Center. See the map on the following page for a depiction of planned future land uses in the Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center. _ {R^' Kerit Manufacturing/1`ndustrial'Fu'tu�ie,L`and Use Percentage Industrial 0.01% Manufacturing Center' 99.99% Total 100% 'This designation is to preserve land in this area for intensive manufacturing and warehouse uses as we# as to provide accessibifity to truck and rad corridors. Source., Gty of Kent Comprehensive Plan(1995) 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 8 4 � 1 - K , k�aY;a•. �c� Y yliz a''� �,�.$ x�lv�wf: -+� ;i v , N � CFl Jl�i*�i��f ki Transportation and Access The Kent MIC has good highway access and is well served by freight rail facilities. The Valley Freeway (SR-167) provides major north-south roadway access to and within the center, with interchanges at S. 212'" Street near the north end of the center, and at Central Avenue N. near the south end. SR-167 includes four general purpose freeway lanes plus two high occupancy vehicle (HOV)lanes. Other major highways and streets serving the center include East Valley Highway,West Valley Highway,76"'Avenue ' South, and 84'h Avenue South. East-west access is provided by South 228"' Street, South 212" Street, South 190 Street,and SW 43'd Street. While Sound Transit's Sounder Commuter Rail line runs through Kent Ml center, the Kent Sounder Station, which opened for service in 2001, is located south of Kent center,at 301 Railroad Avenue,just south of James Street Three north-south rail lines serve the Kent center: two parallel Burlington Northern lines run through the middle of the site, while a single Union Pacific line is located along the western edge of the center. The manufacturing industrial center is served by 5 separate transit routes, which operate an average AM peak frequency of one bus approximately every 32 minutes. There are no transit station areas within the Kent center. The closest is the Kent Sounder commuter rail station located on Railroad Avenue about'f. mile from the center's southern boundary. Kent Manufacturing lhdusfflal'Center Transt(,RouEes and'Frequencies ,` ANI Peak Period ,•r - " Clem Route A Destination Freq 1 150 Seattle-Kent 1600 150 AubumKent 30.55 2 153 Renton-Kent 3000 3 154 Boeing 60.00 4 tI uW 26.00 5 CBD 30.00 _ U09 References and Contacts City of Kent Comprehensive Plan(1995) Commuter Rail Station Area Study(2000) Charlene Anderson,Planning Manager,253-856-5454 " 1 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial tenter Page 10 _ _ ; H .ate+ (A ^ N O w ..1. y f0 t rL O .QUA O O z C �. O co O N 7i rod E vi w� O � � a Ea �. v � O CL cn c V Q G. U a o ca 3S 3AV 86L t� m c �'� c 3AV tip 6 (0 ACV,), m CL �I Y 0 4 I 0 1 f' 3S 3AV Z£lco 0 a r1 co 3S 3AV 9L L co �,1 -i w 9S 3A.V,,9OL o r,. O S 3AV 176, N j L96 US I-- r- 'SD o qS l AAAH 'IIVA 1SV3 w �. .._.._.._.., y s 3AV 9L 64 AVE s M HS Eg U NI .j 1<70 col Y (..� .� r• -•w R S n sg�E MILITARY C14 6 .c t h Elit �!a<� 01 /yam•� M Q) d Y Y = a+ N y 0 01 � �° m a M3 Via` fu01. LL ma cn Uc (1) zz x% rrn� v El ■ o p � ` no ED Q ��_N,Z- � Q � �•n rya L/ � ,}�-'�I v Elil�`31`H`31`3I Q 119 D "'�A� -1A4f-A Q ��-A'A-M-AInIN41IN COD q s 4 i -H-M-1-A N,#M m Cpp x ❑ o n o G3 q II w �t d C-3E a OQ Ca °"Cl a - LO o - N 6 -- - C o ° � d Gi � dQ C �� l!) i - --- -- - - - -_-__ rn ED o dO I on LL — t ❑ U a 2. ,y,:, " o ❑o q -E - D ❑o ❑ ❑OO DO 4 acU� Qfl �� aQ fl dg $ T �• r. > AmQ : cl ca L�:yj b r �= oinw t!X F . �W 41 �a m + C O ,p O N —FLU N cn � a a mN o > W C d` c1• c c, Gj = 01 O O p t� o c°1i a�i ;° o, c 41 c r °o m +W' Z `n ° 0 .� N N � � m a � � m Zn. RLL � � N ° U c� h! = m � �� cn c .�. 1°cu � aa � cE YCou ,coo l_ V1 xx l ;} I `' ..... PRIVmr z +- mu yr:L� ,S k (+, =_ nt18d ;Yr ,F o A ICSV3 (� N o LO DCD Ix cn ^..jy�,?•t ".r.�,�t iial`�,5tr«"5�n�l i'F`.`x '^:?"� wT�.r'�ti,`+tf (n vI Ni +y^,- r`3'a�4i'F �u%�xl�ilit t.�>:':19�"`t�s_�- -+r?4'4',.u�"T:r - -:.e" �`k.• _l,&Allnnn�ws,Yva. ' >''� ,c> .�}c�yt'fiY'-FS�� .:,�;',�+ ya 4v'•Ra '^ ", xt:`s`�_1'R�4;":fls;�.`r�;`;�-"- .r1 e z�F u'hro ervsa� - erw`r SIR r' w CY u., x• SIi'��G:4', r�, 'ary �{` n`xgi,.i�+�ry.n. f� yyb O iiiLLL ' "� '"'A'4's ":t' Div;• 16 N O ^ u p L H m ' ^ r =, V Ln N pa, UI Y ,di C R N O z w ; m H FAO d 14 p (A O > "' N p a F• L d y U d y V O OO O O C H " C v L. L � +' U1 Y � O Oy 9U fO iiny Z 0 O 0 Oy ,� N �iN pL aN a n.J a Oam mm a U c i o a a to �� NL J U UU) zz iU x Li �, al�I yl�I•H�11 dl EO n O "al it]I�7i1�1• Q cn x 1 dl x x D N LLJJ T rn 0 �x , �� - 9S 3AV OU nTw o... H91�lylvl•llai-AA31319 C Ste/ llll�lA-A_W�l41-A_H ■iir� I�H•H�I�iI`�IdI�i�N-N91�1� 41-N414 -4141--NAM41-t-1 44lI11 91 3181 31A1 ]I°1" //� m414141 314131 � � ❑ vlvl�Idlylvl }I�' X ❑ �3191 df dl y13' ' � ^il�•ll��yl F GG X x N •31�31y1 �I.31� o 31 31`)1 N S' N ❑ ❑ '31`31�31`ll�l ]131u ` n X n O CJ ❑ 0 ❑ ll x LR o ❑ � o❑ Q -� — - 3S-3AV 9l l - Q Q❑ i � C5 ._ is fl � ern e . Li oo ❑ ❑ x s Uj xf _ f 16 3a ' 47 G' LL d � E3 ID A 1 MINIX al 04 .aHl`31`SI `11�31 �3IdI�3' € b ill v -1 c n W L Q J N —may c� G ,- N toy U V 0) (A 0tA ° CL 3 = +J WWzvNu ° .�` ° u occ R cM G i � Ea a. m N m N v rcnZrnU N V V 4I CD c 'i G i NN41NN41.41-A41-NN41N414i414i41-A yN41414N-AlmA.AM41A1AAyNylyl 4i414N-A-H--bM D -N'4141-1-M4I41a1N41-A�Ivl�i�Ivl�Ivl�I41 �1�I �IN�1�INNN�1�I�I�1�7�I�1A-AA93 ' -A-M-i1+Nilyl-�IAA11-W-9- -H41-A-A 1131 -MA l�l,A 1'- 41,N--A- -A-A41.NA41- 41'A 1. - A-A-YIN 44-M-H.A-A�i�IN �t�IpNN91'm41A-41,A41-1A.41^NylylNNN N41i14a4141 4f41 V-A-41-A-Ail4141a14ti441 ., 1 A 40a o - W-A A M N W--X411--N-A-Nv141.Nd1.Nilyl41 41,A41-1-N41,N41 4141411"-X-N-N x 1p H4141A-A'A4141 4iN N4IN4Nyl41 4141414141414431514141,AN4141N41 -A H N 41-41 it i1 N44 4N y1 y{yN41 N i141 H M M414144G --H N H-A-N 444441 N �-' i14. ' itNi14NNylyl41 y1 414141,AAN 4141,AMN41414l,41 41 41 41 41N414141 NiN 41 i1�1�1�i�1�1�1�1N 4141-AN-A-A 41,W-Nw-A-)KA-A-A41-A-A -N-1-1 41,A O1 44`31 41A-A 41,N-1 444441 X4141 4141,M g41^ .3 -H-N N`N N'N.N H-A N 4" `11 Y NINI N-AIN414N4141 yN 414141414141 41`N N N N i 414N41414N44414NIN N41 41 4N4 - w-A-N N+N•N^�1�1�1 iI N Ndldl'�1�191 I N�1 -H-N+N-1-A -WA4I+A--AzA -W-N -i+N V1 -Xi -N-Vf4�1�IN34tINNNN�4NN3131NN�4 -MIHA-11�1 4{-H-- 4"PA �I N9 Ny141-A N N4N414N41414141414N41-AA4N41 N41y141-A 'A-N-N-N4141N 414 -AIN-M-2--A--w-H-A�I.N.N41-H41-A41'A41-A41 F +N-WN--N �IN414141IN -ml �I N N N31 N i4 H N N4141 N N4t.N-M N-H-N �n -M-M-H--I.N-3 -H aIN-N3lN 3! 41 y14 414N414N41,A41N41N41 N4141•N+NN3y3F�N-W41IN-NIN 'M1 •11 yN ya 41 yl .a r T N 4N 4N 4"N 4N 4N 4N 4N 4N 414 -N-N-N94-M-H-HgI--m•N4141 --N-M-M--H-N 44 to +14.N-4141.3 -N H-A--Iii--A 4 `{ •Nd N444N41 41 41 41 41A-1-NN41 4NNA-A4141 -HA-I41.H'N-HA-A-9-N-A0 N1 NN41411NNN41414Jtir.11N -XMN41-WW 41 4141 41 41 4N•Hdl+NINyIN 414 NN41y44{41 41 41 414N 4{ H41•NN41IN-All -M4 41444141iI-A-SI1-41 414f41d141N4I41 NNN91N 3131NNNd1 A d13 i1y141 A-41^41•Ny1•N Hd1 41y141 i14141 -X H--X N-A -N N M41.4141 41 H4;41 -M 3 41+1.i141-AA41-NIN 41 4141-9IN41 4N 41 4N414N4N41 A4NIN4N4N41 --- -- — 4N41IN19 41d ilylil1A-A- -NININ�-AAI 41INA-MI1 IW•N4141•NAW-1.N31 diN4t41 •Nd 4N^N4141+N41-A-NNIV-H-H w-HyNi1A41 44414N-N41 41N.N.N41 4141,AX 414 N A-M--m-;4-- -A4l^N41Gm+X 44 41 31 41-M-M •N41-i-m N-HA- -A 41.443141 414 N-Hlw41414141 41 4141^M41-A --mIN'A-H-W-A 141-N41A 4N414141-M )IN-NIN41 d NN414N4141NyNN N4NNN4141N41NI-XWN41A 41W444141 41•X4141 4 O t1 11 44 4131 H 4141411414�v1414141 41 41 4f91414141 4l X4141I N _ 414141 0 i14141-4N IN-M414141 414141-N 41414141 4141�4141 4141414C4N N41y14N414141414141 4N4141414N4141414 41414141 -41414N41,M IAH-N4441A44 41i1 i+ *1-M-l-H+1N41+3141413N411944IN414NIN41IN0: N4141-M+H 'N411-MIN Im141-MIN41444194'4N91d4 �- -A-i141.H+314N-A-NA 41 41 41 4N-A41414I4141 N4l-N N X 4141 X414N 4,N4T9hlN%"414141 RISER N414N4N.3N4N414N414N41414N41414141414i 41414N41IN4f -IN 41-A-H-W 1NAMIN -H-.m 41 N 4t 4141414a 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 4114N 414i 41 I 4L 4L4141 41 31 4141 -Am m 41414N N•N91 41 41 41 41 4N414N+N IN41T 4"-H H4141 4N'4N'N�m-M 'm 41�41 4N-AIN4N+3N41414N414N414N N41 N4141' 4141414141 4141 W41,N 41 a ClE ' i1N41N4l4N4N41-A-NN414N44'414t 'A 4141-A4141 -M 4i4N-A 'm IN- -N 41 41.414;I IN N41414NI N-N4N.X�41.Y 41-W 9N'N4N41 A-M 414N4N41IN-Y •N41 41 X N 4141 v+4N d A-A-W41.W414N41,m m w4141 mly -M-A 41414141-N41 M-X4"41-N IM A-M4XI41 -A,] -MIN � ,r .��a.a.s,�.� Q F N-A-A-H--v N41414N11414N4J 414144414141 44414141 N4141414N4! N41414{41-N44444I4141�;" _ ' .."41 144414144 ii41.N41.' �sSLi (7 s N4N-N-A-A-4N4"'m _ 114141 - aeleag 10 p C, p X Xas X i NIS 6 g r , a m m �s o n c a W m m 10 7 c 0) m V p m 1 C C U > a W !S m � Z Z � • m o U U c o c U m E A vmi o if o a v o a n U a o o o o m E "- y Z > > u o Q m ia t • moo,` L `• m t a a O m m E d cQ O cQ K m a `m .•. m 0 n 'm a'� c i E E `a C. c N n c UE E tg c U E z z e UpEp UE E c 1 U 2 Z N 2U ZU U y7 N N7 U Z N Z U U U N C7 J a m Ci p O O N m G m a 0 i N atIm — W C $ � � O J 2 � O C � � • p o v c m m U c m v ao c Ic c 5 m A rnIL CL C .Z W it IL Y .0. Y C LL Y LL DO LL O • 5 m a— C V '� 7 M C M • N V • t 01m N Q� O�W m C N U It m DO m ®m L C t pi C G = ff�� N d C Q p min w m V U) Y ` W W E N N Q O co 4 ? C a) a • a y q o c � E 3 r U E E C c p m E 14= -e 14= E _U N o w � c o Kc Uo o c4 0 0 U <0D N cc U N U 2 /0� N 107 ZU U Q co LLIO co_ O m G w N • p N OOi rnp N OI V O m o C, > Q N N N cC q > r > O O $ O Q O O E J L r rJ N H O{ O C 0 < W V d N O o E Z >< Q IOC N d = O d Y Y X Y U d � In Coe �t�3Qpy o NIOC m IL N N O �T N N N N 4 N N a N Q N N Q N V N Q N IL ZN v (°�' >Z a � � >g QE E # V W Sc$ ih # W Y sk R w Y 7kN R w Y# 1 0 (� c a +, v E C m Z U Y i m. m G ® o o a E A m m E ... vEE Y s O. m a a O 3 y 04 • Y *rrAeW)WNr < h• L KE N T Wuww otow ADOPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS Adoption Document(s): EIS Description of current proposal:The action proposed by the City consists of the consideration of four(4) Comprehensive Plan Map amendments with associated re-zones. These requests were evaluated collectively as part of the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment process pursuant to RCW 36.70A. Proponent: City of Kent Location ofproWsal: The proposal is a city-wide action. Title of documents)being adopted: City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact j Statement Draft(July 1994)and Final (January 1995)—Prepared by the City of Kent. Description of document(or portion)being_adopted: The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS is being adopted in total. This document evaluated three different land use alternatives for the city. The analysis evaluated the type and range of impacts to the environment, associated with each land use altemative and corresponding development regulations. If the document has been challenged (WAC 197-I1-630). please describe: The document was not challenged. Document availability: This document is available for review at the City of Kent Planning Services office,220 Fourth Ave S,Kent,WA 98032 from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. We have identified and adopted this document as being appropriate for this proposal after independent review. Along with the addendum, this document meets our environmental review needs for the current proposal and will accompany the proposal to the decisionmaker(s). Name of agency adopting the document:Crty of Kent Contact person/Responsible Official: Kim Marousek,AICP(253)856-5436 Principal Planner City of Kent Community Development Dept. 220 Fourth Ave South Kent,WA 98032 Date:_]1/1 5/?fH14 Signatu wQ S.%Permit%Plan%Env\20041CPA&bpt.doc t i COMMUNITY-DEVELORMENT Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES ' Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager Phone:253-856-5454 KEN T Fax: 253-856-6454 wes„,earo„ Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT(#ENV-93-51) ADDENDUM FOR 2004 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS(#ENV-2004-53(A-D) Responsible Official: Kim Marousek 1. PROPOSAL The City of Kent is considering four(4) amendments to its Comprehensive Plan.Comprehensive Plan amendments can be analyzed by the City Council once per year, as authorized by the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) and Kent City Code Chapter 12.02. Additional information and analysis regarding the Comprehensive Plan Map amendments,is contained in the City's Staff Report dated November 15,2004. The proposed amendments are summarized below: A. #ENV-2004-53(A) MILLEN)UM-KANGLEY BUILDING (CPA-2004-4(A) AND CPZ-2004-3) The 0.68 acre subject site is located at the northeast corner of 1161h Ave SE and Kent-Kangley Road SE. The request is to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from SF-6 (Single Family, 6 units per acre) to NS (Neighborhood Services), and the Zoning District Map designation from SR-6 (Single Family, 6.05 units per acre) to NCC(Neighborhood Convenience Commercial). Staff is recommending denial of this request but has considered and would recommend approval of a Comprehensive Plan Land Map designation of MU,(Mixed-Use)and a Zoning District Map designation of O, (Office). B. #ENV-2004-53(B) KENT OFFICE BUILDING (CPA 20044(B)AND CPZ-20044) The 6.26 acre subject site is located southwest of the intersection of 841" Ave S and S 208th St, extending south aloy the west side of 80 Ave S to slightly less than four hundred (400)feet from S 212 St. The northern parcel includes a portion of S 208u St The request is to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from MIC 1 (Manufacturingllndustrial Center) to C (Commercial), and the Zoning District Map designation from M-2 (Limited Industrial) to GWC (Gateway Commercial). Staff is recommending approval of this request. C. #ENV-2004-53(C) LOTTOITOPPANO (CPA-20044(C) AND CPZ.2004-5) The 4 acre subject site was recently created from a lot line adjustment affectin a reduction of a 7.92 acre parcel.,The property is located at the northeast corner of 116 Ave SE and SE 240th St Two acres of this parcel, located at the intersection, is currently zoned NCC, Neighborhood Convenience Commercial,with a Comprehensive Plan map designation of NS, Neighborhood Service. This request is to extend the NCC zoning designation and NS Comprehensive Plan Map designation for the adjacent two acres which would follow Addendum ENV-2004-53(A-D) , City of Kent Comprehensive-Plan-EIS--Addendu the newly created parcel lines. The subject property is currently zoned SR-6, Single Family, 6.05 dwelling units per acre,with a Comprehensive Plan Map designation of SF- 6,Single Family.Staff is recommending denial of this request. D. #ENV-2004-53(D) MUTH (CPA 2004-4(D) AND CPZ-2004-6) The 15.35 acre subject site is located at 21320 42ND Ave S.This request is to amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map designation from AG=R (Agricultural Resource Land) to SF-1 (Single Family 1 unit per acre), and the Zoning District Map designation from A-]0 (Agricultural, 10 acres/unit) to SR-I (Single Family I unit per acre). Staff is recommending denial without prejudice of this request. The scope of this addendum is to provide additional analysis and to identify any impacts associated with this development that may not have been evaluated under the SEPA review for the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS,(Draft and Final), ENV-93-51. The analysis is based upon the comprehensive review of individual Environmental Checklists filed with each Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment application. Il. SEPA COMPLIANCE In October 1993, the City of Kent issued a Determination of Significance (DS) and Notice of Scoping for the Comprehensive Plan (ENV-93-51). After a series of public meetings, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued on July 18, 1994 for the Draft Comprehensive Plan, issued on the same date. The DEIS was distributed to City Council and Planning Commission members, adjacent jurisdictions, affected agencies and other parties of interest. After comments on the DEIS were solicited and reviewed, a Final Environmental Impact Statement(FE1S)was issued and distributed on January 30, 1995. The EIS analyzed the environmental impacts of the Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted April 18, 1995. The purpose of the EIS for the Comprehensive Plan was to assess the impacts of the Plan on the City and its growth area. The EIS does not analyze the significance of site specific impacts; it analyzes the significance of impacts on a broad area. This Addendum to the Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS provides additional information regarding the area-wide impacts from the four 2004 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments. The proposed amendments to the Land Use Map seek to increase the density and development potential from that which was originally evaluated under the EIS. Although the density would be greater than previously evaluated, collectively the Comprehensive Plan amendments would not create unavoidable adverse environmental impacts beyond those previously identified in the EIS. III. STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY Future project applications will be subject to and shall be consistent with the following:City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, the Kent City Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Building Code, Public Works Standards: City Excavation and Grading Ordinance, and the Surface and Stormwater Management Ordinance. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW—SCOPE OF EIS ADDENDUM The City of Kent has followed the process of phased environmental review as it undertakes actions to implement and amend the Comprehensive Plan. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)and rules established for the act, WAC 197-11,outline procedures for the use of existing environmental documents and preparing addenda to environmental decisions. Non project Documents—An EIS prepared for a comprehensive plan,development regulation,or other broad based policy documents are considered"non-project,"or programmatic in nature(see WAC 197-11-704). These are distinguished from EISs or environmental documents prepared for Page 2 of 4 Addendum ENV-2004-53(A-D) City of Kent omprehensrve P alan EIS-Mdendum specific project actions,such as a building permit or a road construction project. The purpose of a non-project EIS is to analyze proposed alternatives and to provide environmental consideration and mitigation prior to adoption of an alternative. It is also a document that discloses the process used in evaluating alternatives to decision-makers and citizens. Phased Review—SEPA rules allow environmental review to be phased so that review coincides with meaningful points in the planning and decision making process, (WAC 197-11-055(5)). Broader environmental documents may be followed by narrower documents that incorporate general discussion by reference and concentrate solely on issues specific to that proposal. SEPA rules also clearly state that agencies shall use a variety of mechanisms, including addenda, to avoid duplication and excess paperwork. Prior Environmental Documents — The City of Kent issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Comprehensive Plan on July 18, 1994 (#ENV-93-51). The DEIS analyzed three comprehensive plan land use alternatives,and recommended mitigation measures, which were used in preparing comprehensive plan policies. The preferred land use alternative which was incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan was most closely related to Alternative 2 of the DEIS, (the mixed-use alternative). A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was issued on January 30, 1995, and the Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the City Council on April 18, 1995. Therefore, the impacts of the adopted Comprehensive Plan are within the range of impacts evaluated in the EIS. Scope of Addendum —As outlined in the SEPA rules, the purpose of an addendum is to provide new information about four (4)amendments to the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. Potential impacts associated with these "non-project' actions were adequately evaluated through the EIS SEPA review process and do not substantially change the prior analysis, therefore it is prudent to utilize the addendum process as outlined in WAC-197-11-600(4)(c). V. ENviRONMENTAL ELEMENTS All environmental elements were adequately addressed within the parameters of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS,draft and final. Further,subsequent"project'actions would require the submittal of separate environmental checklists, pursuant to SEPA, which will be analyzed for consistency with the original mitigating conditions and may require new mitigation and/or a new threshold determination,pursuant to SEPA,based upon site-specific conditions. Additional guidance for future development is as follows: Transportation The four(4)separate amendments proposed for this non-project action are further described in the environmental review decision document staff report Future development on any of the subject properties may result in additional traffic beyond that which was originally evaluated under the Comprehensive Plan EIS. Site specific traffic-related review is required upon submittal of a project proposal. It is anticipated that any traffic-related impacts associated with future development can be mitigated. Water The sites are located throughout the City of Kent. None of the subject sites are completely encumbered with wetlands. However the Muth property has submitted and received approval for a wetland delineation report. Any future development will be subject to applicable critical area regulations and buffer requirements. Page 3 of 4 Addendum ENV-2004-53(A-D) City of Kent Comprehensive-Plan EIS=Addendu Subsequent development pursuant to each of the proposals will increase the amount of t impervious surface on the subject sites. City of Kent Stormwater Standards will be incorporated into the final site development plan. The full implementation of these standards will mitigate any water quality or quantity impacts associated with the additional impervious surfaces. Land Use A complete analysis regarding land use issues can be found in the staff report dated November 15,2004. Public Services/Utilities Public services and utilities are available to the subject properties. VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION A. SUMMARY Kent City Code section 11.03.510 identifies plans and policies from which the City may draw substantive mitigation under the State Environmental Policy AcL These amendments have been evaluated in light of those plans and policies as well as within the overall analysis completed for the City's Comprehensive Plan EIS. That analysis can be found in the"Environmental Review Report"complied by the City and contained in the environmental file. B. RECOMMENDATION The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS, draft and final, provided extensive analysis with regard to the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. The mitigating conditions included anticipated impacts associated with the increased traffic, sensitive areas and stormwater runoff, as well as impacts to public services and utilities. The City has reviewed the individual checklists and has found that they are consistent with the scope of the EIS; therefore, this'action will not create additional or significant impacts beyond those previously identified. This analysis and subsequent addendum did not identify any new significant impacts associated with this proposal. Therefore, this addendum, combined with the Comprehensive Plan EIS adequately evaluates potential adverse environmental impacts and provides appropriate mitigation. Based upon this analysis, a separate threshold determination is not required for this action This document and corresponding environmental record may be utilized in the future in conjunction with environmental review for future project-specific land use proposals on the subject property in accordance with the guidelines provided by WAC 197-11. Dated: November 15,2004 Signature: Kim Ma usek,AICP,Responsible Official KM:CA:j m\\S:\Permit\PlanT-nv\2004\cpaaddendum.doc Page 4 of 4 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REPORT • Decision Document MILLENNIUM-KANGLEY BUILDING CPA 2004-4(A) & CPZ 2004-03 KENT OFFICE BUILDING CPA 2004-04(B) & CPZ 2004-04 LOTTO/TOPPANO CPA 2004-04(C) &CPZ 2004-05 MUTH CPA 2004-04 (D) &CPZ 2004-06 ENV-2004-53(A),(B),(C), & (D) Planner: William Osborne Kim Marousek, Responsible Official I. PROPOSAL A. Millennium-Kangley Building: A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from SF-6,Single Family/Six units acre to NS,Neighborhood Services with the resulting Zoning Map changes from SR-6,Single-Family/6 units per acre to NCC,Neighborhood Convenience Commercial.The property is 0.68 acres in size and is identified by APN 6756700-060,and is located at the northeast corner of Kent Kangley Road/SR-516 and 116d'Avenue Southeast. B. Kent Office Building:A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from MIC,Manufacturing Industrial Center to C,Commercial,with the resulting Zoning Map change from MI-C,Industrial Park/Commercial,to GWC,Gateway Commercial.The property consists of two parcels 5.82 acres in size and is identified as APN 122204-9073&122204-9068,and is located at the northwest corner of East Valley Highway and South 208"Street. C. Lotto/Toppano:A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from SF-6 to NS with the resulting Zoning Map changes from SR-6 (Single-Family 6 units per acre) to NCC(Neighborhood Convenience Commercial.The property is 2.0 acres in size and is a part of APN 162205-9113,and is located at the northeast comer of the intersections of Southeast 2400'Street with 116'h Avenue Southwest. D. Muth: A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from AG-R, Agricultural Resource to SF-1,Single-Family/One with the resulting Zoning Map Change from A-1, Agricultural/One to SR-1,Single family Residential/One.The property consists of twoparcels with a total area of about 15 acres,and is identified by APN 102204-9139 and APN 102204-9004,and is located at the southeast corner of South 2120'Street and 42nd Avenue South. H. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Compliance with Kent's Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance 3222), the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), The Local Project Review Act (ESHB 1724 and ESB 6094), Kent's Construction Standards(Ordinance 3117)and Concurrency Management(Chapter 12.11,Kent City Code),will require concurrent improvements or the execution of binding agreements by the Applicant / Owner with Kent to mitigate identified environmental. impacts. These improvements and/or agreements may include improvements to roadways, intersections and intersection traffic signals, stormwater detention, treatment and conveyance, utilities, sanitary sewerage and domestic water systems. Compliance with Kent's Construction Standards may require the deeding/dedication of Page 1 of 9 right-of-way for identified improvements.Compliance with Title 11.03,and with Sections 15.08.220 to 15.08 224,and to Section 15 08 240 of the Kent City Code may require the conveyance of Sensitive Area Tracts to the City of Kent, in order to:preserve trees;or to regulate the location and density of development based upon known physical constraints such as steep and/or unstable slopes,wetlands or proximity to lakes, streams and wildlife habitat conservation areas; or to maintain or enhance water quality.Compliance with the provisions of Chapter 6.12 of the Kent City Code may require provisions for mass transit adjacent to the site. In addition to the above,Kent follows revisions to the Washington State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 197-11 WAC(effective November 10, 1997),which implements ESHB 1724 and ESB 6094. III. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS A. Earth 1. ENV-2004-53(A) Millenium-KangleyBuilding. Theterrain of theSitecan be characterized as generally flat, mostly covered with gravel, and having groundcover vegetation along the east and southeast. The City of Kent Geographic Information System indicates that the subject site contains a glacial till soil, of the Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam series (AgC). A Detailed Grading Plan and Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Plan meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards will be required for review and approval with any proposal for redevelopment of the property. 2. ENV-2004-53(B) Kent Office Building. The subject site is generally flat, containing one single-level large permanent structure associated with an existing office use. The City of Kent Geographic Information System indicates that the subject site contains a till- type series(Pc) soil. A Detailed Grading Plan and Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Plan meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards will be required for review and approval with any proposal for redevelopment of the property. 3. ENV-2004-53(C) Lotto/Toppano. The subject site is generally flat,containing , a number of temporary and permanent structures associated with an existing commercial landscaping nursery use. The City of Kent Geographic Information System indicates that the subject site is located outside of the soils database—but topographical clues from inventoried soils to the south indicate that the site likely contains glacial till-type Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam series (AgB, AgC, and perhaps AgD) soils. A Detailed Grading Plan and Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Plan meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards will be required for review and approval with any proposal for redevelopment of the property. 4. ENV-2004-53(D) Muth. The generally flat terrain of the subject site is undeveloped. The City of Kent Geographic Information System indicates that the subject site contains three(3)till-type soils: Br,So, and Wo. A Detailed Grading Plan and Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Plan meeting the requirements of the City of Kent Construction Standards will be required for review and approval with any proposal for redevelopment of the property. B. Air Motor vehicles emit several pollutants that EPA classifies as known or probable human Page 2of9 , I - carcinogens. Benzene,for instance,is a known human carcinogen,while formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene and diesel particulate matter are probable human carcinogens. Studies are underway to determine whether other toxic substances are present in mobile source emissions.EPA estimates that mobile (car,truck, and bus) sources of air toxins account for as much as half of all cancers attributed to outdoor sources of air toxins. Additional traffic increases the amount of pollutants in the air, and the creation of significant congestion increases the amount of pollutants in the air even more. C. Water The sites are located throughout the City of Kent. No site is completely encumbered with wetlands, however the Muth property has submitted and received approval for a wetland delineation report.Future developments must meet all provisions of the City of Kent Critical Areas Ordinance including appropriate buffers when the land use applications vest. Wetlands provide functions for wildlife by providing habitat.Encroachment into buffers of critical areas, including wetlands,often occurs unintentionally by adjacent property owners, which impacts wetlands and the associated buffers.A structure,such as a fence,would denote the location of the boundary to the sensitive area as defined by Kent City Code Chapter 11.05. Wildlife passable fences, such as a split cedar fence,provide protection to the critical areas and associated buffers,allowing wildlife access to habitats found in wetlands.In addition,the wildlife passable fence provides a suitable location for educational material such as signage identifying wetland areas. D Plants Most of the proposals would likely result in the eventual removal of some existing plants and trees at the time of development Tree preservation plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval per Kent City Code Section 15.08.240 concurrent with development applications. 1. ENV-2004-53(A) Millen ium-KangleyBuilding. The subject site has sparse vegetation; shrubs,and underbrush—particularly along the east boundary of the parcel. 2. ENV-2004-53(B) Kent Office Building. The subject sitehasafewtreesand shrubs located along 840i Avenue South. 3. ENV-2004-53(C) LottolToppano. The subject site has sparse vegetation,with some fixed trees. The commercial nursery raises a variety of landscape vegetation and produce. 4. ENV-2004-53(D) Muth. The subject site has ground cover and wetland vegetation, as indicated in the wetland map and delineation provided with the application. E. Animals Those proposals containing or adjacent to, sensitive areas might have impact on animals. This would likely involve aquatic and aviary species associated with streams,wetlands,and areas of multi-layered,dense foliage. Page 3 of 9 1. ENV-2004-53(A) Millenium-KangleyBuilding. No known species impacts. 2. ENV-2004-53(B) Kent Office Building. No known species impacts. 3. ENV-2004-53(C) Lotto/Toppano. There are existing sensitive areas such as creeks and wetlands downstream of this proposal.The City of Kent as well as the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)have an interest in the continued health of these areas.Therefore the Applicant will be required to obtain an approved Hydraulic Project Approval(HPA)from the WDFW or a written waiver therefrom at the time of application for a development proposal. 4. ENV-2004-53(D) Muth. This site is immediately upstream of Johnson Creek which is known to provide habitat for salmon ids.Some salmonids are known to be threatened and/or endangered species, under the Federal Endangered Species Act and the City may therefore require more stringent development conditions to ensure the continued survival of these fish. There are existing sensitive areas such as creeks and wetlands downstream of this proposal. The City of Kent as well as the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW) have an interest in the continued health of these areas. Therefore the Applicant may be required to obtain an approved Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from the WDFW, or a written waiver therefrom at the time of application for a development proposal. F. Energy and Natural Resources With the possible exception of the Muth proposal, none of the proposals is anticipated to generate demand for energy or natural resources beyond typical levels for development allowed within an urban area. The increase of residential densities via redevelopment within the city limits serves as an alleviating factor on consumption of rural and natural resource lands outside of the urban growth boundary. The Muth proposal pertains to one of the few natural resource lands located within the City of Kent municipal limits— with an agricultural resource land of commercial significance designation. G. Environmental Health 1. ENV-2004-53(A) Millenium-Kangley Building. Site preparation and construction activities, including the removal of vegetation could create air, vibration (grading)and noise impacts associated with machinery used in site development.Once built, residential units or commercial development on-site would likely receive and generate noise impacts due to increased traffic. 2. ENV-2004-53(B) Kent Office Building. Site preparation and construction activities, could create air, vibration (falling trees) and noise impacts associated with machinery used in site development.Once developed,commercial use at the subject site could have noise impacts on the adjacent single-family residential units,at a level according to the use. Other potential hazards to health would be considered in development review for particular commercial uses. Noise impacts on the subject site from surrounding uses would likely include traffic noise from 84th Avenue South. 3. ENV-2004-53(C) Lotto/Toppano. Site preparation and construction activities, Page 4 of 9 - including the removal of trees and other vegetation could create air,vibration(falling trees) and noise impacts associated with machinery used in site development. Once developed, commercial use at the subject site could have noise impacts on the adjacent single-family residential units,at a level according to the use. Other potential hazards to health would be considered in development review for particular commercial uses. Noise impacts on the subject site from surrounding uses would likely include traffic noise from 116th Avenue Southeast,and Southeast 240th Street. 4. ENV-2004-53(D) Muth. Once built,additional residential units on-site would likely receive and generate noise impacts due to increased traffic. H. Land and Shoreline Use The existing uses on the subject sites and the context of surrounding land uses are described hereafter. i1. ENV-2004-53(A) Millenium-Kangley Building. The existing use of the undeveloped 0.68 acre subject site is primarily informal used automobile sales. Generally, L non-subject parcels in the vicinity of the subject site have been developed with single-family residential dwelling units. 2. ENV-2004-53(B) Kent Office Building. The subject site,consisting of two tax parcels totaling 6.26 acres,is generally flat and almost entirely covered with impervious surfaces. A 92,000 square foot office building The street frontage along 84th Avenue South is improved, while no `street frontage' exists along South 208th Street. The subject site is located within the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) designated Manufacturing/Industrial Center. 2. ENV-2004-53(C) Lotto/Toppano. The subject site,a 2 acre portion of a single tax parcel, is generally flat. The subject site (and remainder of the tax parcel) contains a number of temporary and permanent structures associated with an existing commercial landscaping nursery use. The street frontage along 116th Avenue Southeast is unimproved, while the street frontage along Southeast 240th Street is improved. The tax parcel was part of _ a recently_concluded annexation comprehensive plan amendment and initial zoning process (AZ-2001-1,DeMarco Annexation,see Ordinance#3605). The Council adopted a Land Use Designation for the subject site of Single Family Residential,Six Units per Acre(SF-6),and a Zoning District Designation of Single Family Residential,6.05 Units per Acre(SR-6). The Council adopted a Neighborhood Services(NS)Land Use and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial(NCC)Zoning District for a two(2)acre comer portion of the tax parcel. 4. ENV-2004-53(D) Muth. The subject site, once in agricultural use, is topographically flat and vacant of any structures,located along the south side of South 212th Street and east side of 42nd Avenue South.The street frontage is unimproved.The subject site and parcels in the vicinity are primarily undeveloped. The property was part of a recently concluded agricultural land use study for which environmental impacts were analyzed under #ENV-2001-56. I. Housing One(1)of the four(4)proposals seek to increase residential density,and this proposal(Muth) Page 5 of 9 is described below in terms of the number of housing units allowed under the existing and proposed Zoning District designations. 1. ENV-2004-53(A) Millenium-Kangley Building. No net loss of housing units. 2. ENV-2004-53(B) Kent Office Building. No net loss of housing units. 2. ENV-2004-53(C) Lotto/Toppano. One housing unit on the subject site was recently demolished. 4. ENV-2004-53(D) Muth. A net gain of fourteen(14)housing units would be possible under the proposed zoning. J. Aesthetics The proposals for the most part will create some aesthetics impacts as the subject sites are located in underdeveloped areas,one with dense,screening vegetation.Many of the proposals that might have aesthetics impacts would be more appropriately addressed during the review of development plans. An exception would be the Lotto proposal, which would insert potentially intensive commercial use adjacent to single-family residential neighborhoods. However, the impacts of the proposal in this regard can be assessed from a policy standpoint rather than an environmental standpoint. The intent of past neighborhood-oriented commercial designations has been to limit the scale of commercial development adjacent to existing residential uses. K. Light and Glare Commercial development projects and commercial uses pursuant to the zoning requested for Proposals A(Millenium-Kangley Building)and C(Lotto/Toppano)are anticipated to create light impacts due to the nature of the development process and commercial enterprise during evening hours. Daylight glare impacts from solar reflection might be anticipated for these proposals as well. Any impacts of light and glare would be more appropriately addressed during the review of development plans. - L. Recreation — - - - Any single-family detached residential development of greater than four(4)lots subsequent to the amendment of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and or Zoning District Map will be required to provide open space or recreation areas, or a fee-in-lieu of such facilities,at the time of subdivision. M. Historic and Cultural Preservation No impacts are anticipated. N. Transportation The Washington State Legislature created the Commute Trip Reduction(CTR)Law in 1991 with the goals of reducing traffic congestion,air pollution and petroleum consumption.This law requires major employers to encourage their employees to use commute alternatives such as transit,carpools,bicycles,walking,compressed work weeks,telecommuting,and flexible work schedules to reduce drive alone commute trips during the peak congestion periods.The Page 6 of 9 City addresses the transit alternative by requiring that the Applicant/Owner accommodate the needs for transit as expressed by King County Metro Transit. These four non-project development will not cause significant and/or additional congestion at any intersections,but the subsequent development/redevelopment of the subject parcels may be reasonably expected to result in the following impacts: A.Mill ennium-Kangley Building:A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from SF-6, Single Family/Six units acre to NS, Neighborhood Services with the resulting Zoning Map changes from SR-6,Single-Family/6 units per acre to NCC, Neighborhood Convenience Commercial.The property is 0.68 acres in size and is identified by APN 6756700-060,and is located at the northeast corner of Kent Kangley Road/SR-516 and 116'"Avenue Southeast. This 0.68 acre parcel could currently support 0.68 acres x 6.05 du/acre=4 single-family residential houses. These houses would result in the creation of 40 Average Daily Traffic (ADT), and 4 new PM Peak Hour Trips(PMPHT). Assuming that this parcel was developed as a very large convenience market with a building of about 11,850 square feet(maximum site coverage permitted for parcels in the NCC Zone) would result in the creation of about 8750 ADT,and about 242 new PMPHT. B. Kent Office Building: A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from MIC,Manufacturing Industrial Center to C,Commercial,with the resulting Zoning Map change from MI-C, Industrial Park / Commercial, to GWC, Gateway Commercial The property consists of two parcels 5.82 acres in size and is identified as APN 122204-9073&122204-9068,and is located at the northwest comer of East Valley Highway and South 2086 Street. The 5.82 existing 92,141 square foot building on this parcel could have a be expected to create about 350 ADT, and about 68 PMPHT,assuming a manufacturing land use. Assuming that the existing building remains as a new shopping center, this parcel could be expected to create about 3960 ADT, and about 208 PMPHT, after accounting for Pass-By trips. C. Lotto / Toppano: A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from SF-6 to NS with the resulting Zoning Map changes from SR-6 (Single- Family 6 units per acre)to NCC(Neighborhood Convenience Commercial.The property is 2.0 acres in size and is a part of APN 162205-9113,and is located at the northeast comer of the intersections of Southeast 240`s Street with 116`s Avenue Southwest. The existing 2.0 acre parcel could currently support 2.0 acres x 6.05 dulacres= 12 single- family residential lots.These 12 houses would create about 120 ADT,and about 12 PMPHT. Assuming that the 2.0 acre site was developed with a shopping center Raving a gross floor Page 7 of 9 area of 34,850 square feet (the maximum site coverage permitted in a NCC zone), this development could be expected to create about 1500 ADT,and about 62 new PMPHT,after accounting for Pass-By Trips. D.Muth:A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from AG- R,Agricultural Resource to SF-1,Single-Family/One with the resulting Zoning Map Change from A-1,Agricultural/One to SR-1,Single family Residential/One.The property consists of two parcels with a total area of about 15 acres,and is identified by APN 102204-9139 and APN 102204-9004, and is located at the southeast comer of South 212`" Street and 42"a Avenue South. The existing 15 acre combined parcel is encumbered by wetlands and wetland buffers and could not be reasonably developed under the existing zoning,and thus would not be expected to create any ADT or PMPHT. Assuming that the combined 15 acre parcel was developed under SR-1 zoning, this parcel could support 15 new-single family residences.These 15 new houses would create about 150 ADT, and about 15 PMPHT. Assuming that King County supports this rezone,and the removal of the subjectparcels from the preserved farmlands program;and that a regional stormwater facility is constructed on the subject parcels,this redevelopment would not result in the creation of any ADT,or PMPHT. Actual future traffic impacts for all four developments will be determined at the time the Owner submits a SEPA Checklist for a specific development. O. Public Services On the whole,the proposals will require public services consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and other City operational documents. P. Utilities Two of the proposals (A and D) do not have all of the basic utility services. Any of the proposals that might have utilities impacts would be more appropriately addressed during the review of development plans, as none of the proposals are anticipated at this time to have project-specific impacts. IV. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION A. It is appropriate,per WAC 197-11-660 and RCW 43.21C.060 that the City of Kent establish conditions to mitigate any identified impacts associated with this proposal. Supporting documents for the following conditions and mitigating measures include: 1. City of Kent Comprehensive Plan as prepared and adopted pursuant to the State Growth Management Act. 2. The State Shoreline Master Program and the Kent Shoreline Master Program. 3. Kent City Code Section 7.07 Surface Water and Drainage Code. 4. City of Kent Transportation Plan,Green River Valley Transportation action plan and Page 8 of 9 six-year Transportation Improvement Y p p ovement Plan. 5. Kent City Code Section 7 09 Wastewater Facilities Master Plan. 6. City of Kent Comprehensive water plan and conservation element. 7. Kent City Code Section 6.02 Required Public Improvements.' 8. Kent City Code Section 6.07 Street Use Permit Requirements. ' 9. Kent City Code Section 14.09 Flood Hazard Protection. 10. Kent City Code Section 12.04 Subdivision Code. 11. Kent City Code Section 12.05 Mobile Home Parks and 12.06 Recreation Vehicle Parks. 12. Kent City Code Section 8.05 Noise Control. 13. City of Kent Uniform Building and Fire Codes 14. Kent Zoning Code. 15. Kent City Code Section 7.13 water shortage and emergency regulations and Water Conservation Ordinance 2227. 16. Kent City Code Sections6.02 and 6 03 required public improvements. 17. Kent City Code Section 7.05 Storm and Surface Water Drainage Utility. 18. City of Kent Comprehensive Sewer Plan. 19. City of Kent Fire Master Plan. 20. City of Kent Wetland Management Ordinance 3109. 21. City of Kent ESA Response Resolution 1605. B. No additional mitigation is recommended for these proposed Comprehensive Plan Map amendments and rezone requests. S•kpa+Tdt\plan\ENVU004%capaddendumdecision doc Page 9 of 9 Page 1 of 1 RCW 35A.63.071 Comprehensive plan -- Forwarding to legislative body. Upon completion of the hearing or hearings on the comprehensive plan or successive parts thereof, the planning agency, after making such changes as it , deems necessary following such hearing, shall transmit a copy of its recommendations for the comprehensive plan, or successive parts thereof, to the legislative body through the chief administrative officer, who shall acknowledge receipt thereof and direct the clerk to certify thereon the date of receipt. [1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.63.071.] httn'//www_IPn_wa nnV/PrkA//inrlav rfm7fiicaartinn—Corhinn%Cnri-inn—ZrA rI 0 11 /rnnnnA Page 1 of 1 RCW 35A.63.072 --� Comprehensive plan -- Approval by legislative body. Within sixty days from its receipt of the recommendation for the comprehensive plan, as above set forth, the legislative body at a public meeting shall consider the same. The legislative body within such period as it may by ordinance provide, shall vote to approve or disapprove or to modify and approve, as modified, the comprehensive plan or to refer it back to the planning agency for further proceedings, in which case the legislative body shall specify the time within which the planning agency shall report back to the legislative body its findings and ' recommendations on the matters referred to it. The final form and content of the comprehensive plan shall be determined by the legislative body. An affirmative vote of not less than a majority of total members of the legislative body shall be ' required for adoption of a resolution to approve the plan or its parts. The comprehensive plan, or its successive parts, as approved by the legislative body, shall be filed with an appropriate official of the code city and shall be available for ' public inspection. [1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.63.072.1 hf+n•Ii,A„A„A, linn XNa nnv/P( W/inrlex.cfm?fuseaction=Section&Section=35A.63.0... 11/22/2004 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Jim White, Mayor Phone 253-856-5700 Fax 253-856-6700 • Address 220 Fourth Avenue S K E N T Kent,WA 98032-5895 WASHINGTON November 30, 2004 To: Chair Tim Clark And Planning & Economic Development Committee Members From: William Osborne, :Long Range Planner Through: Mayor Jim White Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment#CPA-2004-1 ' Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update MOTION: Approve/Deny/Modify the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing , regulations as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Board, including replacement of Figure IV-3 with Attachment F, "Downtown Projects.. 1998-2009", and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinances. It is my pleasure to forward to you the recommendations of the Land Use & Planning Board regarding the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing regulations. These recommendations are presented to you from the Board's November 8ih public hearing as per RCW 35A.63.071 and .072. There also were four public participation workshops on the update held in May and June 2004, followed by two workshops and four public hearings of the Board. Staff introduced these proposed ' amendments to the full Council at their November 16ih workshop. The Land Use and Planning Board recommendations are as follows: , 1. Approve DSAP document dated 11/8/04 2. Approve Attachment B (list of figures) 3. Approve Attachment C figures,but replace & incorporate with figures in Attachments D & E ' 4. Attachment D. Figure III-2: Delete "and unsightly" 5. #1 Map Change—north of James between 1 st& 5th: Urban Center/DCE— south 8 4 acres; Low Density Multifamily/MRG—north to Cloudy and 5 parcels north of Cloudy between 4th & 5th , 42 Map Change—one parcel depth both sides of Central between Smith & Gowe: GC-MU 6. Zoning Code Text Amendments: a. Require Downtown Design Review in all districts including North Frame District; ' b. Eliminate minimum lot size requirement for MFR in all DSAP districts, C. Raise surface parking cap to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f, non-residential in East and West Frame Districts; , • Require 25% residential component of overall gross floor area, • Include 2-year sunset clause to re-evaluate. Although the Board did not specifically call out Attachment F in their recommendation, it was , included in the final document packet and public hearings. For clarification, staff is asking the Committee to specify Attachment F in their recommendation to the full Council. ' WO/pm S 1PermrtlPlanlCompPlanAmdments1200412041242-CPA-2004-1-PEDCMtg_120604 doc Eric Attachment A LUPB Staff Report for Continued Public Hearing of 1118104 cc Fred N Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Attachment B Draft Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Charlene Anderson,AICP,Ping Mgr Attachment C 1998 DSAP List of Figures(Original) Tom Brubaker,Legal Dept t Attachment D 1998 DSAP Figures(Original) Parties of Record(Attached) Attachment E 2004 Draft Revised Figures Project File Attachment F Downtown Projects Past,Present and Planned(1998-2009) Attachment G August 17"Attachment Description Memo Attachment H SEPA Adoption Notice&Addendum Attachment 1 RCW 35A 63 071&072 ' PLANNING&ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 6, 2004 1 COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon, Bruce White The special meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4 00 F.M. ' Approval of Minutes Committee Member White Moved and Committee Member Harmon Seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the November 15, 2004 meeting. Motion Carried 3-0. iAnnual 2004 Comprehensive Plan &Zonine Map Amendments#CPA-2004-4(A-D)/#CPZ-2004(3-6) Chris Ferko,Barghausen Engineers, 18215 72"d Ave. S,Kent,WA 98032 proposed amending their Lotto ' proposal to include a conditional restriction prohibiting development of gasoline service stations on the subject site and requesting a conversion of the Single Family zoned two acre parcel to NCC in order that a use be developed to best serve the community Mr.Ferko urged the Committee to consider forwarding to the 1 Council a recommendation for approval of this application Russell Hanscom, 9523 S 2371h Place, Kent, WA, as executive director of Arbor Village, an 89 apartment retirement home and assisted living community, spoke on behalf of the residents in stating that they support an increase in zoning to four acres and a commercial development for the subject site with regard to the Lotto Amendment. ' Planner Bill Osborne stated that this year's four comprehensive plan amendment proposals need to be considered together with the DSAP update as part of the annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. Mr. Osborne described each of the four comprehensive plan amendment application proposals; stating that the Land Use and Planning Board is recommending Approval of the Millenum Kangley Building Amendment proposal for Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan designation and Office/Mixed Use Zoning District designation, Approval of the Kent Office Building Amendment proposal, Denial of the Lotto/Toppano Amendment proposal, and Denial Without Prejudice of the Muth Amendment proposal. Mr. Osborne submitted a letter from Chris Ferko with Barghausen for the record. Mr Osborne spoke about staff s concerns with development standards for NCC zoning and special permitted uses. Mr. Osborne addressed questions raised by the Committee Members with respect to the Millemum-Kangley Building amendment proposal located on 116'h Avenue Southeast Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom addressed Member Clark's questions with respect to alternative plan or zoning designations for ' the subject site Mr Osborne stated that the applicant submitted a revision request subsequent to his initial application submittal requesting a change in the Comprehensive Plan Designation to Mixed Use and a Zoning Designation change to Office/Mixed-Use, Staff and the Land Use and Planning Board are recommending Approval of the revised application. Mr. Osborne addressed questions raised by Member White with respect to the development rights issue ' related to the Muth Amendment and staffs recommendation of Denial without Prejudice. In response to an inquiry by Member White, Assistant City Attorney Kim Adams Pratt stated her office is of the opinion that once King County acts on this property, the applicant would not have to wait to resubmit this proposal with the annual comprehensive plan updates in September 2005 because the Kent City Council can declare an emergency to look at issues considered to be of community wide significance outside of the annual Comprehensive Plan cycle. It appears this application could be of community-wide significance because of the City's interest in the Johnson Creek improvements. She stated that the Legal staff believes it premature to approve this amendment until King County makes a decision concerning this site. Harmon MOVED and White SECONDED a Motion to accept the letter submitted from Chris Ferko with ' Barghausen Engineers and the literature on the Downtown Strategic Action Plan for the record. Motion CARRIED. Mr Satterstrom addressed questions raised by the Committee with regard to the Lotto/Toppano proposal, ' citing staff s rationale for their recommendation for this year's proposal. Steve Mullen, Transportation Engineering Manager spoke to the Committee's concerns with respect to , traffic flow and access issues for the Lotto/Toppano proposal. Mr. Satterstrom addressed Member White's concerns with respect to what uses could be developed if the site were increased to four acres with the exclusion of service stations. He cited durable business type of retail uses, convenience type of commercial uses, personal and professional services would be allowed. Mr ' Satterstrom addressed Member White's concerns with respect to how the City will work with the developer to diminish impacts to surrounding single family developments. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use Planning , Board's recommendation of Approval with reference to Proposal A- Millenium Kangley Building Amendment. Motion CARRIED ' Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation of Approval for Proposal B — Kent Office Building Amendment. Motion CARRIED. Member Harmon MOVED and Member Clark SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendation of Denial for Proposal C-Lotto/Toppano Amendment. Motion CARRIED 2 to 1 , with White opposed. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the Land Use and Planning ' Board's recommendation of Denial without Prejudice for Proposal D-Muth Amendment. Motion CARRIED. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to approve the recommendation of the ' Land Use and Planning Board regarding the four Applications of the 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance Motion ' CARRIED 2 to 1 with White opposed #CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update ' Osborne submitted two exhibits for the record; a letter from Fred High with Kent School District regarding enrollment impacts on ten acres of multifamily zoning and a letter submitted December 6 from Joseph Blattner with Tarragon addressed to the Planning and Economic Development Committee supporting DCE zoning north of James Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to accept the , exhibits to the record. Motion CARRIED. Mr Osborne stated that he would like the Committee to include Attachment F, a list of downtown projects , from 1998 — 2009 as part of their motion. He stated that the Land Use and Planning Board recommends approving the Downtown Strategic Action Plan document dated November 8, 2004, Attachment B-List of Figures, approve the figures themselves and accepting substantive changes to two maps. Mr. Osborne described that zoning code text amendments include applying Downtown Design Review to all districts, including the North Frame District, eliminating minimum lot size requirement for multifamily ' residential in all DSAP distracts; raising surface parking cap to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 s f non-residential in East and West Frame Districts with the requirement of 25%residential component of overall gross floor area and inclusion of a 2-year sunset clause to re-evaluate. Bruce Anderson, Bellevue, WA stated that he wishes to pursue a retail development project on a viable commercial site located in the West Frame District that will complement the Kent Station and that this site ' would not be conducive to residential development due to its proximity to the freeway and railroad tracks. Planning&Economic Committee Meeting 12/6/04 , Page 2 of 3 ' Fred High, Assistant Superintendent of Kent School District, 12033 SE 256t' St., Kent, WA and Tal Guppy,Principal of the Neely O'Brien Elementary School,6300 S 236`h, Kent,WA described the effects that more multifamily residential development would have on the school district. Mr. Guppy stated that it has been the school district's consensus that multifamily residential creates financial impacts for the district. Mr. High submitted a letter for the record. ' Mr. Guppy responded to questions raised by Member Harmon with respect to how the school has worked with transitional students so that they can continue their education in the school without interruption He ' stated that the district employs a family advocate who supports those families and introduces them to community resources. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a motion to adopt the letter submitted by Mr. High, Assistant Superintendent of the Kent School District for the record. Motion CARRIED 3-0 Mr Osbome and Mr. Satterstrom addressed questions raised by the Cominittee with respect to the 4.5 parking spaces cap with the 25% residential component, the 2-year sunset clause and redevelopment versus new development opportunities in both the East and West Frame Districts. Member Hannon stated that he favors the removal of the 25% residential development requirement with a 2-year sunset clause from the West Frame District with Member White concurring adding that he would support removal of this requirement from the East Frame Distnct as well. Member Hannon proposed amending the MR-G to MR-T16 north of James, with Member White concurring. Member Hannon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion for Item #5 to change MR-G from Cloudy to 5th and north of Cloudy between 4`I' and 50' to MR-T16. Motion CARRIED 2 -1 with Chair Clark opposed. Member Harmon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion for Item#6C to raise surface parking ' cap to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f non-residential in the East and West Frame Districts and applying the 25% residential component of overall gross floor area only to the East Frame District, exempting the West Frame District Motion CARRIED 2 to 1 with Chair Clark opposed. Member Hannon MOVED and Member White SECONDED a Motion to approve the modifications of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update and implementing regulations as recommended by the Land Use 1 and Planning Board to include replacement of Figure IV-3 with Attachment F-Downtown Projects 1998- 2009, to include the previously stated modifications under Items 5 and 6-C, and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance. Motion CARRIED 3-0. Chair Clark clanfied that these items will go before Council in January. CPA-2004-5 Urban Density Study Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that a resolution is needed declaring an emergency to pursue revisions of the Comprehensive Plan outside of the annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle to ensure compliance with regard to density in Urban Growth areas. Member White MOVED and Member Harmon SECONDED a Motion to approve a resolution declanng an emergency to pursue revisions of the comprehensive plan to ensure compliance with Chapter 36.70A RCW regarding density in an urban growth area Motion CARRIED 3-0. Adiournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:20 pm L Pamela Mottram, Admm Secretary,Planning Services S lPtrmulPlanlPlanming Commfaee12004Winutesl/20604pc- in dot Planning&Economic Committee Meeting 12/6/04 ' Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT A PLANNING&ECON DEV.COMMITTEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DECEMBER 6,2004 Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,Director • PLANNING SERVICES ' KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager wes« «a*o« Phone.253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address. 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 NOVEMBER 1,2004 TO: CHAIR JON JOHNSON AND LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ' FROM: WILLIAM D. OSBORNE,LONG-RANGE PLANNER SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT#CPA-2004-1 iDOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN UPDATE For Continued Public Hearing of November 8,2004 SUMMARY: The Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) was adopted in April 1998 to recognize the role of Downtown Kent as a designated Urban Center. After six years, an update of this document to reflect changes in existing conditions, planned capital projects, and citizen interests would be appropriate. Staff will present for consideration several of the substantive proposed revisions of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. These include a number of recommended actions which would be effected concurrently with approval of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, including two proposed area land use and zoning map amendments (north of James and along Central Avenue), and text amendments to the Zoning Code (KCC Title 15) relating to development standards for multi-family residential (no minimum lot size for multifamily development), applying Downtown Design Review to all DSAP Districts, and changes to DCE parking space requirements in the East and West Frame Districts Other proposed text amendments, including stormwater detention standards, and capital facilities in Downtown would be brought forward for consideration of implementation subsequent to adoption of the Plan. BACKGROUND: The Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP), recognized by the State, King County, and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) as a subarea plan of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, designated Downtown as an Urban Center/Regional Growth Center. The Urban Center designation criteria relate to addressing anticipated residential and economic development growth, and planned capital improvements. Funding allocated by the PSRC for transportation system improvements are tied to compliance with these criteria. Presently, the adopted DSAP (1998) contains outdated information. Several policy recommendations have been incorporated in the City Code, and some capital improvement projects have either been completed, delayed or removed from the six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and six- year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). In September 2003, the City Council Planning Committee received public testimony regarding specific economic development challenges due to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning east of the Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) Railroad tracks. Citizens proposed a rezone of the area to General Commercial (GC) Zoning. The Planning Committee requested staff to research and make a recommendation on this issue. Because the DSAP, as a subarea plan of the Comprehensive Plan, contains specific recommendations pertaining to the area of interest dating from 1998, an update of this document to some extent was seen as a necessary step in consideration of future Downtown land use decisions. The update of the DSAP provides an opportunity for the incorporation by reference of subsequent Downtown-related planning ' documents prepared by the City, such as the Commuter Rail Station Area Study (2000), the Kent , Station Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (2002), and the Economic Development Strategic Plan (2003). Staff facilitated two public participation workshop sessions on May 17, 2004 and two sessions , on June 14, 2004 to identify the challenges, opportunities, strengths and weaknesses of Downtown Kent — and to brainstorm opportunities and strategies addressing these issues in the ' update of the DSAP. Attendees were asked to discuss general questions about Downtown relating to the Urban Center criteria — affordable housing, transportation, land uses, public facilities, and parks and open space. Citizens identified a number of issues, through discussion and recording to DSAP District paper maps containing 1998 recommendations. The citizen input and responses from a general interest survey of City employees were ' summarized and provided to the Land Use and Planning Board in workshop on July 12, 2004. The Land Use and Planning Board discussed and commented on the issues, concerns, and recommendations contained in a graphic summary map. Several of the recommendations from ' this input process were incorporated into the suggested revisions. Revisions have more recently been made based on testimony from public hearings held on August 23'd (continued on September 27th)and October 25`h, 2004. , OPTIONS: The following substantive revisions to the DSAP have been suggested, and are in addition to the revisions considered at the October 25"h public hearing. The draft presented to the Board includes insertions (noted in underlie and deletions (noted by strikethreegh) to date: 1. Revise development standards to encourage development of market rate multi-family residential units in Downtown (pages IV-2 and VI-12 to 14). a. Waive minimum lot size requirements for multi-family dwelling unit development in all DSAP Districts. b. Reduce or waive residential unit development permit fees in DSAP Districts. c. Extend Downtown multi-family residential development tax exemption program to rental units — owner-occupied multi-family residential market is practically non-existent statewide. d. Allow five (5) stories of wood-frame construction above a concrete base. 2. Change Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Map designations for the area between North First and North Fifth Avenues, and between James and Cloudy Streets from Single-Family Residential, Eight Units per Acre (SF-8/SR-8) to Urban Center Land Use and Downtown Commercial Enterprise Zoning (UC/DCE) in the south (8 4 acre) portion and Multi-Family Residential, Low Density Land Use (LDMF) and Zoning(MR- G or MR-T16) in the north (9 acre) portion, including five parcels (1.62 acres) north of Cloudy Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues (pages V-4 and VI-8 to 11, Attachment D/Figure V-2). A member of the Board requested staff consider designating the entire area (between First and Fifth Avenues south of Cloudy Street) for commercial land use — with either DCE or Office (0) Zoning. Based on a quick analysis of traffic impacts, staff does not recommend either of these zoning proposals — whereas multi-family residential use , would be anticipated to have the same or less impact as single-family residential use (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation (7`h Edition),pages 271 and 308), Land Use&Planning Board Continued Public Hearing November 8,2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update ' Page 2 of 5 textending commercial zoning to Cloudy Street could roughly quadruple (DCE) or double (Office) the number of trips generated adjacent to the single-family residential use north of Cloudy(ITE Trip Generation, pages 1160 and 1453). The Board should select from one of the following options. The appropriate Zoning District designation for the proposed LDMF (Low-Density Multi-Family Residential) area would be: a. MR-G (allows apartments, sixteen(16) dwelling units per acre); or b. MR-T16 (allows condominium units only, sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre). Should the Board desire either Downtown Commercial Enterprise or Office Zoning ' Districts for ANY portion of the area proposed by staff for LDMF, the appropriate designations would be as follows: c. Commercial (C) or Mixed Use (MU) Comprehensive Plan Designation with an Office (0) Zoning District Designation; or d. Urban Center Comprehensive Plan Designation with a DCE Zoning District Designation. ' 3. Amend the Downtown Design Review Area to include all properties located within DSAP Districts—this includes the North France District (pages V-4 &5, and VI-21 to 23, Attachment C/Figure V-1). 4. Rezone the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) area located between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central Avenue, to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay (GC-MU) (pages V-7 and VI-11 & 12, Attachment D/Figure V-6 & 12). 5. Revise DCE surface parking standards for the East Frame District (roughly between alley east of Central Avenue & Jason Avenue, and between Temperance & Titus Streets) — from three (3) spaces per 1,000 square feet commercial gross floor area to 4.5 spaces. This revision could be implemented in one of the following options: a. Without conditions on commercial development; b. Requirement that residential umts comprise 25% of overall project gross floor area. The Board could choose to include a two (2) year "sunset clause" to review effectiveness/impact if one of the above options for revision is selected (pages V-8 & 91 VI-21 to 23, Attachment D/Figure V-6 & 12). 6. Revise DCE surface parking standards for the West Frame District (between SR-167 & Union-Pacific Railroad, and between Willis & James Streets) — from three (3) spaces per 1,000 square feet commercial gross floor area to 4.5 spaces. This revision could be implemented in one of the following options: a. Without conditions on commercial development; ' b. Requirement that residential units comprise 25% of overall project gross floor area. ' The Board could choose to include a two (2) year "sunset clause" to review effectiveness/impact if one of the above options for revision is selected (pages V-11, VI-21 to 23, Attachment D/Figure V-15). Land Use &Planning Board Continued Public Hearing November 8,2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Page 3 of 5 7. Improve recognition of roles and relationships among various interested parties in Downtown (pages IV-1 to 3, 5 &6). ' 8. Expand scope of the study of land uses attributed with increased demand for public safety and social services to include day labor offices, casinos, adult entertainment businesses, ' and gas stations. Add policy language, "...Restrict or prohibit specific commercial uses in Downtown that are known to generate negative impacts on the larger community," to clarify the intent this recommendation(page IV-3). 9. Work with social services providers, public safety officers, temporary labor agencies, and educational institutions to address homelessness issues in Downtown (page IV-3). , 10. Make Downtown Kent the transportation hub of South King County— seek expansion of commuter rail service and increased frequency of bus service in Downtown (pages IV-3 , &4). 11. Support the concept of a performing arts center or a hotel and conference center in Downtown to extend the evening hours of activity (pages IV-4 and V-18). , 12. Support live performance arts in public places, and encourage live performance arts in Downtown retail and restaurant businesses (page IV-4). 13. Allow underground stormwater detention vaults where appropriate for development sites larger than one acre in Downtown to encourage attractive site development and maximum build-out of revenue-generating land uses (page IV-5). 14. Open Cloudy Street to connect Third and Fourth Avenues, and implement traffic-calming measures on Cloudy Street particularly near the Kiwanis Tot Lot, appropriately identified through use of the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program (pages V-3 & 4, Attachment D/Figure V-2). 15. Enhance or replace the pedestrian bridge over Mill Creek at Temperance Street — while ensuring protection of Mill Creek salmonid habitat (page V-8, Attachment D/Figure V-6 & 12). 16. Encourage large lot redevelopment opportunities in the West Frame District, including the Metro Park &Ride Lot (page V-10, Attachment D/Figure V-15)). 17. Consider restoration options for Historic Tram Station (page V-13, Attachment D/Figure V-17&28). ' 18. Encourage mixed-use development projects proximate to the Kent Transit Center, including the Municipal Parking Lot area(page V-19,Attachment D/Figure 21). ' 19. Improve coordination of public improvements with private development actions (page V- 20). , 20. Plan for eventual undergrounding of all utilities in the Historic Core (page V-21, Attachment D/Figure 17 & 28). 21. Incorporation of the Kent Economic Development Strategic Plan, Commuter Rail Station , Area Study and Kent Station SEIS by reference (pages VI-7 & 8). Land Use&Planning Board Continued Public Hearing ' November 8, 2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update ' Page 4 of 5 f22. Connect gateway improvements at Fourth and James to Kent Station to improve pedestrian-orientation(page V-3). 23. Include James and Pioneer Streets in the list for design and construction of design improvements (page V-12). 24. Include vertical curb and gutters in any design of angled parking extended along Saar Street to the Union Pacific Railroad to ensure pedestrian access (pages V-12 & 13). 25. Include consideration of pedestrian facilities when identifying and planning provision of connecting improvements for bicycles. Include traffic calming measures as facilities, and reference use of Neighborhood Traffic Control Program as appropriate to address safety- related improvements (page IV-4). 26. Include trails as part of entrance gateways to Downtown(page IV-5). 27. Replace"Sounder Commuter Rail&Bus Station" with "Kent Transit Center"throughout the DSAP document. 28. Revise "Traffic Mitigation" section to reflect ongoing efforts to update transportation concurrency analysis (pages VI-23 &24). ' 29. Update existing conditions and project status of proposed northbound access street from Willis Street(pages V-9 & 10). Staff will be available at the November 8th public hearing for further discussion. S IPermrrlPlanlCompPlanAmdmenrsl100411041141-CPA-1004-1-LUPBHrg-110804doc Eric Attachment A Draft Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Attachment B 1998 DSAP List of Figures(Original) Attachment C 1998 DSAP Figures(Original) Attachment D.2004 Draft Revised Figures Attachment E Downtown Projects Past,Present and Planned(1998-2009) Attachment F•August 17`h Attachment Description Memo SEPA Adoption Notice&Addendum cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Services Manager Nathan Torgelson,Economic Development Manager Don Wickstmm,Public Works Director Parties of Record Project File Land Use&Planning Board Continued Public Hearing November 8,2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update iPage 5 of 5 1 ATTACHMENT B PLANNING&ECON DEV. COMMITTEE DECEMBER 6,2004 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan DRAFT 1 1 1 KENT W A S H I N G T O N Integrated With The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Prepared for the City of Kent by 1 MAKERS Architecture and Urban Design, BRW, Property Counselors, Langlow Associates and the City of Kent Planning Services Office With the Assistance of a Washington State Planning 1 And Environmental Review Fund Grant 1 November 8, 2004 1 Mayor , Jim White ' Chief Administrative Officer Mike Martin City Clerk Brenda Jacober City Council , Julie Peterson, President Tim Clark Ron Harmon Deborah Ranniger Debbie Raplee Les Thomas Bruce White Land Use and Planning Board Jon Johnson, Chair Greg Worthing, Vice Chair Steve Dowell Theresa Ferguson David Malik Elizabeth Watson Kenneth Wendling 1998 Downtown Stakeholders Task Force ' Brad Bell Merrily Manthey Pat Curran Steve Mariotti ' Connie Epperly June McEleran Tim Giminez Dee Moschel Beverly Hawk Leona Orr Jon Johnson Bill Stewart Jerry Kauth Bob Whalen , Stephanie Klappenbaugh Howard Montoure Doug Klappenbaugh Rico Yingling ' Dick Lackey Charles Turner Introduction I. Introduction A. Purpose ' Since the days when Kent was a valley agricultural community,downtown Downtown Kent has served as the town's civic and commercial focus. In recent decades, the City has supported the downtown Downtown through proactive planning and public ' improvements. Faced with the challenges of regional growth management, Kent citizens responded by requesting a regional urban center designation for downtown. The designation calls for a more intensive mix of uses and a wide spectrum of civic activities well served by the local and regional transportation system. Tl+is-The City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan pursues K-ent's the citizens' vision for its urban center, as described in the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan,and expressed in this document;_byBy translating the Comprehensive Plan's general objectives into a redevelopment strategy consisting of an integrated set of civic actions-, Thts-the Downtown Strategic Action Plan will-serves as a basis for developing the urban center and implementing the Kent Comprehensive Plan. It will provide a basis for future 1 market analysis, environmental analysis,and community participation processes,—_tt-The Downtown Strategic Action Plan outlines methods for encouraging infill and redevelopment compatible with the economic, environmental, and community goals of the citizens of Kent. The Downtown Strategic Action Plan also provides a fiamework for project-level plannmg appropriate for each Downtown distract defined in this document Subsequent project-level plannnng could be specified in Planned Action Ordinances. "Planned Actions" are discussed in Section C of th)s introductory chapter. jThis Year 2004 update to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan intends to strengthen the connection between this 1)ohey document and the recently updated Comprehensive Plan as well as acknowledge changes in Downtown Kent that have occurred since April 1998. B. Background Downtown Kent was established as the commercial center of Kent in the early 1900's when it served as a market town for a thriving agricultural valley. The pattern of retail trade and office development has changed in Kent since that time, but dowutew+1 Downtown has retained+t-ls its position as the center of City civic and cultural life. The City and downtown Downtown merchants have worked diligently to maintain the vitality of the historic commercial core. Pnor to this plan, the City of Kent had undertaken several downtown planning efforts: the 1966 John Graham Plan for Downtown, the 1974 ' Central Business District Plan, the 1983 L.I.D. 313 and Urban Design Plan, the 1986 Downtown Revitalization Task Force Report,the 1989 Downtown Plan,the 1992 Downtown zoning revisions,the 1995 Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, and the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-2 ' P:1PlanninglBilloIDSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP I.doc Introduction designation of downtown en Downtown Kent as an urban center through the King County Countywide Planning Policies processes. Both public and private interests initiated this planning process. In 1995, the Kent , Downtown Partnership and other citizens asked the City to fund a comprehensive market , analysis for dews 1-onDowntown. The City Council agreed to budget $25,000 in general funds for the market analysis. In 1995 the City Council set goals for 1996 which included "Kent: A Home Town for Families -A Friendly Small Town -A Place to Work-A Place to Live,"and"Downtown-A Community Focal Point." Downtown goals were first priority for 1996. In early 1996, the State of Washington awarded the City a$150,000 Planning and Environmental Review Fund (PERF)grant, which the City matched with the previously appropriated $25,000 for the market analysis and $25,000 of in-kind services. The Mayor appointed an executive staff, the Downtown Strategic Planning Team, which assisted the Mayor in appointing a Downtown Stakeholders Task Force. The Strategic Planning Team and the Planning Department hired an interdisciplinary consultant team to assist the City and the citizens to formulate a dew+Hewn Downtown subarea plan. The team consisted of MAKERS architecture and urban design, BRW,Inc., The Langlow Associates, Property Counselors,and Sierra Media. Mier the April 1998 adoption of the original Downtown Strategic Action Plan document, the Regional Transit Authority (since reconstituted as Sound Transit) determined the preferred South Station Site to be impracticable to service the full length of its trains, and selected the North Station Site Since February 5, 2001, Sound Transit CommuterRail trains riding the Burlinfrton Northern/Saute Fe railroad have been loading and unloading passengers between James and Smith Strcels — approximating the North Station Site alignment Several revisions to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan acknowledge this fact The Commuter Rail Station Area Study, completed in 2000, updated the market analysis of the DSAP, and identified a number of parcels in Downtown with development and redevelopment potential in proximity to the Sound Transit rail station. While some things have not changed in Downtown Kent, other circumstances have changed since the 1998 adoption of the DSAP. The Borden Chemical Company sold their property and their operations to the City of Kent in 2001, significantly shortening , the timeframe for potential redevelopment of the 20-acre site. Some of the recommended actions listed in Chapter IV and Chapter V have been completed, yet others are in progress or have since been deemed infeasible, , Still other interested parties in Downtown Kent seek to expand existing business uses or obtain site improvement variances non-conforming to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE)Zoning—particularly on Central Avenue. Some of Central Avenue within the boundaries of Downtown is currently zoned General Commercial (GC). The replacement , of DCE Zoning with a zoning district more favorable to auto-oriented uses should be carefully mitigated by the application of Downtown Design Review. Interest in development opportunities along the James and Smith arterial streets adjacent to Kent City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-3 P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised-1 10804\ReVised DSAP I.doc ' Introduction IStation exist although the area north of James is constrained by the current single-family residential Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Map designations. C. Process As a subarea plan and a supplement to the Kent Comprehensive Plan, the Downtown Strategic Action Plan and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement DSAP were prepared under new State provisions in ESHB 1724, which allows the integration of State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) and Growth Management Act(GMA)processes. It is a programmatic EIS and supplements the Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS issued in January 1995. it ; OISE)prepared as a "Pl ed keti ,» Final e. pl, tal Public participation is essential to a subarea plan environmental review process. The first opportunity for public participation was a general public workshop and a SEIS scopinr session held in 1996 ThePrior to adopting the DSAP, the City subsequently conducted six additional public woikshops and seven Downtown Stakeholders Task Force meetings. City staff responded to numerous letters telephone calls, and Planning Departincnt Visitor's gUestions.E nt„l inipaet Statemeli+ .,1,.eh S,..,� nts tile Elsi p b gi-e.,ter detail related to naoa ^� z � � Sli-ateb The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for the DSAP was issued on February 4, 1997. The DSEIS. contained three land use and urban desigin alternatives. and was distributed at a workshop to gather public opinion regarding a preferred alternative An additional environmental document;authorized by the Washington State Department of Ecology, entitled the Draft Downtown Strategic Action Plan and Preliminary Final Supplemental Environmental impact Statement, was Issued on May 19, 1997 to d stnbttteprovide additional information and allow additional time for pubhe comment and discussion prior to integrated plan adoption. The Preliminary Final Supplemental Impact Statement contamed additional impact analysis, additional mitigation recommendations, the preferred alternative, comment letters received by the City in response to the DSE[S, and the City's responses to the comments. The Land Use and Planning Board conducted a public hearing before reconunending the Plan to the City Council with revisions. The City Council Planning Committee received additional public comment within their review process and recommended further 1 revisions. Typically, the FSE1S would be issued prior to the decision process. In this instance, the public hearings conducted by the Land Use and Planning Board and the City Council Planning Committee became part of the environmental review record. The prefen-ed alternative was revised as a result of the recommendations of the Land Use and Planning Board and the City Council. This document presents the revised preferred alternative for establishing development goals and policies for the whole of Downtown Kent. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-4 P:\PlanninglllillolDSAP1DSAP Revised_11011041Revised DSAP l.doc Introduction As the process chart(Figure I-1) in the Appendix �in die ates planning, , evaluation, and public involvement were coordinated throughout the protect. Public involvement occurred at three key points- setting of objectives development of alternatives, and evaluation of alternatives. Tl„s level of de tad p „des ,.,-„die bili... mid ., . 7uee ei I 1 W necess (e,, efl-'"'rnv"}'r'ni'c•,-ntal . -tO 'rvf-ccz4 - ,r 1 �-}ttak ��c-r CHnflrrti iiTo 1n 2004, the City of Kent is updating the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP)to , reflect the changes in existing conditions and development opportunities as well as address concerns among some in the community about the negative impact of regulations on expansion of existing non-conforming uses. In late 2003, the City Council Planning Committee directed staff to analyze issues relating to zoning and development standards in the Central Avenue District of Downtown. Consideration of other issues, including the guidance of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan were identified as part of the work program. Beginning in March 2004, staff prepared background information contained in the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, as adopted in April 1998, for comment and suggested revision in public participation workshops. Morning and evening workshop sessions were held on May 17, 2004 and June 14, 2004 at the Kent Senior Activity Center to identify present conditions, challenges and opportunities in Downtown Kent. Public participation at these sessions included facilitated discussion of Downtown issues and the DSAP, as well as opportunities for the public to self-record issues, concerns and ideas on 34"x 44"maps. These maps depicted DSAP districts with 1998 recommended actions at the May sessions, and the maps at the June sessions included commentary carried over from the May sessions. As a substantially-large population who work,eat and shop in Downtown Kent, all City employees were offered an opportunity to respond to an all-users electronic message (see Appendix ) about their vision of Downtown as a place to live, play, or shop. The responses are provided in summary form (see Appendix ), and were included in a map , reviewed by the Land Use and Planning Board in a July 12, 2004 workshop. The Land Use and Planning Board offered some of their own comments, and reinforced some of the comments provided by citizens and City employees. PLANNED ACTIONS sever-a! districts within De,�Amtewfi Kept. As suel—,f-be —n-QAjP is a fFamevv@dE4TTRtufe development plans of a FneFe detailed Hatur-e. These Mans,will ,:de the � ptir-sume Planned Aetions. The level of detail «temitie ok e City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-5 , P.1PlanninglBilloSDSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP I.doc Introduction The Planned Action EIS process is a relatively new component of environmental law in Washington State. Under the ESHB 1724 provisions, local jurisdictions with an adopted comprehensive plan can opt to develop a 20-year vision for a subarea or neighborhood and create a Subarea Plan integrated with a Planned Action EIS. The Planned Action EIS ' evaluates the significant adverse impacts and reasonable mitigation measures associated with the development proposed in the Subarea Plan. Using this tool, the City would evaluates several detailed subarea pi oject development scenai ios pnoi to receiving and ieviewln y develoLiient applications for the Planned Action subarea. WWhenever a Planned Action ordinance is adopted by the juifsdie�City, an agency reviewing any subsequent project proposal in the planning area must first determine that the project is consistent with the earlier Subarea Plan Planned Action EIS. Typically, this means that a submitted development proposal oT proposals are consistent with and do not exceed the thresholds of uses and use intensities established in the Planned Action Ordinance The agency must also determine that the Planned Action EIS has adequately addressed the significant impacts of the development and identified mitigation measures. Consistency is determined by a review of four areas: (1)type of land use allowed, (2) level of development allowed, (3) infrastructure, and(4) character of the proposed development. The benefit of this approach is that subsequent project-level development proposals may have a reduced amount of environmental review, if the development proposal is consistent with the adopted SubaizvTrRiiPlanned Action Ordinance. The purpose of creating an integrated plan and /environmental assessment document, consistent with PERF grant requirements, was to adopt a Planned Action ordinance if such an action was appropriate. Ritu subarea io el, «to ated wits assessments of o«t«t gy In 9998, As-as a result of planning analysis and environmental review conducted, the planning team determined that, despite the recommended mitigation measures, existing City regulations may not have provided sufficient environmental protection to take the place of the SEPA process at tins-that time.As a result, the City of Kent has-chosen not to propose and adopt a Planned Action ordinance with the approved plan. However,the Downtown Strategic Action Plan provides development goals and policies for several districts within Downtown Kent. As such the DSAP is a framework for future development plans of a more detailed nature, including Planned Actions. tKENT STATION In 2001, however, with the City purchase of the Borden Chemical property, the opportunity to develop at higher intensities of mixed-uses in close proximity to the recently operational Sound Transit Conunuter Rail Station was both real and immediate AThe City initiated a Planned Action process for the property foi merly owned by Borden Chemical-, identifying site-specific environmental conditions and anticipated impacts and mitigation measures for development of three(3) development scenarios within the North City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-6 P:1PlanninglBilloOSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP I doc Introduction Core District Subarea. The City Council selected Alternative 2(Kent Station Proposal)as the Preferred Altemative in July 2002, and a private sector developer has begun the process to develop Kent Station. Groundbreaking occurred on June 30 2004. n+�Eventually other districts within Downtown Kent may even4,+46._similarly present significant01)POrtunities for planned ac tion 11 t 1eve1 nil H gat!On , .7.,,,.,,,�; ;;�:� P.,.- ,,..f..,,,, ,h.,t , .,1a h„ subject ,., G.,,,..-.,.,.,-,.,,,t„1 . rraCTVETzi �ro,T�-nor z� etio Nrr n�ia + l n ent„t r r + v, TI r +„ . ,-avrctm"�mzr^r•."rrv`rii3-nta,--r�,,v ;;iai;111.---1.1c I.Ly . ii;-y-cv,•1—de+ a-W"i e:iiz-:irc,rivrrrvq revised-design rgiridcriiics-,-in-im his! tl 14 aT irc�r'r'r*--c'7rAe •-•1••, .,+ .,,7,,,,,,,rl tl , 1 t ,1 , , 'ic�z"ti—jrii'Jccri,Tss cti v-iiiirrbn-riifn-iiei-rii=9 - 'ation pi-ejects afe ,.1; duall �^vliv icd_sriv , 1 - t,..7 +„ Q17DA Pubjie . r,i pat,.,,, is essential to a „baFea plaii eii$i ,t.,lpi-eeess. The firs! b. 1.., Dl...,.,;.,., ne,,,.,.,,,ieni .,mtq. eems. FebRiary 4, "I'll* 'lie I)SEIS, eentmned thi-ee land use and m-ban design alteMatiNes; A, a dd,tiejla1 tal d t tho- „7 1 the Wa I t•, State De .,,�r., ,t ^viivi'-ri=ricin4rrvvc^-'c'm=.c'-i-i.-&ct .iicv-o�-irii�ra5ri-ri�b-t Ecology,of C`UPP 1,,114,,,,t.,l Fliyi,-en fliental 1111pA.t statement, was 119-,,,d eii May 19 1907 le dj sfF,h„te Ljiliadditional i4bi-matlen and allow additional tiffle for p he I?Fe"Tfflff� r 1 a 7 r.., ,.1 . .+, •,r, e .7.,r; the of e.7 „pact-iririt.�;i7Tiivc „�=c'C- i=r"m' `•, fi alter-native, o„t th e ^•iz„ ientra rcn rsr. The Land Use ^.,,7 Planning ' a4ditf619' Getined Planning Committee beeame part of tfie elivii-onmental i-evieiv 1 eeor-d. Tile pivF ed altemative was revised a It v r - 7 t•or frT, LmidUse .7 f,lc-i cri civ,�n almiima-ttive. As the pi-oeess ehai4 en the 5+ evaluation, and pablie three key points. setting of objeefives, development of alternafives, and evaluation a &keflltveT City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-7 P:1PlanninglBdlo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_I doc Introduction W112. I-1: 1996-1997 DSAP Process Diagraml D. Organization of Report This report is organized to aid both public and private interests in making decisions concerning development and investment in the downtown. Section I is a summary of the background,purpose and process of the project, Section II describes the vision for de%qitew Downtown. Section III describes the plan concept,and Section IV outlines the recommendations for achieving the community and City's objectives. Section V is the { heart of the plan.This section organizes the recommended actions by areas districts within the dewi�t<�ww3Downtown, showing the interrelationships among actions. Section VI contains the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA)Fact Sheet and other required environmental data. The fact that the subarea plan is integrated with the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is consistent with Washington State Planning and Environmental Review Fund grant requirements. The process provided public participation and environmental analysis in conjunction with the planning process. As the plan evolved, ;k environmental mitigation was often incorporated in problem solving and design solutions. The format of the integrated plan/FSEIS is different from the typical FEIS document. The following chart summarizes where typical sections of an FSEIS are found in this document. Typical SEPA EIS Section Location of Information in the Action Plan Fact Sheet A Fact Sheet is located at the beginning of Section VI. Executive Summary The information typically found in an Executive Summary is located in Section I. And Section VI. Introduction A summary of the project history,purpose, scope and public involvement process is included in Section I. Alternatives Considered A description of the alternatives considered is contained in Section VI, Environmental Information. Impact Analysis Impact analysis supplementary to the analysis found in the Draft SEIS and the Preliminary Final SEIS is included in Section VI, Environmental Information. Mitigation Measures A summary of mitigation/implementation measures is provided in Section VI, Environmental Information, and in Section III, Summary of Recommended Actions City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-8 P.1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised-1 10804NRevised DSAP I doc Introduction Response to Comments A summary of comments and responses is , located in Section VI, Environmental Information. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-9 , P 1Planning%Billo\DSAMDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_I.doc Vision II. Vision : Growing a Home Town ' Prior to this ply Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP), Kent citizens contributed to a downtown vision expressed in the 1992 Community Forum on Growth Management and Visioning,the 1989 Downtown Plan, and the Kent Comprehensive Plan ggo l Goals and i,oliewsPolicies. The community expanded and reinforced the vision by participating in the public workshops, focus group discussions, and Downtown Stakeholders Task Force meetings that helped to form this plan as it was adopted in 1998. A Visit to the Future If this plan is successful, what will downtown Downtown Kent be like, say, 10 or 15 years in the future? What are the character and qualities that the City envisions for its downtown? One thing for certain is an early 21stCentury visitor entering dewiitewn Downtown Kent will be presented with a more gracious welcome mat.Not only will key entry points around the dawntewii-Downtown perimeter be well marked with gateway landscaping, artwork, and directional signage, but the character of development on Central Avenue, James Street, and Willis Street will be more appealing for motorist and pedestrian alike. Robust automobile-oriented businesses will still find a home on Central Avenue, but recent streetscape improvements and incremental business expansions will have Itransformed the old strip into a more welcoming, attractive corridor. At the dewnte%n s Downtown's southern boundary, a well-landscaped Willis Street will frame a rehabilitated single-family neighborhood to the south and the emerging mixed-use residential neighborhood to the north. An underpass will provide passage under the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe railroad nght-of-way, and a trail along Willis will provide Ilocal residents safe bicycle access to the Interurban Trail, the park-and-ride, the Historic Core, Kent Station, and the Commons Recreation Center&PafkPlayfields. ` The-In addition to the above-mentioned Interurban Trail access, the west section of the I downtownDowntown,between the Union Pacific Railroad and SR 167, will have seen major changes. Better street access will have spurred new commercial development between Smith and Willis Streets. There may be well-landscaped clusters of residential development as well. A newly refurbished Commons Par*Pla fields, the Commons Recreation Center—not to mention the Regional Justice Center—will form a civic anchor at the dewiitewrr's Downtown's northwest corner. The Regional Justice Center,by then about 15 years old, will be a still-imposing but more familiar fixture. Regional Justice Center activities will have increased service businesses in the core,but vigilant work by the City will have kept undesirable businesses from proliferating in Kent. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan II-1 P:1PlanninglBilloZSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP 11.doc Vision ^ .� CTfUZ]lTi\l wise have beep,'a-Jcl"]vn-J ' {ale^I.n. c' i rti c I] "vnr n sty T 14 C P Tl vnc Zros.r, But, while the future visitor will notice many changes to the deuwteY n-'s Downtown's perimeter, the most striking transformation will have occurred south-north of eve Smith Street. The Rags^'—+aivA -t4l+of ySound Transit effli+n 4e-Commuter ail Rail 'a �Station, located between James and Snnth Streets on either side of the i-adroad tracks, will be an important transit hub, with local feeder buses meeting the trains and regional buses for transfer to locations throughout the Puget Sound. Although commuter rail service was limited at first to two early morning northbound taps and two early eveningT southbound trips,eengestien ^^ the f eeways will have led to all-day rail service,- will „,gig-make the train the preferred transportation option for commuters to Seattle, Everett or Tacoma or baseball fans heading for a Mariners game. The importance of this transportation connection will have given dewotewr Downtown Kent greater prominence in the region and spurred development in Downtown. Smith Street will be one of the dowtrtew+ Downtown's most attractive corridors,with a ne hotel ^f^^ and retail e •~~'w on the ~ pedestrian-oriented businesses and open spaces located on either side of the street. '^ pai:tieular, the Giyi . ajid Pelf riniii A s re,.o ",III I- ' ' ra " id eveiiing activity dow;itewn. Walking through the histafie Meeker Street Historic eere Care to the eammi:ltef Commuter+-a+l-Rail st-alfen Station will be a pleasure because of the street trees, Sister Cities Parks, and pedestrian- oriented buildings. The first phase of the BoFden site redevelepitientKent Station project will be underwa-ycompleted, with an integrated mix of uses and open spaces supported by a street grid and structured parking. To the east of the BN&SF tracks,the Publie ,.,r,Aet a~a Sister Cities Parks will anew support another cluster of shops and commercial activities. Railroad Avenue district will offer a valuable addition to the unique historic retail core of Downtown Kent. With Ithe Sister Cities Parks providing an attractive backdrop as well as a nedestiian connection to the Commuter Rail Station,the emerging Railroad Avenue activity center will have joined Meeker Street and First Avenue as places where citizens from all over Kent can come to spend some time. They will browse in specialty shops, share a cup of coffee, or enjoy an evening meal. The South Core area between Titus Street and Willis Street,while not having experienced the dramatic transformation of the North Core District, will have seen slower, incremental changes. New midrise mixed-use/residential complexes and townhouses, developed with sensitivity to well-maintained single-family homes of historic character, will have created one of south King County's most attractive in-town neighborhoods for those who want the convenience of local services, easy access to transportation, and a Istable,pedestrian-oriented setting. The ee , it statieii *41 ' leea4ed oil both sides City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan II-2 P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPiDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_11.doc Vision Our visitor will be comforted by the fact that, except for some key infill and building renovation, the Historic Core, centered along Meeker Street and First Avenue, will remain much as it did in the late 1990s. The key to success of the Historic Core will have Ibeen the connections that the City made to the north and south, as well as those connections made to the east and west,which added supporting activity from nearby residents and workers. i From the Present to the Future From the perspective of our visit to the future, it is clear how the downtown Downtown will reach its goals. By enhancing the historic character of its eoreCore Di,tricts, the City will retain its ^�•'�and link to the past— its roots. By emphasizing its pedestrian qualities with gracious sidewalks,pedestrian-oriented businesses and a variety of parks,the dew+3tew Downtown will remain a comfortable, friendly place for people to meet and enjoy themselves. IBy encouraging a wide mix of commercial, residential, and public uses, the dew-»tewr; Downtown will generate the activity necessary for a successful urban center. By fostering high-quality redevelopment through public works improvements and design guidelines,the }3 Downtown will become a source of civic pride for the whole city. By integrating emerging transportation systems, the downiowdi Downtown will regain its role as a regional crossroads. And, through the continued efforts and care of its citizens,the Downtown (Ew.n will continue to be a"home town for the future." IMg. II-2: Map -Downtown Kent 20 Year Vision (1998)1 i i City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan II-3 P:\Planning\Bello\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Il.doc Planning Concept it �i. Planning Concept A. Market Analysis , The foundation of a successful dewr9tew+rpowntown plan must bean understanding of the realities of the real estate market. Consequently, the planning team conducted a market analysis during the first stages of planning in order to determine the potential for growth and the conditions necessary to foster positive redevelopment. The market area from which &{vi3�e ,n Downtown Kent draws 80%to 90%of its sales extends west to Interstate 5, north to the Kent city limits at 180ih,south to 277ih,and east and south toward the Cascade foothills (see Fig. 111-1). This area recognizes the existing concentrations of retail development in Tukwila and Auburn,the natural boundaries of the plateau to the west, and the existing transportation network extending to the east and south. Market Opportunities and Development Potential The market analysis detefffii .e,l .ha a,e f There are several specific opportunities in downtown Downtown Kent. f —Office/Education I nffiee de- strongest ifn ,,ediate ,...poi4unit,.. Continuation of historic 1� levels of office absorption of 16,000 to 18,000 square feet per year in addition to law I offices associated with the Regional Justice Center(RJC), and the development of a i branch of the Green River Community College at Kent Station would result in potential office demand of • 1996-2000: 92,000-112,000 square feet I • 2000-2010: 260,000 270,000 100,000 square feet • 2010-2020: 4S0-,ON80.000 square feet —Retail 1 Projected retail development estimates are based on iriaintainingdramatically increasing dawfltami''s Downtown's share of market area spending,•• M mereases in siare$-nf sPcciislcJ xwQ, apparel, cu ungraa inncing, u.i3o fa;iscclxa.n ...i'v r.�.:..i. �..,..� which may be facilitated by the development of Kent Station and adjacent properties, and other lame parcels Downtown. Kent Station will include a fourteen (14) screen Cineplex, which may generate additional spin-off retail activity. • 1995-2000: 46,000-49,000 square feet(including RJC impact) • 2000-2010: 100,,00)300.000 square feet • 2010-2020: q9;900100.000 square feet t In „ ., the area could siippeft a multi-sereen theater-. —Civic and Performing Arts Center City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 111-1 P.\Planning\Bello\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc rPlanning Concept A Civic and Performing Arts Center has been proposed for downtown Downtown Kent. Attendees at performances at such a facility would also patronize surrounding ` businesses. While the level of spending in itself would only support a few thousand square feet of development, it would contribute toward extending the hours of the distrietDowntown into the evening.AHowever, a bond issue election held in 2000 to provide public funding for the Civic and Performing Arts Center failed to gain Sufficient suI-)port and development of this clement would require slanificant private investment ..'f ..••., ,�•s,•. F,.,,i , tl„.v 11.'. Z1. in i'-i'rna� r ,r�tc-i,•nr,f.-.h �,.,.,o Th,. 14 i,Pfh.,t�iufly--1M1`tlY £*rrc'ci-wa.-rczricr--(lie l=Sri.pflrr&1 h9rr-1-.'�ur"'sixciriii-the—iiiimediate Alturcr jFi� III-]:Map—Market area for downtown Kent(1998)l —Market Rate Residential I One-third of the residential capacity for the City is in the downtown Downtown area. In order for the downtown Downtown to approach this capacity over the next 20 years there must be successful projects that can demonstrate to the development community that there is demand for market rate housing. The best opportunities are single-use residential units on the edge of the eer-eCoi e Districts, where land costs are lower, and small condominium and apartment projects at high-amenity locations in the core. —Hotel/Convention Center A full service hotel with approximately 150 rooms, meeting facilities sized to accommodate groups of approximately 250, and restaurant could compete with hotels near the airport and Southcenter and attract over$2 million in spending to the area each year. —Health Care and Wellness Opportunities exist to increase Downtown Kent's stature as a wellness center. Downtown Kent is the location of an established community of traditional health service providers and providers of alternative health care and natural medicine.King County has recently constructed a 11,100 square foot facility for the King County Natural Medicine Clinic at the comer of South State and E.East Meeker Streets. The Pediatric Infant Care Center anticipates relocating to a larger facility to be built before 2006. In the future, a dew*tewirpowniown facility of several hundred thousand square feet could provide an opportunity to consolidate various care providers. —Finally, additional development of all types creates demand for the others and provides an overall increase in vitality and interest. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-2 P;1PlanninglBilloIDSAPIDSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP—Ill.doc Planning Concept Surnmary of `tdti"cE1tY'11-Fdi-ysis Update 1r908 The updated maflEet data suppeFts sever-al conelusions: *The underlyiiig demegyaphies of the leeal mai4et area are extFemely strong in terms o household and ,A, a whole and DeA%town.Overall business eenditions arze-gOed' v".4, Og grewth in taxable sales for the City as- -The dewntown Kent effiee mar4et is dynamie with new eenstr-Lietien, tenant expansion and , and g c:zrirs oThe downtown retail madEet is stable with net gfewth expeeted with eempletien of the Afldefseft Building at the neftheast eemef ef Meeker Street and Fetifth Avenue an refievation of the Dfagness Building. The r-esidemial fen4al market is extremely iigbt in Kent. The Y-eeenily eempleted Sta&md a Suites is per-forming well as u iur4et wto assisted 1u'vxub Yxvjiet wfr sa.ixivc� , ntewn Kent-. aLe.,.i,values r-eileet a optimistic eutlook Far-Kent. The develepmen! eppei4unities identified for downteym Kent in the py-evieus market study a ntinue to be re.,list:e and eeh:eyable in paFtieulfflf, The Regional justiee Gentef is alFeadygener-ating demand fer law fi is-an a ssee ia. a e h„ aThe Regieiial Tfaftsit Authority (R-TA) eemmlaier-fail station in downtown Kent will r-einfer-ee the demand for-downtown heusing ra eertain t,,., Off eta l ■ !''...„. unity l4e.,lth Ge„te..f: .,tn ., w f edit,. in this seeten Strategy t The major goal of the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan (the-PIanDSAP) is to encourage davHTtoN"+-Downtown growth, infill and redevelopment while creating a stronger community identity and civic/commercial focus through a-strategic public- all-private partnership The Nan-DSAP actions are intended to implement the dir-eetions pr-e ided by the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan), the goals and policies of the 1989 Downtown Plan, and the goals and policies in the dewntaw+-Downtown and commercial sections of the Land Use Chapter•Element. Consistent with the requirements of the Washington State Planning and Environmental Review Fund, the PlatrDSAP integrates environmental analysis and environmental impact mitigation measures within the land use,transportation,urban design,problem solving, and implementation framework of the Naffl)SAP. The Rhm DSAP presents a framework that will maintain Kew s existing physical assets of Downtown,prepare for projected growth, and support future development. It recommends that public and private interests work together to achieve safe, attractive, City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-3 P:1Planning%Billo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP Ill.doc Planning Concept and convenient transportation systems, improved parks and open space, and adequate public facilities. ' ( Successful dew iitewn Downtown redevelopment plans build on the community's existing physical and organizational assets. Fortunately, downtown Downtown Kent eentaip=Thas many resources that will be a foundation for future growth and development. Vigilant City and business efforts have kept Kent's historic, pedestrian-oriented core shopping districts along Meeker Street,First Avenue, and Railroad Avenue vital. The new 1 Regional Justice Center is already a landmark and growing employment center. The do"itewii-Downtown is blessed with a variety of parks and open spaces, including the active Commons Park, `„Ttefnatieflal Sister Cities Parks, the Rose Garden, and Railroad Park. Kent's City Hall,the Commons Recreation Center, library,the Senior Activity Center, and the Resource Center_add-These parks and open spaces provide activity activities and enhance the dewnte wn's Downtown's role as the City's focal point. Nearby residential areas add a built-in consumer and employment base. [Fie, III-2:Map— Challenzes facing downtown Kent(1998)J The community's optimism regarding future private development opportunity is well founded. The market analysis conducted early in formulating this plan ptejeets-projected significant development potential for the downtown Downtown based on continuing growth of the Kent doAvntewn-Downtown market area. While the pace of this growth may fluctuate,the growth potential remains. Opportunities include additional retail development,office development, a full-service hotel, and urban-style housing. In addition, the new restored Kent Public Market will bolster businesses en-in the eere-s east sidecore districts, and as service expands, the; nater-,add ��rstn;;opr selieduled to E) en in Sound Transit Commuter Rail Station, Operatifle siflee c r2001, will make Downtown Kent a regional transportation hub. The expandme presence of attic coi;iiflUte-r Commuter tad-Rail station Station is also likely to stimulate in-town housing development and new employment opportunities. Commercial growth should occur as an indirect benefit of the eejiwi itei Commuter r-ai�Rail statie+}Station and a direct benefit of new in-town housing. Housingd_evelopment, at densities consistent with the Regional Growth Center designation of Downtown Kent, should be encouraged throughout Downtown to stimulate an increase in demand for retail and commercial services. While the dewiit -Downtown contains valuable assets that serve as a foundation for a strong identity and vital economy, there are obstacles to growing a better dewntewt11)owntown Kent. The first is that Kent's assets are scattered and often disconnected. The second is that many of the commercial corridors and residential areas at the downtown's Downtown periphery are underdeveloped or present a poor visual impression. Because of those assets and obstacles,the basic strategies at the root of the Ir,,,., iite ., , Pl DSAP are: I • Connect and unify important dew+tewi-Downtown features-.,- City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-4 P:1Pianning%Bilio\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_lll.doc Planning Concept • Enhance the periphery of the dewntewn Downtown to achieve higher quality development that supports its central activities;.- • Define special activity districts.; • Select "target"areas as a basis for a phased implementation program to accomplish redevelopment and/or infill consistent with the Plan:, • Encourage housing development throughout Downtown,• • Enhance civic identity. Connect and Unify Downtown's Features , iCivic improvements, including the Regional Justice Center, and the Kent Commons and the Publie >.,arliet are expanding the dew-iifawn-Downtown eeFeCore. The core business areas along Meeker Street, First Avenue, and Railroad Avenue will continue to serve as the Downtown's commercial dewi3tewri's south anchor. To maintain and improve this role, the hi-40Fre historic core Core must be linked to the northern featr+}-es districts by a combination of park,pedestrian, and vehicle connections along First, Second and Fourth Avenues and Smith Street. In addition, supportive redevelopment of the Smith Street corridor will strengthen the connection. Development,.fthe new Publie N,r..dEet site and Bu fli.,gton G �e. v.,..,..,hou and Kaii a fa Parks afe high....:ofiffes The parks and the a..u„u,b,v„ vaa�a.,,,z u, , Public Market link the Historic Core District and the ee nittfei-Commuter fa+l-Rail stat-ie+i-Station to the Regional Justice Center and planned commercial, office, and residential activities to the north. I (Fig. III-3: Map— The strategic redevelopment concept(1998)l During the planning process, several commuter rail station locations were proposed within a five-block area adjacent to the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe railroad tracks between Titus and James Streets. Thw�The Nan ninie�fliatDSAP acknowledges that the new eCvmmi:ltei=Commuter earl Rail station Station be-located just setit-h e€ Gowenoi th of Smith Street to provides an efficient multi-modal regional transportation hub. The Commuter fairI--Rail stati, i Station will enhance Kent's role in the region as "host community"and accentuate its identity. It will add significantly to the connectivity of northern and southern downtewn Downtown districts if the City restores the historic train station located between Gowe and Meeker Streets, develops parking areas, vehicular Icirculation systems,and good pedestrian and visual connections to other dowiltewn Downtown features. High-quality redevelopment in the surrounding areas would also enhance Kent's role as a"host community." For these reasons,pedestrian connections across Smith Street and traffic improvements in the vicinity are recommended in addition to the other connecting features described above. The Borden Property purchased by the City of Kent, located between Smith and James Streets represents one of the unique redevelopment opportunities in the Green River Valley, if not the whole Puget Sound Basin. The City ghoul'pfepafe tehas taken advantage of this opportunity by ensuring that there is access to the site (especially along Second Avenue from the south),1jldThe City is collaborating with a private developer to master plan the Kent Station site as a whole, and create a desirable ' City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-5 P:1Plann1nglBill6DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept development setting around the site as described in the Kent Station Planned Action SEIS. The subdivision of Kent Station allows for the sale of parcels to developers in ' phases. Enhance the Periphery of Downtown The second d,&N"fown-Down tow n redevelopment strategy involves upgrading the areas directly around the expanded core. Similarly, allowing office and mixed-use development between Fourth First and Fifth Avenues north of Kent Station along James Street will accommodate and encourage investment in this highly impacted area. The single-family neighborhood east of Fourth Avenue and of Jaynes-Cloudy Street is-an will be buffered from the intensive development alongJame ames Street by a lower intensity multi-family residential district. A combination of pedestrian-oriented street improvements and site design guidelines will help make the Central Avenue corridor a more fitting eastern entry into the eoreCore 1 Districts. The areas to the south, east, and west of the eon e Core Disti icts provide an ideal setting for residentially oriented mixed-use development to support core Core District businesses and add life to the dew*towrr-Downtown as well as reinforce Kent's identity as a"home town." Define Special Activity Districts The l -DSAP identifies and defines existing and emerging special districts within the dawatewni Downtown area such as the h}Stern£-Historic Core business district, civic activity areas, Kent Public Market district, and in-town residential areas. Such definition provides the basis to direct growth in character with each district,and to establish the relationships and connections between distncts. Planned Action Ordinances for each district could adopt subarea or subdistrict development plans with detailed envnonmental analysis of potential development scenarios. The preferred alternative of each subarea plan would then provide guidance for future distriet-development of the whole district subarea, or a discrete parcel of significant development capacity within the district Itis important to consider the existing assets of the districts,potential for improvement, redevelopment and infill,and their context or role within the d9w-ntei f3DOwntown. Select Target Areas Priority development sites have bee were identified during the-past planning processes. The ccornirtuter Commuter rakRail station Station site, Kent Station, the Kent Public Market site, and the eivie Civic and peffigi-flitflg-Performing arts-Arts center site-are-were driven by previously determined plans. The Civic and Performing Arts Center did not receive the necessary bonds to locate and build at the Municipal Parking Lot as planned, and the Kent Public Market has since relocated there after a few challenging years at the Railroad Avenue site. Other projects such as priority in-town housing sites,essential pedestrian connections to connect existing and emerging activity districts, and public City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-6 P.\Planning\Bdlo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept gathering spaces have emerged during the analysis and public participation elements of the hlarrDSAP process. Specific implementation measures to develop target areas provide a framework for public and private action. Mitigation for environmental impacts ' identified during the SEPA review of the proposed plan is integrated with the implementation program. Specific development scenarios may requne additional consideration of site conditions, impacts on environmental conditions and potential mitigation meastn-es befoy-e SEP n th.esholds could be sa6sf ., il1 o..+.,W-..i, a fer- tahlished Enhance Civic Identity A major focus of this plan has been to define an identity for dew+lte-No Downtown Kent. The image that has continually reoccurred throughout the process is the dewrrtewrr's Downtown's role as a "home town." The intent of the phin-PSAP is to "Grow a Home Town for the Future." But what does this mean? What are the characteristics of a "home town" that can be integrated into a dynamic 21"Century community? In looking at Kent's sustaining assets and the dawiitown's-Downtown's opportunities for the future, the following characteristics stand out.: —Variety: A Sum Greater Than Its Parts Hometowns are where people gather for many different functions and activities. They bring people together and focus a sense of community. The dew+rtewa Downtown is home to many civic and commercial activities and can make a vibrant residential neighborhood as well. As noted above,the key to t-lie pl-aP,!sDSAP success will be the connections between the various elements. Physical connections between transportation centers,government services, businesses, and recreational activities will strengthen the community's economic, cultural, and social connections as well. — Quality:A Sense of Caring A hometown's value to its community is reflected in the quality of its physical setting. The actions recommended in this plan are directed at producing higher quality public improvements and private development. One index of the plart°sDSAP success will be the amount of careful, well-considered financial and human investment the recommended actions attract to the dewitewnDowntown. Equally important will be the design quality of development—embodied in the durability of architectural styles, features and building materials. —Friendliness: A setting for personal interaction A good hometown is a place where people meet,where they come to enjoy themselves as individuals and to celebrate as a community. Encouraging these activities means attention to detail. Comfortable,attractive sidewalks, street trees, cafes and meeting places,bicycle paths, parks, artwork, and public amenities are important features of a successful dewi4ownDowntown. Safety is also an important consideration. Streets and public spaces must be well lighted. In addition, they must be designed to support Police and Fire Department efforts. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-7 P:1PlanninglBillo%DSAPIDSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_lll.doc Planning Concept —Memory and Vision: Remembering the Past,Looking to the Future During the middle of the Twe„t;eth twentieth Genturycentury, Kent transformed itself from an active farming community into a robust, industrial-based suburb. Now, with the construction of the Regional Justice Center and a new transportation hub, Kent is again transforming itself, this time into a dynamic, multi-faceted regional urban center. As projected population growth occurs, and as this transformation takes place, it will be important not to lose the perspective of the past. The historic qualities of the core and small-town characteristics must be retained and reinterpreted into new development as the downtown Downtown grows to meet the future. i City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 111-8 P.1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Summary of Recommended Actions IV. Summary of Recommended Actions A. Recommended Actions To implement the objectives and ideas presented in Section III, this plan recommends a series of actions, including regulatory measures, capital investments, and public programs. Section IV summarizes the recommended actions, describes the implementation steps, costs, and environmental impacts, and mitigation measures for actions that require environmental review. Figure IV-1 summarizes many of these actions and indicates where each action targets improvements. Figure IV-2 lists the actions according to their major categories and outlines their timing. Figure IV-3 provides a list of preliminary capital project costs. The actions are described in detail and the manner in which they interrelate to upgrade specific districts is outlined in Section V. To prepare for possible adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance,as discussed in Section 1,the actions that would require environmental analysis under SEPA regulations, with identification of probable, significant, adverse environmental impacts and proposed mitigating measures are included in this section. If When a Planned Action Ordinance is not proposed for adoptioned, diseElss>en identification and analysis of existing environmental site/district subarea conditions, impacts and mitigating measures will serve as-aguiRekr SEPA review, to be used as guidance when projects are proposed within the district subarea. The purpose of a Planned Action Ordinance is to conduct SEPA review for a number of development alternatives, one of which is determined to be most consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the DSAP, and any applicable District Subarea Plan. This "Preferred Action," when adopted by City COWlell, becomes the development blueprint for the District Subarea with SEPA completed for the amount and character of development Proposals meeting the identified requirements of the Preferred Action are eig �erally exempt from additional SEPA review. General actions,which relate to more than one district are discussed below: ■ Continue to support the Kent Downtown Partnership,Kent's Main Street , Program non-profit oreanization,as an aeent of Downtown revitalization. Assist the Kent Downtown Partnership (KDP)in its efforts to identify and promote community interest and economic health in Downtown. ■ Promote Infill Housing. I To meet the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan goals to enhance downtown Downtown as a place to live, and to create an attractive, dense mixed-use City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-] P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions neighborhood, the City should promote construction of housing units. A mix of housing types including condominium townhouses, stacked and attached units that resemble suable-smile-family design and character, and residential mixed with commercial and office uses are desirable. In order to enable development of multi- family residential units in Downtown, it would be advisable to waive the minimum lot size requirement(KCC 15 04.170) for multifamily residential unit development occurring within the DSAP planning area, where many redevelopable lots are not of sufficient size to feasibly develop multi-family residential use,even if so zoned. ■ Encourage the development of at least two hundred (200) units of new market rate housing in Downtown by 2008. Consider incentives such as reducing or waivingdevelopment evelopment permit fees for residential construction in Downtown, and extending the existing Downtown multi- family residential tax exemption program to include market rate rental housing. Developers of condominiums are challenged by two factors in Downtown— condominium owners are still having difficulty acquiring home insurance and the developers do not receive the tax exemption for developing condos in Downtown. Consider also allowing development of buildings with five (5) stories of wood frame construction above a concrete base, consistent with Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE)omng ■ Promote the construction of high quality new commercial,office,or mixed_use development and redevelopment. Also encourage the development of a hotel/conference center to serve as an attractor for commercial activity To respond to the potential for additional dowirtewn Downtown office and commercial evleopfflei t-development identified in the market analysis provide incentives for new development. Mixed Mixed-use development and a hotel/conference center will provide a variety of activities and living situations within districts that require ground floor retail uses. In order to be competitive in the marketplace, new office space in Downtown Kent should provide Class A-type amenities found in other regional centers. "Class A" office space, as described in CB-Richard Ellis Commercial Real Estate quarterly reports, " ..have high quality standard finishes, state of the art systems, exceptional accessibility and a definite market presence." ■ Assist the Kent Downtown Partnership in increasing the varietv and vitality of businesses located in Downtown. The KDP is leading the effort to attract two (2) new businesses to Downtown each year while retainingexisting businesses, and is also seeking to increase the number of existing retail businesses with evening and weekend operating hours. The development of office space, a hotel/conference center and market rate housing in Downtown should increase the demand for variety in retail and restaurant choices available throughout the daytime and evening hours. Public comments received City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-2 P:1PlanninglBilloIDSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions during, the 2004 workshops indicate a strong interest in increasing the variety of stores and restaurants in Downtown with operating hours extending past 5 p rn On the other hand, many comments were received about reducing the number of second- hand merchandise stores and thrift stores in Downtown (see Appendix ). ■ Conduct a study of existing parking requirements related to residential and commercial density regulations downtovwiDowntown. Revise the parking and density standards to improve the balance of on-site and off- i site parking areas. Some property owners in Downtown have indicated difficulty in attracting redevelopment interest due to the maximum of 3 surface parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space for Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning. This on-site parking requirement for commercial use is intended to encourage the use of on-street parking and the development of structured parking. Residential use has a minimum of one (1) space per dwelling unit, which should be an incentive for inclusion of residential units in commercial developments seeking to address parking needs. ■ Survey the impacts of retail uses such as pawnshops, bail bond offices,day labor offices, casinos, adult entertainment businesses, gas stations and tattoo parlors in downtown-Downtown locations in other cities. Restrict or prohibit specific commercial uses in Downtown that are known to generate negative impacts on the larger community. Revise the Zoning eE)de-Code to consider assigning conditional use permit status for such uses to address the results of the survey, if necessary. Certain uses, including pawn shops,bail bond offices, casinos, adult entertainment businesses and tattoo parlors have been observed in other cities in the region to require an increased amount of police and social services. Developable ,and suitable f f retail uses is limited, and Some plan participants have expressed in the past and present the opinion that a proliferation of such uses would not be appropriate. Land available and suitable for retail uses is limited, and some plan partieipants have expr-essed thee opinion that a prejif�ratiafi of such uses would not be appff)ffiate. ■ Work with social services providers, public safety officers, temporary labor agencies,and educational institutions to address homelessness issues in Downtown. Address the causes and consequences of homelessness, and the impacts on community livability. • Make Downtown Kent the transportation hub of South King County. Ensure that Sound Transit completes the Phase II Sounder rail service expansion to eighteen(18)train trips daily by 2008. This increase in service will encourage a commensurate increase in connecting bus and shuttle service located in Downtown— City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-3 P:IPlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions making living working shopping or dining in Downtown Kent convenient as well as attractive. • Add pedestrian and bicycle facilities and bicycle lanes or trails in fill a's*—'^*s 9f dew4}tow--Downtown. Work with the community and the Bicycle Advisory Board to identify and prev-ide plan the provision of sidewalk improvements,planting strips,traffic calming measures, wide curb lanes, trails and pathways. Utilize the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program as appropriate to identify safety-related improvements. The erEwba;Tinterurban Trail provides a regional north/south pedestnan/bicycle/equestrian connection. Improved east EaWwest links into dewwtouvR Down town will attract commuters, shoppers, students and recreational cyclists. i I Support tht-a Performing Arts/Civic Center or a hotel/conference center in a dewntom,n Downtown location. fnsui-e Ensure that activities at in the Urban Center will extend into the evening hours. With facilities for conferences and other events, a civic and performing arts center can be an important attraction, extending hours of activity into the night and providing a much-needed location for meetings, events,parties, catering facilities, and educational programs. ■ Support live performance arts in appropriate public places, and encourage live performance arts in retail and restaurant businesses. The City of has sponsored the well-attended Summer Concerts in the Park series, often held at Kherson Park at the northwest corner of Gowe Street and 2"d Avenue. Such events draw the community together to end live music during lunch in a family-friendly atmosphere. Encourage the interest of retail and restaurant business members of the KDP and Kent Chamber of Commerce in providing space for live music,poetry readings, and other forms of artistic expression that contribute to the vitality of Downtown. ■ Ensure high-quality development on designated signature building sites. Work with property owners and developers throughout the development process, offering incentives as appropriate for compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines. ■ Enhance the City's established public art program. 1 I Reinforce Kent's downtemi-Downtown character and unique traditions through art. Encourage private and public development interests to provide deIA,flte-A,fi Downtown public art as part of significant projects. 1 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-4 P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108WRevised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions ■ Develop a dewnAwvii-Downtown street tree/vegetation plan. Provide a guide for creating an attractive pedestrian network of green spaces. Augment the Kent Street Tree Program to address the entire downtown Downtown as defined by this-the phmDSAP. Associate specific types of street tree plantings to specific streets throughout downtewnDowntown. Identify sites for enhanced landscaping, focusing on parks, entry, and gateway features. Assign responsibilities (public and private) for street tree installation and maintenance. Integrate references to the Street Tree Program into development regulations. ■ Allow underground stormwater detention vaults where appropriate for development sites larger than one acre in Downtown to encourage attractive site development and maximum build-out of revenue-generating land uses. The use of above-ground detention ponds can deter from the attractiveness of Downtown particularly when the detention ponds are large and poorly landscaped. Such ponds also limit the economic utility of land zoned for much more intensive activities. ■ Adopt street standards for the entire downtown Downtown study area. Currently street improvement requirements are often determined on a case-by-case basis. Facilitate permit review and enhance street character by matching street standards to specific areas dew+3tewn Downtown in order to accentuate the identity of each area. Include requirements for undergroundmg utilities in order to improve the attractiveness of the visual environment, and to provide more sidewalk space for walking or outdoor seating where appropriate. ■ Enhance gateways into downtownDowntown. Mark entrances to dow-ntwwnDowntown from streets, trails and rails, provide artwork and amenities, and direct visitors to special attractions. Where there is very little public land for extensive landscaping, work with property owners to develop "signature buildings"that have high quality building and site design that adds character to the streetscape. A gateway design and installation program is underway in the City following a 1997 design charette. Special attention to the pedestrian and visual connection between the Historic Core and North Core (Kent Station) along Second Avenue will be critical. Improvements along Smith Street to connect the West Frame and East Frame will also be important. • Actively promote downtown Downtown historic preservation and commemorate historic sites with interpretive signs, art,tours, and educational programs. To implement the program,the City should update the existing inventory of historic resources,and develop regulations for historic preservation. The City has made City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-5 P.\Planning\Btllo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions several efforts to develop historic preservation programs. The most recent effort concluded with a report, An Historic Preservation Program: Recommendations for the Historic Preservation Committee—,December, 1990. The program should be revisited, as many Kent residents and businesses have voiced continuing concern and interest in historic preservation, in Downtown and throughout Kent. Collaboration with the Greater Kent Historical Society and Kent Downtown Partnership may be necessary to clarify the value and potential scope of this action item. ■ Explore specific redevelopment opportunities within target areas. I A principal objective of this plan is to attract appropriate, high-quality development to dawfliewrfDowntown. The plan seeks to (1) attract positive development by creating a favorable development setting and (2) direct new development to achieve public objectives such as economic vitality and design quality as well as individual private interests. This effort is based on the fact that physical development and land uses that work together to complement one another and that are supported by appropriate facilities are much more successful than disjointed development limited by insufficient,unattractive public facilities. The Plan focuses redevelopment in identified areas in several ways. The land use recommendations seek to fine tune the Gwf�- City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. The transportation recommendations will upgrade connectivity and circulation to and within the dewnteKwDowntown. The public facilities improvements will enhance an already attractive setting. District-specific design guidelines will increase compatibility between uses, reinforce the design quality of the districts, and take advantage of special opportunities. [Fie. IW-1:Map—Actions recommended by the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan are summarized above. (1998)] B. Outline of Phasing Strategy Since the plan is based on projections and changing conditions for the next 20 years,it is clear that all of the actions will not commence immediately. In fact,civic actions ideally will be timed to take advantage of special funding opportunities to trigger or encourage desired development, to respond to emerging market trends, or to integrate related activities. The ehart Since many of the actions are subject to funding,coordinated with other actions,timed to emerging trends, or triggered by private investment, the periods shown are estimates only. In general,the schedule sets priorities for action based on needs and opportunities. The chart suggests that during the next two years the City should concentrate on important new opportunities associated with current redevelopment,especially the Regional Justice City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-6 P:1PlanninglBillo%DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108WRevised DSAP IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions Center and the RTA ..,,...ut rail transit„tut, r a Transit Commuter Rail StationKent Transit Center. Actions that directly respond to these opportunities: (N)the pedestiia n "all at the r.,.,,e. and Smith intense..: . .;B2.c) Smith Street r .. v.vu.� u w✓uui�.a uaa�s vauiw un�.ao�.c�uva improvements; (Cl.b)Burlington Green,Yanghzou, and Kaibara Parks improvements; Gateways at(C2.a)Fourth and James, (C2.0 Central and Meeker, and(C2.e) Central and Smith; (C3.a) the civic and performing arts center; (C3.b) the Kent Public Market;and (C3.c)the historic rail 4atiew depot structure are recommended for special attention during the next two years. Likewise, land use measures (Al and A2) and design guidelines (D4are given high priority because they represent low public cost activities the City can take to update zoning a^a��gn guidelines to be ready for impending private development proposals, The redevelopment programs for the Fourth Avenue, histone-Historic eof Core Di'strict,south South eereCore District, and Central Avenue District target areas could also be initiated during the next twe-few years to spur redevelopment in these areas. Initiating these actions over the next tvie-few years makes for an ambitious work list and represents the current dynamic times. The actions recommended for implementation in two to five years are generally high- priority activities,but they do not have the immediate urgency of those listed above. The actions scheduled to implement after the first five years generally depend upon decisions outside the City's control, such as the n�� men—,fte dealepmeiif or the Regional F t ee+the use of incentives for redevelopment of private property consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the Downtown Stratec�c Action Plan, and where applicable, a district subarea development plan. [Fig. IV-2: Table—Phasing of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommendations. (1998)J C. Preliminary Capital Project Costs The preliminary costs in Figure IV-3 provide a more realistic foundation for the vision and recommendations of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan D� SAP). Although the costs were carefully prepared, they are based on preliminary concepts, intended to serve as a general guide. The fAar+-DSAP spans a period of twenty years of potential new development,redevelopment and infill in dewntew Downtown Kent. The DSAP, costs, and infrastructure needs may change and adjust. Each proposed project should be Ireevaluated in its own time based on specific plans including district subarea development plans. Please note that the preliminary street improvement costs listed in the chart exceed the cost of plan-DSAP recommendations. The cost of full street improvement is included because sidewalk improvements can most economically be accomplished as part of a regularly scheduled street overlay project. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-7 P:\Planning\Sillo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV doc Summary of Recommended Actions Bicycle and pedestrian trails, lanes and paths can be accomplished in a number of Idifferent ways with widely differing costs. Further study of preferred locations and materials selection would be is-necessary before cost estimates can be provided. Additional detail regarding the street improvements and gateways is available at the City of Kent Planning Depafw ;t Services Office. Additional detail regarding the eemm +,,iktatienKent Transit Center is available from the M-1 e^ ^a Regional T-fansit Sound Transit)and the City of Kent Planning Bepal4men Services Office. I [Fig IV-3: Table—Preliminary Capital Cost Estimate(1998)J [Fig IV-4:Map—Recommended Transportation Improvements(1998)J [Fig IV-S:Map—Recommended Public Facilities (1998Y Mr. IV-6:Map—Land Use Recommendations(1998)1 i i City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-8 P:IPlanningl6illolDSAMDSAP Revised-1108041Revised DSAP—IV.doc Kent Downtown Districts V. Kent Do wntown Districts The planning process identified several downtown Downtown districts with distinct characteristics. It also identified how district redevelopment strategies can be integrated to benefit all districts. The following district descriptions illustrate more clearly how the recommended actions listed in Section III focus on individual districts, but also f interconnect throughout downtownDowntown. The Djstf'ets districts include: • North Frame District 1 • Central Avenue Corridor District • East Frame District • West Frame District • South Core District • North Core District • Historic Core District ThemeDowntown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) land use recommendations are directed toward fine tuning the City's comprehensive planning framework in response to specific redevelopment opportunities and neighborhood ffetectien Beedscommunity interests. The transportation recommendations will-are intended to upgrade connectivity and circulation to and within the dwwntewn Downtown for additional businesses and residents. The public facilities improvements envisioned in tl-rrs-the p1a+rDSAP will enhance an already attractive development setting. Distnet ^peeifi de4g Design guidelines will increase compatibility between uses, reinforce the design quality of the various districts, and take advantage of special opportunities. Within eae4-most districts there are target areas that merit special attention. It is recommended that the City work with property owners and developers to ensure that new development on these properties meets its potential. The formulation of detailed district subarea development plans, to be adopted within a number of Planned Action ordinances, could provide specific guidance regarding environmental conditions, development potential, and impacts of such development. Each district is described below with recommended actions and target areas where the ICity-and,the Kent Downtown Partnership, the Chamber of Commerce,property owners, business owners, and volunteers may take a sustaining role. A. North Frame District Located along the north side of James Street, the North Frame District provides a transition between more intensive uses in the North eere-Core and the single-family neighborhood to the north. The North Frame dwAf�c+Distrjct includes the Commons FaiAPlayfields,with its ball ffek and several streets lined with single-family homes. While the overall intent of the plarrDSAP is to preserve the peaceful, insulated&i*& single-family character of the North Park neighborhood,east of Fourth Avenue,two busy arterial streets -N:Fourth Avenue and James Street offer significant challenges to City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-1 P.\Planning\Bdlo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V doc Kent Downtown Districts preservation of this character. Traffic along these streets, the Regional Justice Center, the Kent Transit Center, and the development of Kent Station to the south intrude on residential the desirable qualities associated with smgle- family residential and- west of disc t..Foui+1, A-venue ., a d f'fieuIt to m „t...., , [Fig V-1:Map The Kent downtown districts. I( 998] The Commons Playfields brings mixed blessings. While being a much-loved open space and active recreation area that enhances siflgle,family living conditions in the vicinity, it also draws people and traffic that impact single-family residential uses. Therefore,the plan-DSAP seeks to create a strong edge of high-quality mixed-use development along the north side of James Street west ofbetween North Few4h First and Fifth Avenues, transitioning to multi-family residential development primarily along the south side of Cloudy Street. The area is a designated redevelopment target area. Relieving congestion on James Street may be achieved to some measure by connecting Cloudy Street to Fourth Avenue from Third Avenue for pedestrians and vehicles. Upgrading the streets and Commons Raft Pla, fiY elds to benefit the local neighborhood and the city at-at-large are also high priority actions. The actions presented below include public improvements,land use zoning, and design guidelines spe,.,r:,, t the Ne,.a, Frame Pis t and supportive of the overall plan. The actions are coordinated specifically to encourage target area redevelopment. Public Improvements — Upgrade Commons Ray-lkPlavfields The Commons Park is an important resource for dewntownDowntown Kent in many ways. For one thing, it is such an important attraction that shop owners have opened their stores in the evening during baseball season to take advantage of the increased traffic. However, there are numerous problems, including parking, access, drainage, and impacts to neighboring residents. A master plan.or district subarea development Am should explore a variety of solutions to these problems. Participants in the Downtown Strategic Action Planning process voiced many creative ideas for park improvement. The ideas included: (1) an on-site parking lot that could retain stormwater in the winter, (2)pedestrian overpasses; (3) use of the Regional Justice j Center's parking; (4) incorporating shared parking with redevelopment between N-North Fourth and N-:North Fifth Avenues; and (5) the addition of a play structure. The City will explore the opportunity of shared public parking arrangements with the Regional Justice Center for evening use of the Darking garage located across the street from the Commons Playfields. —Improve James Street City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-2 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Ultimately, James sH-eetStreet will-beis an important arterial, as ell as bee and in the future should include improved pedestrian and bicycle routes connecting the Commons PaTk-Playfields and the Interurban Trail to the n^.- en site "level apme*tKent Station, the SoundeF Commuter-Rail p Bus St t;o zKent Transit Center, the Regional Justice Center, and schools and businesses in the Central Avenue corridor. Long-term planning should encourage bicycle and pedestrian uses. As development and redevelopment occurs, the City should require that James Street have sidewalks at least 12 feet wide be n,"afleed with landscaping and sidewalks at toast 12 feet Wide. M addition, the- Gity and developer-s sheuld eensider the possible grade sepafaiion at th i [Fig. V--2.Map—Proposed elements of the North Frame District(1998)] t —Provide Gateway Improvements at Fourth Avenue and James Street: This high traffic intersection close to the Kent Commons and the Regional Justice Center is an important dewntown Downtown entry point. The owned-F'c'i-'c'r'S'vr$r-rn'e southeast Z^v'i iic'-rim1-1 vi=`ry.'rc `y-e could ineoFpomte the buff color s4erne of the Commons and Regienal justtEe Gefitei- nd . fliapg echesome o ftt, building a4e .,t, „t det.,,t. A design team that included members of the business community, an architect, a landscape architect, artists and planners recommended a distinctive crosswalk pavement design and distinguished streetlights. As redevelopment of Kent Station occurs, this intersection will likely see increased pedestrian activity_ Pedestrian-oriented design, including safety features,will need to be considered in designingthis his gateway. [Fig, V-3:Drawings- The suggested concept for Fourth Avenue and James Street 1( 998)] Open Cloudy Street to connect Third and Fourth Avenues In order to alleviate traffic congestion along James Street, residents of North Park would be able to exit onto Fourth Avenue. All streets intersecting James Street directly north of Kent Station will be restricted to right-in, right-out turns teward-Fw� A*enueonto and off of James Street. T nThe opening of Cloudy Street between Third and Fourth Avenues is already considered a mitigating action for the Kent Station development. —Implement traffic-calming measures on Cloudy Street to reduce vehicular speeds if Neighborhood Traffic Control Program analysis concludes such measures are necessary If findings of any Neighborhood Traffic Control Pro am (NTCP) study indicate necessity, design for reduced vehicular speeds in the vicinity of the Kiwanis Tot Lot, City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-3 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP V.doc ' Kent Downtown Districts ( applying appropriate traffic-calming measures in order to improve safe vehicular and pedestrian travel behavior. Development Target Area Actions — Encourage Office/Residential Mixed-Use Development at the N. Fourth Avenue/N.Fifth Avenu^in the First-Fifth Avenues/James-Cloudy Streets Target Area by amending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District designations As noted above,the llaff-Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) promotes the conversion of the single-family area between N North heu#h First and :-North Fifth Avenues, and between James and Cloudy Streets to include a n.i*ed us mix of uses complementary to Kent Station, the Regional Justice Center, and the c,,wide_r..,,,. maw-. Rail & Kent Transit Center. effieeOffice,retail and multifamily residential development would be encouraged along James Street to a depth of approximately 300 feet by desipnating the area for Downtown Commercial Enterprise(DCE) Zoning= consistent with Kent Station development south of James Street. Further north of the proposed DCE district expansion,to the south side of Cloudy Street, a designation of low-density multi-family residential (LDMF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use would encourage a transition between the intensive mixed-use development along James Street and the single-family residential housing to the north. Extension of low-density multi- family residential zoning to include the five (5) Single-Family Residential-zoned parcels (SR-8) north of Cloudy Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues would in part reaffirm a Council recommendation to rezone this area as adopted in the 1998 DSAP. Either a Multi-Family Residential-Garden Density(MR-G) Zoning District to allow market rate rental, or a Multi-Family Residential-Townhouse, 16 units per acre (MR-T16) Zoning District to allow only purchased units would be appropriate. These uses will benefit from proximity to the Commons Playfields and the visibility along Fourth Avenue and James Street. Also, they will be less adversely impacted by the park Commons activity and traffic}-_Figure V4 illustrates the type of development that is envisioned. [Fig. V-4:Drawittz- The type of office/residential mixed-use development envisioned for the N. Fourth/Fifth Avenue treet area. (1998)1 Design Guidelines IFinally, the City should expand the Downtown Design Guidelines area of applicability to include the North Frame District, and administer distr-iet-spec-i€rethe design guidelines to ensure that: I • Development presents an attractive building face and/or landscaping_particularly to James and Fourth Streets. I • Site improvements do not negatively impact existing development to the north in terms of noise, traffic, air quality, sun/share, or visual intrusion. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-4 P:1PlanninglBilloIDSAPIDSAP Revised-11080CRevised DSAP V.doc Kent Downtown Districts • Development does not result in houses converted to marginal offices without substantial redevelopment. Although on the periphery of the dawntewnDowntown, the North Frame area District merits special attention. A master plan for the Commons P-arl-Playfields could begin to address important issues. Redevelopment of the area lard along the 14. ceu#w Fi fth "venue eofridergbetween First and Fifth Avenues north of James Street will provide opportunities for additional housing in a convenient downtown Downtown location near recreation resources and a regional transportation center. It will also provide opportunities for office/housing mixed use or housing near offices. Finally, as one of the dewntewErs Downtown's most important entries, the Fourth and James gateway merits high priority in the proposed gateway enhancement program. [Fig, V S:Map—North Frame District 20 year vision (1998)J B. Central Avenue Corridor District Central Avenue comprises the dewntewn''sDowntown's auto-oriented strip. As such, it provides a setting for auto-oriented businesses, convenience stores, large-lot enterprises, and fast food vendors. On the other hand, the dist;;e«Distnct's collage of billboards and under-maintained structures does not provide an attractive entrance into the dewntewnDowntown. For this reason,the pla3+-Downtown Strategic Action Plan identifies the entire Central Avenue Corridor dkti ict District as a redevelopment target area although there are some solid businesses. The target area and recommendations include Railroad Avenue in relation to the StationKent Transit Center. Upgrading the corridor will require a two-pronged effort involving public streetscape improvements and incremental private investment. This type of major arterial redevelopment has proven effective in areas such as Lake City Way in Seattle and Central Way in Kirkland. Public Improvements —Upgrade Streetscape Along Central Avenue The width of the street right-of-way width limits the extent of streetscape improvements on Central Avenue. Nevertheless,public and private investment could substantially improve the sidewalks and upgrade the utilities. The high-level transmission lines will undoubtedly remain, but numerous service lines and cable should be placed underground to remove visual clutter. Public and private property owners could augment existing street trees with additional plantings on both public and private property. The intersections of Central Avenue with Smith and Meeker Streets represent important entry points into the dewntewnDowntown, and gateways are recommended at these locations. Public right-of-way is limited on Central Avenue, as it is with all Downtown streets. The gateways should make use of basic streetscape elements. In 1997, a design City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-5 P.1PlanninglBdloIDSAP%DSAP Revised-1108041Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts charette resulted in a recommendation for special crosswalk designs, signs directing visitors to the Regional Justice Center, the eeflimta-ei-G^....„ uter-`ail D_•l ^'a"^^ StattenKent Transit Center and the business core. The recommendation included special lighting to call attention to the gateways. Participants in the charette included a landscape architect, an artist,an urban designer, dowirtwmi Downtown merchants,and City representatives. The ice-Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommends upgrading the sidewalks along Meeker and Gowe Streets between First and Kennebeck Avenues with street trees and lighting. Where these streets intersect Central Avenue,the City should emphasize improvements to integrate the corridor with the downtown Downtown core and the eemmaief r,.~,mute~rail Rail stationStationKent Transit Center. /Fig. V 6:Man— Central Avenue Corridor and West Frame (sic)Districts are illustrated above. (1998)] Design Guidelines The City should add specific standards to the Downtown Design Guidelines to direct development toward higher quality building and site design. The design guidelines should complement streetscape improvements. For example, while it is desirable to place buildings near the public right-of-way, it may be preferable to set buildings back a few feet to allow wider sidewalks and utility placement. The following issues are some that the guidelines should address-; • Designate Central Avenue as a Class B pedestrian street from Willis to James Streets I to provide a better setting for new development arising from the ea:"., r,....mute f rail Rail station S+ati „KentTransit Center and core area investment. • Screen parking areas adjacent to the street right-of-way with low shrubs or walls and trees. • When development occurs, set back buildings to allow for at least a 12-foot-wide sidewalk. • Provide a pedestrian link between the public sidewalk and all business entrances, even if parking is in front of the building. • Control existing signs and remove existing billboards over time. 1 • Provide pedestrian-oriented building facades and integrate signs into the architecture. [Fig. V-7.Drawing—Desipn Issues That New Development Should Address in the Central Avenue District. (1998)1 /Fig. V 8:Drawlnp—Desien Issues That Existing Development in the Central Avenue district Should Address. (1998Y City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-6 1 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Because Central Avenue is many people's first impression of dewnte A ii Downtown appearance and development quality,the-this corridor is important to the whole dowiitewn-Downtown image. For this reason, corridor improvements should be given priority. Successful arterial improvements in other cities in the region have demonstrated that upgrading Central Avenue is possible if the City and property owners work together. Development Target Area Actions — Co;�s;aer--r—e zRezone properties along Central Avenue currently zoned DCE to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay(GC-MU) for purposes of lending requirements regarding conformity of use and zoning Properties adjacent to Central Avenue within the DCE Zoning District have operafing businesses that are non-conforming uses, and have non-conforming site characteristics. A rezone would allow for the existing uses to be deemed conforming for the purposes of obtaining financing for improvements. However, the applicant for any redevelopment or use expansion in Downtown, regardless of zoning, is not exempted from Downtown Design Review requirements. (Fig. V-9: Drawing—Central Avenue as it exists today. (1998)1 /Fiz V-10:Drawing—A Visualization ofHow Central Avenue could look. (1998)1 /Fig. V-11:Map—Central Avenue Corridor 20 Year Vision (1998)1 C. East Frame District Lying immediately east of the Central Avenue corridor, the East Frame District includes a diverse mix of commercial activities interspersed among single and multiple-family residences. Participants at a summer 1996 workshop to identify issues in this district emphasized the need for a more stable residential neighborhood, with access to services and relief from traffic and other impacts. Since the City Resource Center, Senior Center, and Kent Middle-fi-ifflier-High School are located in the district, it is rich in public services. However,better connections to the downtown Downtown core would improve access to shopping,professional services,restaurants, and City and County offices. The actions recommended for the East Frame District focus on urban design improvements which could, over time, upgrade the area's livability. The planning team explored traffic revision proposals to reduce through traffic in the disti-ic District, but no workable options were identified. Public Improvements — Construct a Pedestrian Trail Along Mill Creek City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-7 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts The proposed trail and landscaping connecting Mill Creek Park and Memorial Park will improve access to open space. —Improve Meeker and Gowe Streetscapes Upgrading sidewalks with lighting and landscaping on Meeker and Gowe Streets from First Avenue to Kennebeck Avenue would improve pedestrian conditions in the East Frame. The improvements would connect the First Avenue to Kennebeck Avenue sections to the Historic eete-Core and t-he „ia e,. Faji :' � t�create a more attractive setting. — Inyrove-Enhance or replace pedestrian bridle over Mill Creek at Temperance Connectivity between the residential neighborhood at the foot of East Hill and the Kent Middle School (formerly Kent Jr. High School), and Downtown destinations including the Sounder Commuter Rail &Bus StationKent Transit Center, and Kent Station would be significantly improved by enhancing or replacing the existing pedestrian bridge over Mill Creek at Temperance Street. Aside from ensuring the attractiveness of the improvement, a particularly important consideration would be an increase in the width of this bridge to allow more than one personat a time to comfortably make passage. Ensure also that any improvement to the pedestrian bridge does not adversely impact Mill Creek salmonid habitat. Design Guidelines Design guidelines are recommended to: • Increase compatibility between commercial and residential uses through screening, site design and building bulk regulations or guidelines. • Increase security and safety in the areas by providing lighting and pathways,reducing hazardous areas, and providing visible entries. • Provide useful open space and pedestrian-oriented streetscapes. — Consider options for flexibility in general parking standards for Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning in the East Frame District with the economic development goals of the City The property owners in the East Frame District are not proposing intensive, mixed-use projects—and interest in developingsuch uch projects in the East Frame is limited at this time. Four(4) options to consider: 1. Allow outright 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 gross square feet of commercial floor area; 2. Allow 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 g,s.f. of commercial floor area, provided that 25% of the overall gross floor area of the project is multi-family residential; City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-8 P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP V.doc Kent Downtown Districts 3. No change-the existing 3 surface narking spaces per 1,000 g.s f. commercial in the DCE zone is counterbalanced with a minimum of one-and-one half(1.5) parking spaces per multi-family residential unit east of the Burlington Northern tracks (KCC 15.05.070(C)). This could be seen as an incentive to include housing units in commercial development in DCE; 4. Add two(2)year"Sunset Clause" from date of adoption for any DCE parking standards revision to evaluate the effectiveness of the revision. While there are few specific recommendations for the East Frame District in this plan, the City should continue to monitor residential neighborhood conditions and act if special problems or opportunities arise. (Fir V-12:Man-Proposed Elements of the East Frame District(1998)1 [Fir- V-13:Map-East Frame District 20 Year Vision (1998)I D. West Frame District The area between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks and SR 167 includes a large Metro park-and-ride lot with regional bus service, a skateboard park and sports fields, the remains of a historical residential neighborhood, industrial shops, and vacant lands. The Interurban Regional Bicycle Trail runs north and south through the West Frame disti-ietDistnct. In 2005,Metro plans to phase out the past l ark- -and-ride lot located between Smith and James Streets when the Kent Transit CenterGeFa uter Rail Statte is ready to accommodate express bus service connections. liar The parking demand from tligand ineefpefate the fafietiens pafk--park-ai+d-and-ride lot will be served by to the Kent Transit Center garages^ '��. However, the area south of Smith Street may experience dynamic redevelopment. A mix of retail, office, and residential uses is consistent with current zoning. '4+i-s- he plan Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommends street construction and design guidelines to support development efforts. Public Improvements —Review Proposal for a New Access Street to West Frame from Willis Street Major redevelopment opportunities in the West Frame Districtr^uSmi`a Street will depend on a new street connection northbound through the area from Willis Street. The Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT)reviewed an August 2001 is euffently reviewing a proposal to upgrade the intersection of the northbound ramp off SR 167,and issued a response in March 2002 indicating denial. If such a north-south route connecting Meeker Street with Willis Street is determined to be feasible in the future, the City should carefully evaluate the economic development City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-9 RNPlanningTillo1DSARDSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP V.doc Kent Downtown Districts benefits andits,impacts on the dewntewn's Downtown's traffic system. A traffic signal was placed at the intersection of 74"'Avenue South and Willis Street in 2004 to facilitate westbound turns onto Willis from 74"' Avenue South. — Connect Interurban Trail to Core Districts Besides the proposed access, the most important transportation improvements recommended by this plan are bicycle and pedestrian connections from the Interurban Trail eastward along or near James, Meeker, and Willis Streets. The James Street pedestrian connection is especially important because some Commons Park users park at the park-and-ride and then walk to the ball fields. Crossing James Street is often difficult, so providing better parking and access for park users will be an important consideration in the recommended Commons Park Master Plan. Redevelopment Opportunities — Encourage redevelopment of King County-Metro Park& Ride lot King County-Metro is marketing for sale an 8 acre portion of the 9.5 acre Lincoln Park & Ride lot located between Smith and James Streets. The entire lot is zoned Downtown Commercial Enterprise(DCE). Much of the parking is anticipated to shift to the Kent Transit Center garage as most express bus service trips are replaced by Sounder Commuter Rail service trips to Seattle. The remaining 1.5 acres will continue to provide one hundred(100) surface parking stalls for the reduced service park and ride. — Encourage redevelopment of the area between State Route 167 the Union-Pacific Railroad, Willis and Meeker Streets The access road and Interurban Trail improvements could be key factors in this redevelopment opportunity. Revising the West Frame District surface parking standards to allow for more surface parking stalls per thousand square feet of commercial gross floor area (see West Frame District Design Guidelines Recommended Actions). /Fik y 14:Drawinzs—Exist!"view and the view with the proposed improvements along Willis Street near the Union Pacific Railroad tracks Note the bicycle pedestrian trail connecting downtown to the Interurban Trail,,greensward improvements, and new mixed-use residential development along Saar Street. (1998)l Design Guidelines ' Design guidelines are recommended to ensure that the new development comprises a unified whole with compatible uses, integrated circulation, adequate capital facilities,and attractive amenities. The design guidelines should reflect the type of uses proposed by the property owners. This particular district would also benefit from large site master planning so that project review might involve a phased site master plan concept. A West City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-10 1 P:1PlannmglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised-1108041Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Frame District Subarea Development Plan adopted within a Planned Action Ordinance could accomplish this goal as well. —Consider options for flexibility in general parking standards for Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning in the West Frame District with the economic development goals of the City The property owners in the West Frame District are not proposing intensive, mixed-use projects—and interest in developing such projects in the West Frame is limited at this time. North-south access to this district has long been problematic, especially for vehicular traffic. Four(4) options to consider: 1. Allow outright 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 gross square feet of commercial floor area; 2. Allow 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 g.s.f. of commercial floor area, provided that 25% of the overall gross floor area of the protect is multi-family residential: 3. No change-the existing 3 surface parking spaces per 1,000 g.s.f commercial in the DCE zone is counterbalanced with a minimum of one (1)Qarking space per multi-family residential unit west of the Burlington Northern tracks (KCC 15.05.070(B)). This could be seen , as an incentive to include housing units in commercial development in DCE; 4. Add two(2)year "Sunset Clause" from date of adoption for any DCE parking standards revision to evaluate the effectiveness of the revision. [Fig V-IS:Map—Proposed elements of the West Frame District are illustrated above. ]l 998)1 Mz V-16.Map— West Frame District 20 Year Nsion (1998)] E. South Core District The area immediately south and west of the Meeker Street setion of the lilstojw Historic eei=e Core consists mainly of single-family houses, apartments, senior housing, and churches, with some small businesses and an elementary school. The attractive setting includes tree-lined streets and numerous older, but still viable,buildings. Willis Street provides a pleasant greenbelt on the south,and the civic campus and Meeker Street provide the north boundary. The railroads effects both the eastern and western margins, and development along these edges is less substantial. How +he G,�� the first Nor- eas c-vrzcairiycsu Avenue a.... City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-11 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts The Na19-Downtown Strategic Action Plan encourages residential rni;tied mixed-use in this area to help achieve the Comprehensive Planiq housing-Housing Element goals, and to provide a built-in market for derv}town Downtown businesses. The area is already an attractive in-town neighborhood because of good automobile and transit access,public services, and pleasant streets. For this reason, vacant and underdeveloped properties in the entire district, except the BN&SF Railroad corridor, form a mixed-use redevelopment target area. The blocks directly west of the BN&SF Railroad tracks are appropriate for parking and commercial redevelopment. The South Core District could become one of the most attractive in-town neighborhoods Iin south King County. Looking at the disti-iet District map,the South Core District seems to cradle the histerle Historic Core District commercial area. Similarly, a strong mixed- use residential neighborhood would provide economic support for a more viable downtownDowntown. Therefore, the City should assign high priority to the actions recommended for this-the South Core d+strte-tDistrict. The impetus for the recommendations below is to facilitate redevelopment that strengthens this emerging mixed-use neighborhood. Commuter rail connections will make downtewa-Downtown a regional transportation hub, elevating its role and image in southwest King County. Experience in other communities has shown that such increased visibility can benefit a dewr}tewn Downtown economically if the image presented by the station is positive and the connections throughout the do A iitewx Downtown are clear. Therefore, stimulating the economic and physical vitality of the downtown Downtown depends on in-a series of actions to connect the Commuter Rail station StantionKent Transit Center to the businesses, offices,and residences throughout dewnte�A nDowntown, acid ng,the Fiiie die station. Public Improvements Provide Quality Kent Transit Center Infrastructure The design of the station should complement and enhance the character of the South Core and Historic Core Districts. The station design calls for a platform on each side of the tracks and at least 800 commuter-parking spaces. It also calls for a"kiss and ride"drop off area and eight bus-bays so that both local feeder buses and regional busses can meet the train when it arrives. The plarrpowntown Strategic Action Plan recommends a well-designed, distinctive station to provide dewntewn Downtown with a strong identity and indicate a commitment to high quality development. ■ Reduce Station-Kent Transit Center Impacts Carefully coordinate rail stet A-4.1transit center design to reduce the impacts of the intermodal transportation facility on existing and future mixed-use development. Public Works has designed street widening projects to serve the Sounder-Gemmutef City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-12 P:\Planning\Bdlo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Kent Transit Center on Pioneer Street between Central and I Railroad Avenues, and Smith Street between Fourth and Railroad Avenues. ■ Restore the Historic Train Station The historic Burlington Northern station (Depot) located between Gowe and Titus Streets is an expression of Kent's history and character. The City should research opportunities to coordinate with the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe Railroad BNSF to restore the station. Recent discussions between the Kent Downtown Partnership (KDP) and BNSF have included the possible sale of the Depot for a nominal fee conditional on the building being removed from its current location proximate to the railroad tracks. The Kent Downtown Partnership has considered the potential use of the Depot as a tourist information office and the Greater Kent Historical Society and Museum has expressed interest in the Depot as a history center. Citizens at the 2004 workshops were supportive of these types of reuse of the Depot should it become feasible for purchase and relocation. ■ Construct traffic and pedestrian improvements to devaitow-rpowntown streets as necessary to provide access: DesignDtifing station design, a eemprehensive analysis of potential traffie and tr-afisi _e ents may diet to new improvements forte Railroad and Central Avenues,and Smith,Meeker, Gowe and Willis Streets. Connecting pedestrians living in neighborhoods east of Central Avenue and west of Fourth Avenue with the Downtown Core Districts has been voiced as important. No less important will be the manner in which traffic currently passing through Downtown is routed in such a way to minimize delays while ensuring pedestrian safety in a pedestrian-friendly environment throughout Downtown. ■ Improve connecting pedestrian corridors: Improve or install new sidewalks, streetlights, and tree grates along connecting pedestrian corridors. Use the design elements previously selected by the community and installed on First Avenue to establish a consistent pedestrian character throughout the core. ■ Consider the impacts of the potential Willis Street railroad underpass. The Willis Street and Burlington Northern/Sante Fe underpass and the Willis Street/Union Pacific underpass are two Kent underpasses included in the Seattle project of the Freight Action Strategy(FAST). Member ageneies o seeking funding within the-•max-year-sThis project is planned for completion during the next five to ten years(2009-2014). ■ Extend Angled Parking Along Saar Street to the Union Pacific Railroad Installing angled parking with vertical curbs and gutters would define the edge of the street and provide public parking. Both these improvements would help attract higher quality development to the area. The City could use the additional parking to provide required on-site parking as an incentive to developers. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-13 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts ■ Extend Pedestrian/Bicycle Paths from the Interurban Trail to the Core Connections to the regional trail will provide an amenity for local residents and bring visitors and commuters into the dewiitewnDOwntOwn. (Fi_e V-17: Map—Proposed Elements of the South Core District. (1998)1 t Design Guidelines The Downtown Design Review Criteria should be refined to address specific issues in the South Core District, including: • Enhancement of the historic character of the core and rehabilitation of historically I significant structures. Portions of the South Core District may be eligible for hiitene f Historic d+str+et-District status-; • Maximum compatibility between adjacent uses. Locate buildings to achieve privacy I for residents, separate noisy activities and integrate parking:;• Strong building relationship to the street, with entries visible from the sidewalk:; • Useable open space on site, as required in the Downtown Design Criteria, or require a contribution to acquire new or upgrade existing open space in the neighborhood..-; • Reduction of the impact of parking on the streetscape., • Minimizing the impact of service areas-,- Unified architectural concept consistent with the character and orientation of surrounding buildings I • "Pedestrian scale" in buildings..-; • Building massing, details, and articulation to achieve an "architectural scale" consistent with surrounding buildings-; • Building forms (such as row houses or courtyard apartments), elements (such as roofs,porches, or bay windows), details (such as building trim or decoration), and materials consistent with the surrounding neighborhood-, • Hardy landscaping to enhance building forms, articulate and enhance open space, and reinforce visual continuity with adjacent sites. Figure V- and Figure V- illustrate design guideline recommendations for this district. ffi v. V-18:Drawing—Architectural details appropriate in the South Frame District 1( 998)1 Me V-19:Drawing— This illustration demonstrates how landscaping can derne open: space and add texture to a building (1998)] Other Redevelopment Incentives City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-14 P:1P1anninglBd1o\DSAPIDSAP Revised-1108041Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts The City should undertake the following actions as the opportunity arises to enhance development opportunities in the South Core District. • Consider designating a historic district and/or historic sites. (See recommendations ' under Historic Core District.) • Consider a housing demonstration project in this area. I • To increase potential for dewr3to A,nDowntown housing, explore means to reuse older homes more effectively. Several of these old homes are important resources. In the past, this type of housing has been successfully moved,clustered on more appropriate sites, remodeled to provide more than one unit, or adapted to another appropriate use. • Construct parking on the properties immediately west of the BN&SF Railroad between Willis and Titus Streets. Parking in this location would reduce conflict between railroad operations and existing residences,provide dewrrtownDowntown parking and potentially allow redevelopment of the public parking lot at the southwest corner of First Avenue and Titus Street for housing. Reconfiguring First Avenue would add more parking and upgrade the development setting. [Fif V-20.Man—South Core District 20 Year Vision (1998)J F. North Core District With the Regional Justice Center,the Kent Public Market, a and-the-proposed eivie ivic and performing arts center, and a town square parkCivie and pert ...,,: ne f ,,,;i�af4s "As eenter-Ce .te , the North Core District includes some of the most important new urban development in south King County. These facilities and the future redevelopment Ipotential of the property located between Snri&Harrison and James Streets east of S-South Fourth Avenue make the North Core District unique within the region. Because of these dynamic opportunities, the phH+-Downtown Strategic Action Plan designates the entire a.�North Core District as a redevelopment area. Some vacant and underdeveloped properties will not redevelop immediately. The North Core District links the Historic Core District and the eomn.mef-Kent Transit CenterGernm_•t^~-ail Rao sta:fien Siatiee with the Regional Justice Center,Kent Commons,and the neighborhoodFe&idenees north of James Street (North Park). It is especially important that new public and private investment be coordinated to provide improved connections between these activity areas. The recommendations below call for the City to take assertive action to realize the opportunities within the North Core District. [Fi>'. V 21:Map—Proposed elements of the North Core District are illustrated above. i I( 998)1 Public Improvements City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-15 P:1PlanninglBdloIDSAPIDSAP Revised-1108041Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts — Construct Traffic and Pedestrian Improvements to Downtown Streets as Necessary to Provide Safe, Convenient Connections: Connecting the North Core distrjc4-District witl-and the eei; rKent Transit Centerr^",MUteF ..,., Rail station etat: „ soul li lust north of Howe S mith Street will place new demands on Smith Street. Construct Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Improvements on Smith Street between First Avenue and Central Avenue. New street improvements may include a traffic signal at Railroad Avenue and Smith Street, straightening, a new center through lane on Smith Street, new crosswalks,pedestrian improvements, and directional signs. Citizens have voiced interest in a pedestrian bridge across Smith Street between First and Second Avenues-connecting the Library with the Sounder-Kent Transit Center garage. The likelihood of such a pedestrian bridge being 1 constructed depends on a number of variables including available right-of-way, funding, traffic flow and safety issues. Improve or install new sidewalks,streetlights, and tree grates along connecting pedestrian corridors to other Downtown districts. Use the design elements previously selected by the community and installed on First Avenue and Meeker Street to establish a consistent I pedestrian character throughout the North eereCore District. — Enhance Parks Along the Railroad to Provide Linkages Between the North Core/Station Area and the Historic Core Upgrade Burlington Green,Yanghzou and Kaibara parks as connecting open space and as a kind of gateway. A canopy along the east side of the parks would provide pedestrian protection, serve as outdoor stalls for the Public mar-ketMarket, and visually tie the Sister Cities Parks together. Not only will the parks be an important pedestrian link and open space resource, they will be highly visible to thousands of commuters taking the train from Tacoma to Seattle and be an important part of Kent's image. I — Locate a Town Square Park near the Smith ctreetiAleeke - -Street spine e#between the North Core and Historic Core Districts A Town Square Park would provide a downtown open space for large public gatherings and performances. It might consist of a small plaza constructed as part of or near the-a civic and performing arts center or hotel and conference center that could expand to accommodate concerts or celebrations by closing Seee,a Avenue and the east adjacent streets. Coordinate closely with the Pe 1 Center Committee and then the Kent Downtown Partnership,the Chamber of Commerce, and other interested parties to ensure that the park and eivi. and rerf fming enhances the mix of pedestrian-oriented land uses ei3e anetherand connects adiacent Downtown districts. — Support the Kent Public Market as a connecting activity between the Historic core Core and the area north of Smith Street: City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-16 P:1PlanninglBillo0SAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts [Fib. V 22:Drawing- The above illustration shows existing conditions alone Railroad Avenue. (1998)1 LFi£. V-23:Drawing-A canopy along Railroad Avenue will provide pedestrian protection and rnarket space(1998)Construet Pedestrian "All Cress" or Scramble cystem-at the Carner of Fourth Avenue and Smith Stree it is linked to the eer-e Core arvea shops, restaurants, est ..'and r yv.„7Ann "all iniefsectien in the signal s.--..-, all automobiles wait, would faoilitate pedestfian linkage. it is r-eeenm3iended that the Publie WoAs Depai4ment explore the feasibility e stieh a desigfi and the inter-section be upgfadedwith gateway landscaping and signs. if an 11 all cress" eF seramble system is not feasible, then,at a minimum, signals ean be [Fig V-24:Drawing- "Alt cross"or "scramble)'intersection at Fourth and Smith Streets to allow 4-way crossing at a signal sequence. Decorative pavement, canopy or trellis, and enhanced private landscaping are possibilities. (1998)] Design Guidelines Refinement of the existing design guidelines is recommended to: i Ensure quality development in the North Core District, especially along Fourth Avenue and Smith Street. Classify Smith Street between Central and Fourth Avenues and Fourth Avenue between Titus and James Streets as Class A,pedestrian-oriented streets. Ensure that development along these streets addresses the Kent StationEer-den site issues described below. Redevelopment Opportunities The plan-Doymtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) supports and integrates other development activities, including those described below. —Establish Design Parameters and Review Process for Redevelopment of the Borden Kent Station Site City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-17 P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised-1108041Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Because of its large size,central location,and transportation access,the 13-Kent Station site is one of the premier dowiitewn Downtown redevelopment opportunities in south King County. Although the Bol-deii Company ,,as inajeated „ u'arnediate la *,iove the City should take steps to ensure that when redevelopment occurs, it is carefully coordinated-_Therefore, it is recommended that the City establish a master plan process for this site, such as a Planned Action, with standards to guide any future redevelopment proposal. The standards should include: • Guidelines for streets and sidewalks-; • Provision for extension of Second Avenue into the site:(realized as Ramsay Way),- 0 A defined, appropriate mix of uses and use intensities:; • Convenient access to transit facilities..-; t • Orientation to adjacent sites:, • Provision of open space and pedestrian amenities:; • Design guidelines for architectural and site design character.; • Mitigation measures for piobable, significant, adverse environmental impacts. — Support residential development in the North Core Districts The North Core District is assuming a more central location and role in downtown Downtown activities. Vehicle and pedestrian circulation between activities in the North Core District and-the, including the Kent Transit CenterGemm•,ter Rail station and the adjacent Downtown districts will become increasingly important. For these reasons,the North Core District recommendations merit high priority. [Fig. V-25:Drawing-Shown above is the proposed Civic and Performing Arts Center design by the Bumgardner Partnership (1998)1 — Support a Civic and Performing Arts Center or hotel and conference center in Downtowns IA Civic and Performing Arts Center or hotel with facilities for conferences and other events, would be an important attraction to the downtownDowntown, extending hours of activity into the night. It would provide a much-needed location for events, performances, meetings, and educational programs. The center would also be a lively I' element if pedestrian-oriented uses, such as small shops, newsstands, flower stalls, coffee bars, pedestrian spaces, and/or public artwork, are included along Fourth Avenue and Smith Street. The entry to the site could include a plaza that for outdoor performances and celebrations. (Fig. V-26:Drawing-Architect's drawing of the proposed Kent Public Market building-courtesy of the Kent Downtown Partnership. (1998)1 — Support the Kent Public Market IThe Kent Public Market on Railroad Avenue between ,,seek°.and Smith etFeets will adds an-important weekend activity in Downtown. It " afieheF businessesRail ' City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-18 P:\Planning\Bello\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP-V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Avenue, enhance the Sister-ra;os Dark m i and serves as a connecting element I i Y V33U�, V1133LL3 , between the eemmuteF North Core/failtation and the Noi N3 Historic Core Districts. To stippoi4 the Publie market L�the plan DSAP feeemmends additional parking en qtrljlq in _11- J.-the summer and pedestrian weather-pr-eteetion in the wifiter. —Encourage mixed-use development projects in proximity to the Sou*der Commuter Rail & Bus Kent Transit Center Encourage Private sector interest in redeveloping or developing vacant or underutilized sites to mixed-use, through incentives such as expedited permit review at no additional cost, provided that project designs meet applicable development standards and Downtown Design Review criteria. The Municpal Parking Lot, located between Smith & Harrison Streets, and Fourth and Second Avenues, could provide an excellent opportunity for mixed-use development featuring structured parking. Mg. V-27.Man—North Care District 20 Year Vision (1998)1 G. Historic Core District IThe Historic Core District is the traditional and geographic heart of dewnta%n Downtown Kent. The Historic eer-Core contains three discrete retail areas: one along Meeker Street, the community's "main street"; a second, emphasizing restaurants and specialty shops,just to the south and east along First Avenue (also known as the Old Titusville District); and a third, stretching along Railroad Avenue opposite Burlington Green and Yanghzou Parks. All three feature pleasant pedestrian conditions and tum-of- the-century buildings. The district Histonc Core District also includes the Kent City Hall/civic campus just south of Gowe Street. The Historic Core District is bordered by the public parking lot and library on the north, , Ithe Central Avenue ceig-idor Corridor District on the east, and the South Core District mixed-use residential neighborhood o teFia4-st&ge f-on the south and west. Considerable activity is generated within the Historic Core District by the Regional Z Justice Center located within 1,000 feet. All of these activities will support the Historic Core District economically if they are included in a comprehensive redevelopment strategy. IThe Downtown Strategic Action Plan D( SAP) addresses the areas immediately surrounding the Historic Core District as well as the dtstriet District itself because of the dynamic redevelopment potential of those areas. The surrounding districts will support the Historic Core District by accommodating residences, transportation facilities,jobs, and improved streetscapes and parks, directly adjacent to the Historic Core District. This strategy builds on the district's District's current strengths, including pedestrian-oriented streets, civic attractions, and a variety of activities. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-19 P:kPlanningkBillokDSAP1DSAP Revised_110804kRevised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Several actions are recommended for the existing Historic Core District that are intended to: • Enhance the historic architectural character and pedestrian amenities-; • Develop vacant or underutilized sites-, • Visually and physically connect the Historic Core District to the surrounding districts. fFiz V 28:Map—Proposed elements of the Historic Core District. (1998)] Public Improvements —Make Pedestrian Improvements While the downtewn Downtown benefited from recent improvements, including those to Rose Garden Park, First Avenue (Titusville business district),Meeker Street, and Kherson Park, further improvements are recommended to make connections with neighboring districts. Safe and attractive streets between the e0;;,ii;i;tei-Kent Transit CenterCommuter rail n_.i stat•onStat•on, the King County Regional Justice Center and other offices,businesses and residences throughout dewflte�A n-Downtown will encourage pedestrian use. Pedestrian lighting and street furniture should be installed in the Historic Core District along Fourth Avenue when pedestrian systems are upgraded in the North Core and South Core Districts. As development occurs, 12-foot-wide sidewalks should be required on the east side of South Fourth Avenue. Meeker Street and Gowe Street pedestrian improvements should also be extended eastward from First Avenue to Kennebeck Avenue. —Enhance Gateways The intersection of Fourth Avenue and Meeker Street is identified as a gateway and should be enhanced with special street lighting, signage, distinctive intersection paving, artwork, and/or landscaping. The most effective way to upgrade the image of this intersection is additional good quality infill development with corner entries, architectural features, or plazas. —Inform Historic Core property and business owners of the locations and functional lifespan of utility facilities, and involve these stakeholders in the plannins and coordination of street improvements Several buildings in the Historic Core may require utilities upgrading in order to attract stable businesses. Some buildings of historic age maybe required to upgrade connections to the public utility system as it is upgraded— and without sufficient communication and coordination those on-site upgrades may be a factor that compromises pursuit of historic register status for such buildings. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-20 P:1Planning\BillolDSAP1DSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts — Plan for eventual undergrounding of all utilities in the Historic Core to improve the attractiveness of the visual environment and increase available sidewalk space for walking and other appropriate activities Design Guidelines and Historic Preservation Activities Meeker Street and First Avenue retains much of the character of an early twentieth- century small town. Preserving this traditional quality is an important aspect of the community's desire for a"home town" identity. Therefore, revised design guidelines for the Historic Core District should emphasize traditional building forms, materials, and details. All of the streets in the Historic Core District are Class A pedestrian-oriented streets according to City destgH-Downtown Design gt+ide4fwsCur del ines. New buildings in the Historic eer-Core should adhere to the Downtown Desigyn g•• Guidelines so that the buildings provide continuous building frontage along the street. In general, exterior remodeling to existing buildings should be directed toward restoring the original character. However, there are some cases where the building is significantly altered or is not historically significant. The City should update the existing inventory of historic Icommercial buildings and encourage context-sensitive restoration and renovation +-edE yelopw in the Historic Core where appropriate. A facade restoration project was initiated by the Kent Downtown Partnership in 1997. The program should be continued, and should include educational materials that demonstrate restoration techniques that conform with the Landmarks and Historic District Preservation Program. The program could also include low-interest loans and tax abatements to encourage fagade restoration. IFhy, V-30:Drawings—Facade Improvement and Infill Development Concepts (1998)1 [Fig. V-31:Man— Conceptual Design for the Commuter Rail Station (1998)l Redevelopment Target Areas Because there are several different opportunities in the Historic Core District for the City to encourage private redevelopment, the whole district is identified as a redevelopment target area. One opportunity that merits further exploration is the district's designation as an histefie Historic 'a•,dtiia;-Landmark d}strte District. A very different set of opportunities lies east of the BN&SF Railroad corridor. Several properties are underutilized and could be rehabilitated to provide space for start-up businesses if the surrounding streetscape, access,and parking conditions can be upgraded. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-21 P:1PlanninglBdlo\DSAPIDSAP Revised-1108041Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Recent efforts by the City and the Kent Downtown Partnership have kept the Historic Core District viable. New initiatives should build on this work by focusing on redevelopment opportunities as they arise. Continued infill and connections to the Historic Core District will benefit the dawtewnDowntown as a whole. ffig: V-32:Map—Historic Core District 20 Year Vision (1998)1 i i City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-22 P:1PlanninglBillo0SAPIDSAP Revised_1108MRevised DSAP_V.doc Additional Environmental Information VI. Additional Environmental Information A. Fact Sheet Description of Proposal The City of Kent is supplementing its existing dewntewx-Downtown plan with a Downtown Strategic Action Plan that focuses on future actions and implementation measures. The plan will identify the main features of the City's dewxtev,,n Downtown form for the next several decades, including what type of development should occur where and how it should be served. In 1998, the Vie-environmental analysis focuses focused on the screening of plan alternatives as prepared with contributions by advisory committees,Downtown Stakeholders Task Force, City staff, doWntoWn Downtown property owners and merchants, and the public at-large. Location of Proposal The Downtown Strategic Action Plan and Integrated Preliminary Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) addresses the downtown Downtown area as indicated in Figure III-1, Study Area. The approximate limits of dewntewi+-Downtown Kent are SR 167 on the west, Cloudy and James Streets on the north, Woodford Avenue and Titus Street on the east, and Willis Street/SR 516 on the south. Proponent and Lead Agency City of Kent Planning Depar4 Services Office 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue South) Kent, WA 98032-5895 206/9�5 4-33 WU531856-5454 Proposed Implementation Date The Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan(DSAP) :s ..,.,chided to was adopted on April 7, 1998. The first update of the DSAP is anticipated to be adopted on ...., 2005. Responsible Official ■ IJames fi isKim Marousek Planning Principal Planner City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VIA P:\Plammng\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information City of Kent 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.) Kent, WA 98032-5895 206/9�0� 9L� (253L856-5454 Contact Person Imo^ DWilliam D. Osborne, Planner City of Kent 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.) Kent, WA 98032-5895 206/8� 59-3M(253) 856-5454 Principal Contributors City of Kent Kent Downtown Partnership MAKERS architecture and urban design ■ BRW, Inc. Property Counselors The Langlow Associates Kent Citizens and Property Owners Draft SETS Issue Date February 4, 1997 Preliminary FSEIS Issue Date May 19, 1997 Final FSEIS Issue Date April 8, 1998 Public Meetings A public workshop on the proposed plan alternatives and Draft SEIS was held February 5, 1997 at the Kent Commons. Comments on the Draft SEIS were accepted until March 6, 1997. The Kent Planning Department hosted an Open House on May 19 to display current modifications to the plan based on public input and comment. The Kent Land City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-2 P:\Planning\Bello\DSAP\DSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information Use and Planning Board met April 14 and May 19 to review the plan and preliminary final SEIS. A public hearing was held May 27 and was continued to June 2. The Kent City Council Planning Committee included public comment on August 6, 1997. Nature and Date of Final Action The adoption of the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan is .,e'��d-anticipated€eF a April 7, 1.9fvearly in 2005. Type and Timing of Subsequent Environmental Review The programmatic Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement(SEIS), preliminary Final SEIS and subsequent Final SEIS constitute the required environmental review for the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The Final SEIS will serve to supplement the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Final SEIS which was issued January 30, 1995. Any subsequent environmental review will occur on a project-by- project basis. The draft and final SEIS seek to adequately address the anticipated impacts of certain types of subsequent implementation actions consistent with the Downtown IStrategic Action Plan. In the future,the City may decide to adopt a planned-Planned ae-tien Action ordinance which meets the requirements of RCW 43.21C.240.2. If such an ordinance is adopted, the City, while reviewing a subsequent project action that is consistent with the recommendations of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan,may determine that the requirements for environmental analysis,protection,and mitigation measures in the City's development regulations and the K-ef+t-Comprehensive Plan provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of the subsequent project. As a result,project-level development proposals may have a reduced amount of environmental review, if any. Location of SEIS Background Data City of Kent Planning Depan Services Office 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.) Kent, WA 99032-5895 206,/859-33W�253) 856-5454 Cost of a Copy of the Preliminary Final SEIS This document is available for a fifteen dollar fee to interested citizens and groups. Copies may be obtained in person at the above address, or by mail. One copy will be provided to each individual or group upon request. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-3 P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Vl.doc �j Additional Environmental Information B. Executive Summary Alternatives and Selection Process During November and December of 1996, the consulting team formulated three alternatives. The alternatives were based on the issues identified in public meetings, the environmental and technical analysis, and the redevelopment options outlined in the market report. All three alternatives were consistent with, and refinements of,the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Community members evaluated and commented on the alternatives at public meetings in January. The City published a Draft Supplementary EIS (DSEIS)in February of 1997 evaluating the environmental impacts of the alternatives. Additional public meetings were conducted in February and March to review the DSEIS and to discuss the components of a preferred alternative with citizens. The three alternatives were: —Alternative 1 Alternative I described growth and development downtown Downtown with limited guidance. It emphasized current trends, such as capturing business from motorists, enhancing the historic core, and encouraging commercial development on Central Avenue. It recommended maintaining existing zoning, improving streetscapes, and improving access to all sections of dewutew Downtown. This alternative proposed a commuter rail station at Smith Street with a Smith Street railroad underpass. —Alternative 2 Alternative 2 focused on attracting regional trade based on further development of the compact historic commercial/civic core of dewntewnDowntown. It emphasized encouraging investors to assemble land, identifying redevelopable sites, and increasing park and street improvements. This alternative described a master plan process to develop the existing industrial property between Smith and James Streets east of S. Fourth Avenue. It also described commercial redevelopment of the north side of James Street. It proposed locating the proposed commuter rail station between Gowe and Meeker Streets and closing Gowe Street to vehicle traffic at the railroad grade. This alternative included railroad underpasses at James and Willis Streets. —Alternative 3 Alternative 3 focused on attracting regional trade based on a business/hotel/performing arts complex located in the north area of dewniwA iDowntown. It proposed relocation of the industrial use located on the Borden site. The relocation would be followed by a dramatic redevelopment of the property as an active link between the historic commercial core and the King County Regional Justice Center. This alternative suggested expansion of Second Avenue as a visual and pedestrian link to the historic commercial core. It placed the rail station between Smith and James Streets. James and Willis Streets railroad underpasses were also part of this alternative. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-4 P:1PlanninglBilloIDSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information The Downtown Strategic Action Plan Draft Supplemental Environmental impact Statement contains complete descriptions, maps, and analysis of all three alternatives. The Preferred Alternative and the Recommendation Process The preferred alternative is presented as the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan in Part I of this document The actions recommended in the Downtown Strategic Action Plan are generally based on the concepts expressed in Alternative 2. During the Land Use and Planning Board and City Council review of the preliminary FSEIS, which contained a recommendation for the alternative 3 (north), rather than the alternative 2(south) rail station location, more citizens testified in favor of the alternative 2 commuter rail station location (south site) than in favor of the alternative 3 location (north site). Business owners from both the north and south sites did not approve of relocation proposals. Retail business owners located east of the railroad right-of-way believed that rail station activity would generate additional business,others viewed businesses east of Railroad Avenue and south of Gowe Street as urban blight,to be replaced by a parking garage. Relative costs and vehicle and pedestrian circulation were debated. The City Council voted to recommend alternative 2 (the south site) and passed a resolution to approve the plan with the alternative 2 (south) station site in a location south of Gowe Street. The recommendations made by The Land Use and Planning Board, the City Council Planning Committee, the City Council Committee of the Whole, and the final City Council approval action items have been incorporated in the plan. The recommendations and actions include: Land Use and Planning Board Recommendations 1( 998) 1. Additional study of the north and south depot locations. 2. Do not revise the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation of the north edge of the North Park neighborhood east of James Street from single family residential to limited office/mixed use multifamily residential overlay. 3. Eliminate the Commons Park parking as shown on the Plan maps and recommend angled parking with a wider and improved Fifth Avenue. Locate the angled parking on the west side of Fifth Avenue next to the Park. 4. Study the parking for the park on Meeker near Union Pacific railroad. 5. Develop realistic costs in relation to the Plan. 6. Consider an additional Gateway location at Central and SR-167. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-5 ' P:\Planning\Bdlo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information f 7. Add a safe place for a drop-off/pick-up location at Commons PaMlayfields. This should be located on Fifth Avenue within the angled parking. 9. Study traffic patterns in the North Park area to consider safety and access. These recommendations were carried out and/or incorporated in the plan, and referred to the City Council for final action. The Commons Park recommendations were incorporated in an action to provide a master plan for the park. City Council final Action 1( 998): 1. Change the plan sections that refer to the Performing Arts/Civic Center located in a specific location to a general location downtew Downtown. 2. Include additional support for bicycle lanes and paths. 3. Include additional support for historic preservation and commemoration. 4. Inge-Ensure pedestrian and bicycle safety on the recommended trail linking Mill Creek Park with Kent Memorial Park. 5. Extend the Office/mixed use multifamily residential overlay that is recommended between Fourth and Fifth Avenues north of James Street and south of Cloudy Street north beyond Cloudy Street to the edge of the existing multi-family zone. 6. Refer only to a south commuter rail station location in the final plan document. tThe above recommendations are-were incorporated with the plan as adopted in 1998. Incorporation of the Update Process & Recommendations As the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) is updated, as in 2004, additional recommendations may be considered, and some recommendations previously adopted may be deemed completed or may be removed. Text may be revised to reflect changing conditions, and amendments to the goals, policies and recommended actions of the DSAP, and any consequent map designation changes may be proposed as part of the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process (KCC Chapter 12 02). Additional Environmental Analysis City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-6 P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108t141Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information The environmental impacts of adopting and implementing the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan were identified and analyzed in the DSEIS and the Preliminary FSEIS. Since May 19, 1997, when the Preliminary FSEIS was issued, the City has received additional traffic and commuter rail station environmental information that is summarized below. IIn December, 1997, the Regional Transit Authority(Sound Transit) issued a Kent downtown-Downtown related document, the Tacoma to Seattle Commuter Rail Draft ' Environmental Analysis and the Technical Report in Support of Environmental Assessment. The environmental assessment includes proposed mitigation for traffic impacts during peak park-and-ride trips, including turn lanes in several locations, and signalization on Railroad Avenue. It includes assessments of potential impacts to socioeconomic factors, transportation, noise and vibration,hazardous materials, biological resources/ecology, historical,park, and recreation resources,archaeological and cultural resources, visual quality, safety and security, air quality, water quality, hydrology, and earth. Both documents, incorporated with this EIS by reference, are available for public review in the City of Kent Planning Department. A later assessment of 2010 PM Peak Transit Station Traffic Impacts, dated January 20, 1998, by HT Associates, a transportation consulting firm, is also incorporated by reference. It is available for public review in the City of Kent Planning Department. The findings stated: "The impacts of traffic at either location are rather subtle...There would be a slight,but perceptible, degradation of intersection LOS in the CBD by station traffic at either location. However, the even more subtle differences in impact between the two locations probably cannot be regarded as significant, in light of the travel models inherent limits of precision. This is not to say that there would be no difference—rather,that it is below the model's significance threshold. In September 2000 the Commuter Rail Station Area Study(CRSAS) was published with 1 the intention of supplementing the Comprehensive Plan and DSAP, providing a framework for economic policies, redevelopment opportunities, land uses and streetsm improvements in the vicinity of the Regional Transit Authority (RTA)-selected Seunder- Gemmutef Rail & Bus StatiEKent Transit Center (formerly known as Sounder Commuter Rail & Bus Station) site, located along the Burlington Northern Sante Fe Railroad tracks between Smith and James Streets. A traffic study was completed as part of the CRSAS. The CRSAS is incorporated by reference into this EIS. In July 2002 the City Council adopted the Kent Station Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Kent Station SEIS), which established a range of environmental impact thresholds for the redevelopment of the site formerly occupied by the Borden Chemical Company, and the City municipal parking lots located between Smith and Harrison Streets. A number of impact studies were completed during the SEIS process. The Kent Station SEIS is incorporated by reference into this EIS. ' City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-7 P.\PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Vl.doc ' Additional Environmental Information In October 2003 the City Council adopted the Economic Development Strategic Plan, ' which includes implementation actions for Downtown Kent. This document is incorporated by reference into this EIS. ' Environmental Impacts and Mitigation The DSEIS contains environmental analysis of the environmental impacts three proposed alternatives and recommended impact mitigation measures. The actions proposed in the preferred alternative, together with an analysis of preliminary project related environmental impacts and recommended mitigation measures were discussed in the Preliminary FSEIS. The project related analysis and recommended mitigation measures were discussed in the Preliminary FSEIS should be considered advisory —used as a guide as projects are initiated. If the City adopts a Planned Action ordinance in the future, some of the recommended actions are potentially eligible for a reduced amount of environmental review, if any. Those actions, impacts and mitigation measures are listed below. Proposed planned actions are discussed below: Land Use , fw—Amending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District Map designations for the SF-8 area between Fourth First Avenue N. and Fifth Avenue N. along James Street north to Cloudy Street, and five (5) parcels north of Cloudy Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues N.: and to extend the Downtown Design Review Area to include all of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Districts Discussion: ' Revise the Comprehensive Plan map and adopt a new zoning designation for the area between Fourth First Avenue N. and Fifth Avenue N., north of James Street to Cloudy Street. I e—For the area extending three hundred feet (300') north from James Street between First and Fifth Avenues, revise the existing Comprehensive Plan Map designation, NSF-8 (Single Family residential, 8 dwelling units maximum per acre)to Commer-eialUrban Center WC). The zoning eede-district designation shall allow ' FF:,.e development,ent and . elude fesident:..l development eefBbif,ed with eFF.,. Vlll6:{.: Vl'i V1Vil1� , . n .level pment as a eenditionatusebe changed to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE), consistent with the adiacent zoning along the south side of James. institute ne site development pidelinesApply Downtown Design Guidelines to ensure high-quality, substantial development. eemmer-eial iise. The new zenifig designation should be eensistent with the existing aggr-egation of lots and to pr-event lot by let eenvef:sien of single fafflily hemes to effie D.-efen al O f ee designation (Zoning Gede ceetion 1 c nn 1 50) with the F lle.. inog a ava�uo:vilua vl , exeeptions- City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-8 ' P.\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information I —ions te the existing development standar-ds are as-fel-lews-i Eurfe kewsePermitted Uses Bhwrr-iff� phe4eeepy would be robibiitMuRifafnfly uses wetild be e� ' Ffent Yard 1 @feet to be the I same as 25'2CCC residential diStFiet For the area between First and Fifth Avenues, and between Cloudy Street and the proposed DCE zone north of James Street, change the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from SF-8 to Low Density Multi-family Residential (LDMF) to provide a ' buffer between the residential neighborhood north of Cloudy and the mixed-use development along James Street. Between Fourth and Fifth Avenues, extend low-density multi-family residential designations north of Cloudy Street to include the five(5) SF- ' 8/SR-8 designated parcels immediately south of the existing adjacent LDMF/MR-G district along the west side of Fourth Avenue. Change the zoning district designation to either Multi-Family Residential, Townhouse 16 units per acre (MR-T16), or Multi- , Family Residential Garden Density(MR-G), which also allows 16 units per acre—the only difference is whether units are owner-occupied or rented. Notably, condominium insurance problems still exist statewide, and the City of Kent Downtown Multi-Family Residential Development Tax Exemption applies at this time only to owner-occupied units. Developers therefore have at least two reasons not to develop condominium units in Kent. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • The proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning District Mapt & ' revisions if adopted will result in the eventuala conversionless of single family housing units within the area of change—to a mix of multi-family residential and ' commercial uses. • The proposed bulk and scale of offlee esidenti lmixed-use development as well as the placement of buildings on the site may create impacts to homes in the existing MR-G,Garderr-low density multifamily residential district although MR-G or MR- T 16 zoning is proposed for extension south of Cloudy from the original 1998 , proposal. The AiTRG distr-ietjs leeated neFth of the proposed effinn/ esidential_afea. �i IQG11L1Q1-Cil� • Replacement of single family homes with eff;vxncc/fcsidci>tialla mix of uses will ' eliminate the private open space created by the typical single family yard. However, because of the potential increase in population in the area, the need for open space ' may increase. Multi-family residential development would restore some of the open space in more concentrated areas. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-9 , P.1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information • During the weekday peak hours, office uses will create additional traffic and turning movements onto Fourth Avenue N. • The increased intensity of mixed-use development allowed for an estimated 8.4 acres under Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zonmgde nsity ofof ee used used residential density will result in approximately_four hundred-ten (410)efeate additional peak hour trips above the number of trips anticipated for Single-Family Residential,Eight Units per Acre (SR-8) Zonmg'o and ffe; the Kent`�. • The increased intensity of development allowed under low density multi-family residential zoning for an estimated 10.6 acres (either MR-G or MR-T16—each with a maximum of sixteen (16)units per acre) will result in approximately eighty-one(81) additional PM peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. ' • ncr.,., -.wide„tia-1 Mixed-use development will increase the area surfaced with impervious surfaces. ' • An increased number of occupants will work and live in the proposed rezone area. Due to the proximity of jobs, services, shopping, and recreation,pedestrian activity will increase. • The soil in the proposed rezone area may not support multi-story buildings on ' conventional foundations. Mitigation Measures: • Ensure that the new zoning designation permits adequate housing to replace the existing housing units as development occurs. DCE zoning encourages inclusion of ' residential units. and MR-T16 or MR-G both provide for appropriate development of housing close to the Downtown Core. • t�dep�Incorporate the North Frame District into the Downtown design guidelifesDesign Review Area, and recognize the specific to-context north of the proposed rezone area, to ensure high quality, substantial office esidentialmixed-use and multi-family residential development compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. ' • To make better use of existing open space,improve Commons ParkPla fields, located directly west of the recommended rezone area,by instituting a master plan based on neighborhood involvement and participation. • Prior to issuance of development permits, the owner and/or developer shall construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. ' • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study(see page 20). City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-10 P 1PlanninglBilloIDSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information • The developer shall construct stonnwater facilities consistent with City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as modified , and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V of this plan. ' • If required by the building official,prior to or in conjunction with a building permit ' application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. , Responsibilities: • The City of Kent Planning Services Office is responsible for revising-amending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District designation mUsag, pursuant to the legislative review process before the Land Use and Planning Board, which then forwards a recommendation through the Mayor to the City Council for final action. , The City also is responsible for developing new design guidelines and the Parks Master Plan. • The property owners and/or the developer proponents are responsible for on and off- ' site analysis, corridor mitigation, public facilities and other improvements. Rezone the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) area located between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central ' Avenue, to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay (GC-MU) Discussion: ' Revise the Zoning Districts map designation for the area between Smith and Gowe ' Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central Avenue, to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay (GC-MU). Continue to apply Downtown Design Guidelines to ensure high-quality, substantial development that respects and improves pedestrian connectivity to Core Downtown districts. Environmental Impact Evaluation: , • In the short-term, Central Avenue may continue to provide a visual, noise, and physical health(concentrated pollution) barrier for pedestrians seeking access to and from the Core Downtown districts. , • Ingress and egress from small parcels with auto-oriented commercial uses onto Central Avenue will continue to be problematic, for pedestrians and other vehicles. ' Mitigation Measures: City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-11 ' P.1PlanrnnglBdlo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information ' • Ensure that permit applications for GC and GC-MU zoned properties within Downtown are subject to Downtown Design Review. • Ensure that pedestrian amenities are included as part of Central Avenue street improvements. Responsibility: • The Planning Services Office is responsible for area-wide rezone proposals that are presented to the Land Use and Planning Board as part of the legislative review process. The Land Use and Planning Board then forwards a recommendation through ' the Mayor to the City Council for final action.. Develop Master planning requirements to apply to any redevelopment proposal for the Borden Kent Station Site Discussion: Because of its central location and large area,the former Borden industrial property Kent Station resents a great future opportunity for mixed-use (office, retail and residential) development. However-, the o have no immediate plans t ei, ateor- oalop the site. ra in the futt e the , o of the BOFden Site PFOPese a redesignation to alle.,. plan.The City of Kent purchased the property in 2001, adopted a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement(Kent Station SEIS) detailing a range of development uses and intensities and anticipated probable, adverse, significant impacts. The City is currently reviewing site development pennit applications under a Master Planned Development Agreement. The plan-MPDAnusthe is consistent with the recommendations of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. Environmental Impacts: • No adverse environmental impacts are expected to result from this action. The master plan requirements should result in an improved development proposal consistent with the City's adopted plans. Mitigation Measures: ' • None are required. Responsibility: • The Kent Planning Depaf4 neat Services Office would be responsible for developing the master plan requirements and submitting it to City Council for action. ' Promote infill housing — encourage the development of at least two I hundred (200) units of new market rate housing in Downtown by 2008 ' City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-12 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-1 10804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information S Discussion: In order to meet the Comprehensive Plan's intent to enhance the dewflte'�vrpowntown as ' a place to live,the City should promote the construction of new urban-style infill housing. Housing types should include condominium townhouses, stacked and attached units that resemble single-family design and character, and residential mixed with commercial and office uses. Consider using incentives such as reducing or waiving development permit fees for residential construction in Downtown, and extending the existing Downtown multi-family residential tax exemption program to include market rate rental housing. Developers of condominiums are challenged by two factors in Downtown—condominium owners are still having difficulty acquiring home insurance , and the developers do not receive the tax exemption for developing condos in Downtown. Consider also allowing development of buildings with five(5) stories of wood frame construction above a concrete base. , Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Development of additional residential units will increase the need for open space. , • The bulk and scale of residential development as well as the placement of buildings on the site,may create impacts to-for adjacent homes and/or businesses. • During the weekday peak hours, residential uses will create additional traffic and turning movements onto adjacent streets. • The increased residential density will create additional peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. ' • Residential development will increase the area surfaced with impervious surfaces. • An increased number of occupants will live in the downtow Downtown. Due to the ' proximity of jobs, services, shopping,and recreation,pedestrian activity will increase. , • The soil in the specific site may not support multi-story buildings on conventional foundations. , • Recent development of high-density multifamily residential uses appears to have created a demand for parking beyond what is required by code. , Mitigation Measures: • As residential units increase downtown, assess the amount of available park and ' recreation facilities in relation to the number of households. • Adopt design guidelines, specific to the individual districts, to ensure high-quality, ' substantial residential development. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-13 , P:1PlanninglBillo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study (see page VI-20?) • Construct storm water facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction ' Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. ' • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V of this plan. • If required by the building official,prior to or in conjunction with a budding permit application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification,bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. ' • The City should conduct a study of the relationship of on-site and off-site parking and residential density to determine whether existing parking requirements are adequate ' to provide sufficient on-site parking. Responsibilities: ' • The City is responsible for design guidelines, park master planning and zoning code analysis. • The property owner and/or developer is responsible for required on- and off-site analysis,public facilities, and other improvements. Aetien AS: Promote the construction of high quality new commercial, office, or mixed use development and redevelopment. Also encourane the development of a hotel/conference center to serve ' as an attractor for commercial activity Discussion: ' To respond to the potential for additional Downtown office and commercial ' development identified in the market analysis the City should encourage the construction of commercial, office, and mixed-use developments within the dewntownDowntown, provide a variety of living situations within districts that require ground floor retail uses, as well as hotel and conference space for business-industry meetings. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Development of mixed-use development that includes residential units will increase the need for open space. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-14 ' P:\Planning\Bello\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP VI.doc Additional Environmental Information ' • The proposed bulk and scale of commercial,office or mixed-use, development as well as the placement of buildings on the site, may create impacts to adjacent homes and/or businesses. , • During the weekday peak hours, commercial, office or mixed-use uses will create additional traffic and turning movements onto adjacent streets. • The increased commercial, office or mixed-use density will create additional peak ' hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. • Commercial, office or mixed-use development will increase the area surfaced with , impervious surfaces. • An increased number of occupants will work and live in the dewntownDowntown. , Due to the proximity of jobs, services, shopping, and recreation,pedestrian activity will increase. The soil in the specific site may not support multi-story buildings on conventional foundations. Mitigation Measures: ' I • As the number of residential units within mixed-use development increases in dewntem, Downtown, assess the amount of available park and recreation facilities in ' relation to the number of households. • Adopt design guidelines, specific to the proposed area,to ensure high-quality, , substantial office, commercial, and mixed-use residential development. The guidelines should require development that is compatible with adjacent uses and that maintains the pedestrian quality of the dewntewnDowntown. , • Prior to issuance of development permits, the owner and/or developer shall construct , street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study(see page VI-20?). • The developer shall construct storm water facilities consistent with City of Kent ' Construction Standards and source control best management practices, cr as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V of this plan. ' • If required by the budding official,prior to or in conjunction with a building permit ' application, the developer shall submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification,bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. , City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-15 P.0anninglBilloOSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP Vl.doc , Additional Environmental Information Responsibilities: • The City is responsible for park master planning and design guidelines. Public Facilities Masterplan the Commons P-ar-kPlayfields. 1 Discussion: Masterplan and improve the Commons Pur l`la fields. The Commons ParlFPlayfields is are an important resource for downtown Downtown Kent in many ways. A master plan should explore a variety of solutions to parking,access,restrooms, seating,drainage,and traffic problems, as well as the potential for more efficient use. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Currently the Commons Pa k-Playfields typically hosts six softball games or nine soccer games at one time. It hosts assorted other activities when soccer is not under way. The high rate of utilization for-ball fields :.. .af4ly due to the laek of ph,...ieal field of thjscize.—Master planning the park to add physical support facilities, such as restrooms and bleachers may result in less space available for active and passive recreation. • The increase in facilities may result in an increased need for on-site or off-site parking. The addition of parking on site would reduce the open space usable for recreation, but would create safer access to the park. I • Automobiles entering and exiting a Commons Park-Pla fads parking area entrance wouldeettld create increased traffic congestion. • The increased park usage may create additional peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. 1 • The development of a parking lot,restroom,bleachers,or paved paths would result in increased impervious surface. • Increased park usage and traffic circulation may result in adverse impacts to pedestrian safety. • The soil in the specific site may not support buildings on conventional foundations. • The use of the park at night and required lighting wouldeeuld create adverse light impacts to adjacent areas if not installed and managed carefully. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-16 ' PAPlanning1B11o1DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP VI.doc Additional Environmental Information ' Mitigation Measures: , • If needed, develop additional play fields in other areas in the City. • Review available parking for Commons Pefli-Playfields use..-. Consider restricting the number of parking spaces provided on site to drop off, loading, and handicapped spaces. • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of ' Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide storm water facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. I • Investigate ways to construct safe pedestrian crossings between the Commons P-ar# Playfields and the RJC parking lot. • If a building is constructed, prior to or in conjunction with application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. • Shield lights so that off-site impacts are minimized. Schedule events in order to minimize night time use and restrict night time hours. Responsibility: • The City shall masterplan the park and mitigate redevelopment, if any. Site a Town Square Park in the area between Smith Street and Meeker Street to provide a downtown Downtown open space for large public gatherings. , Discussion: , A Town Square is a traditional community gathering place. It should be large enough to hold community celebrations, performances, and ceremonies. It should be located near ' civic and historic places shared by the community. Environmental Impacts: , No adverse environmental impacts are expected to result from this action. The Town Square will provide a safe, well-organized space for public gatherings. Mitigation Measures: , None are required. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-17 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information tResponsibilities: • The City shall be responsible for identifying appropriate sites,working with land owners, master planning and developing the facility. Masterplan Burlington Green, Kaibara, Rosebed and other parks along the railroad to enhance open space and park facilities and strengthen 4 connections between the proposed GOMrnuteF Fall stationKent Transit I Center and the core. Discussion: Enhance parks along the railroad to provide linkages between the station and the core. A canopy along the east side of the Burlington Northem/Yanghzou Paarks would provide a pedestrian protection, seFve as outdoor-stalls for the maFlEet, and visually tie the Sister Cities Parks together. The expansion of the General Commercial (GC) Zoning District on Central Avenue parallel to these parks may have long-term impact on the attractiveness of using these parks. 1 Environmental Impacts: No adverse environmental impacts are expected to result from this action. The plan should result in improved pedestrian connections. tMitigation Measures: • None are required. Responsibility: • The City shall be responsible for master planning and developing the facility improvements. • The City or, in some instances, a property owner and/or developer may be responsible for construction of the improvements. I • Owners and/or developers whose buildings occupied portions of devritewn Downtown Gateways would be responsible for incorporating building designs compatible with the gateway. Support development of a Civic and Performing Arts Center or a hotel and conference center. ' Discussion: ' Support a civic and performing arts center between Meeker-and Smith Stfeets. " eivie anda.v �a p er f a4s eentef at thts l ,.ati.-.,,or a hotel with facilities for conferences and �i other events,would be an important attraction to the dewntewnDowntown, extending City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-18 P.1PlanninglBillo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information hours of activity into the night. It would provide a much-needed location for meetings, events,parties, catering facilities, and educational programs. Environmental Impact Evaluation: I • The-A Civic/Performing Arts Center,or hotel and conference center may be able to use space presently providing parking— at least in the interim. • Before and after the performance hours,patrons uses-will create additional traffic. , I • '"ie A prepesed Civic and Performing Arts Center or hotel and conference center willmay create additional peak trips to and from the Kent Valley. • T1e-A prepese4-Civic and Performance Arts Center, or a hotel and conference center could increase in area surfaced with impervious surfaces. • The patrons attending events at the-prepeseda Civic and Performing Arts Center and persons using the additional retail and retail service shops will increase pedestrian , activity in the surrounding area. • The soil in the specific site may not support multi-story buildings on conventional foundations. Mitigation Measures: , • Allow joint use of Civic and Performing Arts Center, or hotel and conference center parking for public parking. • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study(see page VI-20?) • Construct stormwater facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V. of this plan. ' • If required by the building official,prior to or in conjunction with a building permit application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The , soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. Responsibilities: , City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-19 ' P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information ` The-A Civic and Performing Arts Center, or hotel and conference center developer would be responsible for conducting the necessary studies and implementing the required mitigation. Support developmenef-the Public Market: g-ure Railroad -venue ac rip-eaed- between Smith and H;;rri-_;nn-Str-eet to inGlude angled par-king Discussion: The Kent Public Market has been a successful community attraction iniv-s-its present location between Smith and Harrison Streets. NI- 1- tS in ether-Cities have operatesueeessfully in pefmanent stpdotures, extending business hours and offering a Vvide vafiet-y of goods and sen,iees. The City can take several actions to support this important activity, including providing angled par-king on Railroad A,,,enue and OutdOOF VendiRg 1.paee in the Sister Cities Raf-s discussing with the Lions Club and other sponsors how to increase the viability of the Public Market. Future relocation or restructuring of the Public Market may become necessary to meet the mixed use development goals of the City for this area. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Development of the market will create an additional demand for parking. one way between Smith and 14arfisen Streets may ipapaet tfaffie flows and tumin fneveme is in the adj .,t . 111V e . ( • The pfopesed-market may create additional peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. Idevelopment -The m e e theafea r eed with. e f� ee -The • The patrons to the proposed market will increase pedestrian activity in the surrounding area. ' I *The .. '1 the :l7,. site at s e..t multi sle .buildings ent.e .,1 *The JV17 ll1 iIZV n foundations. Mitigation Measures: *Ge 4, eta paT Ei study t assess the .,.-,,oust_of p4lie and ,..te.,...a,;,ig available .� L;Yt u Ywlizl.b dete ,.teethe ,F+:,. ent r4ci, ., he .ey:ded t.. .,.. t demand. ' e . .•...ne • }tl J411I11L1111J 611\113E,liUll VY 1JIV YlLLt'1TlV IlILZC\lYll1LL1(4. • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-20 P:1Planning011oOSARDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information , I aThe developershall pre.:de a truff:e :„ipaet ♦ .7 (see V! 2/1. �,uu�-�uca.��-�-i-zv:-� • Construct storm water facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V.of this plan. , -if fequifed by the building effleial,prier to eF iR eonjunetjen with a building p appheat.e., submit soils report stamped by lieensed geateehnieal gin Tl YY a.ua,vn, ouoi nic a engineer. ' soils report must identi6, :1 ejassifie t.,, be .,1.t.e .,,] ..l..,to F ,.7..t.,. reeemmen afi �v > ft Responsibilities: , • The property owner and/or developer is responsible for required on- and off-site analysis,public facilities, and other improvements. , a. Construct pedestrian/bicycle trails from the Interurban Trail into dewntewtt Downtown near Saar, Willis, Meeker, and James Streets. b. Ensurer,,.,side.., tFad ..1eng two south side o Tames etFeet when the ne fth Belden (pla yfiela) site : impreved, and e e that good pedestrian and bicycle routes are established when the larger- erdenKent Station site is developed. c. Establish a pedestrian/bicycle route along Kennebeck Avenue and Mill Creek north of Smith Street connecting Mill Creek Park with Kent Memorial Park, and to other ' segments connecting to the i ai"tatiei}Kent Transit Center. Urban Design Revise the Kent Zoning Code and the Downtown Design Review Handbook to address more specific design guidelines for all of the districts identified in Section V. Discussion: Design guidelines are development review criteria that address the design of the site and , structures of a proposed development. Guidelines provide flexible means to incorporate community goals and policies concerning aesthetics, character and function into a development. Effective design guidelines are the most important means that the City can use to achieve the high-quality,pedestrian-friendly design character called for in the plan concept. They are also useful in increasing compatibility between different activities in , mixed-use zones. It is recommended that the existing design guidelines be updated,with more specific guidelines for the different districts,to achieve the objectives defined below. , City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-21 P:\Plannmg\Bdlo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information Institute or refine design guidelines for the following areas. The guidelines should address the characteristics and uses proposed for each of the following districts. Ensure that the guidelines address multifamily and mixed use buildings where appropriate. a. Historic Core: Address historic preservation, adaptive reuse, and small-scale infill to provide a mixed-use area with pedestrian and commercial emphasis. b. Central Avenue Corridor: Conduct a corridor study to serve as a basis for improvement of the Central Avenue Corridor. Include Railroad Avenue as related to the proposed ,,,...,.,,uter fail ^*^' ^^Kent Transit Center. Address design guidelines, buffers for adjacent residential neighborhood, zoning code enforcement,zoning use issues, and streetscape improvements. ' I c. Smith Street and Fourth Avenue Corridors (North Core, North Frame, Historic Core, South Core): Attract high-quality development that adds to the streetscape and provides an excellent setting for Borden redevelopment. d. Area East and West of the Core (South Core, North Frame, West Frame): Encourage small- to medium-scale mixed-use redevelopment west of Fourth Avenue and East of State Street, emphasizing residential neighborhood qualities. e. Area Between Fou First and Fifth Avenues N. (North Frame): Buffer residential neighborhoods with fencing and landscaping. Present an attractive streetscape frontage. Prevent conversion of single-family houses to offices (require a minimum lot size f. East Frame• Revise DCE surface parking standards in this district, with any conditional criteria, to increase the number ofstalls per thousand square feet of commercial ross floor area from three (3) to our-and-a half(4.5) g. West Frame-Revise DCE surface parking standards in this district, with any conditional criteria, to increase the number ofstalls Per thousand square feet o commercial gross floor area from three (3) to four-and-a half(4 5). h.The guidelines should illustrate and describe the following details for each district: • Design intent. • The guidelines should provide graphic examples of how such uses would achieve the intent of each district. • Residential and mixed use buildings where appropriate. • The City's intent for target areas. • How development should respond of public investment including streetscape, the proposed commuter mil statie Kent Transit Center,parks, etc. • Historic preservation where appropriate. • Recommended additions or changes to the Pedestrian Plan Overlay. • Deviations from the general design guidelines. • Revisions for"problems"identified through prior administration of the ' core. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • No adverse environmental impacts are identified City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-22 P.\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Mitigation Measures: • None are required. ' Responsibility: • The Planning Department is responsible for reviewing the Design Guidelines and , presenting revision proposals to the City Council for adoption. Traffic Mitigation The overall transportation plans for downtown-Downtown as discussed in the Comprehensive Plan are to concentrate growth in the Urban Center and other activity centers in the City to facilitate public transportation and reduce dependency on the Iautomobile. The City adopted as acceptable a Level of Service LOS tstandar4-F for automobile traffic on streets and intersections within the Urban Center boundaries which are generally consistent with the study area defined for the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The previously adopted LOS Standard used transportation analysis methods which have since become obsolete. The City is currently in the process of revising the City of Kent Concurrence Ordinance as needed to reflect current transportation analysis methods. The role of Downtown Kent as a pedestrian-oriented destination for several transportation modes (including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit) will be recognized in such analysis. Traffic impacts created by the development recommended in this plan will also impact j streets and intersections around the study area. Traffic mitigating elements of the plan, such as commuter rail improved METROMetre transit circulation, improved pedestrian and bicycle and pedestrian connections, and housing development close to jobs will serve to help mitigate the probable adverse environmental impacts in and near the dewntewiiDowntown. if the vk ratio ift 2010 emeeeds 1.0witheut the proposed plan aefiens, these aetions .. e:+. impfevements whieb. would prevent the N4 ratio from ner-e sing._Thia's , mitigation (an additional tFayel lane, 1lY f ., ple) wouldro be te f am in the site speeifie safety and-street design imprevemerAs r-eqUiFed undeF SE-PA. it ' ' depending on the s...,+:.,1 extent oi'the +.-.,fF.,. ,,,, .,,.+s be required for aft),.,f the downtown interseetions used to compute thewver-age We 0.90 (LOS D/E)�th twer'rrtcr iectxerT exhibiting V/e rrsfios greater-than 1 fl ..., Kent are foreeasted to gr-ew 0 ' the destination are outside dewnteAffl Kent). The gr-&Mh in through trips will be most generally attfibutable to threugktr-ips (these trips for-Whieh both ends - the origin and- City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-23 P:1PlanninglBd1oIDSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information evident enjames Street and C-entF.' Avenue, .enu duet tripsbetween the valley +laer indttStFial area and the East Hill/Kent Kangley afea. Willis Street is also for-eeasted to exp er-ienee a high p .amen of thr-e,..,l, trip growth. Unless the adverse impacts of this growth in overall traffic can be mitigated,the City's 1 level-of-service (LOS)thresholds will be exceeded, and more severe congestion and delay will result. Possible mitigation measuresimprevements could include—widening for the creation of addAienal-turning lanes along 4`h Avenue South, Smith Street, James ' Street, and Central Avenue^t several: ;„terse^tions along Willis.. Strut. It could also include improvements to promote transit use(such as park-and-ride lots in the East Hill residential area, increased transit service and incentive programs for Valley Floor valley floor-employers). The mitigation process is as follows: The developer eithershall provides a detailed traffic impact study(TIS)to identify both existing and future adverseall traffic impacts upon the City of Kent street and road network, including street capacity, traffic queues, and traffic signal levels-of-service (LOS), and then constructs those mitigation measures listed in the approved TIS as a condition of development, or; in lieu of conducting the above-described TIS, and subsequently constructing or implementingthe he respective mitigation measures identified in that TIS, the developer may instead agree to pay L Environmental Mitigation Fees (EMF)toward the City's cost of constructing_the City's South 272"d Street/South 277`h Street Corridor Project. The final benefit will be determined using $1,068 (m 1986 U.S. Dollars and adjusted for inflation and rezones)for each new PM peak hour trip generated by the developmentan tr^ffi^ sigge ^„rte,., eaused by the proposed development. The study shall identify all intef:seetiefis at level ef service LLH„of"F" a t a t_a ffi ..1ume the d 1. a,,t a�BeZITI]I rTGiSJGU R2TIrIC`1ViCTIIIC,TCf]G�CPI.-fOPSi2i:-clC. The study shall then identify what impr-evements afe neeessar-y to mitigate the development Ll VI3L • T^ts theree.. pen ., e„t by the City with the findings of tl,e stogy i l;e., of eendueting the abe„e tr-aff e study, .+swuet;.,.. .,r.,ller implementing th aaa aa,.0 Va GV , ^ eo.ndit: s to it: ff:,.ate the tra ets of the „1.: et development. l VII The developer shall emee-ute an envirenmental mitigation agreement te pai#ieipate in, and ., fair ..h re of, the „ „stfaetion eests of the City's South '1'77��,� Street GerFidei pay u aua Pr6Jeet. The final benefit valey will be dete.-f,,.,,ed in 1986 delta fsr .,.jested f r i4atim. C. Monitoring System The monitoring system is intended to identify and monitor system capacities for elements ' of the built environment, and to the extent appropriate, the natural environment. The City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-24 P:IPlammnglBilloIDSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP VI.doc Additional Environmental Information ' system will monitor the consequences of growth as it occurs within the dewnte3ATH ' Downtown area, and provides ongoing data to update the plan and environmental analysis. Some systems can be monitored by the City with readily available data. Impacts to other systems require detailed analysis that is typically undertaken by development proponents. The following chart lists the systems, the factors to be monitored and the responsibility for providing information to update the monitoring program. , Component Unit Baseline Response Land Use j Building Permits Number of Permits Housing Dwelling Units Multifamily Single Family Retail Square Feet Office Square Feet Service Square Feet Density Avg. FAR Vacant/Underdeveloped Acres Land Transportation Intersections(per Peak Hour LOS intersection or avg.?) Parking Total Spaces Occupancy Bus Ridership Commuter Rail # of AM/PM Trains , Ridership Public Facilities Stormwater Impervious Surface Detention Facility Capacity Sewer Gallons/day/customer Water Gallons/day/customer Parks Acres/1,000 • Active population ' • Passive t The City should evaluate the above impacts every three years on a predetermined date. Based on the evaluation,the City should update the Downtown Strategic Action Plan and , the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to ensure that planned actions and mitigating measures are adequate to realistically address the impacts of growth and change. Incorporate public participation into the evaluation and update process. , City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-25 P.\Planning\Bello\DSAP\DSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Appendices A. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSES 1997-1998 The City received twenty-one written comments from nineteen correspondents during the Ipublic comment period for the Draft Supplemental Environmental impact statement in early 1997. The City published the comments and responses in the Preliminary Final Environmental Impact Statement. The following is a brief summary of the continents. The proposal to revise the Comprehensive Plan and rezone the property approximately ' three parcels deep north of James Street between fourth Avenue and the Burlington Northern/Saate Fe railroad right-of-way to allow limited office use with a mixed use overlay for office and multifamily housing received a number of comments. The major concern was the loss of the single family homes located within the proposal area, and the impacts the office/multifamily use would have upon the North Park neighborhood generally. Owners of the property directly adjacent to James Street sent letters in favor of the rezone proposal. The response to the neighborhood impact issue noted that the mitigation was proposed in the form of cul-de-sac streets to block office traffic through the adjacent neighborhood, and that expansion of the office area was not anticipated. On June 2, 1997, the Land Use and Planning Board voted to recommend revise the plan to eliminate the proposal in response to public comments. A question regarding the boundaries of the proposed Comprehensive Plan revision and rezone of property between Fourth and Fifth Avenues north of James Street received a response explaining the proposed boundaries. After further analysis, the boundaries have since been moved north in response to comments. Comments were received regarding a Smith Street Underpass of State Highway 167. The option was taken under consideration. The cost of such a measure was questioned in another comment letter. The proposal was not included in the proposed plan after analysis. The perfonning Performing Arts/Civic Center was discussed. One writer inquired about the possible donation of a portion of the municipal parking lot for this use. The response was that the details of the proposed project were beyond the scope of this study and that City Departments could provide details as the project develops beyond the conceptual stage. Several urban design suggestions were noted. One suggestion was to extend the downtown Downtown gateway project beyond the plan boundaries. Another was to provide for space at the comers of blocks for people to gather. Another was to make sure that awnings are provided on new and refurbished buildings. A trellis structure similar to the trellis on First Avenue was suggested for Fourth Avenue. Several comments City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-26 P.\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information concerned additional pedestrian improvements throughout the dewrpowntown core. The comments were noted and awnings, open corners, and pedestrian improvements are elements of the plan. The gateway project does not include locations ' outside the core, but the City will consider the suggested locations as separate projects. Preservation of historic dowHtewn-Downtown properties was a concern. The plan recommends to resume the historic properties analysis and preservation process , conducted in the early 1990's and institute regulations and incentives for restoration and preservation. Several comments were received regarding traffic congestion, and the writer was referred to traffic analysis contained in the Preliminary Final SEIS. Additional traffic analysis has since been provided by the Regional Transit Authority'-s(Sound Transit) Environmental Analysis of the proposed-Commuter Rail Station (Kent Transit Center), and the analysis of commuter rail traffic included in this document. Several comments expressed approval of Plan alternative 2, and the south commuter rail station location. The response was that the analysis of locations favored the north site because access and circulation was more problematic for the south site. Since that time, after numerous comments were received at public hearings, the south site was incorporated in the plan. Other commuter rail concerns included noise and vibration impacts,parking, circulation. The response noted that beyond the information offered in the Preliminary Final EIS, the RTA will be required to perform these evaluations for station improvements. One correspondent requested public restrooms. Restrooms and telephones are not included in the plan. A request for additional detail regarding the proposed James Street Underpass at the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe railroad was noted. A conceptual diagram of the underpass was provided in the Preliminary FSEIS, a preliminary cost estimate has been provided. The response stated that the Washington State Department of Transportation and/or the City wi11 perform detailed evaluations before underpass construction. Several comments were received regarding costs of proposed projects. The response noted that costs estimates at the level of detail requested were not available at that time. Preliminary cost estimates for major proposals in the plan are included in this document. Questions and comments regarding the SEPA process, notice procedures,public ' participation,capital facilities information, and sources of information were answered. Written Comments were received from the following participants: Pamela Newcomer February 5, 1997 Perry Woodford February 5, 1997 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-27 P:\Planning\Bello\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Joseph Kolodziejczak February 5, 1997 Val Batey, Regional Transit Authority February 7, 1997 Paul Hammerschmidt February 28, 1997 Washington State Department of Community, Trade & Economic Development Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation February 26, 1997 Tom V. Harmer February 26, 1997 Mr. Gregory Griffith February 27, 1997 Carol McPherson, Kent Arts Commission February 27, 1997 Gary Kriedt, King County Metro Transit Division March 4, 1997 tDoug Johnson, King County Metro Transit Division March 4, 1997 Howard H. Montoure March 6, 1997 Robert Whalen March 5, 1997 Dee Moschel March 6, 1997 Pat Curran, Kent Downtown Partnership March 4, 1997 Don B. Shaffer March 4, 1997 March 31, 1997 Ms. Carol Schwindt March 5, 1997 Mr. Melvin L. Kleweno, Jr. March 12, 1997 Robert A. Stevens March 5, 1997 B. Glossary Commuter Rail Station (Kent Transit Center): A station an The facilities for boarding and alighting passengers on a-the commuter rail line,which operates along City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-28 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP VI.doc Additional Environmental Information existing Burlington Northern-Saute Fe€reigl3t railroad tracks between Smith and James , Streets. Also referred to as "Commuter-Rail p. Bus Statia^Kent Transit Center"to reflect the eenneetienshift of service routes anticipated when King County METRO-44-ts express bus sefyiee to the C,..,,.. utef nail Stafie., sells the Lincoln Park & Ride Lot for redevelopment.. Developer: An individual or business entity which buys real estate and prepares it for resale at a profit. Preparation generally includes assembling or subdividing parcels, obtaining permits and clearances, constructing utilities and streets and, in some cases, constructing buildings. Economic Market Study: A study of the market demand for services, goods or housing , within a particular area, and the extent to which that market demand is already being satisfied. For example, a major developer might want to know if the current market demand for multiple family housing is great enough to justify a project; or if a proposed new shopping center would generate enough sales for tenants. Environmental Impact Statement(EIS): A document which analyzes the significant environmental impacts of a particular action or proposal,possible alternatives to that action and mitigation measures for those impacts analyzed. ESHB 1724: A Washington State law that requires local jurisdictions to consolidate their local permit review and hearing processes and better integrate environmental regulations with the Growth Management Act. This 1996 law also mandates faster decision making by requiring local jurisdictions to implement a 120-day permit processing period for all land use and building permits. ' Facilities: Capital improvements. Often,but not always, the term implies capital improvements which are ancillary to or supportive of the main purposes of an overall , project. For example, "The recreational facilities for this action includes a playground, tennis court, swimming pool and community center." Floor Area Ration (FAR): A measure of development density expressed as the amount i of building floor area divided by the total development site area or parcel. Grade Separated: Rights-of-way that are separated from general purpose rights-of-way by a level change, often on an elevated structure or in an underpass. Growth Management Act (GMA): A 1990 Washington State law that mandates managing population and employment growth through comprehensive plans,regionally coordinated plan implementation and creation of urban growth areas. Impacts: The effects or consequences of actions. Environmental impacts are effects upon the elements of the environment listed by SEPA. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-29 P:1PlanninglBtllo\DSAPIDSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP_VI doc tAdditional Environmental Information Joint Development: Projects financed and developed jointly be public agencies and private developers. Local Improvement District (LID): A special district in which a tax is assessed to pay for a specific public improvement, such as a new road. Mitigation: Actions which avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, compensate or correct otherwise probable significant adverse environmental impacts. Mixed Uses: Any combination of activities which mix residential, offices, shops and other related uses. Mixed uses exist in concentrated centers and increase activity and density. Mixed uses can be single activities in their own buildings but clustered within walking distance; or buildings containing two or more activities, as in office space located above retail shops. Pedestrian-friendly: Designed to accommodate pedestrians' (and sometimes cyclists') priorities of safety, minimized walking distance, comfort and pleasant surroundings. Planned Action: One or more types of project action(s)that: 1) are designated planned actions by an ordinance or resolution adopted by a city; 2)have had the significant environmental impacts adequately addressed in an EIS prepared in conjunction with a comprehensive plan or subarea plan; 3) are subsequent or implementing projects for a comprehensive or subarea plan; 4) are not essential public facilities; or 5) are consistent with a comprehensive plan. Programmatic EIS: The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a"program," consisting of a policy plan for many inter-related projects. Under Washington's State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), an EIS must be prepared for significant public programs or policy documents, as well as for individual development projects. Sound Transit (formerly"Regional Transit Authority (RTAQ: In the Puget Sound region, the agency responsible for planning, building and operating the regional transit system. The system includes, regional bus service, high occupancy vehicles (HOV)lanes and access, light rail transit and commuter rail. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA): Chapter 43.21 C of the Revised Code of Washington(RCW)—the general policies and regulations intended to help lead agencies Iand citizens make better environmental decisions. Station Area: An area with an approximately ''/4 mile radius around a�i==nrr rail statim,the Kent Transit Center containing transit-related activities and designed to accommodate large numbers of people. Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS): Preparation of a SEIS is appropriate when a proposal is substantially similar to one covered in an existing EIS. New information indicating a proposal's probable, significant, adverse environmental 1 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-30 P.\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information impacts may be provided in an SEIS. The SEIS should not include analysis of actions, alternatives or impacts that is in the previously prepared EIS. l i t T t i t City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-31 P:1Planning\Billo\DSAP%DSAP Revised_1108041Revised DSAP Vl.doc Contents t List of Figures ATTACHMENT C PLANNING&ECON DEV. COMMITT ' DECEMBER 6,2004 FIGURE 1-1: THE PROCESS USED TO PREPARE THE KENT DOWN' UVN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN.........................................................................1• FIGURE II-2 DOWNTOWN KENT20 YEAR VISION..........................:.............................. II- FIGURE III-1: THE MARKET AREA FOR DOWNTOWN KENT............................................... III- FIGURE III-2: CHALLENGES FACING DOWNTOWN KENT.................................................. 111- FIGURE III-3: THE STRATEGIC REDEVELOPMENT CONCEPT. ................:......................... III- FIGURE IV-1: ACTIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE KENTDOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN... ......... ................................................IV— FIGURE IV-2: PHASING OF KENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................IV- FIGURE IV-3 PRELIMINARY CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES................................................. IV- FIGURE IV-4 RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ...............................IV_ FIGURE IV-5 RECOMMENDED PUBLIC FACILITIES.......................................................IV-' FIGURE IV-6 LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................IV. FIGURE V-1: THE KENT DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS. ...........................................................V. FIGURE V-2: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE NORTH FRAME DISTRICT. ...........................V. FIGURE V-3: THE SUGGESTED CONCEPT FOR FOURTH AVENUE AND .LAMES STREET.......................................................................................V- FIGURE V-4: THE TYPE OF OFFICEIRESIDENTIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ENVISIONED FOR THE N. FOURTH/FIFTH AVENUE TARGET AREA............................................................................V FIGURE V-rJ NORTH FRAME DISTRICT 20 YEAR VISION................................................V- FIGURE V-6: CENTRAL AVENUE CORRIDOR AND WEST FRAME DISTRICTS. ............................................................................................V-1 FIGUREV-7: DESIGN ISSUES THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT SHOULD ADDRESS IN THE CENTRAL AVENUE DISTRICT IV-....................................V 1- FIGURE V-8: DESIGN ISSUES THAT EXISTING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CENTRAL AVENUE DISTRICT SHOULD ADDRESS...............:.......................V- ' FIGURE V-9: CENTRAL AVENUE AS IT EXISTS TODAY...................................................V- FIGURE V-10: HOW CENTRAL AVENUE COULD LOOK. ....................................................V- FIGURE V-11 CENTRAL AVENUE CORRIDOR 20 YEAR VISION.......................................V- FIGURE V-12: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE EAST FRAME DISTRICT...............................V FIGURE V-13 EAST FRAME DISTRICT 20 YEAR VISION.................................................V FIGURE V-14 VIEW ON WILLIS STREET NEAR UNION PACIFIC RR TRACKS.........................V FIGURE V-15 PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE WEST FRAME DISTRICT.............................V-s Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan ' 9633RPT5DOC4R/98 r Contents FIGURE V-16 WEST FRAME 20 YEAR VISION.....:.........................................................V FIGURE V-17: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE SOUTH CORE DISTRICT. ..v FIGURE V-18: ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS APPROPRIATE IN THE SOUTH FRAME DISTRICT...................................................................................V- FIGU?E V-19: HOW LANDSCAPING CAN DEFINE OPEN SPACE AND ADD TEXTURE TO A BUILDING. ........................................................................V• FIGUREV-20 SOUTH CORE DISTRICT20 YEAR VISION..................................................V. FIGURE V-21: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE NORTH CORE DISTRICT............................V• FIGURE V-22: EXISTING CONDITIONS ALONG RAILROAD AVENUE......:.............................V• iFIGURE V-23: A CANOPY ALONG THE INTERNATIONAL PARKS.......................................V- FIGUREV-24: AN"ALL CROSS" OR SCRAMBLE" INTERSECTION AT- , iFOURTH AND SMITH STREETS................................................................V- FIGURE V-25: PROPOSED PERFORMING ARTS/CIVIC CENTER.......................................V- FIGURE V-26: THE PROPOSED KENT PUBLIC MARKET BUILDING, COURTESY OF THE KENT DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP...............................V- FIGURE V-27 NORTH CORE DISTRICT........................................................................V- FIGURE V-28: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE HISTORIC CORE DISTRICT....................... V- FIGURE V-30: FAQADE AND INFILL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS. ......................................V- iFIGURE V-31 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR COMMUTER RAIIL STATION ..............................V- FIGURE V-32 HISTORIC CORE DISTRICT 20 YEAR VISION....................................V- I Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 9633RPT5DOC-4IA98 ATTACHMENT D PLANNING&ECON DEV. COMMITTEI DECEMBER 6, 2004 - ------ J � r a -------- -fir —_—► + s q qq i.�ayr Hwy s sR•yelr y j R 4•1 � V 4c > ---- -- _ ! I Nhy 4 1 , m T • _� � KTc � t: Ap Livid rMgng Y�dC Isxtid+w i 1 I • Vision Masterplanned park and access -Fourth Avenue,with gateways• improvements enhance the serves as the downtown's - Grade-separated railroad Commons and Commons Park /� signature avenue.linking civic crossing prevents Increased fad as important downtown and commercial activities. service from cnokrng east-west attractions. ' traffic Limited office and Mixed-use Mixed-use development protect single- - The new RTA commuter rail and development,street I i ��/ 1 family residences from arterial bus station makes downtown improvement.and V,/ impacts Traffic filming Kent a regional transit hub and the Kent Perform.. '//J- = measures prevent through accentuates the town's identity. Arts Center link they/^ I ��' RTA station and _ 7 -Coordinated commercial RJCJCommons ; I `� I eo - ;c v, redevelopment gateways•and area with the ' • i I"--�ate_ r"'�•,-r G!--�: street improvemenu give the historic core.---L r .- ^�.1 Icy'p ^ o , { Central Avenue condor a more ,•i�/ i , i�•Rc �' flg attractrve character and greater economic viability � 7 _ t I Jra 7iel l _- CoaanA.•� � ��• ,./ i; � •••.� i-T' � II// ynol f ..If rrl�i:i•or I � _ • :ter- ' i!?3a i i IS' Nitre` I' vi ; i J7 •�7 }} ^ 1 CS s�°.,i_=- •eG�i- �C :•rim J .•. i �n�- ..p •"-�� r bl.21 mil:.crate. • J I — ,II �I li I _ �_ ON: Y/ •f�F^�•r�'.,J I ,i _-. _ �CJ��..��q--h� = '+--" , I' e_-;l r - � ��• >��L'_i Icy ��/� y e'1 L 7171 �.aree-.erz-"y� 1 2irJ. 3 ,act • I r.,r..i MF.i.�: i 11 IL` 1'7 -Infiil housing with peeesman ,\ ,[ I •N t :i - �5�� a links to the core strengthens C_ t y I� ,•J, _I^ -v�3� the area east of Central •i l r_ R i y Avenue. ~-�' -Public Market and Sister Cities —- —�, ;J` •. - +> 7 6_ 3�,r I Parks strengthen Railroad �; ; //ram^ + �'>-i p---;;^n _�.•+,�--, c_r_yff,-,l Avenue as a local business district and connect the RTA �-M[xed-use residential - - 'i , station with the historic core. development south of the core -Quality infia development creates an in-lown reinforces the historic core's neighborhood and supports core architectural character and businesses. Pwestnan orientation. Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan Vision Ir 200- W Mortht' This graphic is a visualization of types of commercial,office.and residential infill and redevelopment as they could conceptually develop during the twenty year span of the Plan It is intended as a visual aid for discussion purposes It does not represent Draft 6/301g7 specific development plans for any particular property Figure 11-2 Downtown Kent 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 11-4 9633RPT5.DOC 4r1198 t •��rr��w ~� �,,��t � � FtrFp f � - P y • jar *1 y �� { f .� ' ?✓� �'t+:a .ram /r` i }" .. �.. }0.0 Jf_ 7 ✓��_ F•rr 'r , I' try,fist �J L y Ow 'lam IF 9 :re Ji La _r sue,. �.� C�^- � r R J•}��'� - rTj,: j `ly fit t J Wy. - y1 S4 � ' r Planning Concept feasibility of raising the necessary funds through grants and private contributions. The result of that study will affect whether the proposal will be pursued in the immediate future. 27 23 ' ... O �• po n K 4 '1 + 1 t Yr 1 1%�+ v.w.914 • 1 1.87 • �I{.� � .•.I�G. wYY 'Yf f •= . i r.� I Figure/X 1_Market area for downtown Kent — Market Rate Residential One-third of the residential capacity for the City is in the downtown area. In order for the downtown to approach this capacity over the next 20 years there must be successful projects that can demonstrate to the development community that there is demand for market rate housing. The best opportunities are single-use residential 1 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 111-2 9633RPT5DOC-4 f7198 Planning Concept %Aev�Barriers and poor i Underdeveloped and connections separate IIIIIIIII+� unsightly areas present downtown activities. I poor impression of downtown. Do 117 ' `.74 �n.IIQioFit�.n fall! � i '�=ail•.' I'il b�qI�I,,,r��illA i � . R7 O 1 Ia .2r �?0 �I e.l[ I� 1 t rko I• —1 I II_ ' I u 0 o Mr � � I - u �n,l �_n,- ni , II r!° !� rt,' II 1 L_c, A" I n 1].�ILI_" it � o e — -- 111 11"�r oSII D(n �,I o Y;_�� Q• � e 1 Jllo•io (iv lta� �\ `O P f? \ p in I f CI 0.0 e ('W7oe °� I1 'It, Y7II 1 0 I IjY[c�l'-r1 . ,Oi �tt --- a , Key camrrnal buidrpa ••lrnproved streetscapea Parks and do"space -WMOnOM pubac anractom 1 Figurelll-2.Challenges facing downtown Kent. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 111-5 9633RPT5DOC-4 R198 Planning Concept no U �1'o 1,� I 1 I1q}t}�tl-7„I I I 1 i `4�,•.i 1 iI - ' ;7-i I_—Qalli��iV�i!c_nA l� II�JI'__", Ey l-•---- —-- ---_ LJ I' ILa�,'•a❑fir (�Fu- .'I1 i+; El.h t 4th & 5th - - o-;-•, — - 1 Avenues _— ' North of q;r�; l;I p i __ E0 IO b�;! o,c_ James Street 'I' ',tea „( , �1 �;nTsil a .` g P. ( - (] IIt�' '� � L- �'Q-�a;•cam U. :P0 fig, _D . !IF jhf� I ELg �;c SIC 1 5 Central --- El.a I F ' a a =a Smdh Street �- Ef b Avenue - ' South of — Borden a �Comdor Sou o II +rv'i0. d c _ Borden Site Site = aye r , � i i 6° � Ir- 1- Ip lk El.cMi5lFourth o {� U; Avenue Out y, rtC' Ef.d ' - - Historic d v v"`3 �O Streets 'P n In Core Southern '- -tee•, Elf Core I t South ' l _ "Railroad Corridor - w -fir-- =--_ �� - --•fi}r- �9 G�4�r ---- °0 III .1 1 I I: I i%r— ,_•R,I�—, 1 q-0-`-'"il�ra a DiOD� 1�� .i:{ jia;yo i• .— .=-�, ,�. ,w• Z • i�l+ �j 1 +' I p� I a I ��o�I G�JG:.G�JI � �-, )! c•I I Figure I11-3. The strategic redevelopment concept. i III-7 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 9633RPTSDOC-4 n198 Summary of Recommended Actions Master Plan and UP9rad I , ;C Il'^ice"~_ r' , s1 Commons Park tr:i Institute Design Guidelines II•�a]' �D Parking&access o i( "� '�' t For Residential and Office Areas . Drainage a;j�l� _ �J N.: ;f •Achieve high quality- • Layout I use I "`..,I '_--j' I _° _ 1 6 tom �� _n -oaf, I I smaller scale development ' ' ❑:O7 1 �Uy" '�J' i Rezone To Allow C ,_ ,dq�lr, n:`, office With MixedT7! :''6l'$e i Plan For Future Of Borden Site i, �ru^i 1 �r •Create high quality Use Overlay L o_ �Ii _.r development near �Iou S 11 op access ' ! Ga•eR t p�..".�i ��'; �{� •Retain street access .. / �kv a }�I'�of ytK ' •Institute design gwdehnes "Pedestrian All Cross ¢�°� Ii Ir ppp 1 1 ;Possible Rail Grade Separation Intersection + S=m- e-=t�l �' ' $'' I - r _ James Street—_ I ran '< -=�` _ Focus High Quality p -- -� i Development North of Smith Cb j' , ' Streetscape improvements 1� ! (�7 __,�_,_ I *Guidelines to make Existing t ' I I -fa compatible with Borden sne Park&Ride '—R1 0 o�— ; FillR.J.C. 1 Potential Improve Parks r-To Provide Key Civic Square r q North/South v I ,,4' �� s r' 1• �g i , , _LYL I•�,SmitheStreet _ i'G �• ' r,�, Connection Encourage InO� r ;r-t3 °°• 9 ITT o r ' ,� lb � Create a Trail Mixed-use °O I�I ? t4' I �+�+ 1 ��"Along Mill Creek, Development Linking Mill Creek I^l ')M I- Meeker Street' Jr ° Park w/Kent Memorial Park f upport Market N 1 �� ! z `�,. ,--� f � �1 I .a, Refine Design Access I o 1 -�-[ Ttus Street ¢" Guidelines To Build ill 7 �1 a." Road .; � ! I ° � -F-i� I �� ¢- � � i�;ir=�� Quality Residential ti o ° o CIK%I !'E do i a e Neighborhoods And 'Sear Street OaA � � �EnsureCompatibility r i S LI a Imo = Y' e With Commercial - 'Wills ireet ° ��' � _� u..;O� Improve ; &Public Uses Bike/Ped.Links To p +;,n� eeon�e.t'.v Downtown From t •� F ,��+��I �I � Interurban Trail - - Central Avenue Design Guidelines Commute Streetscape Improvements To Encourage Infill Rail Station Refine Design Guidelines Redevelopment w/Parking Structure To Upgrade With Residential Commercial Corridor Componment Legend: Enhance 4th Ave. P-1 public Facilities ■f■t Street RedevelopmentCOrrldOr Opportunities tmprovemenbSpecial D,stnc[s Core Area Lam_ J with Design Guideline 11 0.4 Bike/Ped. i Design Guidelines ® Gateways Links � , To Encourage Mixed-use ParkslDpen Spate f ?nnsR Station infiii And Reinforce Historic Character Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Summary of Recommended Actions Figure IV--1:Actions recommended by the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan are summarized above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-4 1 9633RPT51)OC-4/7/98 -- Summary of Recommended Actions RECOMMENDATION YEARS 0-2 2-5 5-10 10-20 Timing Issues A. LAND USE A I. Redesignate SF-8 area between Fourth.and Cuy to revise zoning Fifth Avenues N.to limited office/mixed use residential A2. Prepare for Borden site master plan proposal A3. Promote infill housing As needed to promote at least 1S00 units. A4. Encourage mixed-use development As needed A5 Study impacts of pawn shops, bail bond offices, and tattoo parlors B. TRANSPORTATION B 1. Develop commuter rail stationI RTA working with Cuyfor timely service B2. Construct street improvements a. Fourth Avenue b. Second Avenue Triggered by site development. c. Smith Street Linked to rail station connections, d. Central Avenue Nigh priority e. Saar Street Triggered by private development. f Meeker Street 71Nigh priority a. Seventh Avenue Property owner mutated. B3 Plan for underpass at James and Willis Determined by Regional Fast Streets/BN&SF tracks Corridorproject B4. Install pedestrian"all cross"at Fourth and Links RJC to core Smith B5. Adopt street tree standards C. PUBLIC FACILITIES Cl. Upgrade downtown parks a. Locate a Town Square b. Enhance parks along railroad Could be incremental effort. c. Masterplan Commons Park Nigh prioriry d. Develop street tree plan - C2 Enhance Gateways a. Fourth and James b. Fourth and Smith c. Fourth and Meeker Supports rail station d. Fourth and Willis e Fourth and Meeker e Central and Meeker f Central and Smith C3.Add public buildings a Performing Arts Center b Public Market c. Rail station structure C4. Provide trails and Paths Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-6 i -9633RPTSDOC-4n/98 Summary of Recommended Actions i • RECOMMENDATION YEARS 0-2 2-S 5-10 10-20 Timing Issues a. Links from Interurban Trail b. Path along James Street c. Mill Creek/Kennebeck C5. Incorporate public art Continuous effort D. DESIGN GUIDELINES Dl. Refine design guidelines a. Historic Core District b. Central Avenue Corridor District c. Smith and Fourth corridor d. East and west of core e. North James corridor LI I E. TARGET AREAS E1. Explore redevelopment opportunities a. Obtain Smith Street right-of-way b. Work with property owner on Borden site Triggered byprivate development c. Fourth Avenue d. Central core historic streets Ongoing effort widh KDA e. South Core District Begin residential development incentives f. Eastern core • g. Central Avenue Corridor District Figure IV-2--Phasing of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommendations. I 1 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-7 -9633RPTSDOC-4n/98 Summary of Recommended Actions Recommendation Cost Suggested Funding A. TRANSPORTATION A 1. Develop a commuter rail system. $6,600,000. Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority,Sound Transit A2. Street Improvements* a. Fourth Avenue S1,172,578. City,federal grants,developers b. Second Avenue $893,256, City,federal grants,developers e. Smith Street $1,525,461. City,federal grants,developers d. Central Avenue Undetermined City,federal grants,developers e. Saar Street $1,110,694. City,federal grants,developers f. Meeker&Gowe Streets E.of First $565,597. City,federal grants,developers g. Extend Seventh Avenue S.(Naden Avenue)north of Willis Undetermined Developer h. Install historic street lights 5166,523.(Meeker St Example) City,merchants,property owners A3 RR Underpass of Willis&James Street SI3,000,000.for each underpass State,Federal.City t A4. Install pedestrian"all cross"at Fourth S 103,000. City Avenue and Smith Street B. PUBLIC FACILITIES B 1. Upgrade downtown parks a. Town Square Park S720,160 City,state grant b. Enhance railroad parks $216,300 City,state grant e. Master Plan Borden Park $40,000 d. Develop Street TreeNeg.Plan $35,000 B2. Enhance Gateways $824,000. City a. Fourth Avenue and James Street b. Fourth Avenue and Smith Street c. Fourth Avenue and Meeker Street d. Fourth Avenue and Willis Street e. Central Avenue and Smith Street f. Central Avenue and Meeker Street B3. Three new public buildings a. Civic and Performing Arts Center S 13,800.000. Public voted bonds.donations b. Public Market $640.00. Privatelpublic partnership c. Commuter Rail Station Structure Undetermined Federal,state.RTA,city B4. Trails and pathways Undetermined State,federal grants.city a. East/West links—Interurban Trail b. South side of James Street trail c. Pedestrian/bicycle route from Mill Creek to Kent Memorial Park d. Green River Trail to Commuter s� Rail Station—Central or First B5. Public An Undetermined City,annually funded program, I i donations,grant Figure IV-3 Preliminary Capital Cost Estimate Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-9 -9633RPTSDOC-4R/95 Summary of Recommended Actions j=" ! gyp- - J, t O , , ; �� -•I�aa C''1�'��1_'I��g:-rr ti , ' %�-{'}.t `u ._..-._�l:.:r�- 'o'a°, +�--- f , 84 -Plan For fi• j roryi ICI _ � ' I i[ Underpass {LI �t i'•�'..a.211� 1 C6 r I of` � Ci C.r B2.b is 14 �o � .t/, __:I: Q C�---il e"Y°J� • �''ol•-�°c1 `ten'-IiY��U-"Y B5 - Install - oo _ ;, �::a e�"a I%a r „ { Pedestrian Friendly = }j��' �`5 �g .I r�, i '� d itsa ='. Crosswalk System - - r ,�,� B2.f Pq r� All Cross" or _ :••- I "Scramble" �n r.T., (rT—�:)•` lei! I Lf- 0--- _ r i�-II{O•d V��i ,i, Y _r• - _, r 7 �Q .�.� CZ f . a : B2.d - 10 j � -° — rv=-o` i :;�. _ jl��_'Y7,1�/iu ,F3 ��+}��- Io=1 •t, G.\ �O+F�`__ lippp�� l�i--�. � �II Tc• G7 a , '1r, of I+• li Cyr Ip„ i �� r��r Legend: .—......Street e\eeee.e,streetscape B2.g Improvements .nbosouImprovements i 1�J►PedestrianIntersection II Cross OGateways = , !('y Intsrsattion ' B2.e �C Possible Underpass I JrTransitStation Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Transportation Improvements Figure IV-4 Recommended Transportation Improvements Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-10 g633RPTsDoc-4nN8 Summary of Recommended Actions jFocus Ig Support -7 Upgrade special improvements i proposed public rI districts and on connecting facilities to add L.J target areas with downtown wide-spectrum redevelopment attractions. of activity. ? opportunities °;�N , S I ti I f C(.f � I ,-,!•,`ram°r,� :i��f)(�ifJo� ;, In I TO i i Ir•'�.,' nnIII11 ; j: IPelfb�-•I�� `r� � 'cu1;,3•+�I In I u I rrl r bI 1 I �441 ,` n� S '' Iht ' lt✓ '• , )r.J -��. �?1 11I"i( '•tli J li 1. I f i �' 1 11 1 (w rI��'��l!;�p r, =ram"-' ru 1 �� 1 J�4T •Tj ❑ I n � q+ Nwqq,,, I ' ��{�~t r tl'� I•l.'1• y 'I 'r,l•' �fll aN _ _�,, h' I^� '�T ter. tl � I�_U_I� '� ` •[. !\'I toJill - ��9b of Pti' I' .''" :• -� �� _;t= I �., ry - ✓� 70.4 F _�11 c• • ti •I 1 'p �� i I•I�:f ' r It a� r 1 In� R •� II� 1 I •f=' � +ate ./ ��••�+` D Oelt ..� I • 1+I r� �It�I/�! j �. U yl I' l+1rS fl P6sl ' F;1rLar l •�_f��I.-1 �1-^, FLIx Q I�'1 r7 11� '• � 1 0 - I i i�-1 br"'i- •• •fit-• - " _� �n EIe a t7IF, �n �� I c•V �R ^J1" �; II �-`��rr�JJr��t�I'�� ;;�� aR•-�tl �-rh,� .hyy�,'� ', 1 .A I�� hl�U�=� � � %�/' I � ��Ilill dnj��i��•�a R�Q�� `= a-'i�� /1 R' •wr� LegeW Key camrermal buddelgs •••••Mproved sneelscapes Parks and open space -kvonanl Wal c allrac!ms Figure IV-5 Recommended Public Facilities Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-11 -9633RPTSDOC-M7191 Summary of Recommended Actions i L= t 1 ' i / '-Q u�"rit—•7�-Ih ! t__._— L1'S��'/S e .n ' �O I 1 �� /%i i//i ilk 'Ir...—'�';'—...4�- � -•.�:--; 'I]1•l D 'u', ttCo]] a i, 71 Cl i? �b%� '^ � A.1 - Redesignate I �� E To Allow Mixed-Use And Multi-Family Residential Uses ` =•.r �� oo Ipt ,oar�ucl�.i�si M-11 -- IF + t j Ire. r _it 10 i C. 4'•Q 6 a7'6 � lt 1 4 ➢I p I�rQ•itTg�'fFpC:'-f�' O+ia-�iS�iI�J� I 0 1 D:R A.3 - Encourage Masterplanned !+{ 1�4 ' Mixed- Use :t lip Iii L �� w �Qq c� Redevelopment - tail-1 to t a �i t�[7s�+' I!Tpp .r 1, :aC4 •' ° 'if la r n I� ;+I��;$[/�"��vQ �,II ? ,,I '¢I �,! (._a+1+1�}-•T, r�v� °h n ,'t'4�'�d 1-- �,r �4.P 's,'t��•?I p /r� •'�� !' t: `_-- _—,_�r- t ��I Ll CL-•I Ip��.p.� �' �'LL'C..1 ,��' .1 r:L••-��_ ` 0 9-t"-'I,o-�. IS, pl I a fo ir`p$.�!�^•' �fl.taAQ•➢_006t(i b'� apaii �'C} r .. rrt :•. •1.---�-� 'T1 I I ' ��Al ---9r'b'� i ) I .-3-. to �' ' ,I I L.n-,91 n�n + i! f".tea',I�pe 1 I = tII• + �� `�*\ 1(� r•' .�� ---, 1'i ' o"y!•'lLU' t �04 p"-^,oil a-iA'.n-oi T' I :I G G + Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Land Use Recomendations Figure IV-6 Land Use Recommendations +� Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-12 i •9633PPT5DOCInA8 1 Kent Downtown Districts �Q U : go �I[�u y!. TIN III � �q o 1 'C7 1 � F�> North Frame h'� ;I i �' -i I�} ; , `D - ilr '� rF'L.li ��-�9-41 ,'"�'� I i ll�! ' Sys .`�•�i. �7— �;(,4� _� '• ^Q kf d �r ll S' y- _i Central Avenue _ G °�_—t ;to _ Corridor ai'� !'►�� Lf North Core-, i ❑ � '�., .• Dom---I � � - East i ,1 JI/ - I ' Frame ' West -1 :o re ' Fme I�C� - Historic , =rT - Core ,I t h^ �`' n 1:CL'1 b�'LJtI .,_ •'1'� s' a vN�^n�❑G,r' — ` I �' Il o l rsr,i' cc1A 70 P. r� E South Core_ i b a. n I I dl�ck r� t-9_�.�1:= � ,;n i it -'oti •O•' �^*� , CJ(!L&O{�d �006,Q } {r n` i�-- r rr yr ur ww' n�n'lp��;�� ''�1 '•� ( : 4.��DgL❑ �• �' e� ii !� �9 aa.D( )'�P7 61 i �r �'� i -3G-p17.- r Figure V-is The Kent downtown districts. V-2 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Dian 9593HFTsDM-.YT:9e Kent Downtown Districts Institute Design Guidelines For Residential and Office Areas Improve Local Circulation & Reduce •Achieve high quality. Impacts of Through Traffic smaller scale development 0 J �;;i; 1_—! Open Cloudy Street —j�—!! •Open ENVcommercial street 0 1= Cut de sac 1 si,2nd&3rd _ r 1 rn �—Ii, Master Plan and Upgrade 1 0. Q Commons Park • Parking&access I J 0 1 • Drainage . Layout/use IQ dDi ❑ ' ❑ 13 o Plan for Possible Rail Grade ;cr !o .s...J Fao �A��I ,c�-, Separation CIO Street J ij. i 1----= '- �9 !� �Ad V-+- me — 1- 1 U Rezone To Allow ! all ! r Office With Mixed Use Overlay Construct Gateway Elements • Screen Parking Lot W '109' 2SW roo' trrorr ti Legend: / ®Public facilities Redevelopment I Street 1 Opportunities Improvements r--I Special Districts r--� I I t___I with Design Guideline ! ---> Bike/Ped. i I Links ®Parks/Open Space )Gateways i- Transit Station -�=T Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan f; I ill 10 North of James Street Area Figure V-2.Proposed elements of the North Frame District Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-4 9633RPIS000—4179a i r mil•'�• �P'� �.'��'�'ti�'�}-:�y:,q.. i' rrrr4- s w d'y V' y r •yy i -`7— f '� t L ti W LU tr M t 1 _ L ,LO DE • � 1 r,M1 rr-am�.. �t ■ % t- - -- [_. _ I • i y� ' l '� Y r Kent Downtown Districts i — Provide Gateway Improvements at Fourth Avenue and James Street. This high traffic intersection close to the Commons and the Regional Justice Center is an important downtown entry point. The unimproved Borden-owned parking lot at the southeast corner could be greatly enhanced by a sign and landscaping that complement the architecture and plantings of the public facility. A wall could incorporate the buff color scheme of the Commons and Regional Justice Center and perhaps echo some of the building materials and detailing. A design team that included members of the business community, an architect, a landscape architect, artists and planners recommended a distinctive crosswalk pavement design and distinguished streetlights. ,JXJXJ INTERSECTION - ICROSSWALKEM DESIGN t STREET NAME 0 nmg DOWN TOWN STREET RENT SIGNAGE `' SIGNAGE IDENT1FICATION DETAILS � SIGNAGE 2+){2+ GATEWAY LIGHT Figure V-3. The suggested concept for Fourth Avenue and James Street. Development Target Area Actions — Encourage Office/Residential Mixed-Use Development at the N.Fourth Avenue/N.Fifth Avenue Target Area As noted above, the plan promotes the conversion of the single-family area between N- Fourth and N. Fifth Avenues to mixed-use office and multifamily residential development. These uses will benefit from proximity to the park and the visibility along Fourth Avenue. Also,they will be less adversely impacted by the park activity and traffic) Figure V4 illustrates the type of development that is envisioned. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-5 9633RPTSDOC-,Lr7M r-al I [1 + ... J m{ [[ �Y I S•'STy_ R VT R � 'TT_ ifj_ " 1111�� 1• ♦ T a r• � •r�• ! l� d r X, J, ��'''''' .�to .. � S,! k T � h�4 ��yMS�•��. r�'1 > y � � .'yam—.`` ,� .� .1�' '''r4•�=r'�3:'.!•� ' _„ 1 S,� if Iles _�� f, ��I- � �' �• - !` z T � llijji i I � yi � � r it �=1'-•��••;�;i� +�- �� + �, t� •-- �1• ' ' Jet I + iIp •�'� � I! R` . 3 �a L� Kent Downtown Districts : f i t la ' =4 i Figure V-4:The type of office/residential mixed-use development envisioned for the N.Fourth/Fifth Avenue target area. Finally, the City should administer district-specific design guidelines to ensure that: • Development presents an attractive building face and/or landscaping to James and Fourth Streets. • Site improvements do not negatively impact projects to the north in terms of noise,traffic, air quality, sun/share, or visual intrusion. • Development does not result in houses converted to marginal offices without substantial redevelopment. Although on the periphery of the downtown, the North Frame area merits special attention. A master plan for the Commons Park could begin to address important issues. Redevelopment of land along the N. Fourth/Fifth Avenue corridors north of James Street will provide opportunities for additional housing in a convenient downtown location near recreation resources. It will also provide opportunities for officelhousing mixed use or housing near offices. Finally, as one of the downtown's most important entries, the Fourth and James gateway merits high priority in the proposed gateway enhancement program. 1 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-6 9633RPTSDOC-ARM Kent Downtown Districts Upgraded Commons Paris with improved access, drainage and parking•••: office mixed-use development j ---Cloudy Street connection Dia a; 5 Q a LL I CID Q Q = *- t, == C q CI �� II p l y n ra3 ❑ }] 13 l7 , a 13 o Q 0 ❑ p >7 51 s James St n %pill C'U➢ " 0 o co � a ' o K Z 0 n Lg aCommons q --Gateway feature LL o Pedestrian connections 7M James Street landscaping C a) = to and sidewalk improvements j m Grade-separated railroad . crossing as part of the regional- Fast Corridor project Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan ' North Frame District 1 I Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies 1 and Downtown Kent Strategic Ammon Plan recommendations. It does not represent a spedfic recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose it to provide an example of possible building infill,including height,location,use,density.and site amendies. r Figure V-5 North Frame District 20 year vision Kent Downtown Action Plan V-7 Slrate9 is 963nvtsooc-a719e , Kent Downtown Districts i �fl c__� �' Possible Ii ' °� q Rail Grade Separation Improve Smith Street P :,fames Stree _ _ ' - '- ` ' v At Railroad Improve Parks To Provide Key G .01 North/South Go C3 l o+h • 1 0,,•j, •,� Imo; :�� I' ,�� I F Connection °°,''''LL� ''� Create a Trail �� nnc3 Linking Mill Creek Along Mill Creek, I� Park w/Kent S_7-th Street Memorial Park IQ i e• ` ' Support Market Refine Design Guidelines To Build Meeker Street Quality Residential Neighborhoods And �E.Gowe Sbeew:• Ensure Compatibility tF �• O' !� j g ��• ,AD,__ With Commercial /�— ?° y o• __ & Public Uses Ar p o❑' er, `��,�� Extend Meeker a �� _ l bM Q.1P% `'__ti 6 a O;iq Gowe Street •I'( n _ Improvements Q� To The East rSaarSVeet P e t; 1\Q IZr ❑ �pr; 6;! p= . —_.. New Parking Garage 1 -►Yrl/lsgreet— - �- I��,F��g'nOgii Between Titus B '0.oop�I�Daopn�� t'e� o,, t II��-,•.-• Gowe Streets Improve Central Avenue Streetscape Commuter Refine Design Guidelines Rail Station To Upgrade Commercial Corridor i Legend: f l 1 ' F-11 Public Facilities Redevelopment it ii S/M II Street ' L Opportunities Improvements I rr—I Special Districts r--� I { lI with Design Guideline /'� I I JL Special ' �, !!_ , 1 )Gateways I � "''�"Intersection ®Parks/Open Space V I t_ ITransit Station Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan T� I Central Avenue Corridor District Figure V-6. Central Avenue Corridor and West Frame Districts are illustrated above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-9 ssasRPTSooc-arise Kent Downtown Districts sa....q.c..n i 1 � Goof P.OwbYn e4cuY11.n 1 hold.bwl plr.uplr alY 1 I p, n obu I. W a 4wl,"PnAacapinp by.11..1 Nenl 1 1 AWMWY Mlnnc.a 1 Or 1 A � 1 YoC.YY 1.1p./aead.. For a mon nom.n scale �• r ° N..on"a"S~howl Mtn Wrkiny N.m.ns or lalraacapnp 7 �7r OrWN Varying soar b f r —N am to recap".Yual Ynpacl Lane.cap.na p1or16.p.AaabYn y- . Nvrara Figure V-7 Design Issues That New Development Should Address in the Central Avenue District. I Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-11 9633RPi5DOG-4,7/9p 4�. 'r�� fl......ttt +j-" '--C6Yr1r•r.4lsJyf`.r1+FIT..il:n..i �- "xCC�4{{�.I r��y' ` 4 it J'�41a..f a✓`rsd lrP'I rl..��n•] .�y1'' ;tr ltl' !I 1 ,►�yfllxti 1! -10 M.r.•ra�lrr�r ...yrriA rlYi r+Jr,f �- ~.Tr�{�S7k" y�M r� {.r.. ..1!.tin.....yr er.Nr� .ul.•..� � Y"� 1 r 1 •rr..11r1 yruf•.LM V'Ol'yf irJbrrl• � !l�'' •'4 '•-'nr M1[ t� VIM r I'r i 4 '•s''- I tl ' 1 .�y 1r r, r+ Ina•I rrrd onl�n; a:a-- _Q _rjN� { 1 .y`� � f��l � ti�' �R. .l�l j •r4 :Irc b.IR.r9 a 6•:I....Aq.. fr 1 I• -+ff•tt.. .a4 JJ _ �I �" i'. � �~1rylr,'4'�+� Il rJ.,:�r l -}J J r inJa i•`� rrr.4.rF: + f t r` •Y.: �� a' S rnf.- liar 4 � 4. �j� �y+ '' �, l u1r...s•.r.r rY co�ar.c+n.an r.:r.r.�.•M�LiR D;f61 n�lr•fgy r'f il.Ly.f.1.,f rqr;n i•N 4♦r•. •ri?+1 .__ �� - -�hrwn74ni 91 n07 pLfA {t� li.�..ral4r"+L lY9i W/rCa:ar� r r�-r�.•f=' �:�-Z{�L�s$::f.rT :S�;ft�$ T'1; c'�sr�.Cl5.Ir.. �Ei�alnn 1 '• a 1• �'E'1^.t ...r�i �+r+�T1?Irlr 41 V1i° �01 :arr s J�ii'r • P•.•�..r1/� V IJ 7ir1 :r.::J:�H i.i��Sc • l•M1.4. Kent Downtown Districts —Comm.nlal pl."M..m..I b.N Eacl.rW lull.rad nom mm. .ndal "a-WHding. at IwWm p.da.bl.n Odonlad locada.WM display Wndo , r..11,ar prnNcdon w odwr alam.nN palgn standards am lar L. Slpw T.1 W.W.gml Wdl haul y.rd parting Iota tQ Yw WddMpy a¢alNcrun ara.•I.mauir.d 4 Malarial.L n larde anc.draga Idgbr yu.INyN. eom WClWn en /audw V Prlaaigays and park"MI ammnew ` r ParWrp bb M hunt y.Ns an limmemoovia"d tar pmaNr afllcNney nd tralflc h rpuMrd b Inc1uW yMWp. a /ary ` .croon.nd l..Namy W.m gm. Figure V-8:Design Issues That Existing Development in the Central Avenue district Should Address. Because Central Avenue is many people's first impression of downtown appearance and development quality, the corridor is important to the whole downtown image. For this reason, corridor improvements should be given priority. Successful arterial improvements in other cities in the region have demonstrated that upgrading Central Avenue is possible if the City and property owners work together. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-12 9633RPT5DOC—U71N Kent Downtown Districts ------------- P 1 i Figure V-9., Central Avenue as it exists today. 1 I r 9 I G Figure V-10.A Visualization of How Central Avenue could look Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-13 9633APTSDOC-4?/9B Kent Downtown Districts L Grade-separated railroad crossing ...... —' James St _ 1 _ r ; Q �s fir • � ' Redevelopment on Central Ave. I supporting Commuter Rail Station.•.•... . Smith St. Public Market..........................•fir n r ', . Gateways on Smith and Meeker Streets ......................... �_ . . rT of Meeker St Intersection and easttwest sidewalk improvements at Meeker and Gowe p I W -� Streets ................................• f r,,,r Incremental redevelopment according , r-L �� I Titus SL to Central Avenue Comdor guidelines••• r R ' Street trees where space permits•••••••• I•`• a uA 0 8 �ni -zccx� b II II I M !� Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan Central Avenue Corridor District li • 1 ILI i Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations It does not represent a specific recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building Will.including height•location,use,density and site amenities. /t I ii �L'ii Figure %io II It Figure V-11 Central Avenue Corridor20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-14 %]JRPTSDOC—YT/9a Kent Downtown Districts r1(! , r: I�1 11 �07 Create a Trail V 441 r �!Dr-_y,[lnh_T� Along Mill Creek, ate l_i1L r eVt o i t7' Ot'iQn�io;E lames Slreer - Linking Mill Creek Park w/Kent D o 6 eo-- Q .F , - Memorial Park { Eai i D L_ �� a 11 a, o ; 4 'Ii�I.1 �i fp CD .-1 Refine Design -!_:Cl�_ r, Guidelines To Build ;Smrth�Str T. aetyie -;� Quality Residential I = i�� i d Neighborhoods And 'b' Ensure Compatibility With Commercial Jf ► 4 Cr -'1' ' &Public Uses Meeker Street • O`y. L� 1 �� tl f' fS fI0 =Gowe Street .. A , y ��yy.. •�. Extend Meeker& Gowe Street —Titus Stree lzn rr•, ', t� Improvements If� l To The East f � ,fie _Ib g Q I i �- - ii - �' Q ra(I_y o `Saar Street=� n - �"•_��Q��i�`� l.='`-'.�' '�ii'_ Improve Central ' °� ?r A��_?` ', � Avenue Streetscape g Guidelines —� Refine Design will $tc et �- - �Qsvrn�!� p1�7�'avg;ii, To Upgrade 92 1 p e�eg Commercial Corridor -c,t I fl, a L v +aP ssv er ,000 I �a it ��I �-1 Q�� I o��i,n!_'i, •��rs�ot- I :J 'i uCS.j �.. ... Legend: Public facilities aRedevelopment a/Ito i a Street t t Opportunities Improvements ^I!I r --I Special Districts JL Special JI 'I L_J with Design Guideline f� i I _ aGateways I I ,� Intersection �. Parkst(]pen Space i--.Translt Station r Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan r Fast Frame District Figure V-12 Proposed Elements of the East Frame District Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-16 9633nPT500C-41171911 Kent Downtown Districts James St. � �— n _3 ............ Mill Creek/Memonal Park Trail �_---- �a.. . •• �J L a C G7-11 , LjthSL T I L_t -! _ • ••••..Senior Center _ """"""' Downtown gateways at Smith, r � 9 Y Titus, and Meeker Streets � Residential development o- I Pedestnan improvements on Meeker and Gowe Streets ..............................•Central Avenue Corridor improvements and redevelopment Downtown Kent Strategic Acton Plan East Frame District i � I�I ' ' Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific recommendation for any one parcel Its purpose is to provide an example of possible budding ' refill•including ht. location,use,dens g height. cry,and site amenities r Figure V-13 East Frame District 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-17 9633RP75DM—47/9e Jt -'v ti -5� •1 •+:. - 'rr J.i I��I!I . Ohl �• '` _ti ~' i }1=t1 t-t'�r '; I 1•.-+"''.Y j '�, .' Y�. Lv' + 1[F S-i �� ,J""-')Sri'_'��"��r Ir''T'.r'`iS (i•-J"'✓•:�� i� !.'sty-'S-��' 1:1 '�'2t�ec L r'-:.ti�.J.i ( ! S .�Y "-_ ry t--fi- ` -.•! tii-- - —=�-. fir. i -sue . ,a•^� ",�.r°' = t+ix'' -- . .r!.•,-�,Tel ti +• r�'�;!'x,`��`• '• _x '.' r;.LE' �i � `�ril4:�-- 1 r+ �.- --�7n• i.r;.'y ;•Y+1' -` .+'- F Vi�-'�_'�•r 1�1'„S .�. is 1• � + ;tom.+.�_.l - ?' t "'• -� �1-M`_.�;.'='-i [ -(I�• '' xJr + .�3 ,` ,I i ( �:i .cr' •- "'�G'" Gf. �-' Nor -+ .. .1 �+ r.e,F L.v. +vr'•t't +`.�h---�' +-c 1-�- Yh r�_> "�• t 4� _� , .r'!.•* j] - 17 ( y,�`• � Y� ---'�_ 4 �•-{`•ter.-.. �'• '�.r �uYr + a,hy 1.--•.. - v ..�'='._ti+3�V ' J+ •, �--•;_ � -.f •. ._ _-�- �.^ 1,~J . � y:'I i .. ' +�T_ice!` •v £ I ) { V ,:r fix,. VIC `flti",-',f; V•,.••i.r_ b'I•aC5�+jilr��rG'v{°.mG�iyr.t1��f:� 1'i�!ii �ifE u.., ..- Y2!!t'iy+i n�I�iv'!�$'. �YIL)i�? r•, � ) 'r f1 !. t• J�"C"' •,.!ter V�c'"__ r- t .A,5 i•}11 C111 GLti/li�'r�rf•)1� ii,i7'i�ytVn Lb tl 11--i m JI f7(.'XE"' '<' iiL':il;7 ' t'•nrr�•t�f) r/si Kent Downtown Districts ! i J _ �- ' ' s � n rQ 4 -^-�." , �•L';-�•,' e fir j i��s ,�f �5.J 11 ` l 1 JA;;�.,�vl�At1go'�Jt!1- �t.�vu;�,f*A�s'— � •� �•' n A P It I ,it � �Y• � Figure V-14 Existing view and the view with the proposed improvements along Willis Street near the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Note the bicycle pedestrian trail connecting downtown to the Interurban Trail, greensward improvements, and new mixed-use residential development along Saar Street. Design Guidelines Design guidelines are recommended to ensure that the new development comprises a unified whole with compatible uses, integrated circulation, adequate capital facilities, and attractive amenities. The design guidelines should reflect the type of uses proposed by the property owners. This particular district would also benefit from large site master planning so that project review might involve a phased site master plan concept. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-19 9633RPTSDOC-ar7M Kent Downtown Districts 1 � i - Master Plan and Upgrade t of Commons Park Li Parking&access . Drainage . Layoul/useFix- ' � Otaat iImprove !f;'•j ; Connections To Park -- - Q _ •raLZc Interurban Trailco J Park 8 Ride will be phased out D and parking transferred to Rail Station. Area �E 1 •i i •j! j i maybe available for development I 1If Encourage e +'I' ��• � a � ,• Mixed-use an H; Cl J � Development :7 j �D ilk ' C Ell Il I 1 U I e 1 1 Improve �_ - Meeker Street----- Bike/Ped.Links To o I " �� 11� Downtown From { interurban Trail �i � � IT r m-n-z-g ; I; I pi t �JI� 0U ' i �TLsj�il j New Access Road By Developer \ 116. — �� Wilhs Street_._ 11 Legend: ' Public Facilities Redevelopment ■M M 0■1 Street Opportunities Improvements Special Districts —� __J with Design Guldalina OGateways 9ike/Ped. I — ' Parks/Open Space U Links ij Cut-de-sac L ,Transit Station / j - Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan West Frame District Figure V--15:Proposed elements of the West Frame District are illustrated above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-20 — 9633RPTSDOC—4471" Kent Downtown Districts i I ......... ................. Pacific Railroad James SL glll,l j alu tp� �-- g1114 D all p D f Interurban Bicycle Trail all pID all aIM 1 D I g1II9 pD� ; a 11 1.0111D 711 as �uD q ropillgD �? g pit a Itil D Metro Park-and-Ride e//{ �nuorinD 1 el 7 1110IIII D e rJ 11110 10 D i I3 0 I �L;+ I � Smith SL { I a G D Better parking and access to � the park �^ ti Meeker SL � I I •"""••••• ••-New office, retail, residential, and commercial activities in a masterplanned development / I \ i •l i Intl up i New access road off Willis Street �q •. •' •-••••Trail connection from Interurban Trail to Downtown Willis SL Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan West Frame District I { r III 1 Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building i infill,including height,location,use,density,and site amenities. Figure V-16 West Frame District 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-21 9633RPT5DOC-417M [ Kent Downtown Districts Enhance 4th Ave. Corridor Improve Bike/Ped.Links To Downtown From Central Avenue Interurban Trail Streetscape Improvements Refine Design Guidelines To Upgrade Commercial Corridor W17 ::a 'aia i I t9 v, J -Meeker Street �7 , 9 i I �! a m01 tz i. •'.-- J t �-I , -4 'Till u ,.Street i I I p �` t � J I ! tr.. , t i '�l---.. e �� Orr• o o --1 � t---, � >7a (!o Ip{ :o�`` . �QA �n6oiabl ll°�'igo,lind 1. i I South Core Commuter Redevelopment Target Area Rail Station With Design Guidelines and Parking To Encourage Mixed-Use Garage Residential Redevelopment ir tw sv ow 10w b Z t aiiiiiiiiiii Legend: 7�' ©Public Facilities Redevelopment ■a a v s p Street ! I ti 7 I I it Opportunities Improvements r--1 Special mstncts 110,ftransit —� ! L__J with Design Guideline OGateways �..� Bike/Pod. Links y ®Parks/Open Space U cul de�ae Station , ,- Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan South Core District Figure V-17:Proposed Elements of the South Core District. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-24 9633RPTSDOC-4 98 .•. ,�, � s 1. �, �'1 � F.{ f .�M j ■ lflll,t!N161GhII�i� : ,.,-� ,► -�Jr 1's � III j`�n�i{,I{llVll'J1111{��:((4!/•I •' ✓' ' fir :��•�'- �- lei �.�•�.�� c,w.rn�Uri/= FO�L a� _ � 1 .7 I 1 •,� ,�� r �i � 11 Kent Downtown Districts Fourth Avenue signature improvements....... L ;.....Infill along core streets LL •-• Realignment of supports historic character � street U. - - - zma c^ ° 9 t 1 C i •. K c City Hall ••%� ii f r :! a r ' ' � ` 1 i b 7� ••� a �i I t j D OCOCY i'9— DI Er 4 ter + _.Willis Streat�^J - � �� - Boulevard � � O� ! p pII' n —F9 lI IT Path to '.Cluster of mixed-use/ Interurban: multifamily residences -• Gateway landscaping Trail•••••• around courtyards and along upgraded Redevelopment coordinated streetscapes withnew parking along railroad Parking and street improvements along railroad...............Commuter Rail Station................ • Parking • Bus center • Station structure • Platform and site improvements lI Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan South Core District fI i Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management polices and Downtown Kent Strategic Acton Plan recommendations It does not represent a specific r• recommendation for any one parcel Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building nifill,inciucing height,location,use,density,and site amenities. \ i i Figure V-20 South Core District 20 Year Vision ' Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-28 9633RPT5DOC-417198 I Kent Downtown Districts Rezone To Allow Plan For Future Of Borden Sit Office With Mixed •Create high quality Use Overlay development nearby •Retain street access •Institute design guidelines Master Plan and Upgrade Focus High Quality Commons Park development North of Smith •Parking d access •Streetscape improvements •Drainage •Guidelines to make •Layout I use compatible with Borden site Existing - I., I~; ( )��i Possible ' Park & Ride ;s >, a, ; �l i Rail Grade May be available Ea $ I' Separation u7 s, '� I" r I t P for development L 1 = 1.0 17-3 i I 3.`w■d�-- Oi b. - ' Uff= _ Interurban Trail Improve Parks To Provide Key ' " Pedestrian North/South All Cross "Intersection Civic Connection Some Street Connections Square When Development Occurs V toc 250• sw loon• N m .,1, Le end: Public Facilities ED Redevelopment /////t Street / I I Opportunities Improvements r--•�Special Districts r'\ 10 , with Design Guideline V Gateways I i 3� Bike/Pod. Links ®Parks/Open Space V 1 i I , Jj Cul-de-i "rransk Station Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan North Core District Figure V-21:Proposed elements of the North Core District are illustrated above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-30 ' 9633RPT5DM-A17M 1 Kent Downtown Districts i 1 � , S N8 1 1 Figure V-22.The above illustration shows existing conditions along Aadroad Avenue. 1 C T7 l � V %r.• ! I a I I 1 r If i ' Vi•, �� r= OJT i� t .7 1 A , 77 1 1 I ' I � 1' 1 Figure V-23.A canopy along Railroad Avenue will provide pedestrian protection and market space 1 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan%33RPT5COC—u7jga V-32 Kent Downtown Districts 1 — Construct Pedestrian "All Cross"or Scramble System at the Corner of Fourth 1 Avenue and Smith Street The King County Regional Justice Center(RIC) brings many new employers and 1 visitors to downtown. The RJC can be a boon to the downtown if it is linked to the core area shops, restaurants, and services. An "all cross"pedestrian connection, 1 which provides for pedestrians to move diagonally through the intersection in the signal sequence while all automobiles wait, would facilitate pedestrian linkage. It is recommended that the Public Works Department explore the feasibility of such a 1 design and the intersection be upgraded with gateway landscaping and signs. If an "all cross" or scramble system is not feasible, then, at a minimum,signals can be sequenced to encourage pedestrian crossing, especially during non-peak traffic 1 periods. 1 - 1 ' less IF i 1 Figure V-24: "All cross"or"scramble"intersection at Fourth and Smith Streets to allow 4-way crossing at a signal sequence. Decorative pavement, canopy or trellis,and enhanced private landscaping are possibilities. 1 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-33 1 9MRPTSDX-471M S rY r I `-5 3v1J; A i}1 J. iTr ..tom=J��r► � -��` ',''I i 1 �3 r ?� LA 0 Y } .e � ,yy,,.q qn r T3 nj rt � 5y, �3 r } ♦ � 4j i IJ i t c o i, j If ti Lst r � � YIf • L. fil- Kent Downtown Districts 1 i 44N6 •�~} "� KENT PERFORMIh16 ARTS CENTER Figure V-25.Shown above is the proposed Civic and Performing Arts Center design by the Bumgardner Partners, — Support a Civic and Performing Arts Center Downtown. , A Civic and Performing Arts Center with facilities for conferences and other events, would be an important attraction to the downtown, extending hours of activity into the night. It would provide a much-needed location for events,performances, meetings, and educational programs. The center would also be a lively element if pedestrian-oriented uses, such as small shops, newsstands, flower stalls, coffee bars, pedestrian spaces, and/or public artwork, are included along Fourth Avenue and , Smith Street. The entry to the site could include a plaza that for outdoor performances and celebrations. v Ja _ L1VIT s _ I — Figure V-26 Architect's drawing of the proposed Kent Public Market building-courtesy of the , Kent Downtown Partnership. — Support the Public Market , The Public Market on Railroad Avenue between Meeker and Smith Streets will add an important activity. It will anchor businesses on Railroad Avenue,enhance the Sister Cities Parks complex, and serve as a connecting element between the commuter rail station and the North Core. To support the market the plan recommends additional parkin, on Railroad Avenue and a sidewalk with a canopy , east of Sister Cities Parks to provide a shelter for outdoor stalls in the summer and pedestrian weather protection to the winter. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-35 , 9633RPT5DOC—477S8 `' -'"" . ?• =s..i '�' . Y \' a� ,..r• :],'ty .ter'-,-..j[_ •g t. _. �{ i. 'L vim•- _ tC-"'_ '` ': `. .•` .�. '+r+ 4?...'�'y,'�`',�" As•O41{�`S.'N,44 sdw%�`�' = :[r 1'�ir:�';�!•'M;:.''' r� /5(•,AIf+l• l.Vjm ' tjJl to :'-2.5:J!I(}IY.R a7�Y.VLj:� P h CS0 •��. ...� ........�....... f B U:cv' �i7V(G.J.hi1 L•r,'u:r7:.•i�AfTS er.:le5!W^...y. :c $t.-•ryai�.�er�sr:,�ers•,'; ------------- J 1L � -LI Ilk it "erg 'J� I .��_-�-_,_ �'tyA',-=a�-'��1ns �-ter _ —''�vp�-w�ri-aw�� +"4��• 3i��.� Al �;at.t G`� Tr In • l _ u•:�rIV"r l�-S- ."J.,�eY� y�� ++•- J" s-��- �a •�iyy.L=.•d-�tr-:. ��ice' i i r 1 f-,?tilt t•%`�t1:C,h_'t'G.�.ri ifIti 4Y1l�� L'1 il�„T.^:1'�f{35EfC]Keor p:i:3:': 1 of Ift? Kent Downtown Districts Potential for masterplanned mixed-use development• Signature street Mixed-use development improvements Office development • ; along Smith Street• ; along Fourth Ave.••• Gateway feature ! I U II v^ u v L . .p C -7 James St. %11 DI !f!19 L97 "� 11 :` •i clec I ' � 81141111a.$ a ill li$ s di �ti :Its' - - r,_ 8,uilg$n In 103601 Ui n 3 Smith SL 1 1 — -t till tS 9 t� C i - - � i •' � 1. I �� I .w �� i e Meeker St 'c -L of .. _ .I ai L r Pedestrian• q p ° ¢ Public > improved roved _ all-cross/gateway = Sister Cities co : ,mac Market -76 intersection o Parks L m a tL to t U Z ••-Outdoor performance/ n ' celebration area -Smith Street street improvements , Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan North Core District , it { Please Note: This visualaation is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies and Downtown kent Strategic Acton Plan recommendations It does not represent a specific recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building r i t mfilt,including height,location,use,density, and site amenities ' Figure V-27 North Core District 20 Year Vision , Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-36 , 9633RPISDOC-N/911 Kent Downtown Districts 1 Core Area Design Guidelines To Encourage Mixed-use Infill And Reinforce Historic Character Improve Parks To Provide Key Potential~ North/South Civic Square Connection Assure Pedestrian /• r/,fi ;i a;: •i - m Oriented - s , ,f,a '�; Support Market Redevelopment 1 % >' P , � ��y/ [' � � • ., 1 With Improvements At This Gateway I S ith Street ' _ I t► ' I ;� i Lb- � Emphasize i l i i t 1 •,' Restoration of I r I Buildings Which - _ Support Historic 1 Meeker Street 1 Character ■ I_ ` Of The Core is Enhance Railroad Ath Ave. i �i U CJL� South Corridor Corridor _ il- '�'�� Redevelopment 7I� - ,,!'c Target Area Titus Street + _q Lj h II Central Avenue Streetscape Improve 10 I t Improvements ■ Saar streetti ��_ _ Q 8tkelPed. , , N Links To I, o I � j �\:,� 61�c Downtown From — —Winis Street- .os Commuter Interurban Trail j pg: !, _clp` tL DOP pM�tu (° I: o jj' �, 1 e 0 Rail Station OI LP P 10P 33P 50O /0°ODesign Guidelines I — �- Mixed-Use Encourage e b o �,o o .f i.n I I (t�ST 4o I; .� .ram Mixed-Use Infill Redevelopment Legend: ' { t ® EJRedevelopment n Street Public Facilities P Opportunities Improvements r i Special Districts i—N I ( I,�J with Design Guideline OGataways I I �� Hiker Pod. j 1 Links ®ParkslOpenspace U i (�Cul-de-sac I- transit Station � r- " ,_ ; , ' I_T Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Historic Core District ' Figure V-28:Proposed elements of the Historic Core District. ' Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-38 9633RPT5000-Y7M Kent Downtown Districts QRG�1iIq�S , � � gpOQS�$ 1 Q0 tCAF[� 40 Before AfteD11Tr ❑OO❑��O�ClC7D .�.�� ❑ ❑ ❑ � � I ft�- fy EN FMNKIIN BUILDING 1. Meeker Street - Before —Repaint the building exienor t---With the exception of tits building and the Best 1I Franklin budding,all the buildings along the somh side — Replace the Canopy with a larger more traditional These two buildings can be tied together with a similar rc! of Meeker Street a two stones tall This one story canopy and install below transom windows Remove painting scheme and comiee fine !!!! building is soinewhal of a"musing tooth'aiong the projecting and wall signs and replace with pedestrian I Meeker Street elevation This dmwmg suggests the oriented signs that hang below the canopy I addition of a second story for residential use 1 c1 st � v i II I 'emove sign and paint a neur step, with a mare la Meeker Street - After adnfonal font srvie onto the bmldtn_facade The en Franklin buildmc has a large amount of wall L uface This larve area can be decorated with a vwcm painted patterns It is also an ideal location fora Increase the storefront glazing to the maximum height Add awnings over earn bav Replace the cxmmi wnrown mural possible and install transom windows projecting signs with signs that hang from the awns below r by Armin Qtulir Figure V-30 Fagade Improvement and tnfill Development Concepts Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-40 9633RPTSOOC—417190 �� =�'='J•••�::•.:-rl 'ice' L'l�.i �;�::I -- �. ;ilBllf .��' ��• � �; Ifs-, •Ej l RANEL Ij •. /� w"':, '� 7� _ � is vN^+ _ •_ SQL-.�.r� �r ' �;% _ ON .• E.�� fray. ` w I • '�I C�� ?,'.� — -/i r.:.vi� /} % • f K r� �./ c• .ems,, / LLL ram! � �I .>E��• ,�1% / M tit" �_ --�wnw •t• w •� gar z Mal !rife , .f ol mooll, myo! • i Appendix : Revised DSAP Recommended Actions Figure IV-2:Phasing of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan Recommendations 1 RECOMMENDATION Strategic Time Frame from 2004 A LAND USE 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years Timing Issues A I Redesigate SF-8 area between lames&Cloudy - City to revise zoning ' Streets and Fourth&Fifth Avenues N to DCE and multi-family residential A2. Review master plan development applications for Kent Station(fmr Borden site) A3 Promote mfill housing "- - 11least 200 nmrket rate dwelling units by 2008 a Extend multi-family residential tax abatement to I Revise existing mule family residential rental units in Downtown - development tax obateient program b. Reduce or waive permit fees for Downtown residential development - c Allow five stones of wood-frame construction Review applicable budding and fire codes. above a concrete base d. Remove Zoning Code minimum lot size - Include in 2004 CPA/CPZ cycle requirement in development standards for mulu- famdy residential zones in DSAP districts A4. Encourage mixed-use development -" As needed a Lincoln Park&Ride lot King County selling 8 acres oJDCE-zoned 9 5 acre lot;see Recommendation DI d b Municipal Parking Lot - - - Possible long-term interest in mixed-use redevelopment. c. Ten(10)acres between SR-167,the UP RR, Lot zoned DCE rsfor sale,see Willis&Meeker Streets .- Recommendations B5 and DI d A5 Study impacts of pawn shops,bail bond offices,day ' labor agencies,casinos,adult entertainment businesses,gas stations and tattoo parlors A6 Rezone DCE area on Central Ave between Smith Fold into 2004 CPA/CPZ cycle and Gowe Streets to GC A7 Allow underground stormwater detention vaults - - Review applicable development standards of where appropriate for Downtown sites larger than Public Works Department one acre in size B TRANSPORTATION 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 ears 10-20 years Timing Issues B 1 Develop commuter rail station Service components completed in 2001 B2. Construct street improvements a IFourih Avenue I lames to north of Smith St Completed in 2004 2 North of Smith St to Meeker St Scheduled for completion in 1005 b. Second Avenue Triggered by site development 1 Sidewalk replacement Smith St to Harrison St I Scheduledfor completion in 2006 c Smith Street Linked to rail station connections&Kent Station development 1 Fourth Ave to Railroad Ave Scheduled for cainplenou in 2005 d Central Avenue High pnonty ' 1 Smith St to George St Completed in 1004 e Saar Street Triggered by private development r Meeker Street High non g. Seventh Avenue Property owner initiated ' B3 Plan for underpass at lames an Willis Streets!-at Deiemimedby Regional Fast Corridorprq/ect UP and BNSF tracks $4; Links JLJC--te-eore- 135-- Adopt street tree standards Street tree plan and species selection document B4 is currently applied to development. B5 Consider accessibility options from Willis and Meeker Streets for properues located between SR- 167 and the Union Panfw RR IV-2 SumRecActionsMatrix e•�� Appendix :Revised DSAP Recommended Actions ' C. PUBLIC FACILITIES 0-2 years 2-5 ears 5-10 years 10-20vearsITiming Issues CI I Upotrade downtown parks , Is ILocate a Town Square b I Enhance parks along railroad `- Could be incremental effort c. IMasterplan Commons Playfield - - High priority-coordinate parking Id lDcvclop street tree plan Completed ' CZ lEnhance Gateways a Fourth and James - - b Fourth and Smith c Fourth and Meeker Supports rail station , d Fourth and Willis e- FeuAh-&ftd44eekeF e Central and Meeker f Central and Smith , g Second and Smith - Connects Kent Station and Historic Core C3 JAdd public buildings a Performing Arts Center b Public Markel This item completed,but Public Market has , returned to Municipal Parking Lot c. Rml station structure Service components completed in 2001,parking garage completed 2002 C4 Provide trails and Paths , Fa Links from Interurban Trail b Path alongJames Street c. Mill Creek/Kennebeck - C5 Inca orate public an Continuous effort C6 Improve pedestrian bridge over Mill Creek ai Temperance St C7 Plan for eventual undergroundmg of all utilities in Long-term implementation-coinciding with the Historic Core District - private development D. DESIGN GUIDELINES 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 cars 10-20 ea Timing Issues DI. Refine design guidelines a Historic Core District Completed,incorporated into adopted Downtown Design Guidelines b Central Avenue Corridor District See above c Smith and Fourth corridor See above d East Frame and West Frame Include in 2004 CPA/CPZ cycle District parking standards revision e North 3emeseeniAer-Frame District Consistent with DSAP boundaries-include in incorporated into Downtown Design Review 2004CPA/CPZcycle Area E TARGETAREAS 0-2 years 2-5 ears 5-10 ears 10-20 ears Timing Issues El Explore redevelo ment opportunities a Obtain Smith Street right-of-way, b Work with propeny owner on Borden site Sale completed City is masierplanning,site c. Fourth Avenue d Central core historic streets Ongoing effort with KDP e South Core District Revise residential development incentives,and , encourage mixed-use t- Eastenveere g-Central Avenue Comdor District F COMMUNITY BUILDING 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10.20 years Timing Issues FI Continue working with Kent Downtown Pannershar Ongoing. in revitalization effens a Assist in identifying and promoting issues and - - Ongoing opportunities to benefit community interests and _ economic health - b. Active) promolehistorical preservation Ongoing-education,inventory,archive ' c Support live performance ans in public places, Revise codes as needed and encourage live performance arts in retail and restaurant businesses F2. Encourage adaptive reuse of historic Kent Depot Assist KDP and Greater Kent Historical Society , efforts F3 Address causes and consequences of homelessness in Downtown IV-2_SumRecAc6onsMaMx pace 2 C�7 3nd IV EPIOP�DO � rO � 13 or 1 l - - ---- a ID ` o n ,„ „ n� u ..-, ..�. .. n n.,_�ri1=.=. --- - - ___ _ o _ n n n r� r� n u u n n o x x u rT-Y-�`i�-��--•-•-r� - AiUd Y ' o O t O CD 1 0� O �OEIJ� ❑ y R o I I, n �o� o E C L C U �Q O0 � d f O / C +�� A103 �7 o Q » o c ❑ G �, ❑ OL � y p_ / / N m U v lY rn Q Q Q Q aa o a o • • •Qo ❑ Qq �� ° >f� 3 y Qa 00 a 0 m o cow • 30) cc 'f7 Y w p �N r N A 0_ o aE m r G d@ E 'F m ?I � V C- CU iv s, aCggC � e-- e G w C N �'9l UU'm uJ• co LLI 0 Lco N � U ~ O ca C) +O D LL �O o z w 13 O �] I I� - — — OWN On u ' R uo n - USar, MINE rr� ous rrrrjjjj All ■ Also • '.fiLdllYa sir ,r � -...� .: J� ■� - _ ; �� 1■ - � III� 'r �� V r�,,k,n•_ _ - �PAPMINE ME its ��■■ � � �e �� SIR 4`2 yen IMF ' 7 tl � - ■ 7' 0 ► NEWS MEMO no ilffill ,�, � � � � � • � V .tip► n , 1 = a a C I H I I I / Master Plan and EST FRAME DISTRICT Upgrade 1 Commons Park �Parking 8 access ` Recommended ActionS� Drainage Layoutluse =3 Q u o �owntown tract is Improve 1 I i 1 I I I Connections Action Plan Cf3 I oPark � EPF-ZCparV,nq Facilities August 23, 200 ` Ken[ 1 u u *ti *.\\ ` Commons k 0 DooO o 8 acres of 15 acre `•'�'`� Regional Lincoln P69lot \�` Justice 4 for sale - too pargng 1\\�4 Center Malls to remain as o most bus service is \ `� Cf) 011 transferred to Sounder Z \ \ O 5lation Enhan \ ` 4lh Ave TUTU 4 Q ou1h111y Z \ �� Corridor o p Q U❑ o \.\ I�' �] ;goo 1 AR 2 (Zevise ParKmg edestnan ; Standards All Cross" ! ¢ �nle �cho W HARRISONST p zW ISO ST e q 0 Assure Pedestnan- {} COriented Redevelop- Improve Ped & U ment at This Gatewa Bike Connectivity Better parking W MEEKER ST way from Interurban nd access Trailu _ I� ' encourage large lot redevelopment z 00 W z O Z a . 0 rn TI w pesign uBe inesto - i ¢ O EEncourage Mice ont vJ O Infill Redeveb mem D ° ° d O Q r7 SR 516 { Gateway New Access Road by ;I II Developer z 4 W I� jA Figure V-15 — ^ a ❑ la a trip Qo Ir ~ F r- 1f a C3 IE lL ❑ / J ON AV 31ViS N 3AV 31b1S W LLJouil ❑ N i f F+ � 3AV 1V2JIN30 m ,mn F+ 1+ O ❑ I> e `FF=F f/�f + F / ! + / A N 3AV aVoa Rl 4 0u3 mE �AV Z ` % E AV Z {J r F m N BA N— V UT 0,0lL, > N AV 7 E mom U Em m c E� Y U a it c AM m 3 y c m}�gym'V ❑ U Q EN 'c C V/ W � r � --Awn o Y N _ p r { {f/ `+, i �f�i f,I'rF F r,+, ,;� r a o 3 d N bW S�Q ZY� � � f` F!{F•/F:r //fj IFrff{J ;J=r� � l�U z \ N aAH A llnn 1 - N 3AV 31VIS ui 3AV 1V1S a a K cc wo FT — L C N O. O V W C C za - mN E ` u c' cG le_ � A 3 c ` - co � � 'C n ElS nV S35ONG c C� � a = 3AV OV06 2i � > U) :]AV UVQ8 IiV8 � c t 3 6AAVs nv L LOZ L j ° y N A CE Q o.3 _ N E q)- rt �r C� N O y L 0 V mto Em Arno� 09 Q f] c l0 Q m dy D QlE � OIG 'Ccc = m $ mU w m U macro �6 of d mz Du 1 o 0 dv o m E li - ¢Oo T m V m C Ip 3 3 q AV 0 vi 51 um c (-z :Eo m C y U C 3 C m E C y ❑ wom om = " a 0 aU d W 'ID 0 ° m0 60 > p ❑ m y m m d q c .o m _ o'.o 0- Q, Fn �rr S3nV5 S3nV9 lip. m r � •H U= N NEE o a U C ¢OE w .0 c a _ ;O v ` t�P p ❑Q RIv S 3AV s Q v CoIc—� d � � � cn o N ' _ 3 tYi W w N—cV W 4 C 1- 0 �� c+!J Q bO o 0 coo Lo .�. O NOSIOVW 4] o LL Ca Li.f 1�7 dil�ll z N — 3nV N3OVN ATTACHMENT Appendix :Updated Downtown Capital Projects,Costs and Dates PLANNING&ECON DEV. COMMITTEE DECEMBER 6,2004 Downtown Projects Past, Present and Planned 1998—2009 April 1998—Present(completed) • 2000 Sidewalks&Gateway Improvements $1.13 million • James&Central Intersection Improvements $1.20 million • Washington Ave/Meeker St.Road Improvements $3.50 million • 2"d Ave.Extension $500,000 • 1 s Ave./46 Ave Widening and Utility Trench $750,000 Projects Planned I • Downtown ITS Project $3.20 million (Includes Smith St. widening,Pioneer St.Widening and RR interties) (2005) • Ramsey Way/40'Ave Signal $350,000 (2004) • Right Turn Pocket on Central Ave and Willis $150,000 (2005-06) • Left Turn Lane on Willis St.and 4'h Ave. $163,000 (2005-06) • Central Ave Sidewalk Improvements(Smith St.to Gowe St.) $400,000 (2005-06) • Willis Street Grade Separations at UP and BNSF Railroad $37 Million (2009-2014) DowntownProjectsList MM.doc Appendix :Updated Downtown Capital Projects,Costs and Dates ' • Right Turn Lanes at Harrison St. $953000 (2005) • WSDOT overlay of SR516 (SR167 to Central Ave.,Central Ave. to Smith St.) (2005) • Left turn pocket at Lincoln Street at Smith Street $1 Million (2005) • Left turn pocket on Willis St.at 2"d Ave. $750,000 , (2005-06) r t DowntownProlectsList MM.doc 2 ATTACHMENT G ' PLANNING 8 ECON DEV COMMITTEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DECEMBER 6,2004 Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Director • PLANNING SERVICES KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager WASHINGTON ' Phone 253-856-5454 Fax 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent, WA 98032-5895 DATE: AUGUST 17, 2004 TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR& LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS FROM: WILLIAM D. OSBORNE, LONG-RANGE PLANNER RE: DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN UPDATE MATERIALS FOR MEETING OF AUGUST 23,2004 An important note for all members of the Land Use and Planning Board regarding the organization and use of the draft Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP)update documents packet. The draft DSAP(Attachment A)was re-created in Microsoft Word, and the images and tables included in the original document were unavailable to original quality digital format for inclusion in Attachment A. To minimize the same type of logistical difficulties experienced with the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update (Community Design Element) by attempting to insert and remove digital images from a Word document under revision, a photocopy of the original 1998 List of Figures (Attachment B) and photocopies of all of the original figures themselves are provided separately(Attachment Q. The figures that have been `updated,' primarily diagrammatic maps and tables (Attachment D), are labeled according to the label of the original figure(s) being replaced Public Works Engineering provided the document Downtown Projects:Past, Present and Planned, 1998-2009 (Attachment E), which is proposed to replace the Capital Cost Estimates table(Figure IV-3). Descriptive placeholder references for figures are located throughout the draft DSAP document, and a photocopy of each figure can be found in the sequentially-organized Attachment C In cases where a drawing/ figure was accompanied on a page by text in the original document, the page was digitally scanned to order to crop the text out of the image. The photocopied figures follow the scanned versions for comparison. In addition to presenting the staff report which focuses on the draft DSAP text, staff will ask the Board to review each of the figures. Please contact me at (253) 856-5437 if you have any questions about the staff report, the draft DSAP document, or any of the attachments. William D. Osborne, Planner P.\Planning\Billo\DSAPMemos\dsapnavmemo_082304 doc Enclosure cc Fred N Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager Nathan Torgelson,Economic Development Manager ' Don Wickstrom,Public Works Director Project File ATTACHMENT H PLANNING 8 ECON DEV.COMMITTEE DECEMBER 6,2004 u � KENT WIS.I.CT0. ADOPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS Adoption Document(s): Supplemental EISs Description of current proposal: The proposal is to update the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) which was originally adopted in April 1998. This update proposes textual and substantive changes which reflect updated planning goals, public and private improvements, and development which has taken place in the DSAP planning area over the past six years. Some Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map re-designations as well as potential Zoning Code amendments are proposed. A more specific project description is contained in the Addendum to the DSAP Supplemental EIS dated October 18,2004. Proponent: City of Kent Location of proposal: The proposal is a sub-area wide non-project action. Title of document(s) being adopted: City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Draft(February 1997)and Final (April 1998)—Prepared by the City of Kent. The City is also adopting the Kent Station Planned Action Supplemental EIS, Draft (April 2002) and Final (July 2002). Description of document(or portion)being adopted: The City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, draft and final, are being adopted in total. This document is a sub-area element to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The DSAP is a programmatic integrated GMA planning document and Supplemental EIS which evaluated goals, policies and actions specific to the downtown related to growth and redevelopment. The Kent Station Planned Action Supplemental EIS was prepared as a supplement to the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS. This document analyzed alternatives for a Planned Action in downtown Kent, as identified in the DSAP. The Kent Station SEIS,draft and final,are adopted in total. If the document has been challenged (WAC 197-11-630)• please describe: These documents have not been challenged. Document availability: These documents are available for review at the City of Kent Planning Services office,220 Fourth Ave S,Kent,WA 98032 from 8:00 am to 5.00 pm. We have identified and adopted these documents as being appropriate for this proposal after independent review. Along with the addendum, these documents meet our environmental review needs for the current proposal and will accompany the proposal to the decisionmaker(s). Name of agency adopting the document-City of Kent Contact person/Responsible Official: Kim Marousek,AICP(253)856-5436 Principal Planner City of Kent Community Development Dept. 220 Fourth Ave South Kent,WA 98032 , Date: (/l�l 1 � Signature S:\Permit\Plan\Env\2004\DSAPadopt doc I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager Phone:253-856-5454 Fax- 253-856-6454 KENT Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. wanH,NCTc� Kent,WA 98032-5895 CITY OF KENT ADDENDUM TO THE NVIRONMENTAL IMPACTDOWNTOWN GIC STAT MENTPLAN SUPPLEMENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN (DSAP)UPDATE Responsible Official: Kim Marousek SCOPE pursuant to the State Environmental The City ( Kent ,as for an completed ldate to the Downtown,Strateg P Action Plan (DSAP) which is a sub 98 t Policy Act t to the> P ! area element to the Ctty's Comprehensive Plan. The DSAP s a was a atic Suppl riginallyne Pal E�vited in Aro ntmegtal as an integrated SEPA-GM o doc City of rrient. 1Kentis as Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Impact Statement (SEIS) provide a basis for future market analysis, Statement (EIS). The DSAP was meant to p processes. The plan enlvironn ent�alsand environmental analysis and community participation encouraging inftll and redevelopment compatible with the economic, community goals of Kent's citizens. planned capital The focus of this update is to reflect changes in existing conditions, update the projects and to reflect more lan andrrentZoning ntap amendments as citizen interests. Generally, well as some Zoning Coda text specific to Comprehensive P amendments. ntive revisions to the DSAP are proposed: 1. Revise development standards t es IV 2 and VId1 elopment of market rate multifamily The following substa -o encourage residential units in Downtown(Pa,g requirements for multifamily dwelling unit developments a. Waive minimum lot size ere,multifamily is permitted). to all DSAP districts b. Reduce Or waive residential si multifamily unit res dent aledevelopment t xnt ermit fees in D districts. exemption program to c. Extend rental units. d. Allow five(5)stories of wood frame construction above a tions for the area between 2. Change Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Map designa North First and North Fifth Avenues and betwoeUrb7 an Cente Streets from Single Family Eight Units per Acre (SF-8/SR 8) Residential, Low Commercial Enterprise (UCaDdCZoning of either Multifamily uth P Residential, Garden Density Or Density Lad Use (LDMF) res ectively) in the Multifamily Townhouse Diand VI18 to 10,Attachment6 units per Acre dDlFigure V 2)lb, p north portion(pages V-3, Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) Supplemental EIS—Addendum 3. Amend the Downtown Design Review Area to include all properties located within the DSAP a� Districts. This includes the North Frame District(pages V-4,Attachment C/Figure V-1). 4. Rezone the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) area located between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central Avenue to General Commercial or General Commercial Mixed Use(pages V-6 and VI-11,Attachment D/Figure V-6& 12). 5. Revise DCE surface parking standards in certain areas of the East and West Frame from the current cap of 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area (GFA) to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA of commercial development. Additional details regarding the proposed textual and substantive revisions can be found in the City's Comprehensive Plan Amendment file#CPA-2004-1. This SEPA addendum adds analysis to the existing SETS specific to the above-noted proposed substantive revisions to the City's DSAP. Through this analysis, it was found that the proposed revisions did not create additional adverse environmental impacts beyond those identified in the DSAP SEIS. The mitigation proposed in the DSAP SEIS are sufficient to cover any impacts associated with this nonproject,programmatic planning document. SEPA COMPLIANCE In October 1993, the City of Kent issued a Determination of Significance (DS) and Notice of Scopmg for the Comprehensive Plan (ENV-93-51). After a series of public meetings, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued on July 18, 1994 for the Draft Comprehensive Plan, issued on the same date. The DEIS was distributed to City Council and Planning Commission members, adjacent jurisdictions, affected agencies and other parties of interest After comments on the DEIS were solicited and reviewed, a Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS)was issued and distributed on January 30, 1995. Subsequent to the Comprehensive Plan EIS, the City embarked upon a specific analysis of the downtown core area. This resulted in an integrated SEPA and GMA document titled the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP). This SEPA analysis contained within this document was prepared as a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to the City's Comprehensive Plan EIS. The city issued a Draft and Final SETS for the DSAP on February 4, 1997 and April 7, 1998, respectively. The SEIS analyzed the environmental impacts of the DSAP. The purpose of this environmental analysis was to assess the impacts of the Plan on the City within this specific area. The DSAP SEIS does not analyze the significance of site specific impacts;rather,it analyzes the significance of impacts upon the downtown area. This Addendum to the DSAP SEIS provides additional information regarding the proposed changes to the plan specific to potential environmental impacts not previously anticipated in the original SEIS. However, this proposed nonproject action will not create unavoidable adverse environmental impacts beyond those previously identified in the SEIS. STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY t Future project permit applications on the property within the DSAP area will be subject to and shall be consistent with the following_ City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, the Kent City Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Building Code, Public Works Standards and all other applicable laws and ordinances in affect at the time a complete project permit application is filed. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW—BACKGROUND ' The City of Kent has followed the process of phased environmental review as it undertakes actions to implement and amend the Downtown Strategic Action Plan.The State Environmental Paee 2 of 5 Downtown Strategic Action Plan(DSAP) Supplemental EIS-Addendum outline procedures for the and rules established for the act, VAC denda tolenvironmental decisions. Policy Act(SEPA) prepaying use of existing environmental documents and p P development regulation, rehensive plan, An EIS prepared for a comp ro ect,"or programmatic in nature Nonproject Document_ are considered non p J or other broad based policy documents distinguished from EISs or environmental documents (see WAC 197-11-704). These are Pp- or a road construction Project provide ` such as a building p !k is to analyze proposed altematives and it prepared for specific proja`to eatoBlS The purpose of a non-p j prior to adoption of an alternative. It is also a environmental consideratithe p ocesstgstednin evaluating alternatives to decision makers and document that discloses citizens. hosed so that review coincides and decision making process, (WAC 197 l 1-060(5))• phased Review—SEPA rules allow environmental review to e P orate planning ower documents ocumen that incoo Proposal with meaningful points in the P be followed by Harr specific to that p P Broader environmental documents maYencies shalt use. a variety of mechanisms, including general discussion by reference and concentrate solely on issues SEPA roles also clearly state that agencies shall to avod duplication and excess paperwork. addenda, adoption and incorporation by Draft Environmental Impact 1 The City of Kent issued99�Draft The DEIS Prior Environmental Document., Comprehensive Plan on July 18' and recommended mitigation. Statement (DEIS) Ian land use altematives, referred land use rehensive P comprehensive plan policies. The p +� analyzed three comp re aring measures, which were used i into the Comprehensive Plan was most closely relate c alternative which was incorporatedthe mixed-use alternative). A Fill-at Environmental Impact IAlterna of the DEIS, ( 1995,and the Comprehensive Plan was adopted by Statement(FEIS)was issued 18, 1995fluary 30, the City Council on April (DSAP) was adopted as a sub-area element nd°tile objectives general Policies The Downtown Strategic Action Plan The DSAPs major goal is to encourage downtown Comprehensive Plan. It translated the Comprehensive Pan scg icicommercial focus through into a more specific redevelopment St n unity identity i� include connecting and growth while creating ment. The basic strategies districts; and selecting target coordinated public and private developdefining special activity unifying important downtown features; ment. areas for phased infill and redevelop in 2000 to examine potential and Sound Transit undertook a further planning studySt in the The City TOD) near the Kent Commuter Rail e ob ective was to lencourage transit-oriented development( CRSAS),September 2000. Th It facilities to Commuter Rail Station Area Study( edestrian environment near trenoe pursuant to This document is hereby incorporated by development of a dense mix of land uses in a P 5 min the Kent Planning 1� encourage higher transit use. Tlr WAC 197-11-635. This study is available for review from 8 am— P 98032. Office,220 Fourth Ave S,Kent,WA endations from the DSAP, established a Planned Action within The City, acting upon recomm "Kent Station;' went through the downtown area pursuant to, purs WAC 197-11 1b4. This area, Specific environmental analysis re s sulting in a supplemental EIS issued in July 2002. The draft and final S EIS for the Kent Station Planned Action are also adopted for this DSAP amendment pursuant to WAC 197-1t-630. D....a-2-F< Downtown Strategic Action pla SuPPle1nental EIS_Addendum n(DSAP) Scope of,4ddendu environme 'n`As outline ntal anal d in the DSAP So IS but do analysis with SEPA rules, the Prudent to es not su respect to the described Purpose Utilize the bstantially chan actions• °f an addenda ENVIRONMENTAL addendum "go the identified ' this analysis rn is to provide process EA4ENTSas outlined builds u ELmental 'mpacts and analysis upon the All environme in WAGIg7- , therefore it is Kent ntal ele 11-600(4)(c) ments requ1fe the lsb ntal 'DSAP SEISrdadequately add resse ba eanalYzed for cons s[en of separate ra$n d final. Flirt d ,ver subin the parameters of the d upon site n y with the orn;iro mental check]' Sequent `po�eC City of specific condition Original mitigatin , Pursuant to t actions Would groat DSAP ns. g conditions and may r EPAe,newhich will be The on Measures for goals ument mitigation doc w gation Land Use discussed ' follow ' Public and policy recommend specific environmental s the same Facilities ation docu Proces s. menu associated s Sperm fib text and Traffic impacts were °Pcall and mitigation DISCUSSION plan the update ' 'Cp-2.Icatiom can The updateth �o aped under m file Land fSIONOFENVIRONiyENTALELEAfENTS A 2004-1• e found in the Draft DSAP DSAP Proposed land zoning in the use and Enterprise North FrarneIng changes include This district io multifa the re'desi area is firth area to for $nation of a 200q_ ntifie mily resident' portion a l• The total areaeiden d'n the mapsD contained m tal residential and Downtown of hmeSF-8 Pproximatel Ufied fort edges the reside area GO rcial Y 19 acre he Com the Dra fit along Ile City's transpOrtati s in size this netcould Prehensive plan DSAP update 'lames Street. mitigation gs trap analysis upon the mitigatior2te aPoroximately SOQ newg map re-des PM Pea n is area. Additional adequate to mitigate new develo Propose ' k hour development Y, the Sate any future I Pment or re n the existing SEIS would tri s to P pmenk This Proposed draft DS impacts associ development in this call for surrounding nei Would het AP update ated with future area. This ghborhood, ensure high for Desi development i P to calls Additional, gh quality develo n Review rn this ar n this y, Pment consistent area upon Central Avenue between s AP update seeks with the Commercial. This rezone mith to rezone Of Commercial. ne is and Cowe Streets at o apProximatet No si consistent With one Parcel y S acres of pro gnificant ire h the existingdepth from DCE to op rty along Another Pacts are anticipated Comprehensive General resident'Proposed amendment with this Plan ma a ndment to this Pro P designation developm� development in the do Portion Of the D Posed action for "TmPermit f 'on SAP would market rate fees fOS�n sidential development Se In Include Onsider various incentives to construe tio or hou proposed g> and to consider ' extending the multtfa educing or waiving , n a ve a concrete base. No ad amendment. allow• $ ditional mg five (5) stori Sal tax exemption Urban P P Sed eslg$es tot mitigation measures are warrante of d porrth,s chan P contained in the c rsportion of parking in the East and Wes Oningn�ad0°ument Include vou od he surface Fra This chan rfication tot acts to allow for ul increase the allow Parking stalls per 1,0al able surface square feet of pa oP a of� Downtown Strategic Action Plan(DSAP) Supplemental EIS—Addendum Gross Floor Area for commercial developments. No mitigation measures are warranted for this proposed code amendment. Public Facilities and Traffic Mitigation Proposed modifications to these portions of the DSAP are largely textual in nature and do not substantively change the nature of the original analysis under the SEIS. Therefore, no additional mitigation measure area proposed. II. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION A. SUMMARY Kent City Code section 11.03.510 identifies plans and policies from which the City may draw substantive mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act. This nonproject action has been evaluated in light of those substantive plans and policies as well as within the overall analysis completed for the City's Downtown Strategic Action Plan SEIS. B. DECISION The City of Kent DSAP SEIS, draft and final, provided analysis with regard to the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The City has reviewed this proposed amendment and has found it to be consistent with the range, types and magnitude of impacts and corresponding mitigation outlined in the DSPA SEIS. The proposed amendment is similar to, and does not substantially modify,the goals and policies outlined in the DSAP. 1 This analysis and subsequent addendum did not identify any new significant impacts associated with this proposed amendment to the DSAP. Therefore, this addendum, combined with the Downtown Strategic Action Plan SEIS adequately evaluates potential adverse environmental impacts and provides appropriate mitigation. Based upon this analysis, a separate threshold determination is not required for this action. This document and corresponding environmental record may be utilized in the future in conjunction with environmental review for future project-specific land use proposals on the subject property in accordance with the guidelines provided by WAC 197-11. Dated: October 18,2004 Signatur m� Oki�VQ Kim arousek,AICP,Responsible Official - KM jm11S 1Permit\PlanlEnv120041DSAPaddendum doc ATTACHMENT I Page i of 1 PLANNING & ECON DEV. COMMITTEE DECEMBER 6,2004 RCW 35A.63.071 Comprehensive plan -- Forwarding to legislative body. Upon completion of the hearing or hearings on the comprehensive plan or successive parts thereof, the planning agency, after making such changes as it deems necessary following such hearing, shall transmit a copy of its recommendations for the comprehensive plan, or successive parts thereof, to the legislative body through the chief administrative officer, who shall acknowledge receipt thereof and direct the clerk to certify thereon the date of receipt. [1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.63.071.] 1 � t 1 1 i i t httn-//www_IPn wa nn%11P(-1A11inrInv 4 4 1�� Page IofI RCW 35A.63.072 Comprehensive plan -- Approval by legislative body. Within sixty days from its receipt of the recommendation for the comprehensive plan, as above set forth, the legislative body at a public meeting shall consider the same. The legislative body within such period as it may by ordinance provide, shall vote to approve or disapprove or to modify and approve, as modified, the comprehensive plan or to refer it back to the planning agency for further proceedings, in which case the legislative body shall specify the time within which the planning agency shall report back to the legislative body its findings and recommendations on the matters referred to it. The final form and content of the comprehensive plan shall be determined by the legislative body. An affirmative vote of not less than a majority of total members of the legislative body shall be required for adoption of a resolution to approve the plan or its parts. The comprehensive plan, or its successive parts, as approved by the legislative body, shall be filed with an appropriate official of the code city and shall be available for public inspection. [1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.63.072.] r r http://www.leq.wa.gov/RCW/i ndex.cfm?fuseaction=Section&Section=35A.63.0... 11/22/2004 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Bids 1. SUBJECT: PUBLIC WORKS TENANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CENTENNIAL CENTER 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT:, The bid opening was held on January 14, 2005, with six bids received. The apparent low bid was submitted by Mike Werlech Construction in the amount of$212,965, excluding Washington State Sales Tax. 3. EXHIBITS: Bid tab 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks Director (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.) 5. FISCAL IMPACT Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A Currently in the Budget? Yes X No If no: Unbudgeted Expense: Fund Amount$ Unbudgeted Revenue: Fund Amount $ 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember. seconds to authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Werlech Construction in the amount of$212,965, excluding Washington State Sales Tax, to complete the Centennial Center Second Floor Tenant Improvements project. DISCUSSION: ACTION: AA-C" Council Agenda Item No. 8A CITY OF KENT PARKS FACILITIES Bid Tab January 14, 2005 Project: Centennial Center 2"d Floor Tenant Improvement Bidder: Bid Amount: Mike Werlech Construction $212,965.00 Lake Tapps Construction Unlimited $214,450.00 NTB $225,000.00 Flag Const $225,711.00 SCCI Sumit Central Construction $226,000.00 Lincoln Construction, Inc. $237,024.00 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 1, 2005 Category Bids 1. SUBJECT: KENT RESERVOIRS SEISMIC STRENGTHENING PROJECT— AWARD BID 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The bid opening for this project was held on January 25, 2005 with nine bids received The low bid was submitted by Advanced Construction, Inc. in the amount of $301,376.00. The Engineer's estimate was $473,280.00. The Public Works Director recommends awarding this contract to Advanced Construction, Inc. 3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Director's memorandum 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director (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 that the Kent Reservoirs Seismic Strengthening contract be awarded to Advanced Construction, Inc. for the low bid amount of$301,376. DISCUSSION: ACTION: �^L Council Agenda Item No. 813 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Larry Blanchard Acting Public Works Director Phone 253-856-5500 Fax 253-856-6500 K E N T WASHINGTON Address 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent, WA 98032-5896 February 1, 2005 TO: Mayor White and Kent City Council FROM: Larry Blanchard, Acting Public Works Director SUBJECT: Kent Reservoirs Seismic Strengthening Bid opening for this project was held on January 25, 2005 with nine bids received. The low bid was submitted by Rodarte Advanced Construction, Inc. in the amount of$301.376.00. The Engineer's estimate was $473,280 00. The Public Works Director recommends awarding this contract to Advanced Construction, Inc Bid Summary Advanced Construction, Inc.. $301,376.00 Briere & Associates, Inc. $381,697.60 Diamaco, Inc. $397,120 00 Morse Construction Group, Inc. $397,664.00 Flag Construction, Inc. $412,234 50 T Bailey, Inc. $419,532.80 Western Eng. Constructors $423.232.00 Caicos Corporation $450.072 96 S.L Larsen Construction Co., Inc. $526,619.20 Engineer's Estimate $473,280.00 Mayor White and Kent City Council Kent Reservoirs Seismic Strengthening -Award Bid February I,2005 1 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 COMMITTEE G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS f 1 ! I i EXECUTIVE SESSION ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION