HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 05/04/2010 CITY OF KENT
1
City Council Meeting
Agenda
" 'n
1 May 4, 2010
a
Mayor Suzette Cooke
ar Jamie Perry, Council President
1 � �
1 ti, Councilmembers
Elizabeth Albertson
1
Ron Harmon
' Dennis Higgins
I
Deborah Ranniger
Debbie Raplee
`°h' y KENT
WASHINGTON
s Les Thomas CITY CLERK
KENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS
KENT May 4, 2010
W I. 1, I I<,T 11. Council Chambers
MAYOR: Suzette Cooke COUNCILMEMBERS: Jamie Perry, President
Elizabeth Albertson Ron Harmon Dennis Higgins
Deborah Ranniger Debbie Raplee Les Thomas
**********************************************************************
tCOUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
5:30 p.m.
Item Description Speaker Time
1. Grade Separations/TMP Funding Tim LaPorte 50 minutes
**********************************************************************
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 - Citizens may request that an item be added
to the agenda at this time. Please stand or raise your hand to
be recognized by the Mayor.
4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A. Public Recognition
B. Community Events
C. Senator Claudia Kauffman Legislative Update
D. Introduction of Appointees
E. Economic and Community Development Report
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
' 6. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Minutes of Previous Meeting - Approve
B. Payment of Bills - None
C. Safe Havens Services Grant - Accept
D. 4Culture Grant for Fourth of July Splash - Accept
E. Kent Station Sponsorship Agreement for Concerts - Accept
F. Park and Open Space Plan Ordinance - Adopt
G. Capital Facilities and Park & Open Space Elements, Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, Parks Master Plan, Ordinance - Adopt
(Continued)
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CONTINUED
H. Capital Facilities Element, Comprehensive Plan Amendment,
Transportation, Ordinance - Adopt
I. SR 516 & 41" Avenue Improvements Consultant Agreement with Magnan
Consulting Services - Authorize
J. Tacoma Second Supply Project Hybrid Filtration and Bond Sale -
Authorize
K. Fairway Crest Bill of Sale - Accept
L. Punjab Bill of Sale - Accept
M. Scenic Heights (aka Scenic Hill) Sewer Extension Bill of Sale - Accept
N. Kent Human Services Commission Appointments - Confirm
O. Civil Service Commission Reappointment - Confirm
P. Verdana (aka Bridges) Modification to Planned Unit Development
Ordinance - Adopt
Q. Development Fee Deferral, Public Hearing by Economic & Community
Development Committee - Approve
R. Excused Absences for Councilmembers Raplee and Thomas - Approve
S. Green River Levee Schedule 1C - Accept as Complete
7. OTHER BUSINESS
A. S. 228"h St. Union Pacific Railroad Grade Separation Agreement
B. Animal Control Services Agreement
S. BIDS
None
1 9. REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES, STAFF AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
10. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION AND AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION
A. Labor Negotiations
' B. Lease Negotiations
12. ADJOURNMENT
I NOTE: A copy of the full agenda packet is available for perusal in the City Clerk's
Office and the Kent Regional Library. The Agenda Summary page and
complete packet are on the City of Kent web site at www.choosekent.com
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.
OLD N p 5 T Tu i
dL_ L. cCp N O F- 0.0 �—� Q N R1 C E1]L a
on � nv E
o c W= o y� Es
av � u a maT� y\ n no c0C-0
• c-6 7 ,tl y �� C Y O 0. d m V O .0. y 0 Oa O
-0 c T y L
C_ >6. J 2 ^� .'� ro C—= W O IJ y v Y V y p
• vVi°bc c? 3� v � Ec � un� o � � E� E � �Y � 3 = E �
Li
O E 3 o E A E u ro o is E c
5,2S UE
w
LN > ro -j
c `1 v N C W
-N ° >. _ 0 1cNO..OI oa
O ESN ro= y EJ Y 3 E a °« v U< OC > O p .� U O
i
ro> ,� `- o'�� v u � �" o enu v� E y
v�Ou3 �cEU3N Yv~Nro T sYCo�yLnuo ?o4�uO uO3 vNrs VV NE'L�v� �y- vLy NC Qvc�EJ s`_c6�U'J v=vsros EnT u m�En° UdC. Ead av�a
bo > > u po E
c o a
a %�oWao0E
° m r0 _
sEJOWl W -) s m -nE Oa C `tl H
� °o � o � mac V F o O� E�c ° Y ,=�
• �. yt E"' y EF- -' v �J E
G
E > v� y E y v •• ac S ro--c v n� v °�F- o c
`_^U C v z ° N Y �'L N.roi — rt C K� �.- C v ° N
n1 C N- y m O V y V E E p— p
� nroo Q b Nc,—
n.ut vc� Evo � ccv .. � vEE EUE e Ems '^ you = Evo .= = v = _S =
r0 oo- ooyuu >sy .. oauvnvnv -aEuv � Ev � Ev
VUU ,a V� nvror�0000 � a�w�a��� d.� a�f
['m
o
= oz=
E 0
> °n
O
Z c
3
y i N
N rt > i
7 Q C b
• LEaa i00 7 N-- 3 p 3
Uoo TE o E v u
f^V o g V o ^ o c u
E
W 1YV � � Ji mm� Fr V � - Co E —
LLI
co
u
N pp n O C U 3 u p
C O t a O O U! W v Y V
y E y 3 y 3 42
• m1v °' v c oo > -pv o roTE Yi � � "s >-u
m o o °; a
T a L >
• c �>.m—y" v o -°� of E `>°� �ro � c-�°- ro��� o�
0 o r� Tc E v u
• o� � °i � � Tov p �au � cw� � ocoo � v,n
Uv v
u v c eo i6 ro s a 3 0 Q c Y .3 v v p.p` o
C�O� W
00-
c. z�
vni vC v a a � v�i u ro QV > nv E :�E E�r Q �>a0 d roU��vvi
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
1) GRADE SEPARATIONS/TMP FUNDING
!
!
I
!
1
!
t
!
t
1
1
t
!
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time, make known the
subject of interest, so all may be properly heard.
A) FROM COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATION, OR STAFF
B) FROM THE PUBLIC
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
r
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A) PUBLIC RECOGNITION
B) COMMUNITY EVENTS
C) SENATOR CLAUDIA KAUFFMAN LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
D) INTRODUCTION OF APPOINTEES
E) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Item No. 6A - 6B
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. City Council Action:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember
seconds to approve Consent Calendar Items A through S.
Discussion
' Action
' 6A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of April 20, 2010.
6B. Approval of Bills.
' Numbers were not available.
1
I
' Kent City Council Meeting
KE April 20, 2010
'Nnsn rvc T ary
The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by
Mayor Cooke. Councilmembers present: Albertson, Harmon, Higgins, Perry,
Ranniger, and Raplee. Councilmember Thomas was excused from the meeting.
(CFN-198)
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
A. From Council, Administration, Staff. (CFN-198) Consent Calendar Item L was
' added by the Council President and CAO Hodgson removed the Executive Session.
B. From the Public. (CFN-198) Continued Communications Item A was added at
' the request of Tom Sharp.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A. Public Recognition. (CFN-198) Mayor Cooke read a proclamation recognizing
the vital services performed by the Office of the Municipal Clerk, and presented it to
City Clerk Brenda Jacober.
' B Community Events. (CFN-198) Council President Perry announced three Town
Hall meetings being held in the upcoming week; Raplee announced events coming to
' the ShoWare Center, and Ranniger encouraged all citizens to vote for Earthworks
Park in the $1,000,000 Preservation Funding competition.
' C. Introduction of Appointees. (CFN-198) Mayor Cooke announced her
appointees to the Kent Arts Commission and the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee,
and introduced those who were in attendance.
D. Public Safety Report. (CFN-122) Police Chief Strachan updated the monthly
statistics and provided information on school officers, grants, and fund-raising. He
' then awarded a commendation to Dick and Dee Staples and Tootie Gerber, who
have provided mooring for the Police boat at Lake Meridian, as well as many other
volunteer services to the Police Department.
' E. Legislative Update. (CFN-198) Michelle Witham gave a final update on the
status of legislative issues including cuts to services, tax increases, flooding issues,
street utility and brokered natural gas.
CONSENT CALENDAR
' Perry moved to approve Consent Calendar Items A through L. Raplee seconded and
the motion carried.
A. Approval of Minutes. (CFN-198) Minutes of the regular Council meeting of
April 6, 2010, were approved.
' B. Approval of Bills. (CFN-104) Payment of the bills received through March 15
and paid on March 15, after auditing by the Operations Committee on April 6, 2010,
were approved.
1
Kent City Council Minutes April 20, 2010 '
Checks issued for vouchers were approved: '
Date Check Numbers Amount
3/15/10 Wire Transfers 4079-4099 $2,553,664.52
3/15/10 Regular Checks 641182-641566 962,979 40
Void Checks 64133 (740.00)
Use Tax Payable 2,454.27
$3,518,358.19 '
Payment of the bills received through March 31 and paid on March 31, after auditing
by the Operations Committee on April 6, 2010, were approved. ,
Checks issued for Vouchers were approved:
Date Document Numbers Amount t
03/31/10 Wire Transfers 4100-4114 $1,672,410 00
03/31/10 Regular Checks 641567-641993 3,014,586.77 '
Void Checks 641579 (200.00)
Use Tax Payable 706.19
$4,687,502.96 '
Checks issued for payroll for March 1 through March 15 and paid on March 19, 2010,
were approved:
Date Document Numbers Amount '
3/19/10 Checks 316824-317049 $ 162,964.46
3/19/10 Advices 264357-265130 1,585,383.78
$1,748,348.24
Interim Pay '
3/19/10 Check 317050 $187.80
Checks issued for payroll for March 16 through March 31 and paid on April 5, 2010,
were approved: ,
Date Document Numbers Amount '
4/5/10 Checks 316824-317049 $ 162,964.46
4/5/10 Advices 264357-265130 1585,383.78
$1,748,348.24
Interim Pay
4/6/10 Check 317316 $1,097.97
4/5/10 Voided 317058 ($845.89) '
C. Countywide Plannina Policies, Amendments, Allocation of Regional
Service and Facilities, and Growth Targets Resolution. (CFN-961) Resolution '
No 1825 ratifying the proposed amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies
(CPP) approved under County Growth Management Planning Council Motion
Nos. 09-1, and 09-2 was adopted. '
2 ,
Kent City Council Minutes April 20, 2010
tD Meridian Valley Creek Design Consultant Agreement. (CFN-1038) The
' Mayor was authorized to sign the consultant services agreement with The Watershed
Company in the amount of $68,391 to perform design work, and environmental
studies, and to obtain the needed permits to construct the project on the Meridian
Valley Creek.
E. Safe Routes to School Grant. (CFN-122) The Mayor was authorized to accept
' Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Safe Routes to School Grant Funds totaling
$893,775, and Congested Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Grant Funds totaling
$350,000 for the George T. Daniel Elementary School and Horizon Elementary
School's Safe Routes to School Projects, sign all necessary grant documents, and
amendment of the budget and expenditure of the funds were authorized.
F. Federal Grant Funding for East Valley Highway Improvements. (CFN-1038)
The Public Works Director was authorized to accept the Construction Phase portion of
the Federal Highway Administration's Surface Transportation Program Grants received
for East Valley Highway (84th Ave. South) Improvements, establish a budget, and
expend the funds, and the Mayor was authorized to sign all documents necessary to
receive the grant funds.
G. Union Pacific Railroad Agreement for James Street Crossing. (CFN-113)
The Mayor was authorized to sign the agreement in the amount of $143,564 with the
Union Pacific Railroad Company for reconstruction and widening of the existing James
Street crossing, subject to approval of final terms and conditions by the City Attorney.
' H. Appointments to the Kent Arts Commission. (CFN-839) The Mayor's
appointments of Wendy Johnson and Sharona Chandra to the Arts Commission were
confirmed. Ms. Johnson's term on the commission will expire on October of 2011 and
' Ms. Chandra's term will expire on October of 2013
I. Appointments to Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. (CFN-1170) The
appointments of Andrew Hutchinson and Aaron Watne to the Lodging Tax Advisory
Committee were confirmed, and their terms will expire on December 31, 2012.
J. Washington Traffic Safety Commission Grant. (CFN-122) The grant from
the Washington Traffic Safety Commission in the amount of $8,200 to fund overtime
for two sergeants and four officers to conduct four Illegal Street Racing enforcement
sweeps during the summer of 2010 was accepted, amendment of the budget was
authorized, and the Police Chief was authorized to sign all necessary grant
documents.
K. 212`h Street Warehouse Bill of Sale. (CFN-484) The Bill of Sale for the South
212th Street Warehouse for 1 gate valve, 2 hydrants, and 271 linear feet of water
main, 24 linear feet of sanitary sewer line, 15 linear feet of frontage improvements,
4 storm sewer manholes, 5 storm sewer catch basins, 2,640 cubic feet of detention
pond storage, and 131 linear feet of storm sewer lines was accepted.
' 3
Kent City Council Minutes April 20, 2010 ,
ADDED ITEM '
L. Council Absence. (CFN-198) An excused absence from tonight's meeting for '
Councilmember Thomas was approved.
OTHER BUSINESS
A. Verdana (aka Bridges) Revised Request for Major Modifications to
Previously Approved Planned Unit Development. (CFN-1314) City Attorney
Brubaker noted that this is a quasi-judicial matter and explained the process to be '
used. It was determined that none of the Councilmembers have a conflict of interest
or have had ex-parte contacts. There were no objections from the audience regarding
the Council's participation. It was noted that a copy of the complete record has been
available for review in the Council Office. Brubaker explained the issue and major
modification criteria to be considered.
Sharon Clamp of Planning Services stated that this is a modification to the '
Verdana Planned Unit Development previously approved by the Hearing Examiner
with conditions on February 15, 2006. She outlined the history of the project, ,
summarized the revisions, and noted that the Hearing Examiner's recommendation is
approval with conditions. Clamp then responded to questions from Councilmembers
regarding wetlands, screening, and density. '
Perry moved to accept the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations of the
Hearing Examiner, to approve the revised Verdana (aka Bridges) Planned Unit '
Development Major Modification, and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the
necessary ordinance consistent with this motion and bring that ordinance back to
Council, and to amend the motion to add the "in addition to" language, so that it's '
very clear that all original conditions of the residential PUD and commercial PUD
modification revision conditions be met, and to amend the motion to clarify that
improvements to 1241h/304th Street required by the original PUD be constructed as
required by the original PUD, if residential development begins before commercial
development, and that, if commercial development begins first, the developer
construct all improvements to 1241h/304th required by both the original PUD and this
major modification. Ranniger seconded. A brief discussion clarifying the intent of and ,
supporting the motion was then held, after which the motion carried unanimously.
B. Mid-Air Refueling Tanker Contract. (CFN-198) Michelle Witham, Community/
Public Affairs, explained that the United States Department of Defense has begun the
process to procure the Air Force's next mid-air refueling tanker, and that The Boeing
Company and Airbus are anticipated to be competitors to build that tanker, the cost '
of which could be $35 billion. She noted that the proposed resolution urges the
Department of Defense to select The Boeing Company to build the tanker. Raplee
moved to adopt Resolution No. 1826 urging the U. S. Department of Defense to ,
award the mid-air refueling tanker contract to The Boeing Company. Harmon
seconded and the motion carried.
BIDS
A. East Hill Operations Center Phase II On-Site Utilities. (CFN-239) The bid
opening was held on April 13, 2010, with eleven (11) bids received. The low bid was ,
4 ,
Kent City Council Minutes April 20, 2010
submitted by Shoreline Construction Company in the amount of $1,964,027.59. The
Engineer's estimate was $3,418,540.73. Public Works Director LaPorte explained the
project and noted that funds have been budgeted He recommended awarding the
bid to the low bidder, and noted for Harmon that the fact that the bids were lower
than the estimate is a sign of the economy, and that he is comfortable with the low
bid. Raplee moved to authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract to award the East
Hill Operations Center Phase II On-Site Utilities project to Shoreline Construction
' Company in the amount of $1,964,027.59. Harmon seconded and the motion carried.
REPORTS
A. Council President. (CFN-198) Perry reminded everyone of the upcoming Town
Hall meetings.
' B. Mayor. (CFN-198) Mayor Cooke noted that staff is working on a grant request
focusing on obesity.
' C Operations Committee. (CFN-198) Perry noted that an animal control agree-
ment will be on the next Council agenda.
D. Parks and Human Services Committee. (CFN-198) Ranniger encouraged
citizens to attend the Wine, Women and Wow event.
' E. Economic & Community Development Committee. (CFN-198) Perry noted
that the next meeting will be in May, and that an annexation zoning plan will be on
the May 4 Council agenda.
' F. Public Safety Committee. (CFN-198) No report was given.
G. Public Works Committee. (CFN-198) Raplee noted that the next meeting will
be on Monday, May 4, at which time they will discuss transportation projects and
funding.
' H. Administration. (CFN-198) Hodgson reiterated that there will be no Executive
Session. City Attorney Brubaker explained that since the time the Council
grandfathered in the house-banked social card rooms in the annexation area, the
' Gambling Commission has changed their opinion and now say that the Great
American Casino would be allowed to relocate but that the Gambling Commission
would coordinate that relocation with the City of Kent. Brubaker opined that the
Council will still have sufficient controls. He noted that the Side Track Tavern is a
non-house-banked social card room, and the recent ordinance does not give the City
the right to grandfather in that establishment.
Brubaker then explained the status of the foreclosure issue on the parking garage
property, noting that the process will take approximately five months. He clarified
' that it is possible to opt out at any time, and that there are also delay options
throughout the process.
' 5
Kent City Council Minutes April 20, 2010 '
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS ,
ADDED ITEM
A. Regional Fire Authority. (CFN-122) Tom Sharp, 24254 14P Avenue SE, Kent,
questioned why there have been no comments on the Regional Fire Authority from
the City. He expressed hope that there will be a revenue neutral transition, saying he
feels it would be unethical for the City to keep any money from it.
ADJOURNMENT ,
The meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m. (CFN-198)
Brenda Jacober, CMC
City Clerk
6 '
r
rKent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
rCategory Consent Calendar - 6C
1. SUBJECT: SAFE HAVENS SERVICES GRANT - ACCEPT
' 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the King County Domestic Violence Grant
of $10,000 to fund Safe Havens services, amend the budget accordingly, and
authorize the expenditure of funds in the Safe Havens budget.
The King County Grant funds in the amount of $10,000 will be used to provide
services to low income families at the Safe Havens Visitation and Exchange
' Center. Funds will be used for personnel costs, rent, utilities and supplies.
i
1
1
r
3. EXHIBITS: King County Grant Agreement
r4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks and Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
r5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue? X
Currently in the Budget? Yes No X
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
rCouncilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
1
rDISCUSSION:
' ACTION:
i
' King County Contract No. D39757D
Federal Taxpayer ID No. 91-1355875
Department/Division Community and Human Services/Women's Program
' Agency City of Kent
Project Title Safe Havens Visitation Center _
' Contract Amount $ 10,000 Fund Code 1421
Contract Period From 01/01/2010 To 12/31/2010
KING COUNTY PUBLIC ENTITY SERVICES CONTRACT — 2010
' THIS CONTRACT is entered into by KING COUNTY (the "County"), and City of Kent (the "Agency"),
whose address is 220 - 4th Avenue South Kent WA 98032
' WHEREAS, the County has been advised that the following are the current funding sources, funding
levels and effective dates
FUNDING SOURCES _ _ FUNDING LEVELS EFFECTIVE DATES
COUNTY $10,000 01/01/2010 - 12/31/2010
' TOTAL $10,000 01/01/2010 - 12/31/2010
' and
WHEREAS, the County desires to have certain services performed by the Agency as described in this
Contract, and as authorized by Ordinance No. 16717;
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
This form is available in alternate formats upon
request for persons with disabilities.
City of Kent Page 1 of 18 2010 Contract
I. EXHIBITS
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
® Certificates of Insurance/Endorsements Attached hereto as Exhibit I
® Safe Havens Visitation Center Attached hereto as Exhibit III
It. DURATION OF CONTRACT '
This Contract shall commence on the 1 st day of January 2010, and shall terminate on the
31 st day of December 2010, unless extended or terminated earlier, pursuant to the terms ,
and conditions of this Contract
III. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A The County shall reimburse the Agency for satisfactory completion of the terms and 1
conditions found in this Contract and its attached Exhibits.
B. The Agency shall submit an invoice and all accompanying reports as specified in the ,
attached Exhibit(s), including its final invoice and all outstanding reports, The County
shall initiate authorization for payment to the Agency not more than 30 days after a
complete and accurate invoice and all outstanding reports are received and approved
C. If the Agency's final invoice and reports are not submitted by the day specified in the
attached Exhiblt(s), 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.
IV. OPERATING BUDGET
The Agency shall apply the funds received from the County under this Contract in '
accordance with the budget, if included within an Exhibit 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 within an Exhibit is expected to exceed ten percent of
the total Exhibit budget Supporting documents necessary to explain fully the nature and
purpose of the amendment must accompany each request for an amendment
V. INTERNAL CONTROL AND ACCOUNTING SYSTEM
The Agency shall establish and maintain a system of accounting and internal controls which
complies with applicable, generally accepted accounting principles, financial and '
governmental reporting standards as prescribed by the appropriate accounting standards
board.
VI. 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 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.
1
City of Kent Pago 2 of 18 2010 Contract
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 working days of any such relocation.
Vll. AUDITS
A. The Agency shall submit to the County a copy of its annual report of examination/audit,
' conducted by the Washington State Auditor, within 30 days of receipt
B. If additional federal and/or state audit or review requirements are imposed on the
County during the term of this Contract, the Agency agrees this Contract may be
1 amended to require that the Agency comply with any such additional audit
requirements Even if this Contract is not amended, the Agency agrees to comply with
any such additional audit requirements
' Vlll. EVALUATIONS AND INSPECTIONS
A. The Agency shall provide right of access to its facilities, including those of any
' subcontractor, to the County, the state, and/or federal agencies or officials at all
reasonable times in order to monitor and evaluate the services provided under this
Contract. The County shall give advance notice to the Agency in the case of fiscal
audits to be conducted by the County.
B. The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this Contract shall
be subject at all time to inspection, review, or audit by the County and/or federal/state
' officials so authorized by law during the performance of this Contract and six years
after termination hereof, unless a longer retention period is required by law,
' C. The Agency agrees to cooperate with the County or its agent in the evaluation of the
Agency's performance under this Contract and to make available all information
reasonably required by any such evaluation process. The results and records of said
evaluations shall be maintained and disclosed in accordance with RCW Chapter 42 17
IX. CORRECTIVE ACTION
If the County determines that a breach of contract has occurred, that is, the Agency has
failed to comply with any terms or conditions of this Contract or the Agency has failed to
provide in any manner the work or services agreed to herein, and if the County deems said
breach to warrant corrective action, the following sequential procedure shall apply-
' A The County shall notify the Agency in writing of the nature of the breach;
B. The Agency shall respond in writing no later than ten working days following receipt of
such notification, which response shall indicate the steps being taken to correct the
specified deficiencies The corrective action plan shall specify the proposed
completion date for bringing the Contract into compliance, which date shall not be more
than 30 days from the date of the Agency's response, unless the County, at its sole
discretion, specifies in writing an extension in the number of days to complete the
corrective actions,
C. The County shall notify the Agency in writing of the County's determination as to the
sufficiency of the Agency's corrective action plan. The County shall have sole
discretion in determining the sufficiency of the Agency's corrective action plan;
City of Kent Page 3 of 18 2010 Contract
D. In the event that the Agency does not respond within the appropriate time with a
corrective action plan, or the Agency's corrective action plan is determined by the '
County to be insufficient, the County may commence termination of this Contract in
whole or in part pursuant to Section XI.B,
E. In addition, the County may withhold any payment owed the Agency or prohibit the ,
Agency from incurring additional obligations of funds until the County is satisfied that
corrective action has been taken or completed; and
F. Nothing herein shall be deemed to affect or waive any rights the parties may have ,
pursuant to Section XI Subsections A, B, C, and D.
X. ASSIGNMENTISUBCONTRACTING
A. The Agency shall not assign or subcontract any portion of this Contract or transfer or
assign any claim arising pursuant to this Contract without the written consent of the
County, Said consent shall be sought in writing by the Agency not less than 15 days
prior to the date of any proposed assignment or subcontract
B "Subcontract" shall mean any agreement between the Agency and a subcontractor or
between subcontractors that is based on this Contract, provided that the term
"subcontract" does not include the purchase of (1) support services not related to the
subject matter of this Contract; or(2) supplies.
XI. TERMINATION
A. This Contract may be terminated by the County without cause, in whole or in part, prior
to the termination date specified in Section ll, by providing the Agency 30 days
advance written notice of the termination
B The County may terminate this Contract, in whole or in part, upon seven days advance '
written notice in the event: (1) the Agency materially breaches any duty, obligation, or
service required pursuant to this Contract; and/or (2) the duties, obligations, or services
required herein become impossible, illegal, or not feasible '
If the Contract is terminated by the County pursuant to this Subsection XI B (1), the
Agency shall be liable for damages, including any additional costs of procurement of
similar services from another source ,
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 immediately return to the County any funds, misappropriated or
unexpended, which have been paid to the Agency by the County,
C. If County or other expected or actual funding is withdrawn, reduced, or limited in any
way prior to the termination date set forth in this Contract and its attached Exhibits, the
County may, upon written notification to the Agency, terminate this Contract in whole or
in part. ,
If the Contract is terminated as provided in this Subsection. (1) the County shall be
liable only for payment in accordance with the terms of this Contract for services
rendered prior to the effective date of termination, and (2) the Agency shall be released
from any obligation to provide such further services pursuant to the Contract as are
affected by the termination.
City of Kent Page 4 of 18 2010 Contract ,
Funding or obligation under this Contract beyond the current appropriation year is
conditional upon appropriation by the County Council of sufficient funds to support the
activities described in the Contract Should such appropriation not be approved, this
Contract shall terminate at the close of the current appropriation year.
D. This Contract may be terminated by the Agency without cause, prior to the date
specified by providing the County 90 days advance written notice of the termination.
The Agency shall provide the County 90 days advance written notice of its intent not to
' renew this Contract, in whole or in part
E. Nothing herein shall limit, waive, or extinguish any right or remedy provided by this
Contract or law that either party may have in the event that the obligations, terms, and
conditions set forth in this Contract are breached by the other party.
XII. 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 excep: as expressly
set forth in this Contract.
' XIII. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION
A In providing services under this Contract, the Agency is an independent contractor, and
' neither it nor its officers agents or employees are employees of the County for any
purpose. The Agency shall be responsible for all federal and/or state tax, industrial
insurance, and Social Security liability that may result from the performance of and
compensation for these services and shall make no claim of career service or civil
' service rights which may accrue to a County employee under state or local law
The County assumes no responsibility for the payment of any compensation, wages,
' benefits, or taxes, by, or on behalf of the Agency, its employees, and/or others by
reason of this Contract The Agency shall protect, indemnify, and save harmless the
County, its officers, agents, and employees from and against any and all claims, costs,
' and/or losses whatsoever occurring or resulting from (1) the Agency's failure to pay
any such compensation, wages, benefits, or taxes, and/or (2) the supplying to the
Agency of work, services, materials, or supplies by Agency employees or other
suppliers in connection with or support of the performance of this Contract,
iB. The Agency further agrees that it is financially responsible for and shall repay the
County all indicated amounts following an audit exception that occurs due to the
' negligence, intentional act, and/or failure, for any reason, to comply with the terms of
this Contract by the Agency, its officers, employees, agents and/or representatives
This duty to repay the County shall not be diminished or extinguished by the prior
termination of the Contract pursuant to the Duration of Contract or the Termination
sections
C. The Agency shall protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, its
officers, employees, and agents from any and all costs, claims,judgments, and/or
awards of damages, arising out of, or in any way resulting from, the negligent acts or
omissions of the Agency, its officers, employees, and/or agents, in its performance
and/or non-performance of its obligations under this Contract The Agency agrees that
its obligations under this subparagraph extend to any claim, demand, and/or cause of
action brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents For this purpose,
the Agency, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, as respects the County only, any
' immunity that would otherwise be available against such claims under the Industrial
City of Kent Page 5 of 18 2010 Contract
Insurance provisions of Title 51 RCW. In the event the County incurs any judgment,
award, and/or cost arising therefrom including attorneys' fees to enforce the provisions '
of this article, all such fees, expenses, and costs shall be recoverable from the Agency
D The County shall protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Agency, its
officers, employees, and agents from any and all costs, claims, judgments, and/or
awards of damages, arising out of, or in any way resulting from, the sole negligent acts
or omissions of the County, its officers, employees, or agents The County agrees that
its obligations under this subparagraph extend to any claim, demand, and/or cause of ,
action brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents. For this purpose,
the County, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, as respects the Agency only, any
immunity that would otherwise be available against such claims under the Industrial
Insurance provisions of Title 51 RCW In the event the Agency incurs any judgment, ,
award, and/or cost arising therefrom including attorneys' fees to enforce the provisions
of this article, all such fees, expenses, and costs shall be recoverable from the County.
E. Claims shall include, but not be limited to, assertions that use or transfer of software,
book, document, report, film, tape, or sound reproduction or material of any kind,
delivered hereunder, constitutes an infringement of any copyright, patent, trademark,
trade name, and/or otherwise results in unfair trade practice '
F. To the extent that an Agency subcontractor fails to satisfy its obligation to defend and
indemnify the County as detailed in Section XVII.B, of this Contract, the Agency shall
protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, its officers, employees and
agents from any and all costs, claims, judgments, and/or awards or damages arising
out of, or in any way resulting from, the negligent act or omissions of the Agency's
subcontractor, its officers, employees, and/or agents in connection with or in support of '
this Contract
G Nothing contained within this provision shall affect and/or alter the application of any
other provision contained within this Contract
H. The indemnification, protection, defense and hold harmless obligations contained
herein shall survive the expiration, abandonment or termination of this Contract ,
XIV. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
A. By the date of execution of this Contract, the Agency shall procure and maintain for the ,
duration of this Contract, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages
to property which may arise from, or in connection with, the performance of work
hereunder by the Agency, its agents, representatives, employees, and/or
subcontractors. The costs of such insurance shall be paid by the Agency or
subcontractor. The Agency may furnish separate certificates of insurance and policy
endorsements for each subcontractor as evidence of compliance with the insurance
requirements of this Contract. The Agency is responsible for ensuring compliance with
all of the insurance requirements stated herein Failure by the Agency, its agents,
employees, officers and or subcontractors, to comply with the insurance requirements
slated herein shall constitute a material breach of this Contract.
For All Coverages: Each insurance policy shall be written on an "occurrence" form,
except that insurance on a "claims made" form may be acceptable with prior County
approval.
If coverage is approved and purchased on a "claims made" basis, the Agency warrants
continuation of coverage, either through policy renewals or the purchase of an ,
City of Kent Page 6 or I 2010 Contract
extended discovery period, if such extended coverage is available, for not less than
three years from the date of Contract termination, and/or conversion from a "claims
made" form to an "occurrence" coverage form
By requiring such minimum insurance, the County shall not be deemed or construed to
have assessed the risks that may be applicable to the Agency under this Contract
The Agency shall assess its own risks and, if it deems appropriate and/or prudent,
maintain greater limits and/or broader coverage
' Nothing contained within these insurance requirements shall be deemed to limit the
scope, application and/or limits of the coverage afforded by said policies, which
coverage will apply to each insured to the full extent provided by the terms and
conditions of the policy(ies). Nothing contained within this provision shall affect and/or
alter the application of any other provision contained within this Contract.
I B. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as the following:
1 General Liability:
Insurance Services Office form number(CG 00 01) covering COMMERCIAL
GENERAL LIABILITY).
t2 Professional Liability,
Professional Liability, Errors, and Omissions coverage In the event that services
' delivered pursuant to this Contract either directly or indirectly involve or require
professional services, Professional Liability, Errors, and Omissions coverage
shall be provided "Professional Services", for the purpose of this Contract
section, shall mean any services provided by a licensed professional or those
services that require professional standards of care
3 Automobile Liability:
In the event that services delivered pursuant to this Contract require the use of a
vehicle or involve the transportation of clients by Agency personnel in Agency-
owned vehicles or non-owned vehicles, the Agency shall provide evidence of the
appropriate automobile coverage
Insurance Services Office form number(CA 00 01) covering BUSINESS AUTO
COVERAGE, symbol 1 "any auto", or the appropriate coverage provided by
symbols 2, 7, 8, or 9
4. Workers' Compensation
Workers' Compensation coverage, as required by the Industrial Insurance Act of
the State of Washington, as well as any similar coverage required for this work by
applicable federal or"Other States" state law
5. Stop Gap/Employers Liability
Coverage shall be at least as broad as the protection provided by the Workers'
Compensation policy Part 2 (Employers Liability) or, in states with monopolistic
state funds, the protection provided by the "Stop Gap" endorsement to the
general liability policy
City of Kent Page 7 of 18 2010 Contract
C Minimum Limits of Insurance
The Agency shall maintain limits no less than, for: ,
1, General Liability. $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence by bodily
injury, personal injury, and property damage, and for those policies with ,
aggregate limits, a $2,000,000 aggregate limit.
2 Professional Liability, Errors, and Omissions: $1,000,000 per claim and in the
aggregate. ,
3. Automobile Liability. $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily
injury and property damage. Except if the transport of clients by Agency
personnel is involved, then Risk Management will review the appropriate amount
of coverage
4 Workers' Compensation, Statutory requirements of the state of residency. ,
5 Stop Gap/Employers Liability, $1,000,000.
D. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions '
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to, and approved by, the
County The deductible and/or self-insured retention of the policies shall not apply to
the Agency's liability to the County and shall be the sole responsibility of the Agency.
E. Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies required in this Contract are to contain, or be endorsed to
contain, the following provisions,
1. Liability Policies Except Professional/Errors and Omissions and Workers ,
Compensation
a, The County, its officers, officials, employees and agents are to be covered
as additional insureds as respects liability arising out of activities performed
by or on behalf of the Agency in connection with this Contract. (CG 2010
11/85 or its' equivalent)
b. The Agency's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects
the County, its officers, officials, employees, and agents Any insurance
and/or self-insurance maintained by the County, its offices, officials,
employees or agents shall not contribute with the Agency's insurance or
benefit the Agency in any way.
C. The Agency's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against
whom claim is made and/or lawsuit is brought, except with respect to the
limits of the insurer's liability,
2. All Policies '
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 30 days prior written notice has been given to the County.
City of Kent Page 8 of 18 2010 Contract '
F. Acceptability of Insurers
Unless otherwise approved by the County, insurance is to be placed with insurers with
a Bests' rating of no less than A Vill, or, if not rated with Bests, with minimum
surpluses the equivalent of Bests' surplus size VIII
Professional Liability, Errors, and Omissions insurance may be placed with insurers
with a Bests' rating of B+VII Any exception must be approved by the County.
' If, at any time, the foregoing policies sha4 fail to meet the above minimum
requirements the Agency shall, upon notice to that effect from the County, promptly
obtain a new policy, and shall submit the same to the County, with appropriate
certificates and endorsements, for approval.
G. Verification of Coverage
' The Agency shall furnish the County certificates of insurance and endorsements
required by this Contract Such certificates and endorsements, and renewals thereof,
shall be attached as exhibits to the Contract The certificates and endorsements for
' each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind
coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy
are to be on forms approved by the County prior to the commencement of activities
associated with the Contract The County reserves the right to require complete,
certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time
H. Subcontractors
The Agency shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall
require separate certificates of insurance and policy endorsements from each
subcontractor If the Agency is relying on the insurance coverages provided by
subcontractors as evidence of compliance with the insurance requirements of this
Contract then such requirements and documentation shall be subject to all of the
requirements stated herein,
I. Municipal or State Agency Provisions
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
XV. NONDISCRIMINATION AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
A, Nondiscrimination to Employment Provision of Services
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 King County Codes Chapters 12 16
and 12 17 are incorporated herein by reference, and such requirements shall apply to
this Contract.
Cdy of Kent Page 9 of 18 2010 Contract
B. Nondiscrimination in Subcontracting Practices
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. 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, KCC 12 17, RCW Chapter 49 60, Titles VI and VI I of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 United States Code (USC) 2000(a) et seq., the Americans
with Disabilities Act, 42 USC 12102 et seq , and the Restoration Act of 1987. The
Agency shall further comply fully with any affirmative action requirements set forth in
any federal regulations, statutes or rules included or referenced in the contract '
documents
D. Small Business and Minority and Women Business Enterprise Opportunities
The County encourages the Agency to utilize small businesses, including Minority-
owned and Women-owned Business Enterprises ("M1WBEs") in County contracts. The
County encourages the Agency to use the following voluntary practices to promote '
open competitive opportunities for small businesses, including MNWBEs
1 Attending a pre-bid or pre-solicitation conference, if scheduled by the County, to '
provide project information and to inform small businesses and other firms of
contracting and subcontracting opportunities
2. Placing all qualified small businesses attempting to do business in King County,
including MM/BEs, on solicitation lists, and providing written notice of
subcontracting opportunities to these firms capable of performing the work,
Including without limitation all businesses on any list provided by the County, in
sufficient time to allow such businesses to respond to the written solicitations
3 Breaking down total requirements into smaller tasks or quantities, where
economically feasible, in order to permit maximum participation by small
businesses, including MIWBEs,
4. Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirements of this Contract permit,
that encourage participation by small businesses, including MNVBEs
5. Providing small businesses, including MANBES that express interest with
adequate and timely information about plans, specifications, and requirements of ,
the Contract
6. Using the services of available community organizations, contractor groups, local
assistance offices, the County, and other organizations that provide assistance in
the recruitment and placement of small businesses, including M/WBEs
City of Kent Page 10 of 18 2010 Contract
1
7, The Washington State Office of Minority and Women's Business Enterprises
1 (OMWBE) can provide a list of certified MIWBEs Contact OMWBE office at
860-208-1064 or on-line through the web site at http,//wvvw omwbe.wa gov/
E Fair Employment Practices
King County Code Chapters 12.16 and 12 18 are 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 engage in unfair employment practices.
F. Record-Keeping Requirements and Site Visits
jThe Agency shall maintain, for at least six years after completion of all work under this
Contract, the following,
1. Records of employment, employment advertisements, application forms, and
other pertinent data, records and information related to employment, applications
for employment or the administration or delivery of services or any other benefits
' under this Contract, and
2. Records, including written quotes, bids, estimates or proposals submitted to the
Agency by all businesses seeking to participate on this Contract, and any other
information necessary to document the actual use of and payments to
subcontractors and suppliers in this Contract including employment records.
The County may visit, at any time, the site of the work and the Agency's office to
review the foregoing records The Agency shall provide every assistance requested by
the County during such visits. In all other respects, the Agency shall make the
foregoing records available to the County for inspection and copying upon request. If
this Contract involves federal funds, the Agency shall comply with all record keeping
requirements set forth in any federal rules, regulations or statutes included or
referenced in the contract documents.
' G. 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,
withholding payment and any other sanctions provided for by the Contract and by
applicable law.
H. Reporting
The Agency shall complete all reports and forms provided by the County and shall
otherwise cooperate fully with the County in monitoring and assisting the Agency in
providing nondiscriminatory programs
XVI. SECTION 504 AND AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT(ADA)
The Agency has completed a 504/ADA Self-Evaluation Questionnaire for all programs and
services offered by the Agency (including any services not subject to this Contract) and has
evaluated its services, programs and employment practices for compliance with Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 USC 701 et seq as amended ("504") and the American
Disabilities Act, 42 USC 12102 et seq as amended. The Agency has completed, attached
' as an exhibit to this Contract, and incorporated herein by reference a 504/ADA Assurance of
Compliance.
city of Kent Page 11 of 18 2010 Contract
XVII. SUBCONTRACTS AND PURCHASES
A. The Agency shall include the above Sections IV, V, VI, VII, Vill, XII, XIII, XIV, XV, and '
XVI, in every subcontract or purchase agreement for services which relate to the
subject matter of this Contract
B The Agency agrees to include the following language verbatim in every subcontract, ,
provider agreement, or purchase agreement for services which relate to the subject
matter of this Contract,
"Subcontractor shall protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless King County, its
officers, employees and agents from any and all costs, claims, judgments, and/or
awards of damages arising out of, or in any way resulting from the negligent act or
omissions of subcontractor, its officers, employees, and/or agents in connection with or
in support of this Contract. Subcontractor expressly agrees and understands that King
County is a third party beneficiary to this Contract and shall have the right to bring an
action against subcontractor to enforce the provisions of this paragraph "
C The Agency shall ensure that all subcontractors receiving any federal funds pursuant to
this agreement have not been disbarred or suspended from federal contract ,
participation. This may be done by checking the Excluded Parties List System
http://epls arnet gov, which lists all suspended and debarred entities
Will, CONFLICT OF INTEREST
A. The Agency agrees to comply with the provisions of KCC Chapter 3 04 Failure to
comply with any requirement of KCC Chapter 3 04 shall be a material breach of this '
Contract, and may result in termination of this Contract pursuant to Section XI and
subject the Agency to the remedies stated therein, or otherwise available to the County
at law or in equity
B. The Agency agrees, pursuant to KCC 3 04,060, that it will not willfully attempt to secure
preferential treatment in its dealings with the County by offering any valuable
consideration, thing of value or gift, whether in the form of services, loan, thing or
promise, in any form to any County official or employee The Agency acknowledges
that if it is found to have violated the prohibition found in this paragraph, its current
contracts with the County will be cancelled and it shall not be able to bid on any County ,
contract for a period of two years
C. The Agency acknowledges that for one year after leaving County employment, a
former County employee may not have a financial or beneficial interest in a contract or
grant that was planned, authorized, or funded by a County action in which the former
County employee participated during County employment. Agency shall identify, at the
time of offer, current or former County employees involved in the preparation of
proposals or the anticipated performance of work if awarded the Contract Failure to
identify current or former County employees involved in this transaction may result in
the County's denying or terminating this Contract After Contract award, the Agency is
responsible for notifying the County's project manager of current or former County
employees who may become involved in the Contract any time during the term of the
Contract
City of Ken[ Page 12 of 18 2010 Contract
XIX. 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
XX. EQUIPMENT PURCHASE MAINTENANCE, AND OWNERSHIP
A The Agency agrees that equipment purchased with Contract funds at a cost of$5,000
per item or more and identified in an exhibit as reimbursable is upon its purchase or
receipt the property of the Agency, County, and/or federal, and/or state government, as
specified in the exhibit
B. The Agency shall be responsible for all such equipment, including the proper care and
maintenance.
C. The Agency shall ensure that all such equipment shall be returned to the appropriate
government agency, whether federal, state or county, upon written request of the
County.
' D. The Agency shall admit County staff to the Agency's premises for the purpose of
marking such property with appropriate government property tags.
E. The Agency shall establish and maintain inventory records and transaction documents
(purchase requisitions, packing slips, invoices, receipts) of equipment purchased with
Contract identified funds.
XXI. NOTICES
Whenever this Contract requires that notice be provided by one party to another, such notice
shall be.
A. In writing; and
B. Directed to the chief executive officer of the Agency and the director of the County
depa tment specified on page one 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 party
XXII. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS
The parties to this Contract hereby mutually agree that if any patentable or copynghtable
material or article should result from the work described herein, all rights accruing from such
material or article shall be the sole property of the County The County agrees to and does
hereby grant to the Agency, irrevocable, nonexclusive, and royalty-free license to use,
according to law, any material or article and use any method that may be developed as part
of the work under this Contract
The foregoing products license shall not apply to existing training materials, consulting aids,
checklists, and other materials and documents of the Agency which are modified for use in
the performance of this Contract
The foregoing provisions of this section shall not apply to existing training materials,
consulting aids, checklists, and other materials and documents of the Agency that are not
' modified for use in the performance of this Contract.
City of Kent Page 13 of 18 2010 Contract
XXIII. CONTRACT AMENDMENTS
Either party may request changes to this Contract. Proposed changes which are mutually
agreed upon shall be incorporated by written amendments to this Contract.
XXIV. KING COUNTY RECYCLED PRODUCT PROCUREMENT POLICY ,
The Agency shall use recycled paper for the production of all printed and photocopied
documents related to the fulfillment of this Contract and shall ensure that, whenever possiole,
the cover page of eacn document printed on recycled paper bears an imprint identifying it as '
recycled paper.
If the cost of recycled paper is more than 15 percent higher than the cost of non-recycled
paper, the Agency may notify the Contract Administrator, who may waive the recycled paper
requirement.
The Agency shall use both sides of paper sheets for copying and printing and shall use
recycled/recyclable products wherever practical in the fulfillment of this Contract
XXV. ENTIRE CONTRACT/WAIVER 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 approval by the County,
which shali be attached to the original Contract
XXVI. SERVICES PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND RULE AND REGULATION
The Agency and any subcontractor(s) agree to abide by the terms of the Revised Code of
Washington, rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, and the DSHS and County
Agreement on General Terms and Conditions between the Department of Social and Health '
Services and King County, as amended, and regulations of the state and federal
governments, as applicable, which control disposition of funds granted under this Contract,
all of which are incorporated herein by reference ,
In the event of a conflict between any of the language contained in any exhibit or any
attachment to this Contract, the language in the Contract shall have control over the
language contained in the exhibit or the attachment, unless the parties affirmatively agree in
writing to the contrary.
XXVII. CONFIDENTIALITY
The Agency agrees that all information, records, and data collected in connection with this
Contract shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure in accordance with applicable state
and federal law,
XXVIII. COMPLIANCE WITH THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
ACT OF 1996 (HIPAA)
Terms used in this section shall have the same meaning as those terms in the Privacy Rule,
45 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 160 and 164,
City of Kent Page 14 of 1 B 2010 Contract
A. Obligations and Activities of the Agency
1 The Agency agrees not to use or disclose protected health information other than
as permitted or required by tHs Contract, HIPAA and the Health Information
Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH). The Agency shall
use and disclose protected health information only if such use or disclosure,
respectively, is in compliance with each applicable requirement of 45 CFR §
164.504(e) The Agency is directly responsible for full compliance with the
privacy provisions of HIPAA and HITECH that apply to business associates.
2. The Agency agrees to implement administrative, physical, and technical
safeguards that reasonably and appropriately protect the confidentiality, integrity,
and availability of the protected health information that it creates, receives,
maintains, or transmits on behalf of the County as required by 45 CFR, Part 164,
Subpart C The Agency is directly responsible for compliance with the security
I provisions of HIPAA and HITECH that apply to business associates, including
sections 164 308, 164 310, 164 312, and 164,316 of title 45 CFR
3. Within two (2) business days of the discovery of a breach as defined at 45 CFR §
164 402 the Agency shall notify the County of any breach of unsecured protected
health information The notification shall include the identification of each
individual whose unsecured protected health information has been, or is
reasonably believed by the Agency to have been, accessed, acquired, or
disclosed during such breach, a brief description of what happened, including the
date of the breach and the date of the discovery of the breach, if known, a
' description of the types of unsecured protected health information that were
involved in the breach (such as whether full name, social security number, date of
birth, home address, account number, diagnosis, disability code, or other types of
information were involved); any steps individuals should take to protect
themselves from potential harm resulting from the breach; a brief description of
what the Agency is doing to investigate the breach, to mitigate harm to
individuals, and to protect against any further breaches, the contact procedures of
the Agency for individuals to ask questions or learn additional information, which
shall include a toll free number, an a-mall address, Web site, or postal address,
and any other information required to be provided to the individual by the County
pursuant to 45 CFR § 164.404, as amended. A breach shall be treated as
discovered in accordance with the terms of 45 CFR § 164.410, The information
shall be updated promptly and provided to the County as requested by the
County.
4. The Agency agrees to mitigate, to the extent practicable, any harmful effect that
is known to the Agency of a use or disclosure of protected health information by
the Agency in violation of the requirements of this Contract or the law.
5 The Agency agrees to report in writing all unauthorized or otherwise improper
disclosures of protected health information or security incident to the County
within two days of the Agency knowledge of such event
6. The Agency agrees to ensure that any agent, including a subcontractor, to whom
it provides protected health information received from, or created or received by
the Agency on behalf of the County, agrees to the same restrictions and
conditions that apply through this Contract to the Agency with respect to such
information
City of Kent Page 15 of 18 2010 Contract
7. The Agency agrees to make available protected health information in accordance
with 45 CFR § 164 524, '
8 The Agency agrees to make available protected health information for
amendment and incorporate any amendments to protected health information in
accordance with 45 CFR § 164 526.
9 The Agency agrees to make internal practices, books, and records, including
policies and procedures and protected health information, relating to the use and
disclosure of protected health information received from, or created or received
by the Agency on behalf of King County, available to the Secretary, in a
reasonable time and manner for purposes of the Secretary determining King
County's compliance with HIPAA, HITECH or this Contract.
10. The Agency agrees to make available the information required to provide an
accounting of disclosures in accordance with 45 CFR §164.528 Should an '
individual make a request to the County for an accounting of disclosures of his or
her protected health information pursuant to 45 CFR § 164.528, Agency agrees
to promptly provide an accounting, as specified under 42 U.S.C, § 17935(c)(1)
and 45 CFR §164.528, of disclosures of protected health information that have
been made by the Agency acting on behalf of the County The accounting shall
be provided by the Agency to the County or to the individual, as directed by the
County
B. Permitted Uses and Disclosures by Business Associate
The Agency may use or disclose protected health information to perform functions, '
activities, or services for, or on behalf of, King County as specified in this Contract,
provided that such use or disclosure would not violate HIPAA if done by King County or
the minimum necessary policies and procedures of King County.
C. Effect of Termination
1 Except as provided in paragraph C 2 of this Section, upon termination of this
Contract, for any reason, the Agency shall return or destroy all protected health
information received from the County, or created or received by the Agency on
behalf of the County. This provision shall apply to protected health information
that is in the possession of subcontractors or agents of the Agency, The Agency
shall retain no copies of the protected health information.
2, In the event the Agency determines that returning or destroying the protected '
health information is infeasible, the Agency shall provide to King County
notification of the conditions that make return or destruction infeasible Upon
notification that return or destruction of protected health information is infeasible, ,
the Agency shall extend the protections of the Contract to such protected health
information and limit further uses and disclosure of such protected health
information to those purposes that make the return or destruction infeasible, for
so long as the Agency maintains such protected health information
D. Reimbursement for Costs Incurred Due to Breach
Agency shall reimburse the County, without limitation, for all costs of investigation,
dispute resolution, notification of individuals, the media, and the government, and
expenses incurred in responding to any audits or other investigation relating to or
arising out of a breach of unsecured protected health information by the Agency '
City of Kent Page 16 of 18 2010 Contract
1
XXIX. EMERGENCY RESPONSE
A. The Agency shall prepare and submit within six months of the execution of the
Contract the necessary plans, procedures and protocols to.
1, Respond to and recover from a natural disaster or major disruption to agency
operations such as a work stoppage, and
2 Continue operations during a prolonged event such as a pandemic.
B The Agency shall conduct exercises or drills to test the effectiveness of its plans at
least once a year and document the results of the exercise or drill.
C. The Agency shall prepare the plans to a format approved by the County The
explanation of the format will include the specific content of the Agency's plans The
County will specify areas that must be addressed in the Agency's plan.
D. The County may waive the requirements in subsections A, B or C upon written request
by the Agency identifying compelling reasons why such requirements should not apply
XXX. PERSONAL INFORMATION —NOTICE OF SECURITY BREACH
A. If the Agency maintains computerized or other forms of data that includes personal
information owned by the County, the Agency shall notify the County of any breach of
the security of the data immediately following discovery if the personal information was,
or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person in
accordance with RCW 42 56.590 (2)
B. The Agency shall provide all information requested by the County including the
following in accordance with RCW 42 56,590, KCC 2.14.030, the King County
Information Privacy Policy and any other applicable federal, state and local statute:
1. Circumstances associated with the breach,
Z Actions taken by the Agency to respond to the breach ; and
3. Steps the Agency shall take to prevent a similar occurrence.
This information shall be provided in a format requested by the County.
C. The County may at its sole discretion, require the Agency to contact the appropriate
law enforcement agency and to provide the County a copy of the report of the
investigation conducted by the law enforcement agency The Agency shall also
provide the County with any information it has regarding the security breach.
I D. The Agency shall conspicuously display King County's Privacy Notice and provide a
printed copy upon request
E. The Agency shall be responsible for notifying individuals whose personal information
may have become available to unauthorized users through a security breach The
Agency shall also be responsible for any cost associated with notifying the affected
indivicuals This notification must be in accordance with RCW 42 56,590 (7),
F. If the Agency demonstrates that the cost of providing notice would exceed $250,000, or
that the potentially affected persons exceeds 500,000, or the Agency does not have
sufficient contact information, substitute notice shall consist of the following in
accordance with RCW 42 56 590 (7), (c)
City of Kent Page 17 of 1 a 2010 Contract
1. E-mail notice when the Agency has an e-mail address for the subject persons,
2. Conspicuous posting of the notice on the Agency's web site page, if the Agency
maintains one; and
3 Notification to major County-wide media.
G. For purpose of this section, "personal information" means the same as defined in RCW
42 56 590:
1. An individual's first name or first initial and last name in combination with any one
of the following data elements, when either the name or the data elements are
not encrypted, social security number, driver's license number or Washington
identification card number; or
2. Account number or credit or debit card number, in combination with any required
security code; access code, or password that would permit access to an
individual's financial account
KING COUNTY CITY OF KENT
FOR
King County Executive Signature
Date Name (Please type or print) ,
Date '
Approved by DCHS Director
Approved as to Form
OFFICE OF THE KING COUNTY
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
November 9, 2009
City of Kent Page 18 of 18 2010 Contract
EXHIBIT II
CITY OF KENT
SAFE HAVENS VISITATION CENTER
SUPERVISED VISITATION AND SAFE EXCHANGE SERVICES
I. WORK STATEMENT
' The Agency shall provide supervised visitation and safe exchange services for families
impacted by domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, and stalking in accordance with
the terms and conditions described hereinafter The total amount of reimbursement pursuant
to this Exhibit shall not exceed $10,000 from County funds for the Exhibit period January 1,
2010 through December 31, 2010
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
iA. Outcome
To provide effective prevention and intervention strategies for those most at-risk and
most in need to prevent or reduce more acute illness, high-risk behaviors, incarceration
and other emergency medical or crisis responses by increasing interpersonal safety of
survivors of domestic violence and their children.
B. Indicators
Seventy-five percent of adult victims of domestic violence utilizing the Safe Havens
Visitation Center will report an increased sense of safety during service provision as
measured by pre and post surveys.
C Eligibility
The criteria for acceptance into the program are the fear or need for protection of one
parent against the other parent while complying with visitation or exchange orders
D Definitions
1. Enrolled clients are supervised visitation and safe exchange services to families
impacted by domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, and stalking
2. Program Measurement Tool is a pre- and post-survey administered to protected
parent at the beginning and end of service provision Survey has scales of
perceived safety or danger in and around the center, before, during, and after
visitation.
3. Safe visitation and exchange are one-hour weekly visits between non-
residential parents and their children Exchanges are provided to families
transiticning out of supervised visitation or as outlined in a court order
Services are offered Wednesday through Sunday.
City of Kent Page 1 of 4 2010 Contract-Exh 11
E. Program Requirements
1 The Agency agrees to provide, at minimum, the following cumulative units of '
service
Services April May June April-June
2010 2010 2010 2010
cumulative)
Enrolled Clients 2 2 2 6
Hours of Service 25 25 30 80
2 The Agency shall offer the following services-
a. Intake and Assessment: (two hours) separate schedules, in-depth, on-
site intake interviews with the offender and the adult victim in order to
identify risk factors related to domestic violence, sexual assault, child
abuse, and stalking. Services shall include- a review of all program '
guidelines and expectations, current contact information, additional
resources as needed; tour of the visitation area; preparation of files and
development of visitation schedule,
b Child Orientations. (one-half hour) meeting with child to identify
concerns, answer questions, set up safety signal as needed, explain
visit supervisor's role, showing of various activities and toys available ,
during visits ano practice visitation without custodial parent,
c Supervised Visits, (two hours) check-in with visiting parent during pre-
visit 30 minute wait time Services shall include supervised one hour
visit, debrief with visiting parent and completion of observation notes
and other relevant documentation for file,
d. Supervised Exchanges: (one-half hour) sign-in of each party at
designated entrances and times. Escort of child from one parent to the
other and enforcement of staggered arrival and departure times to
ensure no contact between parties, and
e. Weekly Staff Case Consults (two and one-half hours) staff identify and
discuss ongoing and emerging concerns related to safety and
scheduling issues, problem solve and present case challenges and
identify training needs and debrief stressful case situations
3. In order to complement and maximize available resources, and to achieve the
best possible outcomes for clients, the Agency shall have a working agreement
and/or contractual relationship for coordinated service provision
City of Kent Page 2 of 4 2010 Conlract-Exh 11
III. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A Billing Invoice
1. The Agency shall submit a Billing Invoice Package quarterly that consists of an
invoice statement and other reporting requirements as stated in Section IV ,
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, of this Exhibit in a format approved by the
County. The Billing Invoice Package is due within five working days after the
end of the quarter.
2. A hard copy of the invoice shall be submitted with original signatures. Other
reporting forms shall be submitted electronically
B. Method of payment
' 1 Reimbursement shall be made quarterly.
2. The costs for clients shall be paid according to the following unit cost:
a. Assessment/intake (per intake) $300
b. Child Orientation (per family) $ 75
C. Supervised Exchange (per exchange) $ 65
d. Supervised Visitation (per visit) $300
- d. Staff Consultation (per week) $375
3. The total amount of payment of unit cost shall not exceed $10,000 for the
Exhibit period January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2 010
4 The Agency shall advise the County quarterly of any changes in revenues from
sources other than the County that are used to provide the services funded
under this Contract. The Agency agrees to re-negotiate performance
requirements if the County determines that such changes are substantial
5 The Agency shall not invoice and charge the County for incurred costs which
are also specifically paid for by another source of funds.
6 If the Agency fails to submit any of the reporting requirements as stated in
Section IV , REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, the current invoice and the future
invoice shall not be paid until the Agency submits all required paperwork.
IV. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The Agency shall submit the following data in a format approved by the County.
A. The following forms shall be submitted electronically to the contract manager at
Scott Ninnemanokingcounty go v in a format approved by the County:
1. Service-Activity Report;
City of Kent Page 3 of 4 2010 Contract-Exh 11
2. Client Profile Report, and
3 Human Services Outcome Report(s)
B The Agency shall submit a Service-Activity Report in a format provided by the County
This report states the number of units of services provided by the Agency as described
in Section II E.1 , Program Requirements and in Section III.13.2. The Agency shall
submit this report within five working days after the end of the quarter
C The Agency shall submit the Client Profile Report for King County (client
demographics) with the June 2010 invoice in a format provided by the County.
D The Human Services Outcome report shall be submitted by the end of December
2010
y
1
f
I
l
I
l �
i
City of Kent Page 4 of 4 2010 Contract-Exh 11
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6D
1. SUBJECT: 4CULTURE GRANT FOR FOURTH OF JULY SPLASH - ACCEPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept a $6,500 grant from 4Culture to
restore professional performances at the 2010 "Fourth of July Splash" event,
amend the budget accordingly, and authorize the expenditure of funds in the
Fourth of July Splash budget.
4Culture has awarded the Kent Arts Commission $6,500 to preserve arts Jobs
I through a competitive grant process. The funding comes through 4Culture from
the National Endowment for the Arts distribution of American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act funds. The money will allow professional performances to be
restored at the Kent's Fourth of July Splash festival at Lake Meridian Park in
2010.
3. EXHIBITS: 4Culture Contract
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks and Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue? X
Currently in the Budget? Yes _ No X
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
4
t CULTURE Preserving Arts Jobs
%IN6 COUNTY MOM TAX
--[; s.;:-i�--,-� -'-__i-;n. i s�v_3.; x-_k: — �y •iS „iZ;s .0-' fEk `.:? i'_i,^.-a ti L,M y�tiy�t�r%t� rR
`7`''•,rli4%'..' #LL r M1
;2Q�9Amerlcan Relnvest�nenfi�and Recove<r�r Act NE`A=funds
4Culfure . t
;t t 206 296 758Q
Prefontaine Place S;`��att�e WA 98904 7T1 rrY
%app)jc�fiogs must b+r�aceived electro`nicaily by,500'pm on'= a� _
. _2Q0 _ ar A u57 '709 mST10tAU'GJ
`INSTRUCTIONS Read the PRESERVING ARTS JOBS guldellnes before Nfing out this form
=-_ • Please type application.Do not reduce type or use smaller than 10 point type.
_ _;,>:f' r ,% i- r .,•A, • Please send electronic copies of the application to Bret Fetzar(a)4Culture.org Subject
heading"ARRA Application"
'�l piicant lriforrriation;y� ,;t Organization Legal Name. City of Kent
>;�� - w�, r,�;,��a•=-;_ _?- ;. Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services
Director Mr.X Ms. ❑ Title
Director
First Name: Jeff Last Name, Watling
I King County Council District#: Address: City. Zip:
5 220 4'h Avenue South Kent 98032
WA State Legislative District(s)#:
33 Phone- (253)856-5050 e-mail: jwatling@ci.kent wa us
US Congressional District# Fax (253) 856-6050 http/l www.KentArts.org
9 Federal Tax ID#: 91-6001254 WA State U B I#' C-173-000-002
YOU MUSTBEA 509(c)(3)or Local For 501(c)(3)organizations. Most recently completed Fiscal Year's
Arts Agency in order to apply for DATE INCORPORATED:
Operating Revenue.
funds from this program
October 1975 $981,962
r ,<'e x:
.AwaFd Contact_ ,=,>t `_=r • , Mr ❑ Ms.x Title' Visual Arts Coordinator
First Name Cheryl Last Name dos Remedios
Address City: Zip
220 4"Ave S Kent 98032
Phone (253)856 5058 e-mail: cdosremedios@ci kent via us
; `_
jr !Narrative Statement
Please address the following questions as they relate to the review criteria.
vt
IA,Describe the-positions}you.wish to restore_or retain using these arts stintulus,funds.Why is'it;impnrtant to your;
'organization?:(For more than one job or contract, pleasegive answers,in separate paragraphs.)- _ __-_
The City of Kent Cultural Division hosts two festivals each summer.4th of July SPLASH and Arts at Cornucopia
Days This year, we experienced a 37% reduction in artist fees due to Kent Parks budget cuts
After 10 years of having live symphonic music accompany the 4°i of July SPLASH fireworks display,this year we
played canned music Because of larger City budget issues, all departments were asked to find areas of savings,
and it was determined that by cutting this large ticket item we could meet budget requirements
We contract with the Rainier Symphony, a Tukwila arts organization. In addition to the loss of 55 musicians
performing live music,there was the "trickle down" loss of$6,000 worth of revenue to a Redmond based tent rental
company The sound system and shuttle bus costs were also reduced Only artist fees are included in the
calculations below,but these other lobs are mentioned here to illustrate the extended effect.
Likewise, there were significant cuts to our Arts at Kent Cornucopia Days budget Rather than having both a
community stage in the Children's Area and a Main Stage at Town Square Plaza,we combined the programming
onto one stage We hired 8 fewer bands this year compared to last,for a loss of approximately 25 jobs, the majority
of the artists reside in King County
�,7 - _ .$, ./'i'�3£' - - tw _ ,�,- =Sri ac--„ - .+f�,t _ ___r'�n`4t,=>_ - �.,_ifx;n�, -sic - {�•53.'-` i z- - •.
16, Use;ofARFLAFund�;�;�n;��€�,.s,•� � yµ.
°Please,sho;Wspeciftaa(ly how th6"ARRA`funds will`be`spent taT"pre'serve;restore brextend"•the:position{s),or
;odntract(s)'y4u pr -06s- `'6y;stating the previous employm'ent,leyel, the_typeand-arnwvrit-offeductions or cutsttiat . n
are-threatened or Nke already been'made,-and the proposed new employment
or each positio l oi_contraet--;
you havq-propos-ed,-answer questions 1-9 in-the box below Note:.A full-tjme_annual"posifion (FTE) =208Q-hours'.;el
Pleasg express the torte included in either a salaried positton OR,a_c6n6r ct as a percentage of an FTE. iez�A`. '
contractpositro_Yfir_ivolvfng 5o hourswould translate into 50/2080='.024 or�,4°/a FTE- ;',
Splash Artist Cornucopia
1) Position title(s) I Fees Days Artist
Fees
2) Grant amount(s)to be used for position(s) 4000 6450
— -- --- --------- — ---- -- ---- - — -— --- -------—
i 3) Previous salary and benefits or previous contract fee 22900 36800—^
4) Previous time, stated as a portion of a full-time position l II
--(e g._5 FTE=haif-time position) - ---- ------- ------ — --- -------
5) Current salary and benefits or current contract fee 18900 1I30350
E 6) Current time, stated as a portion of an FTE
7) Proposed salary and benefits or contract fee 22900 ( 36800
8) Proposed position time, stated as a portion of an FTE
9) Time frame for ARRA-supported position July 2010 July 2010
- — --- ------------------
ARRA Application 2009
Page 2
I�
C tT� o#L IL�.NY
2.Whaf"would,happen if this jobweie'unfilled?, Iri particular;speak to`theeffect this lab=does(or wl(Ij Have on=the, :.
ervlces,your organization provides to your comma 'Ity,�«
Kent is an incredibly diverse, rapidly changing community The arts programming that the Kent Cultural Division
provides is essential to our community gatherings.We are thoughtful when choosing acts so that there is a
wide-range of styles represented This becomes ever more difficult if we cannot afford to hire a symphony or
other professional artists
As people continue to experience financial strain,the opportunity to attend a free performance becomes ever
more valuable Live music gives people a reason to attend the Cornucopia Days street fair, even when they
have no money to purchase items from the vendors It is important for people to feel comfortable participating in
community life regardless of their economic situation.
Live music at our-Summer festivals brings everyone peacefully together. Sadly, this is not something we can
take for granted We have experienced gang activity during Cornucopia Days. Having two stages fully
programmed at two different locations in this large street fair helps send a positive message to everyone who
attends
za'c".:_a�:' .'��-!;e:k"n' V=rtw:3i' .avt�;;.,'yFv4'•' --
Tit :economic dowritum:is`affecftng otganl�atioCts in;djfferentv+ays _Briefly=sumhhanze Uie,majdrr_imp
aatsyouur=74LL;
i'organization is experiencirid arid,,'
' We are attempting to maintain all of our program areas, even as we are being asked to make cuts to our
budget The City of Kent's tax base is continuing to decline, and it is highly likely that we will be asked to make
even deeper cuts to our 2010 budget The Kent Cultural Division is already a very tightly run organization with a
thrifty mindset During the past year, we have even joked about getting on stage ourselves to save performing
fees Picturing one's co-workers playing the kazoo is momentarily amusing, but when you pause to think about
it,this joke is not at all funny
Kent is well-known for its strong performing arts program Just yesterday, I was at a barbeque in Seattle and
when I mentioned that I work for the City of Kent, my new acquaintance responded, "Kent has a great arts
programl I attend concerts in Kent"This story helps illustrate why it is important for the City of Kent to continue
providing the citizens of King County with quality performances during our summer festival season To do this,
we ask you to award us$10,450 so that we can restore artists'fees to 2008 levels.
ARRA Application 2009
Page 3
I
E-MAIL APPLICATION WORD DOCUMENT TO US
E-mail electronic copies of application to Bret Fetzerno 4Culture.org -subject heading"ARRA Application"
ORGANIZATIONAL PAPERWORK AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ,
NOTE THAT IF YOUR ORGANIZATION IS FUNDED YOU MUST.
• Register with the Federal Government as a Contractor with the US Government Central Contractor Registey
• Obtain a DUNS number through Dunn and Bradstreet
• Be responsible for providing regular information to 4Culture or the NEA,including personnel activity time and
effort reports for any er-ployee whose salary is charged,in whole or in part,to the award In a format
determined by the NEA
Signatures
Each signatory declares that s/he is an authorized official of the applicant organization or local government,is authorized to
make this application, and will assure that any funds received as a result of this application are used only for the purposes
set forth herein. i
A. FOR ARTS ORGS.Signature of Applicant—Director or Board President
B FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.Signature of Authorizing Personnel
�i
ARRA Application 2009
Page 4
�I�
Exhibit A
Scope of Service
PROJECT
City of Kent and 4Culture, the Cultural Development Authority of King County, mutually agree
that the following services be provided in accordance with the application submitted to and
approved by 4Culture as part of the National Endowment for the Aris distribution of American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Employment time for the following position(s): Artists
TOTAL AMOUNT OF ARRA AWARD: $6,500.00
For artistic activity, arts administration, technical or educational activity. Payable in regular
installments upon the monthly submittal of 4Culture invoice and Time &Effort Report.
PUBLIC BENEFIT
Progi ams presented by this organization are accessible to a broad range of King County residents; all
ARRA recipient organizations are also Sustained Support recipients and must adhere to all Public
Benefit obligations for that award.
PUBLICITY/PROMOTION POLICY
Prominent acknowledgment of 4Culture/King County Lodging Tax Fund and the NEA&ARRA
Stimulus is required of all recipients for use in all publicity and promotional materials related to the
ARRA Stimulus Funding. Please contact your 4Culture contract administrator or go to
http://4culture.orV,//Iiartner/index,htm to download the appropriate logo credit for 4Culture; please
go to www.arts.gov/manageawaid/logos/indcx.htnit for logos for the NEA and
www.arts gov/manageaward/logoos/ARRAlogo hunt for logos specific to ARRA.
r
1
Agreement No 109602
Contractor's Federal Taxpayer ID No (last 4 digits)
Contractor City of Kent
Protect Title Preserving Arts Jobs
Contract Amount. $ 6,500.00 Fund Source: NEA—American Reinvestment and Recovery Act
Contract Period From. 10/01/09 To: 08/31110
SPECIAL AGENCY SERVICES CONTRACT 2009
THIS CONTRACT is entered into by the CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF KING COUNTY("4Culture"),
whose address is 101 Prefontaine Place South, Seattle,WA 98104-2672 and telephone number is (206) 296-7580
and the City of Kent(the"Contractor"),whose address is 220 4th Ave 5 Kent WA 98032 and telephone number is
(253)856-5058. Contractor is an art, cultural or historical organization or specialist qualified to receive funds pursuant
to King County Code Sections 2 48 and 4.42 and ROW 67 28 180 and as hereinafter may be amended.
Funds for this award are being distributed as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act(ARRA)through
the National Endowment for the Arts, and must be used to support the retention of lobs in the arts.
To maximize transparency and accountability, all recipients of ARRA funds agree
• To maintain adequate personnel activity reports which document the salaries supported by ARRA funds
separate from any other 4Culture or other federal funding for any salaried position whose work will be partially !
or fully funded through this award NOTE An Invoice and Time and Effort report will be sent to each
contractor to use for all reporting and claiming funds
• To maintain adequate signed contracts for any contract personnel whose work will be supported through this
award
• To report the use of all ARRA funds in a timely fashion to 4Culture throughout the life of this award
• To provide appropriate acknowledgement of the IN EA,the Recovery Act, and 4Culture in materials and
announcements related to this award
• No ARRA funds can be used for fund raising activities, including donor relations, grant writing or development
of any kind This includes any and all work supported by this award, whether by salaried personnel or
contractors
4Culture desires to provide funds with which the Contractor shall retain lobs which benefit King County citizens through
activities consistant with those defined in ROW 67.28.180 ('Public Benefit Services").
4Culture is organized pursuant to King County Ordinance 14482 and ROW 35 21 730, at sec. ROW 35.21.750 ,
provides as follows: "[All] liabilities incurred by such public corporation, commission, or authority shall be satisfied
exclusively from the assets and properties of such public corporation, commission or authority and no creditor or other
person shall have any right of action against the city,town,or county creating such corporation, commission, or
authority on account of any debts, obligations, or liabilities of such public corporation, commission, or authority."
King County and the legislative authority of 4Culture has found and declared that providing funds to Contractor to
reimburse Project costs in consideration of services provided hereunder constitutes a public purpose with the meaning
of Article VI I, Section 1 of the Washington State Constitution for which public funds may properly be expended or
advanced
NOW,THEREFORE, in consideration of payments, covenants, and agreements hereinafter mentioned,to be made
and performed by the parties hereto, the parties do mutually agree as follows.
ARRA contract 2009 Page 1 of 5
I. SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. The Contractor shall provide services and comply with the requirements set forth hereinafter and in the
following attached exhibits which are incorporated herein by reference:
® Specific Scope of Services & Reimbursement Schedule Attached hereto as Exhibit A
® ARRA Proposal and Budget Attached hereto as Exhibit B
❑ Current Certificate of Insurance Attached hereto as Exhibit C
B Funds awarded under this Agreement shall be used solely to reimburse the Contractor for expenses
incurred expressly and solely in accordance with the Protect Proposal and Budget and revised in the Specific Scope of
Services attached.Any amendment or modification to the Specific Scope of Services and Payment Schedule must be
approved in writing by 4Culture The work described generally by the Project Proposal and Budget and more
specifically by the Specific Scope of Services shall hereinafter be referred to as the"Project"
C. Contractor agrees to acknowledge support in all marketing and promotional materials during the period this
contract is in force Information about the specific logos and requirements for appropriately acknowledging the NEA
and ARRA funds can be found at www arts govlmanageaward/recovery/
D. The Contractor agrees to notify 4Culture in advance of any public Project activities, including but not limited
to ground breaking events, dedications, and other public programs.
H. DURATION OF CONTRACT
This Agreement shall commence on October 1, 2009 and shall terminate on August 31, 2010 This
Agreement, however, may be terminated earlier as provided in Section IV hereof.
III. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A. 4Culture shall reimburse the Contractor for its actual and authorized expenditures incurred in satisfactorily
completing the Specific Scope of Services attached and otherwise fulfilling all requirements specified In this contract in
an aggregate amount not to exceed$6,500 00
B. Contractor may apply to 4Culture for reimbursement at intervals detailed in the Specific Scope of Service
C. Contractor shall submit its final invoice and all outstanding reports within 30 days of the date this Agreement
terminates If the Agency's final invoice and reports are not submitted by the day specified in this subsection,4Culture
will be relieved of all liability for payment to the Agency of the amounts set forth in said invoice or any subsequent
invoice.
D. If the Contractor fails to comply with any terms or conditions of this contract or to provide in any manner the
work or services agreed to herein, 4Culture may withhold any payment to the Contractor until 4Culture is satisfied that
corrective action, as specified by 4Culture, has been completed. This right is In addition to and not in lieu of 4Culture's
right to terminate this contract as provided in Section IV, any other rights of4Culture under this Agreement and any
other right or remedy available to4Culture at law or to equity
IV. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
A If, through any cause, the Contractor shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under
this Agreement or if the Contractor shall violate any of its covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement,
4Culture may terminate this Agreement and withhold the remaining allocation Prior to so terminating this Agreement,
4Culture shall submit written notice to the Contractor describing such default or violation 4Culture shall not so
terminate this Agreement if 41.ulture determines that Contractor has,within twenty(20) days of the date of such notice,
fully corrected such default or violation
ARRA contract 2111 Page 2 of 5
V. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS
A. The Contractor shall maintain accounts and records, including personnel, property,financial, and
programmatic records and other such records as may be deemed necessary by 4Culture to ensure proper accounting w
for all contract funds and compliance with this Agreement All such records shall sufficiently and properly reflect all
direct and indirect costs of any nature expended and services provided in the performance of this Agreement
B. These records shall be maintained for a period of six(6)years after termination of this Agreement unless a
longer retention period is required by law.
VI. AUDITS AND EVALUATIONS ,
A The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement shall be subject at all
times to inspection, review or audit by 4Culture and/or federal/state officials so authorized by law during the
performance of this Agreement and six(6)years after termination hereof.
B The Contractor shall provide right of access to its facilities, including by any subcontractor to 4Culture,the
King County, state and/or federal agencies or officials at all reasonable times in order to monitor and evaluate the
services provided under this Agreement 4Culture will give advance notice to the Contractor in the case of fiscal audits
to be conducted by 4Culture.
C The Contractor agrees to cooperate with 4Culture in the evaluation of the Contractor's performance under
this contract and to make available all information reasonably required by any such evaluation process The results
and records of said evaluations shall be maintained and disclosed in accordance with RCW Chapter 42 17(Public
Records Act)
VII. FUTURE SUPPORT
4Culture makes no commitment to support the services contracted for herein nor guarantee regarding the
success of the services and assumes no obligation for future support of the Project except as expressly set forth in this
Agreement.
Vill. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION
A. In providing services under this Agreement, the Contractor is an independent contractor, and shall
determine the means of accomplishing the results contemplated by this Agreement. Neither the Contractor nor its
officers, agents or employees are employees of 4Culture for any purpose. The Contractor shall comply with all
applicable federal and state laws and regulations regarding employment, minimum wages and hours, and
discrimination in employment. The Contractor is responsible for determining the compensation of its employees,for
payment of such compensation, and for all federal and/or state tax, industrial insurance, and Social Security liability that
may result from the performance of and compensation for these services. The Contractor and its officers, agents, and
employees shall make no claim of career service or civil service rights which may accrue to a 4Culture employee under
state or local law 4Culture assumes no responsibility for the payment of any compensation, wages, benefits, or taxes
by, or on behalf of the Contractor, its employees and/or others by reason of this Agreement To the extent allowed by
law, the Contractor shall protect, defend, indemnify and save harmless 4Culture and its officers, agents, and
employees from and against any and all claims,costs, and/or losses whatsoever occurring or resulting from (1)the
Contractor's failure to pay any such compensation, wages, benefits,or taxes, (2)the supplying to the Contractor of
work, services, materials, or supplies by Contractor employees or other suppliers In connection with or support of the
performance of this Agreement The Contractor shall also defend, indemnify, and save harmless 4Culture, and its
officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all claims made by Contractor's employees arising from
their employment with Contractor,
ARRA contract 2009 Page 3 of 5
I
B To the full extent provided by applicable law,the Contractor shall protect, defend, indemnify, and save
harmless 4Culture its officers, employees, and agents from any and all costs, claims,judgments, and/or awards of
damages, arising out of or in any way resulting from the acts or omissions of the Contractor, its officers, employees,
and/or agents, except to the extent resulting from 4Culture's sole negligence if this Agreement is a"a covenant,
promise, agreement or understanding in, or in connection with or collateral to, a contract or agreement relative to the
construction, alteration, repair, addition to, subtraction from, improvement to, or maintenance of, any building, highway,
road, railroad, excavation, or other structure, project, development, or improvement attached to real estate' within the
meaning of RCW 4 24 225, the Contractor shall so protect, defend, indemnify, and save harmless 4Culture, its
officers, employees, and agents only to the extent of the Contractor's, its officers', employees', and/or agents'
negligence The Contractor agrees that its obligations under this subparagraph extend to any claim, demand, and/or
cause of action brought by or on behalf of any employees, or agents In the event 4Culture incurs anyjudgment, award
andlor cost arising there from including attorneys'fees to enforce the provisions of this article, all such fees, expenses,
and costs shall be recoverable from the Contractor Claims shall include, but are not limited to, assertions that the use
or transfer of any software, book, document,report,film, tape or sound reproduction or material of any kind, delivered
hereunder,constitutes an infringement of any copyright.
IX. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement insurance as described on the
Exhibit labeled as Insurance Requirements attached here to
X. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Chapter 42 23 RCW (Code Of Ethics For Municipal Officers--Contract Interests) is incorporated by reference
as if fully set forth herein and the Contractor agrees to abide by all the conditions of said Chapter. Failure by the
Contractor to comply with any requirements of such Chapter shall be a material breach of contract
In addition, Contractor represents,warrants and covenants that no officer, employee,or agent of 4Culture who
exercises any functions or responsibilities in connection with the planning and implementation of the Specific Scope of
Contract Services funded herein, has or shall have any beneficial interest, directly or indirectly, in this contract The
Contractor further represents,warrants and covenants neither it nor any other person beneficially interested in this
Agreement has offered to give or given any such officer, employee, or agent of 4Culture, directly or indirectly, any
compensation, gratuity or eward in connection with this Agreement.The Contractor shall take all appropriate steps to
assure compliance with this provision
XI. NONDISCRIMINATION
During the performance of this Agreement, Contractor shall comply with state,federal and local legislation
requiring nondiscrimination in employment and the provision of services to the public, including, but not limited to-Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, chapter 49 60 RCW (the Washington state law against discrimination); K C C
chapter 12.16 regarding discrimination and affirmative action in employment by contractors, subcontractors and
vendors, K C C.chapter 12 17 prohibiting discrimination in contracting, K C C chapter 12.18 requiring fair employment
practices, K C C chapter and 12 22 prohibiting discrimination in places of public accommodation.
The Contractor shall maintain, until 12 months after completion of all work under this contract, all written
quotes, bids, estimates or proposals submitted to the Contractor by all businesses seeking to participate in this
Agreement The Contractor shall make such documents available to 4Culture for inspection and copying upon request.
XII NOTICES
Whenever this Agreement provides for notice to be provided by one party to another, such notice shall be in
writing and directed to the chief executive officer of Contractor and the Executive Director of 4Culture at the addresses first
written above Any time within which a party must take some action shall be computed from the date that the notice is
received by said party.
ARRA contract 2009 Page 4 of 5
XIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS
No modification or amendment to this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the
parties hereto Proposed changes which are mutually agreed upon shall be incorporated by written amendments to this I
Agreement 4Culture's failure to insist upon the strict performance of any provision of this Agreement or to exercise any
right based upon a breach thereof or the acceptance of any performance during such breach, shall not constitute a
waiver of any right under this Agreement In the event any term or condition of this Agreement or application thereof to
any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, conditions, or applications of
this Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition, or application To this end, the terms and
conditions of this Agreement are declared severable The parties agree that this Agreement 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 Agreement
XIV. ATTORNEYS' FEES; EXPENSES
Contractor agrees to pay upon demand all of 4Culture's costs and expenses, including attorneys'fees and
4Culture's legal expenses, incurred in connection with the enforcement of this Agreement.4Culture may pay someone
else to help enforce this Agreement, and Contractor shall pay the costs and expenses of such enforcement Costs and
expenses include 4Culture's attorneys'fees and legal expenses whether or not there is a lawsuit, including attorneys'fees
and legal expenses for bankruptcy proceedings (and including efforts to modify or vacate any automatic stay or injunction),
appeals, and any anticipated post-judgment collection services Contractor also shall pay all court costs and such
additional fees as may be directed by the court.
XV. SURVIVAL
The terms and conditions of Sections III,V,VI,VII,Vill, IX,XI,XII,XIII and XIV shall survive the termination of this
Agreement and shall be continuing obligations of the parties.
4CULTURE: CONTRACTOR:
4Culture-CDA Executive Director Signature
Date Name(Please type or print)
Title(Please type or print)
Date
ii
I�
ARR-A contract 2009 Page 5 of 5
I�
KENT
WAS.1 N OTON
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT
(between the City of Kent and Tarragon-Kent Station Phase II,L.L.C.)
THIS AGREEMENT Is made between the city of Kent, a Washington municipal
corporation (hereinafter the "City"), and Tarragon-Kent Station Phase II, L.L.C., located
and doing business at 417 Ramsay Way, Suite 110, Kent, WA 98032 (hereinafter the
"Sponsor").
I. RECITALS
1.1 Cooperatively, the City and the Kent Arts Commission produce the Kent
Summer Concert Series annually during the months of July and August, which includes
(Take-Out Tuesdays." As part of that undertaking, the City and the Kent Arts
Commission offer entities the opportunity to become official sponsors of the annual
concert series.
1.2 The Sponsor has solicited the City to provide financial and other support in
exchange for promotion of Sponsor's products and services as specified in this
Agreement and for location of the Take-Out Tuesdays event at the Kent Station
property during 2010. As such, the parties desire to enter into this Agreement to
establish each party's responsibilities with respect to the Kent Summer Concert Series
for 2010.
II. AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual intent, desire, and promises of
the parties and other good and valuable consideration, the City and Sponsor agree as
follows:
2.1 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the last date
signed below and shall terminate either on August 31, 2010, or upon each party's
performance of the terms specified in this Agreement, whichever occurs first.
2.2 Concert Location and Financial Soonsorshio. The City agrees to locate the
Take-Out Tuesdays event at the Kent Station Plaza for the 2010 term. In exchange,
the Sponsor shall provide financial assistance to the City in the amount of $6,000 for
the six Take-Out Tuesday concerts during the months of July and August, 2010.
Sponsor shall provide payment of fifty percent (SO°/o) of this financial assistance to the
City by March 31, 2010. The remaining fifty percent (SO%) shall be paid to the City
before the date of the first concert, scheduled for July 6, 2010.
2.3 SSonsor's Responsibilities Concerning Performance Space. In fulfilling its
contract responsibilities, the Sponsor shall:
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT- 1
A. Provide an adequate electrical supply to include at least one 20 amp
120 volt dedicated circuit.
B. On concert days, the circular stage in front of the AMC box office,
which is where the Take-Out Tuesday concerts are to be performed,
shall be made available to the City and concert performers from 7:30
a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The concerts are currently scheduled for July 6,
July 13, July 20, July 27, August 3, and August 10, 2010.
C. Provide adequate access for City and concert performer vehicles to the
performance site to load and unload equipment for the concerts.
D. Provide parking in close proximity to the performance site for use by
the concert performers.
E. Provide restrooms, preferably dedicated facilities, for use by the
concert performers as a private dressing room.
F. Provide Sponsor information, which shall include names and logos to
be used by the City in concert promotional materials, no less than
three (3) months prior to the initial event date.
G. Promote the Take-Out Tuesday events In businesses located within the
Kent Station development by displaying printed materials and making
flyers available to the public.
2.4 Citv's Responsibilities Concerning Performance Space. In fulfilling its
contract responsibilities, the City shall:
i
A. Provide performances, as selected solely by the City, for the Take-Out
Tuesdays event.
B. Provide a sound technician and associated equipment.
C. Provide a 15' x 15' canopy to cover the stage. Kent Parks
Maintenance staff will assemble and disassemble the canopy on the
day of each concert performance within the time period provided in
section 2.3(B).
D. Provide on-site concert management staff.
E. Promote the Take-Out Tuesdays event through community calendar
listings, press releases, distribution of printed materials, Kent TV
channel 21, and the City's website.
F. Produce and distribute more than 30,000 printed promotional pieces
for the entire Take Out Tuesday concert season, including brochures,
posters, wallet schedules, and newsletters. Promotional pieces are
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT-2
I
distributed throughout City facilities, South King County businesses,
regional libraries, day cares, churches, schools, and direct mailings.
G. Credit the Sponsor for its assistance and sponsorship by:
(i) Titling the concert events during 2010 as "Kent Station Take-Out
Tuesdays" in all promotional materials.
(11) Printing Sponsor's name and logo on all concert promotional
materials produced by the city.
(ill) Cooperating with and providing space for Sponsor to have an on-
site presence at the performance site.
(iv) Facilitating Sponsor's promotional activities such as giveaways,
announcements, contests, and demonstrations.
2.5 Impossibility ofPerformance. Outdoor performances are considered"rain
or shine." In the event extreme inclement weather renders an outdoor performance
impossible, the City will use its best efforts to arrange an alternate performance space,
but is under no obligation to Sponsor to provide the alternate performance, and no part
of Sponsor's payment will be reimbursed In the event of any cancellation due to
extreme inclement weather.
IIN WITNESS, the parties have executed this Agreement, which shall become
effective on the last date executed below.
TARRAGO KENT STATION P ASE II, L.L.C. CITY OF KENT:
By" By:
Print N e: ��� l Print Name: Jeff Watling
Title: Title: Parks Director
Date: �I__i 10 Date:
P7\Civil\FILES\OpenFlles\0105-2006\KentStatlon-SponsorAgreement doc
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT-3
i �
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6E
1. SUBJECT: KENT STATION SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT FOR CONCERTS -
ACCEPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the $6,000 sponsorship from Kent Station
to partially fund summer concert performances, amend the budget accordingly,
and authorize the expenditure of funds in the Arts Commission budget.
Kent Station will sponsor the City's Take-Out Tuesday concerts in 2010. The
$6,000 will cover artistic fees and offset other expenses associated with
producing the concerts.
3. EXHIBITS: Kent Station Sponsorship Agreement
t4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks and Human Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue? X
1 Currently in the Budget? Yes No X
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
WASHINOTON
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT
(between the City of Kent and Tarragon-Kent station Phase II, L.L.C.)
THIS AGREEMENT is made between the city of Kent, a Washington municipal
corporation (hereinafter the "City"), and Tarragon-Kent Station Phase II, L.L.C., located
and doing business at 417 Ramsay Way, Suite 110, Kent, WA 98032 (hereinafter the
1 "Sponsor").
I. RECITALS
1.1 Cooperatively, the City and the Kent Arts Commission produce the Kent
Summer Concert Series annually during the months of July and August, which includes
"Take-Out Tuesdays." As part of that undertaking, the City and the Kent Arts
Commission offer entities the opportunity to become official sponsors of the annual
concert series.
1.2 The Sponsor has solicited the City to provide financial and other support In
exchange for promotion of Sponsor's products and services as specified in this
Agreement and for location of the Take-Out Tuesdays event at the Kent Station
property during 2010. As such, the parties desire to enter into this Agreement to
establish each party's responsibilities with respect to the Kent Summer Concert Series
for 2010.
II. AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual intent, desire, and promises of
the parties and other good and valuable consideration, the City and Sponsor agree as
follows:
2.1 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the last date
signed below and shall terminate either on August 31, 2010, or upon each party's
performance of the terms specified in this Agreement, whichever occurs first.
2.2 Concert Location and Financial Sponsorship. The City agrees to locate the
Take-Out Tuesdays event at the Kent Station Plaza for the 2010 term. In exchange,
the Sponsor shall provide financial assistance to the City in the amount of $6,000 for
the six Take-Out Tuesday concerts during the months of July and August, 2010.
Sponsor shall provide payment of fifty percent (5011/o) of this financial assistance to the
City by March 31, 2010. The remaining fifty percent (SO%) shall be paid to the City
before the date of the first concert, scheduled for July 6, 2010.
2.3 Sponsor's Responsibilities Concerning Performance Space. In fulfilling Its
contract responsibilities, the Sponsor shall:
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT-1
t
A. Provide an adequate electrical supply to include at least one 20 amp
120 volt dedicated circuit.
B. On concert days, the circular stage in front of the AMC box office, ■
which is where the Take-Out Tuesday concerts are to be performed, j
shall be made available to the City and concert performers from 7:30
a.m, to 3:00 p.m. The concerts are currently scheduled for July 6,
July 13, July 20, July 27, August 3, and August 10, 2010.
C. Provide adequate access for City and concert performer vehicles to the
performance site to load and unload equipment for the concerts.
D. Provide parking in close proximity to the performance site for use by
the concert performers.
E. Provide restrooms, preferably dedicated facilities, for use by the
concert performers as a private dressing room.
F. Provide Sponsor information, which shall Include names and logos to
be used by the City in concert promotional materials, no less than
three (3) months prior to the initial event date.
G. Promote the Take-Out Tuesday events in businesses located within the
Kent Station development by displaying printed materials and making
flyers available to the public.
2.4 City''s Responsibilities Concerning Performance Space. In fulfilling its
contract responsibilities, the City shall:
I
A. Provide performances, as selected solely by the City, for the Take-Out
Tuesdays event.
B. Provide a sound technician and associated equipment.
C. Provide a IS' x 15' canopy to cover the stage. Kent Parks
Maintenance staff will assemble and disassemble the canopy on the
day of each concert performance within the time period provided in
section 2.3(6).
D. Provide on-site concert management staff.
E. Promote the Take-Out Tuesdays event through community calendar
listings, press releases, distribution of printed materials, Kent TV
channel 21, and the City's website.
F. Produce and distribute more than 30,000 printed promotional pieces
for the entire Take Out Tuesday concert season, including brochures,
posters, wallet schedules, and newsletters. Promotional pieces are
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT-2 I(
distributed throughout City facilities, South King County businesses,
regional libraries, day cares, churches, schools, and direct mailings.
G. Credit the Sponsor for its assistance and sponsorship by:
(1) Titling the concert events during 2010 as"Kent Station Take-Out
Tuesdays" in all promotional materials.
(ii) Printing Sponsor's name and logo on all concert promotional
materials produced by the city.
(ill) Cooperating with and providing space for Sponsor to have an on-
site presence at the performance site.
(iv) Facilitating Sponsor's promotional activities such as giveaways,
announcements, contests, and demonstrations.
2.5 Impossibillty ofPerformance. Outdoor performances are considered"rain
or shine." In the event extreme inclement weather renders an outdoor performance
impossible, the City will use its best efforts to arrange an alternate performance space,
but is under no obligation to Sponsor to provide the alternate performance, and no part
of Sponsor's payment will be reimbursed in the event of any cancellation due to
extreme inclement weather.
IN WITNESS, the parties have executed this Agreement, which shall become
effective on the last date executed below.
TARRAGON- ENT STATION P SE II, L.L.C. CITY OF KENT:
0/�By: By:
Print Nam pi Print Name: Jeff Watling
Title: G t--\ -- Title: Parks Director
Date —Z i 0 I b Date:
P\Civil\FILES\OpenFlles\0105.2006\KentStatlon-SponsorAgreement.do
SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT-3
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6F
1. SUBJECT: PARK AND OPEN SPACE PLAN ORDINANCE - ADOPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adopt Ordinance No. regarding adoption of
the Park & Open Space Plan (the "Plan"). The Plan update process re-examined
the vision for Kent Parks and prioritized next steps for the short and long term
future. The Plan analyzes the most recent census information, provides an
updated park and open space inventory, updates level of service and goals and
policies and recommends long and short term capital projects. The Plan includes
four core themes: Kent's Legacy, Athletic Fields, Green Kent and Connectivity;
and will be used to direct future development, acquisition and renovation of parks
and open spaces.
3. EXHIBITS: Ordinance and Park & Open Space Plan (please refer to Consent
Calendar Item G for Committee and SEPA exhibits)
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks, Recreation and Community Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? No Revenue? No
Currently in the Budget? Yes _ No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
t
i
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington adopting the Park and
Open Space Plan.
RECITALS
A. In the spring of 2009, the City began the process of
developing an updated Park and Open Space Plan (Park Plan). When the
Park Plan is integrated into the Park and Open Space Element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan, it will direct future development, acquisition and
renovation of parks and open spaces for the short and long-term future.
The Park Plan includes, among other items, an inventory of the existing
parks and open spaces, level of service standards, goals and policies, and
an implementation strategy that includes short and long-term capital
projects.
B. The Park Plan has undergone a public process. A survey was
taken during the spring of 2009 seeking ideas and opinions regarding the
existing park system, deficiencies and priorities for the coming years. A
rpublic workshop was held in September 2009 to further refine the areas of
focus in the update. Additional public comment was solicited throughout
the update process via email, the City's website and articles in the Kent
1 Park & Open Space Plan
Reporter.
C. Throughout this process, the City Council has held workshop
and committee meetings to gather information and analyze the ongoing
development of the Park Plan. Meetings were held on September 17,
2009, November 19, 2009; January 21, 2010; February 16, 2010; and
March 18, 2010.
D. On January 8, 2010, the City provided the State of
Washington with the required sixty (60) day notification under RCW
36.70A.106 of the City's proposed adoption of the Park Plan and
corresponding amendment to the Park and Open Space Element and
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. No comments were
received.
E. On February 13, 2010, the City's SEPA responsible official
issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the proposed Park
Plan and corresponding changes to the Comprehensive Plan. The DNS
explained that the proposal would not have probable significant adverse
impacts on the environment.
F. The public involvement process continued with the Land Use
and Planning Board holding workshops regarding the Park Plan and
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan on January 11, 2010, and a
public hearing on March 8, 2010. Adoption of the Park Plan and the
corresponding changes to the Park and Open Space Element and the
Capital Facilities Element were also considered by the City Council's Parks
and Human Services Committee on March 18, 2010. On May 4, 2010, the
City Council adopted the Park Plan for the City of Kent.
2 Park & Open Space Plan
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
SECTION 1. - Incorooratlon of Recitals. The preceding recitals are
incorporated herein.
SECTION 2. - Amendment. The Park and Open Space Plan as
attached and incorporated as Exhibit "A" is adopted by the City of Kent.
SECTION 3. - Severability. If any one or more sections, sub-
sections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or
invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion
of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 4. - Corrections by Clty Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws,
codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and
section/subsection numbering.
SECTION 5. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and
be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of passage as provided
by law.
SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR
3 Park & Open Space Plan
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of May, 2010.
APPROVED: day of May, 2010.
PUBLISHED• day of May, 2010.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved
by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P\Ciml\Ordinance\Pa rkPlanOrdinante docx
4 Park & Open Space Plan
Park & Open
Space Plan
Kent Park, Recreation &
Community Services
KENT
W�B HiMOiO�
i
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
Table of Contents
WHO WE ARE...
1. Introduction ................................................................. 1
WHERE WE ARE...
2. Background.................................................................. 3
Natural Resource Characteristics....................................4
Demographic Profile ..................................................... 4
3. Park Inventory & Classification ....................................... 7
WHERE WE WANT TO GO...
4. Goals and Policies ....................................................... 14
5. Needs Analysis . 27
Level of Service (LOS) ................................................ 27
Demographics ........................................................... 30
Public Participation ..................................................... 30
Regional Coordination................................................. 31
HOW WE WILL GET THERE...
6. Implementation .......................................................... 33
Overview .................................................................. 33
Core Themes ............................................................. 33
Long Term Capital Recommendations (2010-2030) ........ 35
Short Term Capital Recommendations (2010-2020) ....... 38
Financing .................................................................. 41
7. Appendices ................................................................ 45
A. Public Involvement................................................ 45
B. Relevant Regulations............................................. 49
C. Capital Facilities Plan ............................................. 51
D. Ordinance Adopting Plan ........................................ 53
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
1. Introduction
Over the past several decades Kent has developed an award-winning network of
parks, open spaces and recreation facilities. Kent's park and open space system
provides a wide variety of recreation experiences, from the Arbor Heights 360 skate
park and climbing pinnacle and the passive nature of Clark Lake Park, to the
regional draw of the Russell Road softball/baseball complex and our stunning
downtown gathering place, Town Square Plaza.
Kent Parks' vision - "Creating a Better Community"- emphasizes the role parks play
in the make-up of a vibrant community. Meeting the needs of our residents has
strongly influenced the character of the City's park system and has helped create a
well-rounded and expansive network of recreational opportunities. Our recent park
survey resulted in positive comments about the City's existing system.
Kent parks serve a community that has grown not only in numbers but in area and
diversity. Kent is now home to more families, children and seniors than ever
before. A quarter of Kent's residents were born outside the U.S. and one-third
speak a language other than English at home. Over the past 20 years, the City has
doubled in size as urban growth areas have been annexed. As Kent transitions
from a suburban community to an urban center, the need to build upon Kent's
legacy is crucial to meet the changing community's needs. The Park Plan update
establishes a vision of a park system that addresses urbanization in its future
development to better serve a growing community. The Park Plan is a tool to help
Kent meet this challenge.
Park Plan Objectives
The purpose of this plan is to guide acquisition, development and redevelopment of
parks and open spaces as we progress into the next 20 years. This plan examines
Kent's existing park and open space system, assesses needs, identifies short- and
long-term recommendations, details funding sources and prioritizes our next steps.
In addition, the plan will be incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan as an
implementing document and will allow the City to retain eligibility for State grant
funds.
The Growth, Management Act (GMA) provides planning goals for Parks and Open
Spaces. Although the Park Plan is a required element under GMA, Kent has long
maintained a Park and Open Space Element because park and recreational
opportunities are viewed as an integral part of the City and essential to the quality
of life for its residents. A summary of the Park Plan will be included in the Park and
Open Space Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
1
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Philosophy
The mission for the Park and Community Services Department is to enrich the
quality of life in Kent by providing parks and facilities that are safe, attractive, and
that offer enjoyable and meaningful recreation and cultural programs, and supports
human services. This is accomplished via development and maintenance of parks
and facilities, professional programming, and the optimum utilization of community
resources. The following mission statement articulates the Department's
commitment to the community:
Vision: Creating a Better Community
Mission: Dedicated to Enriching Lives D
1. We are committed to providing safe and inviting parks and facilities.
2. We offer meaningful and inclusive recreational, cultural and human
service programs.
3. We are responsive, encouraging and ethical in our dedication to the
community by providing:
Personal Benefits that strengthen self esteem, improve health and promote
self sufficiency.
Social Benefits that bring families together and unite people within our
diverse community.
Economic Benefits that welcome new business relocation and expansion,
leading to a more productive work force and increased tourism opportunities.
. . . Environmental Benefits that protect and preserve natural and open space
areas and enhance air and water quality.
As we seek to develop a park and open space system that adequately meets the
needs of Kent's residents, this Plan will provide the necessary guidance to help us
fulfill the Department's mission and work toward creating a better community.
2
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
2. Background
' The City of Kent is the fourth largest city in King County, with a culturally diverse
population of 88,380 (April 2009 OFM Official Estimate). Annexation of the Panther
Lake area to the northeast of the City's limits in July 2010 will add an additional five
square miles and approximately 24,000 residents to Kent's population. Kent has a
unique makeup, from its distinct residential neighborhoods, its regional
manufacturing center and regional urban center, to an extensive network of natural
features; these make Kent an attractive destination for living, working and
conducting business. Situated between Seattle and Tacoma, Kent's city limits cover
a geographic area of 29 square miles with major residential areas on the east and
west hills, a warehouse and distribution hub in the valley, a vibrant urban center,
and commercial nodes scattered throughout. Over the past several decades Kent
has developed an established network of parks, open spaces and recreation
facilities totaling more than 1,400 acres. In 2003, Kent was selected Sports
Illustrated Sportstown USA, which recognized Kent's innovation in the development
of park facilities and programming. In addition to providing parks and open spaces,
Kent offers a wide variety of recreation programs. Kent's service area goes beyond
the city limits, serving the entire Kent School District and portions of the Highline
and Federal Way School Districts.
Figure 1: City of Kent General Map
Legend
A� �f F I, { F Moor Wa[er FeaNeg
l 19351
10 IT
\hptlaYd3
szaa sT z�aT `�isRooE e� ~ 4 w elvaa - IM Park Facilities
1�. 3 C _arzuo sr I
/,/� r AT'3 artlher k�� X�py Mlwr wa'er Feahle
�I rJ1 ` P w 1� SE OPGre"ItldsNfleXanClPAfea
3iE5 T SE2 97
S212S L ty Limits
w S
3233 STw
" loll 5 aS_ZO uT mt Il SE ST
\\ 24 STm 5;�._IIl1 w
s + y, J Sq`� eK
9ft 31 EZSJ�
E2E:5 v � FI �Y
TY
H - elnam
m FX
]p
fu\4 �1 1251
v sT nl snrsT
� /
�
S 239T �1 ➢
3
chapter 2 - Background
Natural Resource Characteristics
Kent is lucky to have a wide variety of natural systems that help define our city and '
make it unique. Some of the larger systems include two waters of the state: the
Green River which runs north-south along the west side of the City and Lake
Meridian located on Kent's east hill. There are several other shoreline areas in Kent
as designated by the Shoreline Management Act, which include: Lake Fenwick,
Green River Natural Resource Area, Springbrook Creek, portions of Soos Creek, and
the Mill Creek Auburn Floodway. In addition to these, the City has many areas that
are considered critical or environmentally sensitive such as wetlands, streams, fish
and wildlife habitat, geologic hazard areas, frequently flooded areas and aquifer
recharge areas. An extensive urban forest stretches across and within many of
these natural systems.
Kent's natural systems have been pressured by widespread development over the
years; however, many of these areas are incorporated and protected within the
City's parks and open spaces. The City has the opportunity to further protect and
utilize these areas through increased stewardship and through acquisition of natural
areas that are currently within private ownership. An example of recent efforts to
preserve Kent's natural areas is the development of an urban forestry management
program, currently underway. This program, titled Green Kent, will contain a 20-
year action plan to manage our natural areas and take advantage of our
enthusiastic volunteers by training residents to become volunteer stewards. The
community recognizes the need to protect natural areas. Our most recent park
survey indicated that natural and open space areas were rated of extremely high
importance to our users.
Demographic Profile
Demand for park facilities is directly related to the makeup of the community in
areas such as population, age, ethnic diversity and household makeup. A look at
Kent's demographics is one measure that can help determine how much and what
kind of park land is needed to serve the specific needs of the community. The
demographic information below is a broad overview based on information
developed from the 2000 U.S. Census data.
Population Growth
Significant growth over the last 20 years has underscored the need to plan for the
next phase of Kent's parks and open spaces so that these spaces continue to meet
the needs of the growing community. We also recognize that, due to fiscal
constraints, we need to become more creative in the maintenance, redevelopment
and programming of our existing parks as well as in the acquisition of future parks
and open spaces. Establishing partnerships with other organizations will become
4
CITY of KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
increasingly important if we are to continue to provide and maintain quality parks
' and open spaces.
The City of Kent is the ninth largest city in Washington and fourth largest city in
King County. Figure 1 depicts Kent's population growth, by decade, since 1960,
and also reflects population projections to 2031. Annexation of the Panther Lake
area to the northeast of the City's limits in July 2010 will add an additional five
square miles and approximately 24,000 residents to Kent's population. By the year
2031, Kent's population is projected to reach 133,347 (or 133,857 including all
potential annexation areas). Kent grew at an average rate of 10.9 percent per year
t' in the 1990's compared to an average of 6.4 percent per year in the 1980's.
Several significant annexations occurred in the 1990's which account for a large
part of the population increase during the 1990's.
Figure 2: Kent Population Growth 1960-2031
Kent Population Growth
160000
140000 133,347
i120000 11238
100000 —
79,52
80000
60000 --
37,9
40000 23,152
20000 , 16,275
0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2031
U S Census Bureau/OFM/PSRC/KmgCounty
' Households
There were 31,113 households in Kent in 2000, with an average of 2.53 persons
per household, up from 2.33 in 1990. Family households make up 63 percent of
households in Kent, with 38 percent of all households having children (individuals
under 18 years of age) and 13.9 percent of all households including seniors
(individuals 65 years and over).
5
Chapter 2 - Background
Ethnic Diversity
Kent's ethnic diversity is growing rapidly. Close to 29 percent of Kent's residents '
identified themselves as a race other than white, compared to 11 percent in the
1990 Census. The ethnic makeup of Kent is 70.8 percent white, 9.4 percent Asian,
8.2 percent African American, 8.1 Hispanic, 0.9 percent Native American, 0.7 1
percent Pacific Islander, 4.7 percent from other races and 5.3 percent from two or
more races. The American Community Survey estimates that from 2005-2007, 31
percent of Kent's residents spoke a language other than English at home. Of those
speaking another language, 30 percent spoke Spanish and 70 percent spoke some
other language, and 56 percent reported that they did not speak English very well.
The American Community Survey also estimates that from 2005-2007, 25 percent
of people living in Kent were foreign born.
Age Makeup
Kent's population appears to be aging with an increased number of seniors and a
higher median age. There are also a greater number of children under the age of
18. The 2000 census found that 27.7 percent of Kent's population was less than 18
years of age, compared to 24.7 percent in 1990. The 2000 census found that 7.3
percent of the population was 65 years or older, compared to 6.5 percent in 1990.
The median age in 2000 was 31.8 years. The American Community Survey
estimates that the median age from 2005-2007, was 33.9 years.
Figure 3: Age Groups as a Percentage of Population
1990 Population 2000 Populaton
6% 7%
■0-17 s0-17
■18-44 20% ■18-44
.x a o 45-64 ^' u 45-65
w ❑
❑ 65+65+ ,
r �
6
' CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
3. Park Inventory & Classification
' Kent owns or leases 1,434 acres of park land. The majority of this park land is
natural resource land, while the remaining is distributed between Community and
Neighborhood Parks, Recreation Facilities and undeveloped land. Since 2000, over
87 acres of additional park land have been acquired. Park land from the Panther
Lake Annexation, effective July 2010, is included in the inventory below.
' Inventoried parks are shown in Figure 5, Park & Recreation Facilities. The City's
park land is generally broken down into the following categories:
Figure 4: Total Parks by Classification
■Community Parks
■ Neighborhood Parks
®Indoor Recreation Facility
j
■Outdoor Recreation Facility
= �
®Natural Resource
.�. �w .
max_ ,
®Undeveloped
®Golf Course
' Community Parks — A park that serves the entire City of Kent and includes
facilities or amenities that are not offered elsewhere in the city. Amenities will vary
' at each park and may include boating, swimming, fishing, group picnic shelters,
play equipment, trails, sport courts and ball fields. Access to the park is by car,
public transit, foot or bicycle. Off-street parking is provided. There are eight
' Community Parks with a total of 111.9 acres.
Facility Location Acres
1. Arbor Heights 360 east 2.82
2. Green River Parks
Anderson Park valley 0.30
Briscoe Park valley 7.00
Cottonwood Grove valley 0.77
Russell Woods Park valley 7.00
Three Friends Park valley 1.00
7
Chapter 3 - Park Inventory & Classification '
Van Doren's Landing Park valley 10.00
3. Lake Meridian Park east 16.02 ,
4. Morrill Meadows east 16.31
5. Old Fishing Hole valley 5.70
6. Town Square Plaza valley 0.77
7. Urban Core Parks
Burlington Green* valley 0.22
Castlereagh Park* valley 0.21 ,
First Avenue Plaza valley 0.60
Kaibara Park* valley 0.56
Kherson valley 0.58 '
Rosebed Park* valley 0.23
Sunnfjord Park valley 0.21
Titus Railroad Park valley 0.30
Uplands Extension* (Rotary Basketball & Lions Skate) valley 4.10
Yangzhou Park* valley 0.21
8. West Fenwick Park (includes West Hill Skate Park) west 37.00
Total 111.91
* Leased Land
Neighborhood Park - A park designed to meet the active and passive recreation '
needs of an immediate neighborhood. A neighborhood is defined by surrounding
arterial streets and access is usually by foot or bicycle. Parking spaces are typically
not provided, unless on-street parking is not available, accessible or safe.
Neighborhood parks have amenities for casual activities that are not programmed
or organized. Amenities may include play equipment, picnic tables, hard courts
(basketball, tennis), walking trails, and open grass areas. There are 27
neighborhood parks with a total of 90.33 acres.
Facility Location Acres
1. Canterbury Neighborhood Park east 2.08 ,
2. Chestnut Ridge Park east 3.33
3. Commons Park valley 2.66
4. East Hill Park east 4.62
5. Eastridge Park east 0.80
6. Garrison Creek Park east 5.00
7. Glenn Nelson Park west 10.00 '
8. Gowe Street Mini Park valley 0.10
9. Green Tree Park east 1.47
10. Green View Park east 1.10
11. Kiwanis Tot Lot #1 valley 0.60
12. Kiwanis Tot Lot #2 valley 0.41
13. Kiwanis Tot Lot #3 east 0.75
14. Kiwanis Tot Lot #4 valley 0.35
15. Linda Heights Park west 4.20
16. Meridian Glen Park east 5.47 ,
8
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
P P
1
17. Naden Avenue RV Park valley 0.70
' 18. Park Orchard Park east 7.22
19. Pine Tree Park east 9.80
20, Salt Air Vista Park west 2.00
21. Scenic Hill Park east 4.10
22. Seven Oaks Park east 0.50
23, Springwood Park east 10.00
' 24. Sun Meadows east 1.54
25. Tudor Square Park east 4.70
26. Turnkey Park east 6.53
27. Walnut Grove east 0.30
Total 90.33
' Recreation Facility - Buildings and parks used by the community for social,
cultural and programmed recreation. Outdoor recreation facilities are distinguished
from other parks by the scheduled nature of the facilities. Recreation facilities
include community centers, historic buildings, sports fields and golf facilities. These
facilities serve the entire City of Kent, and in some cases, the region. Access to
these facilities is by car, public transit, foot, or bicycle. Off-street parking is
provided. Riverbend is unique from the other recreational facilities because it is an
enterprise facility, which is a self-sustaining, revenue generating facility that
financially supports itself. Some of the facilities identified below include open space
which may be developed in the future.
Square
Facility Location Acres Feet
Indoor
' 1. Kent Commons valley 3.00 50,000
2. Kent Historical Museum valley 1.70 3,720
3. Kent Memorial Park Building valley 0.25 3,000
4. Kent Valley Ice Centre*** valley 3.60 65,154
5. Neely/Soames Historical House valley 1.00 21256
6. Resource Center valley 0.44 6,000
' 7. Senior Activity Center valley 4.36 21,000
Subtotal 14.35 151F 130
Outdoor
' 8. Kent Memorial Park valley 10.95
9. North Meridian Park Fields east 8.40
10. Service Club Park east 28.80
' 11. Russell Road Park valley 30.40
12. Uplands Playfield valley 2.30
13. Wilson Playfields east 11.49
Subtotal 92.34
Golf Course
13. Riverbend Golf Complex-18 holes valley 131.00 11,296
' 14. Golf Par 3, Driving Range, Mini-Putt valley 36.00 11800
9
i
chapter 3 - Park Inventory & Classification
Total 273.69 164,226
*** City Leased Land '
Natural Resource - Parks that are passive in nature and include areas of
openness, environmentally sensitive areas, or wildlife habitat. Amenities include '
passive recreation elements such as benches, bird watching platforms, fishing,
trails, and open green areas.
Facility Location Acres '
1. Anderson Greenbelt valley 4.00
2. Campus Park east 16.50
3. Clark Lake Park (includes Lake rental 2.06) east 129.11
4. Eagle Scout Park valley 0.50
5. Foster Park valley 4.00 ,
6. Green River Natural Resources Area** valley 310.00
7. Green River Corridor/Trail valley 39.35
8. Ikuta Property Donation valley 0.90 '
9. Interurban Trail valley 10.35
10. Kennebeck Avenue valley 0.10
11. Lake Fenwick Park west 141.34
12. Mill Creek Canyon Park east 107.25
13. North Meridian Park east 67.06
14. Old Fire Station west 0.21 '
15. Puget Power Trail valley 20.00
16. Springbrook Greenbelt valley 5.00
17. West Canyon Open Space west 5.00
18. Willis Street Greenbelt* valley 4.00
Total 864.67
* Leased Land, ** Public Works Managed '
Undeveloped - Land area acquired by the city that has not yet been developed or
programmed for recreational use.
Facility Location Acres
1. 132nd Avenue Park (Dow Property) east 4.56
2. 277th Corridor Park east 4.58
3. Eagle Creek Park east 1.00
4. Hopkins Open Space east 1.34
5. Kronisch Property west 0.70
6. Midway Reservoir (W. Hill Neighborhood Park) west 9.67 '
7. Naden Ave. Property valley 6.45
S. Rainier View Estates east 1.17
9. Riverview Park valley 14.40
10. Valley Floor Community Park & Ball fields valley 50.05
Total 93.92 '
10
z
�W
i0 y
u Z —�'•^ Ili p" ... °aa`_az
CL � � O Ov Oa d. LL m U U F J y -• cI-ti.a� Ii:LL d �,C/J ¢ e�m=`3 i_`n
() C o E o o
C/1 A C7 3 m E v m y w C ?e w o<<s ems
aZ3i r ~ 3 _ O m>F•>>
nW/ W Z Z U K O 2
-.-. _ i I� _�— _"csg•y
giCD
°3
s
wil
li�
7-1
T
i L
I � Ile• -ti>—�" I � I Y,.��,°��•
gL
OL
• Imo/ N
s•J�ls� u� � v__I - i v � � �� �- f'�1
H' i'' 'Iry e✓Q7s1J
4 3 m � vK b '�-I R•� �,a,l t�,,.�.w�� �1 I
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
1
' Urban Center & Green River Subareas
Kent contains two distinct areas comprising several parks. These areas are
' included in the inventory under Community Parks. Kent's downtown includes 10
parks, which together, form the Urban Center Community Parks. Parks within the
Urban Center collectively provide a variety of amenities such as play areas, picnic
' tables, skate and basketball facilities, and passive open green areas. During
festivals and other events downtown, these parks serve as gathering places and
key focal points.
The Green River features 13 parks stretching from Briscoe Park at the northern city
limits to the 277th trail connection at the southern limits. Several of the parks
' provide passive green space, two are undeveloped, and the remaining provide a
variety of amenities for fishing, play, barbecues, picnics and bicycling. Each of
' these subareas provides a distinct experience for park users based on the area.
Greenways
Greenways provide a contrast to urban density. They combine the natural functions
and separations provided by a greenbelt with the linear and connected orientation
of a parkway. Greenways are present
in many existing parks and within
privately owned property. They
commonly exist because they include
' environmentally sensitive areas such
as wetlands, streams or steep slopes. f
One of the most prominent greenways
in Kent is within Mill Creek Earthworks
Park, which starts at the base of the 5 w
east hill and continues up the hill along << '
P
both sides of Mill Creek. This t � ai
greenway includes an urban forest,
stream, wetlands, wildlife habitat and , ,,
steep slopes. In addition to the
environmental benefits of this area, Mill
Creek Greenway provides a break in
the urban landscape and has the
potential to provide a much needed
connection between the city center and
the east hill.
Given the limitations of public
resources, urban greenway systems must be sensibly created and carefully
Mill Creek Canyon Greenway
11
Chapter 3 - Park Inventory & Classification ,
managed. Urban greenways, such as
the Mill Creek Greenway, can provide multiple benefits at an affordable price to a '
wide array of residents, since many greenways are already under public ownership
and can be utilized for several purposes. As greenways are increasingly used for '
other purposes, it is important to provide access to residents in a safe manner, with
thought given to crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) and other
methods to increase visibility and safety for park users. '
Green Kent
Protecting natural areas in an urbanized area requires an active resource
management program to provide long-term environmental, recreational, and social
benefits.
Green Kent, an urban forest management program currently being developed, will '
identify present conditions across approximately 2,000 acres of public land, and
determine the resources required to realize a 20-year strategic plan of action. The ,
long-term strategy will become the driving force to engage community groups and
build a network of support to achieve city-wide forest and natural area restoration
goals.
The following are Green Kent's goals:
1) Connect people to nature and improve the quality of life in Kent by restoring '
urban forests and other urban open spaces;
2) Galvanize an informed, involved, and active community around urban forest '
restoration and stewardship; and
3) Improve urban forest health, and enhance urban forest long-term '
sustainability, by removing invasive plants and maintaining functional native
forest communities.
12
F KENT - Park & Open S
crrr o ace Plan - 2010 p p
1
1
1
1
1
1
13
Chapter 4 - Goals & Policies ,
4. Goals and Policies
The following goals and policies express how the City's park and open space system ,
would best develop over the coming years and details measurable steps toward
achieving these goals. '
Overall Goal: Encourage and provide opportunities for local residents to participate in
life- enrichment activities via the development of park land and recreational facilities, ,
preservation and enhancement of environmentally sensitive areas, professional
programming, and the optimum utilization of community resources. ,
I. Park & Recreation Facilities Goals & Policies ,
Develop a high-quality, diversified recreational system for all abilities, ages and
interest groups.
Goal P&OS-1:
Work with other agencies to preserve and increase waterfront access and facilities. '
Policy P&OS-1.1: Cooperate with King County, Kent, Federal Way and
Highline School Districts, and other public and private agencies to acquire and ,
preserve additional shoreline access for waterfront fishing, wading, swimming,
and other related recreational activities and pursuits, especially on the Green '
River, Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, and Panther Lake.
Policy P&OS-1.2: Develop a mixture of opportunities for watercraft access, '
including canoe, kayak, sailboard, and other nonpower-boating activities,
especially on the Green River, Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, and
Panther Lake, where practicable.
Goal P&OS-2: ,
Work with other public agencies and private organizations, including but not limited to
the Kent and Federal Way School Districts, to develop a high-quality system of athletic '
facilities for competitive play.
Policy P&OS-2.1: Develop athletic facilities that meet the highest quality t
standards and requirements for competitive playing for all abilities, age groups,
skill levels, and recreational interests. '
14
CITY of KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
Policy P&OS-2.2: Develop field and court activities like soccer, football,
baseball, basketball, softball, tennis, roller hockey, and volleyball that provide
for the largest number of participants, and allow for multiple use, where
appropriate.
Policy P&OS-2.3: Develop, where appropriate, a select number of facilities
' that provide the highest standard for competitive playing, possibly in
conjunction with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other
public agencies and private organizations.
Goal P&OS-3:
Develop, maintain, and operate a high-quality system of indoor facilities that provide
activities and programs for the interests of all physical and mental capabilities, age,
and interest groups in the community.
' Policy P&OS-3.1: Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor community
centers, such as the Senior Activity Center and Kent Memorial Park Building,
that provide arts and crafts, music, video, classroom instruction, meeting
facilities, eating and health care, day care, and other spaces for all age groups,
including preschool, youth, teens, and seniors on a year-round basis.
Policy P&OS-3.2: Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor recreational
centers, such as Kent Commons and the Kent-Meridian Pool, that provide
taquatic, physical conditioning, gymnasiums, recreational courts, and other
athletic spaces for all abilities, age groups, skill levels, and community interests
' on a year-round basis.
' Policy P&OS-3.3: Support the continued development and diversification by
the Kent, Highline, and Federal Way School Districts of special meeting,
assembly, eating, health, and other community facilities that provide
' opportunities to school-age populations and the community at large at
elementary, middle, and high schools within Kent and the Potential Annexation
Area.
Policy P&OS-3.4: Develop and operate special indoor and outdoor cultural
' and performing arts facilities that enhance and expand music, dance, drama,
and other audience and participatory opportunities for the community at large.
15
Chapter 4 - Goals & Policies '
Goal P&OS-4:
Where appropriate, develop and operate specialized park and recreational enterprises ,
that meet the interest of populations who are able and willing to finance them.
Policy P&OS-4.1: Where appropriate and economically feasible (i.e., self- '
supporting), develop and operate specialized and special interest recreational
facilities like golf, ice skating, frisbee golf, mountain biking and archery ranges. ,
Policy P&OS-4.2: Where appropriate, initiate with other public agencies and '
private organizations joint planning and operating programs to determine and
provide for special activities like golf, archery, gun ranges, off-leash areas,
model airplane flying areas, frisbee golf, mountain biking and camping on a
regional basis.
Goal P&OS-5:
Develop and operate a balanced system of neighborhood and community parks, with 1
active and passive recreational opportunities throughout the City.
Policy P&OS-SAL: Acquire and develop parks to meet the level-of-service '
needs as Kent's population grows and areas are annexed.
Policy P&OS-5.2: Identify neighborhoods bordered by arterial streets and ,
geographic features that act as natural barriers. Set aside neighborhood park
land within each neighborhood to meet the levels-of-service.
Policy P&OS-5.3: Develop amenities in parks for individual and group use,
active and passive uses, while representing the best interests of the
neighborhood or community as a whole.
r
Policy P&OS-5.4: Encourage new single-family and multifamily residential,
and commercial developments to provide recreation elements. ,
H. Open Space and Greenway Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality, diversified and interconnected park system that preserves and
sensitively enhances significant open spaces, greenways and urban forests. The ,
establishment of greenways as urban separators is a strategy that promotes
connectivity of Kent's open space system.
16
CITY of KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
1
Goal P&OS-6:
LEstablish an open space pattern that will provide definition of and separation between
developed areas, and provide open space and greenway linkages among park and
recreational resources.
Policy P&OS-6.1: Define and conserve a system of open space and greenway
corridors as urban separators to provide definition between natural areas and
urban land uses within the Kent area.
Policy P&OS-6.2: Increase linkages of trails, in-street bikes lanes, or other
existing or planned connections with greenways and open space, particularly
along the Green River, Mill Creek, Garrison Creek, and Soos Creek corridors;
around Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, and Lake
Youngs; and around significant wetland and floodways such as the Green River
Natural Resource Area (GRNRA).
' Policy P&OS-6.3: Preserve and enhance, through acquisition as necessary,
environmentally sensitive areas as greenway linkages and urban separators,
particularly along the steep hillsides that define both sides of the Green River
Valley and the SE 277m/272ne Street corridor.
Goal P&OS-7:
Identify and protect significant recreational lands before they are lost to development.
' Policy P&OS-7.1: Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with
' private landowners to protect land and resources near residential
neighborhoods for high-quality, low impact park and recreational facilities
' before the most suitable sites are lost to development. Suitable sites include
wooded, undeveloped, and sensitive lands along the Green River, Soos Creek,
Garrison Creek, and Mill Creek Canyon corridors, and lands adjacent to the
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) power line rights-of-way.
Policy P&OS-7.2: In future land developments, preserve unique
environmental features or areas, and increase public use of and access to these
areas. Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with private
landowners to protect unique features or areas as low impact publicly
accessible resources, particularly along the Green River, Soos Creek, Garrison
Creek, Mill Canyon, and SE 277tn/272nd Street corridors.
17
Chapter 4 - Goals & Policies '
III. Trail and Corridor System Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality system of multipurpose park trails and corridors that provide '
access to significant environmental features, public facilities, and developed
neighborhoods and business districts. '
Goal P&OS-8:
Create a comprehensive system of multipurpose off-road and on-road trail systems
that link park and recreational resources with residential areas, public facilities,
commercial, and employment centers both within Kent and within the region.
Policy P&OS-8.1: Where appropriate, create a comprehensive system of
multipurpose off-road trails using alignments of the Puget Power rights-of-way,
Soos Creek Trail, Mill Creek Trail, Lake Fenwick Trail, Green River Trail,
Interurban Trail, Parkside Wetlands Trail, and Green River Natural Resource ,
Area (GRNRA).
Policy P&OS-8.2: Create a comprehensive system of on-road trails to '
improve connectivity for the bicycle commuter, recreational, and touring
enthusiasts using scenic, collector, and local road rights-of-way and alignments.
Policy P&OS-8.3: Provide connections from residential neighborhoods to
community facilities like Kent Commons, the Senior Activity Center, the Kent-
Meridian Pool, schools, parks, and commercial districts.
Policy P&OS-8.4: Work with Renton, Auburn, Tukwila, Federal Way, Des
Moines, Covington, King County, and other appropriate jurisdictions to link and '
extend Kent trails to other community and regional trail facilities like the Green
River, Interurban, and Soos Creek Trails.
Policy P&OS-8.5: With proposed vacation of right-of-way and street
improvement plans, consider potential connectivity with existing or proposed '
trail corridors, parks, and neighborhoods.
Policy P&OS-8.6: Link trails with elementary and middle schools, the ,
downtown core, and other commercial and retail activity centers on East and
West Hills. '
18
Pa Open CITY OF KENT - Park & O Space Plan - 2010
p
Policy P&OS-8.7: Extend trails through natural area corridors like the Green
River, Mill Creek, Garrison Creek, and Soos Creek, and around natural features
like Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian and Panther Lake in order to
provide a high-quality, diverse sampling of Kent's environmental resources.
Policy P&OS 8.8: Revise development regulations so that key trail links, that
are identified within the corridor map, are provided to the City during the
development approval process.
Goal P&OS-9:
Furnish trail corridors, trailheads, and other supporting sites with convenient
amenities and improvements.
' Policy P&OS-9.1: Furnish trail systems with appropriate trailhead supporting
improvements that include interpretive and directory signage, rest stops,
drinking fountains, restrooms, parking and loading areas, water, and other
services.
' Policy P&OS-9.2: Where appropriate, locate trailheads at or in conjunction
with park sites, schools, and other community facilities to increase local area
access to the trail system and to reduce duplication of supporting
improvements and amenities.
' Policy P&OS-9.3: Design and develop trail improvements which emphasize
safety for users and are easy to maintain and easy to access by maintenance,
' security, and other appropriate personnel, equipment, and vehicles.
IV. Historic and Cultural Resources Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality, diversified park system that includes preservation of
significant historic and cultural resources, as well as programs to recognize the City's
multicultural heritage.
Goal P&OS-10:
Preserve, enhance, and incorporate historic and cultural resources and multicultural
' interests into the park and recreational system.
19
Chapter 4 - Goals & Policies
Policy P&OS-10.1: Identify, preserve, and enhance Kent's multicultural
heritage, traditions, and cultural resources including historic sites, buildings, '
artwork, views, monuments and archaeological resources.
Policy P&OS-10.2: Identify and incorporate significant historic and cultural
resource lands, sites, artifacts, and facilities into the park system to preserve
these interests and to provide a balanced social experience. These areas
include the original alignment for the interurban electric rail service between
Seattle and Tacoma, the James Street historical waterfront site, and the
Downtown train depot, among others.
Policy P&OS-10.3: Work with the Kent Historical Society and other cultural ,
resource groups to incorporate community activities at historic homes and sites
into the park and recreational program.
Goal P&OS-11:
Incorporate man-made environments and features into the park and recreational
system.
Policy P&OS-11.1: Incorporate interesting, man-made environments,
structures, activities, and areas into the park system to preserve these features
and to provide a balanced park and recreational experience. Examples include
the earthworks in Mill Creek Canyon Park and art in public places.
Policy P&OS-11.2: Work with property and facility owners to increase public
access to and utilization of these special features. ,
V. Cultural Arts Programs and Resources Goals & Policies '
Develop high-quality, diversified cultural arts facilities and programs that increase
community awareness, attendance, and other opportunities for participation. '
Goal P&OS-12:
Work with the arts community to utilize local resources and talents to increase public
access to artwork and programs.
Policy P&OS-12.1: Support successful collaborations among the Arts ,
Commission, business community, service groups, cultural organizations,
20
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
schools, arts patrons, and artists to utilize artistic resources and talents to the
optimum degree possible.
Policy P&OS-12.2: Develop strategies that will support and assist local artists
and art organizations. Where appropriate, develop and support policies and
programs that encourage or provide incentives to attract and retain artists and
' artwork within the Kent community.
1 Goal P&OS-13:
Acquire and display public artwork to furnish public facilities and other areas and
thereby increase public access and appreciation.
Policy P&OS-13.1: Acquire public artwork including paintings, sculptures,
exhibits, and other media for indoor and outdoor display in order to expand
access by residents and to furnish public places in an appropriate manner.
Policy P&OS-13.2: Develop strategies that will support capital and operations
funding for public artwork within parks and facilities.
VI. Wildlife and Natural Preservation Goals & Policies
Incorporate and preserve unique ecological features and resources into the park
' system in order to protect threatened plant and animal species, preserve and enhance
fish and wildlife habitat, and retain migration corridors for local fish and wildlife. Such
incorporation is intended to limit habitat degradation associated with human activities.
Goal P&OS-14:
Designate critical fish and wildlife habitat resources and areas.
Policy P&OS-14.1: Identify and conserve critical fish and wildlife habitat
including nesting sites, foraging areas, and wildlife mitigation corridors within
or adjacent to natural areas, open spaces, and developed urban areas.
Policy P&OS-14.2: Acquire, enhance 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.
21
Chapter 4 - Goals & Policies '
Policy P&OS-14.3: Enhance fish and wildlife habitat within parks, open '
space, and environmentally sensitive areas by maintaining a healthy urban
forest with native vegetation that provides food, cover, and shelter, by utilizing
best management practices.
Goal P&OS-15:
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-15.1: Preserve and protect significant environmental features
including environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, open spaces, ,
woodlands, shorelines, waterfronts, and other features that support wildlife and
reflect Kent's natural heritage. ,
Policy P&OS-15.2: 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 Resource Area (GRNRA), and the '
shorelines of Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, Lake Fenwick, and Clark Lake.
Goal P&OS-16: Develop and maintain an Urban Forestry Management Program.
Policy P&OS-16.1 Connect people to nature and improve the quality of life in '
Kent by restoring urban forests and other urban open spaces.
Policy P&OS-16.2 Galvanize the community around urban forest restoration
and stewardship through a volunteer restoration program.
I
Policy P&OS-16.3 Improve urban forest health, and enhance urban forest
long-term sustainability, by removing invasive plants and maintaining '
functional native forest communities.
VII. Design and Access Goals & Policies
Design and develop facilities that are accessible, safe, and easy to maintain, with life- '
cycle features that account for long-term costs and benefits.
Goal P&OS-17:
22
crrY of KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
Design park and recreational indoor and outdoor facilities to be accessible to all
Lphysical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests.
Policy P&OS-17.1: Design outdoor picnic areas, fields, courts, playgrounds,
trails, parking lots, restrooms, and other active and supporting facilities to be
accessible to individuals and organized groups of all physical capabilities, skill
' levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests.
1 Policy P&OS-17.2: Design indoor facility spaces, activity rooms, restrooms,
hallways, parking lots, and other active and supporting spaces and
' improvements to be accessible to individuals and organized groups of all
physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income levels, and activity
interests.
Goal P&OS-18:
Design and develop park and recreational facilities to be of low-maintenance
materials.
Policy P&OS-18.1: Design and develop facilities that are of low-maintenance
and high-capacity design to reduce overall facility maintenance and operation
requirements and costs.
Policy P&OS-18.2: Where appropriate, use low-maintenance materials,
settings, or other value-engineering considerations that reduce care and
security requirements, while retaining the natural conditions and environment.
Policy P&OS-18.3: Where possible in landscaping parks, encourage the use
of low maintenance native plants.
Goal P&OS-19:
' Identify and implement the security and safety provisions of the American Disabilities
Act (ADA), Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), and other
Istandards.
Policy P&OS-19.11.: Implement the provisions and requirements of the
American Disabilities Act (ADA), Crime Prevention through Environmental
Design (CPTED), and other design and development standards that will
23
Chapter 4 - Goals & Policies '
improve park safety and security features for users, department personnel, and
the public at large. '
Policy P&OS-19.2: Develop and implement safety standards, procedures,
and programs that will provide proper training and awareness for department
personnel.
Policy P&OS-19.3: Define and enforce rules and regulations concerning park
activities and operations that will protect user groups, department personnel,
and the public at large.
Policy P&OS-19.4: Where appropriate, use adopt-a-park programs,
neighborhood park watches, and other innovative programs that will increase
safety and security awareness and visibility.
VIII. Fiscal Coordination Goals & Policies
Create effective and efficient methods of acquiring, developing, operating, and
maintaining facilities and programs that distribute costs and benefits to public and ,
private interests.
Goal P&OS-20:
Investigate innovative methods of financing park and recreational requirements,
including joint ventures with other public agencies and private organizations, and
private donations.
Policy P&OS-20.1: Investigate innovative, available methods, such as growth
impact fees, land set-a-side or fee-in-lieu-of-donation ordinances, and
interlocal agreements, to finance facility development, maintenance, and
operating needs in order to reduce costs, retain financial flexibility, match user
benefits and interests, and increase facility services.
Policy P&OS-20.2: Where feasible and desirable, consider joint ventures with '
King County, Kent, Highline, and Federal Way School Districts, regional, state,
federal, and other public agencies and private organizations, including for-profit
concessionaires to acquire and develop regional facilities (i.e., swimming pool,
off-leash park, etc.). ,
24
h
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
Policy P&OS-20.3: Maintain and support a Park Foundation to investigate
grants and private funds, develop a planned giving program and solicit private
donations to finance facility development, acquisition, maintenance, programs,
services, and operating needs.
Goal P&OS-21:
Coordinate public and private resources to create among agencies a balanced local
park and recreational system.
Policy P&OS-21.1: Create a comprehensive, balanced park and recreational
' system that integrates Kent facilities and services with resources available from
King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other state, federal,
and private park and recreational lands and facilities, in a manner that will best
serve and provide for the interests of area residents.
Policy P&OS-21.2: Cooperate, via joint planning and development efforts,
with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other public and
private agencies to avoid duplication, improve facility quality and availability,
reduce costs, and represent interests of area residents.
Goal P&OS-22:
Create and institute a method of cost/benefit and performance measure assessment
to determine equitable park and recreation costs, levels of service, and provision of
facilities.
Policy P&OS-22.1: In order to effectively plan and program park and
recreational needs within the existing city limits and the potential annexation
area, define existing and proposed land and facility levels-of-service (LOS) that
differentiate requirements due to the impacts of population growth as opposed
' to improvements to existing facilities, neighborhood as opposed to community
nexus of benefit, requirements in the City as opposed to requirements in the
Potential Annexation Area.
Policy P&OS-22.2: Create effective and efficient methods of acquiring,
developing, operating, and maintaining park and recreational facilities in
manners that accurately distribute costs and benefits to public and private user
interests. This includes the application of growth impact fees where new
developments impact level-of-service (LOS) standards.
25
Chapter 4 - Goals & Policies ,
Policy P&OS-22.3: Develop and operate lifetime recreational programs that '
serve the broadest needs of the population and that recover program and
operating costs using a combination of registration fees, user fees, grants,
sponsorships, donations, scholarships, volunteer efforts, and the use of general
funds.
26
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
5. Needs Analysis
Level of Service (LOS)
' Under the Growth Management Act (GMA), communities are responsible for
providing public facilities without decreasing levels of service below locally
established minimums (RCW 36.70A.020(12)). Measuring the adequacy of our
Parks and Open Spaces requires an established set of standards. Level of service
(LOS) standards are measures of the amount of a public facility which must be
provided to meet the community's basic needs and expectations. The GMA allows
flexibility in establishing level of service standards that meet local needs and
expectations.
Over the past 30 years, the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) has
developed guidelines and standards for parks, recreation and open space. NRPA
first published guidelines in 1971 and revised them in 1983 through the Recreation,
Park, and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, to serve as a basis for developing
standards at the community level. The NRPA no longer recommends a standard for
facility and park land based on population ratios; however the NRPA recommends
that because every community is different, standards should be developed by the
community and used as a guide in planning.
The former NRPA guidelines are used throughout the United States, and Kent's
1994 Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan level of service standards were
developed with these standards, which represent the minimum for which a
community should strive. The level of service standards established in the 1994
1 Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan and adopted by City Council remain an
appropriate guideline today; however with the changing demographics of Kent, the
City may want to consider establishing new standards or supplemental measures in
future years.
Future demand for park and recreation facilities is based on comparing projected
populations with Kent's park and recreation standards. Park and recreation needs
are related directly to the characteristics of a city's population. The City's
' population is projected to increase to 133,347 (or 133,857 including all potential
annexation areas) by year 2031. Table 1 shows Kent's level of service from 1993-
2003. Table 2 shows Kent's level of service for the year 2009 and projections for
the year 2031. Table 2 is based on a reorganized park and open space inventory
that more accurately classifies park land based on current use and investment
(developed/undeveloped/athletic facilities/natural resource). While the park and
open spaces are broken down differently in the two tables, the overall LOS numbers
are comparable and show a steady decline in the number of acres per 1000 people
and square feet per person as the population increases.
27
Chapter 5 - Needs Analyses
Table 1: LOS 1993-2003
1993 1996 1998 2000 2003
Population 41,000 45,000 701140 79,524 84,275
Neighborhood Parks 2.53 ac. 1.58 ac. 1.56 ac. 1.45 ac. 1.13 ac.
13.72
Community Parks 18.19 ac. 18.4 ac. 14 ac. ac. 14.85 ac.
Golf Course (holes/1000) 0.56 0.6 0.38 0.38 0.32
Recreation Facilities (sq.
feet/person) 2.33 2.12 1.36 1.2 1.13
Overall LOS (acres/1000) 20.72 19.98 15.56 15.17 15.98
Overall LOS (sq. ft./person) 2.33 2.12 1.36 1.2 1.13
Table 2: LOS 2009 & 2031
2009 2031
Population 88,380 133,347
Natural Resource 9.2 ac. 6.5 ac.
0.92
Neighborhood Parks ac. .68 ac.
1.27
Community Parks ac. .83 ac.
Recreation Facilities ,
Indoor (sq.
ft/ erson) 1.86 1.13
Outdoor
acres/1000 2.8 1.9
1.05
Undeveloped ac. 0.70 ac. ,
Overall LOS acres/1000 15.24 10.81
Overall LOS
sq.ft./person 1.86 1.13
In order to maintain the current level of service of 15.24 acres per 1000 people, the
following amounts of additional park land would need to be acquired:
28
i
3
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
685 acres - 2031 pop of 133,347
693 acres - 2031 pop of 133,857 (includes potential annexation areas)
It is important to note that level of service standards are typically quantitative,
measuring the size, amount or capacity of a facility. These standards represent
only one measure of a successful park system and do not address the quality or
investment in each facility. Future LOS standards that include both qualitative and
quantitative measures may more fully capture how Kent's parks and open spaces
are meeting the community's needs.
Neighborhood Service Areas
Another tool used to determine what and where improvements need to be made is
with the use of our Neighborhood Service Area Map. The City is divided into 48
neighborhood service areas that are bounded by major arterial streets, geographic
features (steep topography, rivers etc.), and other barriers that would make it
difficult for users to reach the designated park for each area. This method breaks
the city into smaller service areas where parks facilities may easily serve a specific
Ineighborhood. Providing parks in each area allows residents to easily access a park
in their neighborhood.
Figure 6: Neighborhood Service Area Map
r
9
I- s Le end
_t
Plaighftod Park Service Areas
�OPOeMdI U,e atm ArE2
4 - CAl'L.rrrtS
= 131
t9,�� 20 1"d.Hl 16
Tl
31 30 &i
h
k( 34Ci 37� 394
e J � x� �q
While 24 of the areas are served by a neighborhood park, eight neighborhoods are
served by community parks (Three Friends, Van Doren's Landing Park, Russell
29
Chapter s - Needs Analysis
Woods, Kent Memorial Park, Russell Road, Clark Lake Park, Urban Center Parks and
Wilson Playfields) that have elements typically found in a neighborhood park. Four
neighborhoods have undeveloped or minimally developed community parks (132"d
Street Park, West Hill, Eagle Creek, and Valley Floor Community Park), which will
service neighborhood needs when fully developed. Five neighborhood service areas
are primarily industrial and no neighborhood parks are proposed in these areas.
Two service areas are low density residential with agricultural or industrial land
uses and no designated neighborhood park. These areas have a combined
population of 156 people (2000 Census) and will be monitored for future park
needs. Four service areas have no park space (NSA #11, 21, 30, 41).
Within the Panther Lake area, three service areas have either no park land or the
parks serving the areas are deficient (NSA #4, 9, 16). The remaining service area,
located entirely within the Panther Lake annexation area, is served by a community
park.
Neighborhood parks are needed in seven Neighborhood Service Areas which
currently have no park space or are in need of additional amenities or
improvements, three of which are located in the Panther Lake Area (NSA #4, 9, 11,
16, 21, 30, 41).
Demographics i
Considerable growth and large annexations over the past 20 years has significantly
increased Kent's population and the number of people our parks serve. Families
make up the majority of households in Kent with more seniors and children than
ever before. Kent is also rapidly becoming more diverse, with many different
cultures represented in the City. As our community becomes more diverse, as it
ages and families grow, the needs of the community in terms of parks and open
space, change. Not only has the need for parks and open spaces increased with the
population, future park investments need to also consider the increasingly diverse
population and the growing numbers of seniors and children.
Public Participation
The building of a city's parks and open spaces is largely directed by community
values, priorities, and resources. Kent has worked with the community in an '
ongoing dialogue to gauge residents' parks and open space values. Over the years
we have relied upon surveys, workshops, questionnaires and consultation with the
Parks and Human Services Committee. Feedback has been valuable in setting
priorities and allocating resources.
An informal survey was taken during the spring of 2009, preceding the park plan
update, in order to obtain the community's ideas and opinions about the existing
30
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
park system, deficiencies, and priorities for the coming years. While the survey
was not geographically representative or scientific, it is helpful to use the survey
responses as a general guide. Respondents rated trails, open space and natural
areas as extremely important followed by major parks and small neighborhood
parks. Park security and maintenance were also noted as a top priority in the
coming years.
In addition to the survey, a public workshop was held in September 2009 to further
refine the areas of focus in the Park Plan and supplement the comments received
through the survey. Participants commented on the need to maintain our existing
facilities and to make use of underutilized areas. Participants expressed a desire
for better connectivity between parks and throughout the City. A detailed
description of the survey, public workshop and other efforts to solicit public input
can be found in Appendix A.
In order to address the community's park and open space needs, short- and long-
term implementation priorities and funding options are discussed in the following
chapter.
Regional Coordination
Coordination with school districts, neighboring jurisdictions, other public agencies
and private organizations is an important piece of Kent's strategy in providing a
high level of service to our residents and users. Regional coordination is identified
in the goals and policy section of the plan (P&OS Goals 20, 21).
' There are some needs that warrant a regional approach to meeting demand for
specific types of parks. The trail systems (Green River & Interurban) in Kent
require extensive coordination with King County and neighboring jurisdictions due
to our combined interest in providing an interconnected trail system that functions
as one parks facility for people throughout the region.
The need for a dog park serving the east hill of Kent, Covington and unincorporated
King County is another area where a regional solution would best serve park users.
A regional dog park would allow resources to be pooled and prevent duplication in
services where one larger facility may more effectively meet the need of several
jurisdictions.
Urban forest restoration is another area that would benefit from intergovernmental
coordination. As Kent embarks on creating an urban forest management plan,
coordination with other jurisdictions who are also implementing urban forestry
programs will provide us a greater understanding of how plans have functioned in
other areas.
31
i
Chapter s - Needs Analysis
Kent will continue to explore other areas where regional coordination may better
serve the residents of our City and users throughout the region.
32
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
6. Implementation
Overview
M The following recommendations for implementing the Park Plan focus on park
acquisition, development and redevelopment. Implementing the recommendations
contained in this Plan will depend on both opportunity and funding availability. As
competing demands escalate for increasingly limited City resources, creative
solutions are needed to fund park-related projects. Realization of the Park Plan will
take time and will require a sound and realistic financing strategy.
This section establishes both short- and long-term priorities. The long-term
program described in this section addresses what is needed to build upon our
established park and open space system over the next 20 years. The short-term
program defines more immediate needs over the next 10 years. The challenge for
1 Kent in the short term will be finding a balance between focusing on immediate
needs and remaining flexible to take advantage of unique opportunities of great
long-term benefit.
To achieve long-term priorities, it is important to continue to acquire key parcels
1 during the next 10 years. The ability to realize our long range plans for our parks
and open spaces requires an ongoing effort to obtain property for community and
neighborhood parks in the short term. The rate of acquisition however, may be
slower than in past years due to a pressing need for redevelopment and renovation
of existing parks.
tDevelopment and redevelopment are equally important to provide residents a
variety of recreation opportunities. Redevelopment of existing park facilities and
development of new facilities must be balanced in a way that maintains our existing
investments while also providing new opportunities and facilities to meet demand
and changing needs. Renovation of facilities plays a role in ensuring a safe,
functional and well-maintained park system.
Core Themes
The Park Department proposes to focus attention on four major core themes in
order to meet the short- and long-term needs of the community.
j1. Kent's Legacy — Preserving Kent's Park System: Over the past several
decades, Kent has developed an established network of parks, open spaces
and recreation facilities totaling more than 1,400 acres. A key component of
the Park Plan is to recognize and re-invest in our existing facilities. As
expressed in our park survey, security and maintenance ranked as a top
33
Chapter 6 - Implementation
priority for park users. Continued maintenance and re-investment will
ensure that existing facilities continue to provide recreational benefits for
years to come.
2. Athletic Fields - A New Approach: In order to meet the needs of organized
sports, the Park Plan introduces a shift in how athletic fields are developed,
from traditional single use facilities within separate spaces, to multi-use
facilities that take advantage of technology and partnerships in order to
maximize space. This approach would provide facilities that accommodate a
wide array of organized sports, which recognizes Kent's diverse culture. This
shift also recognizes that easily developable land is much more expensive
and increasingly difficult to find in an urbanizing city. Creative solutions to
providing sports fields for year-round use will be an important element of the
Plan's implementation.
3. Green Kent - Managing Our Urban Forest: Green Kent, an urban forest
management program currently being developed in partnership with the
Cascade Land Conservancy, seeks to protect and maintain all Parks and
Public Works owned urban forest and natural areas. These areas provide
many benefits to our park users and residents, by providing a contrast to ,
urban density, creating links between parks and other areas of interest as
well as providing habitat and environmental benefits. Stewarding Kent's
urban forest will ensure the long- term health of these areas so that they
may provide benefits for generations to come.
4. Connectivity - A Vision for Trail & Greenway Corridors: Kent's park system,
which is built on a suburban grid, can become better connected through the
use of trails, greenways, and existing recreational corridors. The Park Plan
seeks to emphasize connectivity between parks, schools, neighborhoods and
other areas of public interest to create easy access to the outdoors and
recreation. A connected system becomes a part of the community fabric,
weaving together elements of our daily lives.
Kent is lucky to have several existing corridors which are either substantially
connected or have the potential to make important connections across the
City. The Green River Trail follows the meandering Green River along the
west side of the City and provides links to the downtown core. The
Interurban Trail, which follows the Union Pacific Railroad, provides a major
non-motorized north-south corridor through the central valley of Kent and
extends to Kent's surrounding communities of Tukwila and Auburn, serving
as a regional connection. A third north-south corridor is located on the
34
(A o
v
06 o a
76
_�/
_A/V� d > -sw U
U
JA
TTF
Li
jjj
1-9
•� 6
-�-
u
l _ ��
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
eastern limits of the city. The Soos Creek Trail provides 9.5 miles along Soos
Creek on the east hill. This trail has the potential to connect further to the
north and south. An underutilized corridor, Mill Creek Canyon, stretches
from Earthworks Park up the east hill. This corridor provides a valuable
connection from the valley to the east hill of Kent, where connections are
difficult to make outside of existing right-of-way due to grades and existing
development.
Additional existing and potential corridors are identified in Figure 7,
Connectivity - Trails, Biking & Paths Conceptual Corridor Map. The corridors
identified in this section and in Figure 7 were identified during the park plan
update process in an effort to address the need for greater connectivity
between parks and other points of interest. The identified corridors are
conceptual in nature and intend to provide a long term vision of a corridor
system where significant areas of interest are linked and easily accessible to
our users. It is important to note that these corridors are not the same as
the LOS corridors identified within the Transportation Master Plan.
Connectivity is a City-wide goal and the park plan seeks to compliment
existing plans, such as the Transportation Master Plan.
' The next step for furthering the vision of connectivity is to establish a trails,
bikeways and paths plan that evaluates how best to build on our existing trail
system and move toward a connected system. A trails, bikeways and paths
plan would examine current resources, potential corridor routes, and specify
future projects needed to achieve connectivity.
Long Term Capital Recommendations (2010-2030)
Over the past several decades Kent's park system has grown and developed to
include an impressive collection of parks and open spaces totaling over 1,400 acres
1 in size. Strategic investments over time have allowed Kent to develop a fantastic
legacy, with much to be proud of. The City's existing parks and open spaces have
developed on a suburban grid, and as the size and population of Kent increases, the
makeup of the community is becoming more dense and urban in nature.
This Plan sets the stage to build upon Kent's legacy in order to best serve a more
urban and diverse community. It will require finding the right balance, in the
allocation of our limited resources, between current development/redevelopment
efforts and acquiring land for future development. Our success will depend on
carefully defining and articulating a clear vision, maintaining community support
and crafting a realistic funding package.
35
Chapter 6 - Implementation
I
Re-investing in and renovating our existing parks, completing property ,
assemblages for key community parks, creating a multimodal system of greenway
corridors and trails, and addressing the need for athletic fields and recreation
facilities are all important steps in building upon Kent's legacy. The goal for our I
park system in the next 20 years is to take care of existing assets while at the
same time building a system that creatively meets the needs of an urbanizing city.
The following recommendations address the components needed to create the
envisioned park system in the next 20 years. Many of the recommendations are
proposed for action over the next 10 years, and are, therefore, also found in the
short-term recommendations that follow this section. All of the implementation
recommendations are shown in Figure 8, Long & Short Term Implementation
Strategy.
Acquisitions
Neighborhood & Community Parks
• East Hill/Morrill Meadows Park
• Panther Lake Annexation Area Acquisitions
• Naden Avenue Property Assemblage
• Lake Meridian Park - Acquisition for additional parking
• Envision Midway Subarea Plan Acquisitions
Natural Resource/Open Spa ce/Greenways/Trails
• Clark Lake Park Property Assemblage
• Green River Corridor - Missing links
• Greenway Connections/Linear Parks
• Trail/Bike/Pathway Easements
Recreation Facilities
• Wilson Playfields Expansion
• Valley Floor Athletic Opportunities
Development/Redevelopment ,
Neighborhood & Community Parks
• Off-Leash Dog Park(s) on East Hill
• West Hill Neighborhood Park
• 132"d Street Neighborhood Park
• West Fenwick Park - Phase II Renovation
• Van Doren's Landing Park - Renovation
36
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
• Lake Meridian Park - Play Area Expansion & Dock Replacement
• Springwood Park - Renovation
• Tudor Square Park - Renovation
• Eastridge Park - Neighborhood Park Renovation
• Meridian Glen Park - Neighborhood Park Renovation
• Pine Tree Park - Master Plan Phase I Development
• Russell Woods Park - Renovation
• Seven Oaks Park - Neighborhood Park Renovation
• Old Fishing Hole - Master Plan, Phased Renovation
• Garrison Creek Park - Renovation
Briscoe Park - Master Plan, Phased Renovation
• Kiwanis Tot Lot #3 - Neighborhood Park Renovation
• Salt Air Vista Park - Master Plan & Phased Renovation
• Scenic Hill Park - Master Plan & Phased Renovation
• Panther Lake Annexation Area Community Park
• Downtown Parks - Renovation
• Eagle Creek Park
• Riverview Park
• Lake Meridian Park - Parking, Drainage, Master Plan
• East Hill/Morrill Meadows Park Redevelopment
• Commons Park - Master Plan
Natural Resource/Open Space/Greenways/Trails
• Clark Lake Park - Restoration Work, Phase I
• Mill Creek Greenway Phase I - Trail development
• Lake Fenwick Park - Restoration & Dock Replacement
• West Fenwick Park/Lake Fenwick - Greenway Trail Development
• Green Kent Partnership - Master Plan, Restoration
• Trails, Bikeways and Paths Plan
• Panther Lake Water Access Park
• Clark Lake Park - Future Phases, Retreat/Environmental Ed. Center
• Mill Creek Greenway Phase II
• Greenway Trails & Connections
• Green River Corridor - Trail Renovation & Enhancements
• Mountain Biking Trails
Recreation Facilities
• Community Sports Fields - Lighted Synthetic Turf Facilities partnered with
Kent School District
• Kent Memorial Park - Master Plan, Phased Renovation
• Russell Road Park - Phased Renovation for Multi Use Capacity
37
i
Chapter 6 - Implementation
• Service Club Park — Trails, Additional Phase
• Valley Floor Athletic Complex
• Aquatic Center
• Wilson Playfields —Play Structure, Additional Parking/Support Facilities
• Community Centers/Community Buildings — Potential East & West Hill
Facilities
Short Term Capital Recommendations (2010-2020)
The challenge over the next 10 years will be to balance the need to re-invest in
existing parks while taking advantage of unique opportunities as they arise. As
financing becomes increasingly difficult, wise choices in how we invest in our
system cannot be understated. With this in mind, the short-term recommendations
have been separated into acquisition and development/redevelopment categories.
Analysis of neighborhood and community parks shows a great need to re-invest in
our existing parks. There is an immediate need to redevelop and renovate existing
facilities where improvements are beginning to show their age or where parks are
due for master planning in order to determine how they may better serve the
changing community. Given this need, acquisition and development projects will be
secondary to the redevelopment and renovation of existing facilities in the
immediate short term (3-4 years). The recommendations listed below include
those parks with the greatest need for reinvestment. Maintaining Kent's legacy
depends on making renovation and redevelopment efforts such as these an ongoing
priority, particularly in the next 10 years.
While acquisition and development are secondary to reinvestment, a few key
development projects and acquisitions will help address specific needs. The first, a
dog park located on the East Hill, will provide a much needed amenity as expressed
in our park survey. The development of West Hill and 132"d Street Neighborhood
Parks will provide park amenities for two neighborhoods which currently lack
neighborhood park space. Completion of key property acquisitions will help to
further the development of Clark Lake Park and East Hill/Morrill Meadows Park.
Acquisition within the Panther Lake Annexation Area will provide much-needed park
space for an area that is currently underserved. ,
Furthering connectivity within and between parks and activity areas via a unified
greenway and trail system is another key component of the vision expressed in this
Park Plan and the short-term recommendations. Greenways provide a contrast to
urban density. They combine the natural functions and separations provided by a
greenbelt with the linear and connected orientation of a parkway, providing
practical connections from individual neighborhoods to various parts of the City.
38
CITY OF KENT- Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
Kent is lucky to have established north- south greenways and opportunities for
potential east-west greenways and trail connections. Making use of the
underutilized Mill Creek Greenway through trail development and acquiring missing
connections within the Green River Greenway are two specific areas the greenway
system can be developed in the short term.
Kent's trail system enhances passive recreation opportunities and provides
connections to our downtown, employers in the valley and our neighboring cities.
There is opportunity for our existing system to be expanded to provide additional
ways for residents to connect to parks and other points of interest. A future Trails,
Bikeways and Paths Plan will examine the opportunities in greater detail. It is
recommended that the City initiate a coordinated planning effort that includes both
on and off right-of-way connectivity.
Providing multi-use athletic fields is another priority expressed within the short-
term recommendations. The expense associated with purchasing raw land and
developing new complexes underscores the need to be creative in how our existing
jathletic fields are redeveloped so that they can provide maximum benefit to users.
Taking advantage of potential partnerships and available technology will also
maximize space and investment.
Development of a new aquatic facility to replace the aging Kent Meridian Pool
remains a short term goal. Given the relatively high capital cost of this project, a
partnered approach with public, private and/or non-profit agencies will likely be
required to build and operate this facility.
The following list of projects should be given priority in the short term. This list is
intended to serve as a blueprint for action and to be utilized as a tool to develop the
Parks CIP. Circumstances will influence which and how many of these
recommendations can be accomplished in the anticipated timeframe.
Acquisitions
' Neighborhood & Community Parks
• East Hill Park Expansion
• Panther Lake Annexation Area Acquisitions
• Naden Avenue Property Assemblage
Natural Resource/Open Space/Greenway/Trails
• Clark Lake Park Property Assemblage
• Green River Corridor — Missing Links
39
Chapter 6 - Implementation
Development/Redevelopment
Neighborhood & Community Parks
• Off-Leash Dog Park(s) on East Hill
• West Hill Neighborhood Park
• 132nd Street Neighborhood Park
• West Fenwick Park - Phase II Renovation
• Van Doren's Landing Park - Renovation
• Lake Meridian Park - Play Area Expansion and Dock Replacement
• Springwood Park - Renovation
• Tudor Square - Renovation
• Eastridge Park - Neighborhood Park Renovation `
• Meridian Glen Park - Neighborhood Park Renovation
• Pine Tree Park - Master Plan Phase I Development
• Russell Woods Park - Renovation
• Seven Oaks Park - Neighborhood Park Renovation
• Old Fishing Hole - Master Plan, Phased Renovation
• Garrison Creek Park - Renovation
• Briscoe Park - Master Plan, Phased Renovation
• Kiwanis Tot Lot #3 - Neighborhood Park Renovation
• Salt Air Vista Park - Master Plan & Phased Renovation
• Scenic Hill Park - Master Plan & Phased Renovation
Natural Resource/Open Space/Greenway/Trails
• Clark Lake Park - Restoration Work, Phase I
• Mill Creek Greenway Phase I - Trail development
• Lake Fenwick Park - Restoration & Dock Replacement
• West Fenwick Park/Lake Fenwick - Greenway Trail Development
• Green Kent Partnership - Master Plan, Restoration
• Trails, Bikeways and Paths Plan
Recreation Facilities
• Community Sports Fields - Lighted synthetic turf facilities partnered with
Kent School District
• Kent Memorial Park - Master Plan, Phased Renovation
• Russell Road Park - Phased Renovation for Multi Use Capacity
Aquatic Center
40
N N N I
T—
_OT
x
FBI �j v 2 .D 2 2 m I �«7'�T rC'c
-Ivyl` Icl� L-•�
W �
°� Y'E_ y7G9J—
ZC Eaw �
z zN 1tm mz zz0 \
_
U
IF
-� F _ --I
3nV B6L -�<
3 6w� luh
ILA �ILT �
was AV ze11 r.
31
{ -
1 3SanV 9A m
Imp
3S tlBLb y I 3S_3AV Bbt�=�, r
or��� Lr 1, 2 } e� i-g✓ '
? 35 3AV,Bet � �= —3s 3nv eo,
M -�'�.��. i r-C35`�Jrooc _
� � � �¢• mil_ i T ;�J �f�, �Y�R
�� 0$3DLltl1 - A-V
n
A3llY
3m
ZIz
TT
��f_ \ of Er n,v'' 4•-��C d�1iF e \ s' < "// (-'1
za
L--Cj
s ~✓
w ss as
sin ,I66
— ( J
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
Financing
Achieving both the short- and long-term recommendations will require the
community's commitment and a willingness to explore innovative solutions.
Funding for Park capital projects has typically come from two sources; councilmanic
bonds and Real Estate Excise Tax (REET). Over the past five years, REET revenues
have decreased by 25 percent. Continued economic slowdown will limit available
funding for the next several years, so the City must look for alternative means of
financing capital projects if it wants to implement the Park and Open Space Plan. It
should be noted that the recommendations above are tentative and dependent
upon financing. The following is a summary of funding sources that may be used
in the future to fund short- and long-term capital projects.
Real Estate Excise Tax (REST)
REET consists of money derived from one-half percent of the selling price of real
property within the City of Kent. Cities planning under the State's Growth
Management Act must generally use these funds for capital projects as described by
State law. Beginning in 2002, one-quarter percent (REET2) was allocated for
capital improvements related to parks in the City's CIP. REET revenues fluctuate
with the local real estate market, which directly affects the amount of money the
Parks CIP receives from this source of revenue.
Voter-approved Bonds /Levies
General obligation bonds can be generated by either the City or the County and can
be used for acquisition or development. Voter-approved bonds are typically repaid
through an annual "excess" property tax levy authorized for this purpose by State
statute through the maturity period of the bonds, normally 15 to 20 years. Broad
consensus is needed for passage, with a 60 percent "yes" vote required. A
validation requirement also exists, where the total number of votes cast must be at
least 40 percent of the number of votes in the preceding general election.
A levy is another voter-approved funding source for financing capital
improvements. Unlike a bond issue, no validation is needed and a "yes" vote of 50
percent plus one passes a levy. The proceeds may be received on an annual, pay-
as-you-go basis, or bonds may be issued against the levy amount in order to
receive the proceeds all at once.
Non-voter-approved Bonds
Councilmanic bonds are general obligation bonds issued by the City or County
Council without voter approval. Under State law, repayment of these bonds must
be financed from existing City revenues, since no additional taxes can be
implemented to support related debt service payments.
41
�I
Chapter 6 - Implementation
Revenue bonds are typically issued for development purposes, and often cost more
and carry higher interest rates than general oblication bonds. Revenue bond
covenants generally require that the revenues received annually would have to
equal twice the annual debt service payment. Revenue bonds are payable from
income generated by an enterprise activity.
King County Conservation Futures Tax
Conservation Futures tax levy funds are a dedicated portion of property taxes in
King County and are available, by statute, only for acquisition of open space,
agricultural and timber lands. The King County Council approves funding for
projects based on submittals from cities and the County. Kent has received
Conservation Futures funds for acquisitors around Clark Lake and Panther Lake.
Grants
The Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), formerly known as the Interagency
Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC), administers a variety of grant programs
from several federal and state sources to eligible application sponsors for outdoor
recreation and conservation purposes. The amount of money available for grants
varies from year to year and most funding sources require that monies be used for
specific purposes. Grants are awarded to state and local agencies on a highly
competitive basis, with agencies generally required to provide matching funds for
any project proposal.
The following are state or federal programs administered by the RCO to provide
agencies funding to acquire and develop park, open space and recreational lands
and facilities:
• Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program, or WWRP
• Land and Water Conservation Fund
• Recreation Trails Program
Youth Athletic Facilities Fund
• Boating Facilities Program
• Non-Highway and Off-Road Vehicle Activities Program (NOVA)
• Salmon Recovery Funding Board
• Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account
Firearms and Archery Range Recreation Program
Donations/Partnerships
As traditional funding sources begin to fund less, the City must search for creative
and dynamic methods of financing the projects identified in the Park Plan. This can
include donations, endowments, volunteer support and partnerships with
community businesses, organizations and residents.
42
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
Volunteers stretch City dollars and empower residents to participate in the
development and maintenance of the park system. One of our longest partnerships
has been with the scouting community. Boy and girl scouts of all ages are
mainstays at our volunteer events, where they can earn badges. A number of
troops go on to formally 'adopt" a park for regular clean-ups. The first young man
to do his Eagle scout advancement project with Kent Parks was in 1983. Over 160
have followed in his footsteps, including several young women earning the Girl
Scout-equivalent Gold Award. All make an effort to offset the cost of materials for
their projects, which enables the City to assist 15-25 each year.
Churches and high/middle school students earning community service credits also
provide strong volunteer support.
In recent years, corporate partnerships have included Comcast Cares Day, several
Home Depot collaborations, REI projects involving numerous work groups and park
areas, Boeing Community Service Days and Hawkeye Consultants, who have
harvested the garden at Neely-Soames Home since 2006 and, in 2008, added
Earthworks to their regular annual Adopt-a-Park efforts. Both Comcast and the
Home Depot have provided cash and inkind support as well as scores of employee
volunteers.
The Green Kent Partnership is the next step in a cohesive volunteer program. After
the 20-year plan has been created to restore Kent's urban forests and natural-
areas, volunteer stewards will be trained to help implement the plan, each
responsible for managing one acre of public land.
In 2003, the Kent Parks Foundation was established to keep park programs strong,
costs affordable and help those in need. Cash donations in any amount can
purchase trees, benches and other amenities. Donations of land through the non-
profit Foundation are also possible and can allow residents the opportunity to leave
a legacy for future generations.
Many options exist for potential donors to conserve their land in trust for public use
by future generations. Creative financing of property acquisition or donation can be
a benefit for both the seller/donor and the City. w
Impact Fees/Developer Mitigation Fees
As determined in the Comprehensive Plan, developers are required to improve
private recreation facilities or in some cases pay a park mitigation fee as part of the
permit review process. These developer contributions cannot supplant other
revenue sources within a project. They are in addition to existing funding and must
be used for a specific purpose within a certain geographic area. The City has
43
Chapter 6 - Implementation
received approximately 2.2 million dollars in park mitigation fees from developers
since 1998. As land available for development decreases, this source of revenue is
expected to diminish.
Real Estate Transactions j
Selling or trading parcels of land that the City now owns but does not think will be
r purposes could be considered as a method to finance acquisition used for park or p p
development of more suitable sites. Renting or leasing park-owned property can
offset the cost to acquire or manage property. Less than fee-simple property
acquisition techniques, such as life estates and conservation easements, can also
be used to help reduce the cost of property acquisition. Leasing property for non-
park purposes, e.g, wireless communication facilities, can also provide a source of
revenue to offset capital costs.
i
1
l
1
44
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
7. Appendices
A. Public Involvement
The public outreach effort is a critical component of every land use planning
process. Involving Kent residents and park users in the process of identifying park
needs ensures a successful planning process, provides for a mutual exchange of
ideas, and helps meet the community's needs. As stakeholders in the planning
process, residents and park users can work with the City to ensure park and open
space needs are accurately identified, planned for, and funded.
The Park Plan update process has benefited from public involvement, which has
been utilized in determining needs and priorities and in determining long- and
short-term recommendations. This section outlines the public involvement that has
helped shape the recommendations contained in the 2010 Park and Open Space
Plan.
Park Plan Survey
A survey was taken during the spring of 2009 in order to obtain the community's
ideas and opinions about the existing park system, deficiencies, and priorities for
the future. The survey was made available online at the City's website, and written
surveys were distributed to all of our facilities and neighborhood councils. The
survey was advertised on the City's phone system and website, in the Kent
Reporter, utility mailings, and through various postings at park facilities.
A total of 631 responses were received, 45 percent of which noted that they were
residents of Kent. Due to the nature of the distribution of the survey, it is not a
statistically valid survey. However, it does provide a sense of the community's
desires and needs. Respondents rated trails, open space and natural areas as
extremely important followed by major parks and small neighborhood parks. The
top three needs expressed in the survey were a swimming facility, an off-leash dog
park and park security and maintenance.
jDetailed results for each question are below. Due to the length of responses to
open ended questions, they are not included in the Plan, but are available for
review on the City's website and in the Park Planning & Development Office.
2009 Park Plan Update Survey Results
ITotal Responses - 631
L 1. Do you live within the City of Kent?
a. Yes -450/a
b. No - 54%
c. I don't know - 1%
45
Chapter 7 - Appendices
2. How many years have you lived in the City of Kent?
a. 1-10 - 20%
b. 11-20 - 13%
c. 21-30 - 9%
d. 31-40 -4%
e. 41 or more -3%
3. Do you consider yourself a resident of East Hill, Valley or West Hill?
a. East Hill -34%
b. Valley - 8%
c. West Hill - 11%
d. Don't know - 2%
4. How many children under the age of 18 live in your household?
a. 0 - 60%
b. 1-2 - 35%
c. 3 or more - 50/b
5. What is your age?
a. 17 or under - 1%
b. 18-29 - 15%
c. 30-39 - 31%
d. 40-49 - 27%
e. 50-59 - 15%
f. 60-69 - 70/a
g. Over 70 - 4%
6. What is your gender?
a. Male - 59%
b. Female - 41%
7. Which parks and recreation facilities do you or your household currently use?
See spreadsheet
8. What improvements, if any, would you like to see at these parks?
See spreadsheet
9. For this City as a whole, what do you feel are the biggest needs in terms of
Park and Recreation?
1. Swimming Facility
46
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
2. Off-leash dog park
3. Security & Maintenance
4. Biking & Walking Trails
5. Connections/non-motorized access to Parks
6. Mountain Biking Trails
7. Frisbee Golf
L8. Athletic Fields
10.Within our parks, what three activities do you and your family members
participate in the most?
a. Walking - 34%
b. Biking - 33%
c. Swimming - 7%
d. Fishing - 4%
e. Organized recreation i.e.: baseball, soccer - 110/o
f. Use of play equipment - 12%
g. Other, please specify: see spreadsheet
11.What recreation opportunities would you like to see in Kent that you can't
find here now?
See spreadsheet
12.Using a 0 to 10 scale with 10 meaning "extremely high importance" and 0
meaning "extremely low importance" please rate the importance of the
following park amenities: MOST IMPORTANT NUMBERED IN ORDER -
HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF *10 RATING. * EACH CHOICE WAS SCALED
SEPERATELY.
a. Small neighborhood parks that serve families and individuals (5 - 19%)
b. Major parks that serve all areas of the city (4 - 22%)
c. Outdoor athletic fields for youth (6 - 18%)
d. Outdoor athletic fields for adults (11 - 11%)
e. Expanded recreational trails in and out of parks (2 - 410%)
f. Parks with fishing, boating and swimming (12 - 9%)
g. Indoor recreation facilities for social programs, events and athletics (10 -
12%)
h. Natural areas and open space (3 - 37%)
i. An accessible playground large enough to serve the entire community (13
- 8%)
j. Off leash dog park (7 - 18%)
k. Spray park/water park (14 - 7%)
I. Off Road Biking Trails (1 - 45%)
47
i
Chapter 7 - Appendices
m. BMX park (9 - 16%)
n. Swimming pool (8 - 16%)
13.Have you or anyone in your household participated in a City of Kent
recreation program, activity or cultural event in the last 12 months?
a. Yes - 44%
b. No - 510/o
c. Don't know - 50/o
14.What types of recreation programs, activities or cultural events have you
and/or your household participated in the last 12 months?
a. Youth/Teen athletics - 13%
b. Adult athletics - 170/o
c. Youth enrichment, such as ballet or piano lessons - 5%
d. Adult enrichment, such as cooking or aerobics - 9%
e. Concerts - 21%
f. Festivals - 24%
g. Senior Center activities - 4%
h. Adaptive Recreation (Special Needs) - 1%
i. Youth/teen activities - 7%
j. Other - Please specify
15.What could the City change about its programs that would make them more
attractive for you and your household?
See spreadsheet
16.Are you aware that the City offers scholarships so that all children can
participate in programs regardless of ability to pay?
a. Yes - 24%
b. No - 76%
17.Would you like to be notified of future public meetings and opportunities to
participate in the update of the Comprehensive Plans? I
a. Yes - add contact info
b. No thank you
Public Workshop
Once the survey results were tabulated and the Park Plan update was well
underway, a public workshop was held in the fall of 2009 to further refine the areas
of focus in the Park Plan and supplement the comments received through the
survey. Participants were given a comment sheet with specific questions about the
48
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
different elements of the plan that were presented at the meeting. Participants
commented on the need to maintain our existing facilities and to make use of
underutilized areas. They also expressed a desire for better connectivity between
parks and throughout the City.
Public Process
In preparing the Park Plan, several public meetings occurred in order to provide the
public, the Land Use and Planning Board, and the Parks Committee an opportunity
to review and comment on the proposed Park Plan update.
The City's website was utilized as a tool for ongoing communication regarding the
status of the update process. Survey results were posted as was the draft plan. E-
mail notices were sent to interested survey participants at each milestone in the
update process, inviting the public to review the draft plan, participate in public
hearings and provide additional comment.
In addition, the Park Plan complied with State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
requirements. An Environmental Checklist was completed and a Determination of
Non-Significance was issued on February 13, 2010. Public comment periods
associated with the environmental review process were provided.
Public Meetings & Hearings
The Draft Park Plan was presented and discussed at a series of public meetings and
hearings held before the Land Use and Planning Board, Parks Committee and the
City Council.
B. Relevant Regulations
Critical Area Regulations
Since the adoption of the 2000 Plan, new environmental regulations were passed
and implemented at the state and local level. These new regulations resulted in
changes to the City's Land Use Code, Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Master
Program and may impact how the park system develops. Critical areas such as
wetlands, streams, lakes, and wildlife habitat areas occur throughout Kent Parks.
Therefore, these regulations have implications on the development and
management of the park and open space system. Development and maintenance
practices will likely change to better protect critical areas and their resources.
Growth Management Act (GMA)
The Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes 13 statewide planning goals that
' must be considered locally within the City's Comprehensive Plan and development
regulations. Several of these planning goals apply to parks, including open space
retention, development of recreational opportunities, conservation of wildlife
49
Chapter 7 - Appendices
habitat, public facilities sufficient to support growth, and attention to historic
resources. The Park Plan and Park and Open Space Element of the Comprehensive
Plan evaluate our system relative to relevant GMA goals.
State Shoreline Management Act Guidelines
The State Shoreline Management Act requires local governments to regulate their
shorelines through adoption of a local Shoreline Master Program, The City
completed an update to the Shoreline Master Program in 2009 in order to conform '
to the state's update of master program guidelines. The updated Master Program
will impact park operations and development in the following areas: Green River,
Lake Meridian, Lake Fenwick, Panther Lake, Soos Creek, the Green River Natural
Resource Area pond, Springbrook Creek and Jenkins Creek.
1
1
50
CITY OF KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
C. Capital Facilities Plan
Parks-Planning&Development
2010 - 2015 Division Requests
Amounts to Thousands
Total
Request 201D 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Priority IN
Proposed Revenue '
WA State Grant 7,6250 1,5250 2000 1,4000 1,2500 1,9500 1,3000
King County Grant 2,6180 1,1680 6700 1750 2300 1850 1900 ,
Other Grant 1,1000 5500 1200 5050 50 50 50
Donations!Contributions 90 D 150 150 150 150 150 150
CIP Revenues 1,6500 1500 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000
CIP REET2 Revenues 16,0390 1,5560 1,9860 2,3810 2,4960 3,5460 4,0440
Source To Be Determined 3,9550 1050 2050 1250 3,1550 2550 1210
Total Proposed Revenue 33178Q 090 3A9-U 49010 7 45 10 �5f,0 597 0
Expenditures Requested
Life Cycle Park System 2,0750 3460 346 0 3460 3460 3460 3460 1 71
Grant Matching Funds/Land Acq 4500 750 75 0 750 750 750 75 0 2 72
Life Cycle-Play Equipment 2750 250 500 500 500 500 500 3 151
Life Cycle-Balifields 1750 500 250 250 250 250 250 4 157
Life Cycle-Imgation 1500 250 250 250 250 250 250 5 173
Life Cycle-Infield Soil 1750 500 250 250 250 25 0 250 6 266
Life Cycle-Trails 450 90 90 90 90 go 7 79
Event Center Lifecycle 1,8000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 8 290
Wilson Plsyfields(Debt Service) 8460 1410 1410 141 0 141 0 141 0 141 0 9 156
Service Club Balifields(Debt Service) 1,6800 2800 2800 2800 2800 2800 2800 10 155
Town Square Plaza(Debt Service) 1,1520 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 11 80
East Hill Skate Park(Debt Se;wce) 460 80 80 80 80 80 80 12 207
Urban Forestry Program 750 250 too 100 100 100 100 13 158
Master Plans 1500 250 250 250 250 250 250 14 74
Comprehensive Park&Recreation Plan 300 so 250 15 330
Adopt-A-Park Volunteer Program 2300 300 400 400 400 400 400 16 306
Eagle Scout Volunteer Prcgram 1950 200 350 350 35 0 350 350 17 75
Archr ect,Engineerng 400 100 100 100 100 18 76
Kent Parks Foundation 150 0 250 250 250 250 250 250 19 304
Regional Trails-Levy Program 1,068 0 1 Ge 0 1700 1750 1800 1650 1900 20 331
PagwnaVLocal Dog Off Leash Park 4500 1000 3500 21 352 '
Mill Creek/Greenway Plan&Renovation 6500 500 2600 3500 22 101
Lake Ferwick Park Improvements 3500 1500 2000 23 333
Community Sports Fields 4,5090 3,8000 200 0 5(@ 0 24 99
West Hill Park Development 1,9200 100 0 1,8200 25 82
Clark Lake Land Acquisition 2,0000 1,0000 1,0000 26 307
East Hill Park Land Acquisnwn 5000 5000 27 315
Botanical Garden Lake Acquisition 1'000 0 5000 500 a 28 3G0
Panther Lake PAA Park Acquisition 1,13000 1,0000 29 102
Major Entries into Kent 3000 500 500 500 500 500 500 30 315
Downtown Gateways,Phase 2 7500 1500 Ilia 0 15D 0 1500 1500 31 267
West Fenwick Park Renovation 1,1150 850 1,5000 32 89
R5560032 1/20/2010
51
Chapter 7 - Appendices
Parks-Planning&Development
2010 - 2015 Division Requests
Amounts in Thousands
Total
Request 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Priority ID#
Van Doren's Park Improvements 3000 1500 150 D 33 310
Lake Mandian Park Ran &Master Plan 1,3000 1000 1,200 0 34 337
132nd Street Park Development 2,1000 1000 1,700 D 3000 35 311
Eagle Creek Park Development 1,0000 1,0000 36 78
Service Club Community Park 2000 2000 37 312
Spnngwood Park Improvements 650 650 38 85
Tudor Square Renovations 6B 0 680 39 163
Clark Lake Develcpment 1.0500 500 1,0000 40 313
S 272nd St Neighborhood Park Develop 1000 1000 41 93 _
WdsonPlayhaldsAcquisdion!Renovation 5000 5000 42 314
RNerval6'Rwerview Park Development 1300 1300 43 113
International Parks Acq!Development 500 500 44 96
Valley Floor Athletic Complex Acq&Dev 5000 5000 45 104
Total Expenditures Requested 3 ,1Z$,4 __5.tL0 4.0010 7,4510 6.2560 59752
I
i
52
CITY of KENT - Park & Open Space Plan - 2010
D. Ordinance Adopting Plan
53
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6G
1. SUBJECT: CAPITAL FACILITIES AND PARK & OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PARKS MASTER PLAN,
ORDINANCE - ADOPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adopt Ordinance No. regarding amend-
ment of the Capital Facilities Element and the Park & Open Space Element of the
City's Comprehensive Plan to ensure consistency between the Comprehensive
Plan Elements and the Park & Open Space Plan. Pursuant to the Growth
Management Act, the Park & Open Space Plan must be incorporated into the
City's Comprehensive Plan in order for it to be used as a policy document for
implementation purposes.
3. EXHIBITS: Ordinance, Parks & Human Services Minutes and Agenda packet
from 4/15/10, SEPA DNS, Decision Document and Environmental Checklist
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks, Recreation and Community Services Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? No Revenue? No
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
tDISCUSSION:
ACTION:
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, amending the Park and
Open Space Element and the Capital Facilities
Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan related ,
to the adoption of a Park and Open Space Plan.
(CPA-2009-113).
RECITALS
A. In the spring of 2009, the City began the process of
developing an updated Park and Open Space Plan (Park Plan). When the
Park Plan is integrated into the Park and Open Space Element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan, it will direct future development, acquisition and
renovation of parks and open spaces for the short and long-term future.
The Park and Open Space Element provides the foundation and guidance
for the park system within the City. The Park and Open Space Element
includes an inventory of existing parks and open spaces, level of service
standards, a summary of public participation, goals and policies, and
opportunities for regional coordination.
B. In general, the Capital Facilities Element provides guidance
for the provision and maintenance of public services and capital facilities
1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space Plan
CPA 2009-18
r
required to support anticipated growth over the next 20 years. The
Capital Facilities Element includes a summary of park facilities and level of ,
service standards that need to be amended with the information from the
updated Park Plan.
C. The Growth Management Act ("GMA") requires the City to
establish procedures governing amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
that limit amendments to once each year unless certain circumstances
exist. RCW 36.70A.130(2).
D. The amended Park and Open Space Element, Capital Facilities
Element, and Park Plan have undergone an extensive public process. A
survey was taken during the spring of 2009 seeking ideas and opinions
regarding the existing park system, deficiencies and priorities for the
coming years. A public workshop was held in September 2009 to further
refine the areas of focus in the update. Additional public comment was
solicited throughout the update process via email, the City's website, and
articles in the Kent Reporter.
E. On January 8, 2010, the City provided the State of
Washington with the required sixty (60) day notification under RCW
36.70A.106 of the City's proposed amendments. No comments were
received.
F. On February 13, 2010, the City's SEPA responsible official
issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the proposed
amendments. The DNS explained that the proposal would not have
probable significant adverse impacts on the environment.
2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space Plan
CPA 2009-iB
G. The Land Use and Planning Board held workshops regarding
these amendments to the Comprehensive Plan on January 11, 2010, and
a public hearing on March 8, 2010. The amendments were also
considered by the City Council's Parks and Human Services Committee on
March 18, 2010. On May 4, 2010, the City Council approved incorporation
I of the Park Plan into the Comprehensive Plan as an appendix as well as
corresponding amendments to the Park and Open Space Element and the
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. These amendments
were made in accord with Kent City Code 12.02.050.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
SECTION 1. - Incorporation of Recitals. The preceding recitals are
incorporated herein.
SECTION 2. - Amendment. The Park and Open Space Plan is
incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan as an appendix. The Park and
Open Space Element and Capital Facilities Element of the City of Kent's
Comprehensive Plan are amended as attached and incorporated as
Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" respectively.
SECTION 3. - Severability. If any one or more sections, sub-
sections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or
invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion
of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect.
3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space Plan
CPA 2009-1B
SECTION 4. - Corrections by City Clerk or Code Revwser. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws,
codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and
section/subsection numbering.
SECTION S. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and
be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of passage as provided
by law.
SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of May, 2010.
APPROVED: day of May, 2010.
PUBLISHED: day of May, 2010.
4 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space Plan
CPA 2009-IB
i
i
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved
by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P\Civil\Ordinance\CompPlanAmendParkOpenSpacePlan2010 docx
i
5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space Plan
CPA 2009-IB
CH
APTER TEN
PARK & OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
INTRODUCTION
open space, and rvereational faeilities for the years 2004 2010. The GompFehensivo Park
The Park & Open Spaee Element works in cone-e— A— GE)ffiffeheflSiVe Pa 1- afld-ReoFeation
T:tn o.,r ,.tt,n .,tom n.l E,1;..' F4j„• tl,o 1 S;4'.,,, -d tonanee F
i�c�--ivrznc�ruiaitii,b•�-cccc�cli.,r¢vrriiraun�.-6i_�aCz I
t' 1 nv.;4inn t •t 1, +. stingy, .dam A -M, .•G,r. d nd theinn
1LTriiTLZILiC1CIL1tZill'ICZ+2L42 TC�fC[C�GITV'iTr� b �•b ^ , �a���
of enyiron,„en+.,ll„ sonsf t;. 0 Kent's sefviee mea goes boyetid the eity limits aFA Planning�Vea, serving the entire Kent Sehool
it s+.- i `l`h U / „1 12 +
v'rJcciu-�rrti�rising--c'ri-im-cci�uzici�,i=c-vc=p�irciric'Zis-m�fr�c�`d��-`.i--'Frio'icr.^mn�"--vrZr.�.—rir�-rrrnc��r'rov':�r'^
within-tle•,+�crjc'-scrvivco afeariias iftefeLiscEli the de cmic+r-o'r'rand i:ci•Sim��'-periitzhia � •,r: .,1 f., :l;t:o n.l
bfully develaigod, and Aith providing
paiks and program
malce Ketit d desirable plaee in whieh to live and work, The lafge industrial and
i�iCRCG-CJ-IT[
b
ij• GC[G4ai[vi�iTCTC�-R
,
b
hborhood parks, tiatis, youth athletic fields, aftd-pkT,,gfotwAs
Park&Open Space 10-1
ha-ve been aequir-ed and developed ft 3rA general fund sotifees and laeal. state, and feder4-�.
r J•}, o I J ,I lV } Ili!! Skate Park, Ghestnut Ridge T r ,..tit ,.t,,,,,,t
Neighbor-hood Park-, CfLefl
T.T N4ew eighh .t „a D,,,y +t Di se Golf r at .,+Lind
NeighborhoodHeights
) Ai, Garrison Gfeek Neigl+borhood PaFk, Russell Read b1
Neighberhood Un,d- 132 �'}.• rT�T_ 1 1` T, a D. 7. , ,,.1 .,.7,1,t..,.,nl I�r(1 .�LI.,�I. T .,1 -crric-
D >
Rild fiwdq H-P 000ftlifiated among the Cit)-, King Ceti- Kent's solewl A 19"iels, late
planning -
under.the r. ,I Management A e,
assessment of existing parks is oonducted and the City teeeives iftput ftem inteie-sted usels of GiV
I
buildings and the eoR+fflunity summit, direct mail to sekeel gioups (1)�As�� -��L
1
hearings, nr a .,+t, r,, ,_c}af,
J
The Park & Open Spice ElemeRt bne4ly analyzes the suppl)-, demand, and need for publie an
b
ff& b�i$t
Tr ••}iLc.Tlts�
Parks,
programming-
The
Park&Open Space 10-2
r
Golf Advisor� atfIll --t-po"e-d by the Mayor with the eonsent of'e- advises staff
eenceming the activities and inipy-ovetuents at tke
V SIR-QiICCTi 111CLi/11.T.
The mission of the Kent
0 Kent b Parks,
quality of 1:{ proN..J, parks .,,-1 faeil.r:e thataFe safe,� ,.ttr et. ...1 +hat offel.
enjoyable and meaningful teefeation and oultural b
accompitshed via development and
of pafks and > b e
and11,e ,,,.tiff,..... „t'l.Zatiel OfThe Kent
Parks,
Managesreereational pfograms and eommun4y seFviees that serve divefse interests in the population. Fe
example, the depaFtfnent- 1) leagues ,
and ,; edtioafional classes and ;
pt!ogfams for- speeial populations; Outh day canips and before and
�)
r f
all City buildings and grattnds stil-M, f Human Services > f
b ,
e e o
for youth, teens, families, and homeless`>�PcvPcc'
The Park & Open Space Element works in concert with the 2010 Parks & Open Space
Plan to provide direction for the planning, acquisition, development and
redevelopment of parks, open spaces and recreational facilities for the years 2010-
2030. Park Plans were prepared and updated in 1972, 1982, 1988, 1994, and 2000.
The 2010 Park & Open Space Plan was developed with participation from city and
service area residents. It evaluates existing demographics, facilities and service
needs, presents goals and policies, estimates park and recreation demand, outlines
intergovernmental coordination opportunities, examines potential funding sources and
provides long- and short-term capital recommendations for the next 20 years.
The 2010 Park Plan has been updated to accommodate the impacts of current and :
projected growth and to be consistent with the City's overall Manning efforts under
the Growth Management Act. A variety of participatory outreach methods were used
in the 2010 update of the Park & Open Space Plan to involve citizens in the
comprehensive planning process, these efforts include: online and written surveys
displays with comment sheets at parks facilities, public workshops, email updates to
Park&Open Space 10-3
interested parties utility mailers newspaper articles, and public hearings through the
formal plan adoption process.
It is the mission of the Kent Parks Recreation and Community Services Department is
to enrich the quality of life in Kent by providinq—parks and facilities that are safe,
attractive and that offer enjoyable and meaningful recreation and cultural programs,
and supports human services This is accomplished via development and
maintenance of parks and facilities, professional programming and the optimum
utilization of community resources Continued urban development may outpace
Kent's ability to maintain the current level of service and to improve on existing park
and recreation opportunities unless public resources, policies and funds are
coordinated among the City Kind County, Kent's school districts _and
partnerships.
Kent's service area goes beyond the city limits and Planning Area serving the entire
Kent School District The Parks and Community Services Department also serves
portions of the Highline School District and Federal Way School District that are within
the city limits The expanding and aging population within Kent's service area has
increased the demand on existing park and recreational facilities and programs. City
residents are concerned about maintaininq existing facilities as well as the provision of
parks open spaces and programs that make Kent a desirable place to live and work.
Kent's park system is administered by the Director of the Kent Parks Recreation &
Community Services Department with the policy direction set by a three-member
City Council Parks Committee An Arts Commission advises staff and approves public
art and cultural programming The twelve members of the Arts Commission are
ggR anted by the Mayor with the consent of the City Council and serve one-to-five
year terms without co sensation or salary The seven-member Golf Advisory Board,
appointed by the Mayor with the consent of the City Council advises staff concerning
the activities and improvements at the Riverbend Golf Complex.
The Kent Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department provides a variety of
park and recreational programs and community services that serve diverse interests
in the population For example the department: 1) manages recreational programs
and athletic leagues for youth teen, adult and seniors; 2) conducts educational
classes and workshops; 3)_organizes special events like the Fourth of July Splash,
Canterbury Faire and special arts programs; 4) supports resource programs for
special populations 5) operatesyouth day camps and before- and after-school care;
Park&Open Space 10-4
C
w
z 2
O rp Usa rA Z
E w CO
W J Q
Cx] ty Lo Z U a- iS g'a-m •Z;� O
'1•"r]i Icy d' Z LL >- 'HIM;
LL)
u J _� Yz Qa & Y; a
� W z � a � � � =q=m�� U
o x a zed
LU
U p w z
W ac� YY c3gmo
O W t'•� �' p E`�E
Y
'"' 35 I
n
/ — T, `
/ w Tj
3S 3Atl L =
35 V0 tt - V zf l,. �•
g4-
0
sin aLt
C
q '� c a 353nt�yLL
lab AS anv am
I � S3ntl MIL y I �
A�✓LY Salle I f 9'-
�
BL
�• ~I y 53AV 9L _ 1 .
AMH RalleA M L yl LL ANd/9119 I
n
�• �� '� v � �' E � �,.....�n, AMFF�nenM
Nr-
Ov
�•U�III L 2' S n m,; 516 _b—%--�. -'r III �1
m? m �� -�
iILyle-�
9t
m Y
al �
w a
T \ ES
Z
Q % a a ti° .o o_ m m ¢
i II <
(� Z z U d' D
Ga W G
QI a
II II V
titAle r�lam,y ,
h
i '�--_•I - — f� .. �d - ,J"^pia _
LD
FV
�i I �--'I �- ��'�_� <� `� � Imo— `t5'i z •...` — f`-
1 x� rL--7 `S
`I \� IL_
U a
,a a a ds @
w b Z � v a
O Y
K UJ to E=>�ael
a a (le o •Z° o
^Fr]y ✓: Ili Z O
z 0 f vs
Q OW Q
O wa ow < � fr o O
U Z SUd OU ,.oaxq
W > FL-
ca ~ O a' Z O M E! W W O W W W Z
CJ CL U Z(n Y Y -2221
u
353Atl
v�359�1tl ZSL
mom-
� .ter=Y � 35 3hV 1.11
3 V DYL < `Q
to
44-
v a y € s ? y 7
3 �� �7hI, IF
,:11 I I I-
y ,�, �° n -_1 b � � o —'
:m
co
nl
nv sn �m
o ` p}[v 3sy,'rvb eA�;yJ
�� J��
c A J
1!
p L 4
3sT11V
ear
rib
{ 33 3AV BOL
m � I 353gV _
it-
u _ a
v /.Mj AalleA
Aa ie I
IS AM AaIIeAM
1f1
cor
3AVfi
ti LC 1 uav
516
1-7
< �I
N r aJels�a
$ J s3nvp�,o
4
Q
W gg
0-4
o w z a
fr ccpc Fc V1
_Tam �i
O W .•�
a L• €E Sz_
I, 1ry ll
3Av M
Im •. ell
,. \
2; r
35 tlObL �_ ..• / n h. i �.
1 3 gtlfL£l
N .. AVbZL
N U•' � 7
p Y--
h1-
�3W
I 3J`µno 3 L Ba 64 I. � J S3Atl BOL �.-L
aa+l�,asU+gr IT�,
te�n.,• �
$1 OP aIIWA3 o I�
I Pawl
_ y S 3AV 9d =
m W
t
q
^ 1-- AfI
,Vy3{IJa11en AAS—I A/✓Li Halle
I[ is tl I �...•.•.,.••• .....
AMWaIIeAM
Li
M;
..................:"
3Avss
70\
\
y s 3ntl z ,—Y,a S
m v-• 9L J r—`1 R qA i of MS1AMHi
6) maintains the golf course; 7) maintains City parks street trees and open space
areas; 8) maintains all City buildings and grounds such as fire stations, City Hall, and
Kent Commons; 9) manages the Human Services Program which offers home repair
and links Kent residents with service providers counseling therapy, food clothing
' education emergency assistance crisis intervention assistance for youth, teens,
families, and homeless people.
INVENTORY & CLASSIFICATION OF PARK AND OPEN SPACE LANDS
The eurr-efA mventat-y of lands !eased and wxned b) tke City totals 1,343 acres. Sinee the I
Comprelictisive Paik and Reefeation Plan, over 113 aefes have beeii aequired. (1.34 of these aef
aFe i . , a within
the Potential n.,.,,..,,,t,,.. Area rn n n) as defined i the Land Use r,i erne.,, but
ptifehaged by the City) King County Parks manages 734 aefes of parks in the PAA (sseeee
North Green Rivef PaFk, Y,4-aeh is located witNn both the City of Atibum PAA and the City of Kent
PAA. Soes Greek Regional Trai!/GaE��GfaFA Park at 522.4 5 acres, is Weated on the eastern edg"
Ke+4's PAA, but seFVes a much gFeater area. Park and open spaee land m Kent's PAA is estimate
The' eight of Kent has f6fty
Planr�tig Area (see Figufe 10.2). Five (5) netghbofhoed sefviee areas have appfoximately hal
the land afea in the PAA. Four (4)iiotghborheed sefviee areas a+e laeated entifely within the P
Within the KeFA N4*4eipal limits. there are twenty eiglA (29) neighborhood parks loeated NNithi
' undeveloped
neighbor-hood park land, f6r a total land area of 95.7 aues Four (4) neighborhoods are served-by
e e
Van Doren's Kent Memor-ial Pafk, Lake Meridian Park, and
Russell Road -12afk) which have elements t�Tieajly f6und in a neighbofh F,,�*k �/:�a7
equipment, ntenie—areas, hard suffaee couils) Few ins neigkbethoods liave undeveloped
mimmally developed community parks ., o
Russell Weeds Park, Val4ey Poor
whieh will service
, , b
density r-esidentiA A44 agfieultwal oF industfial land uses with tie pat4E land, and a eembined—
pepulation of 156 (based on the 2000 U.S. Census). These NSAs will be momtofed Pqr ftiture-pafk
' Park&Open Space 10-5
provide paric and reereatiofi oppofWpAties within the PUP. As this NSA developg, it wil
monitored for t need for neighborhood pafk- !a-nd. Kent's Urban Center NSA is sen,ed by sevetal
ttrbaa parks Four(4)neighborhoods lack park spaee.
NSAs hme either no padi land or are deCteient according to the LOS. The other NSA is set-N,od b"
park. T the south PA A, 0 (1) NSA «„,h � .Marion of eleven (11) (base on th
�` , a�v�u `a a� wuo�u vaa
2000 U.S. Census) and prtmar-ily a+i agnoultafal land use, has tH+developed comfAtinity park 1,
When this pa& is 4eveloped, it n+ost likely will not inelude neig4borhoocl park olements. One (I
NSA whieh lies in the municipal limit-, and sotA PAA has an existing eammull—ity park vAlich
# *�''�g '79 3 aeres�see Figure 18 � for tralls�--Er>---a��I#r^^, the �'roon or„or
cvcani i �..ar��,�
,
Driving RaRg8, Par 3 Course, and Ming Putt arnGwnts to 167 acres Five (5) GGR;MUPAY
paFk sites are undeveloped The BGrdGR Playflelds are aRt'Glpated to be redeveloped
as part of K8Rt StatlE)R, a masteF planned mixed use retail, offiGe, and Fesiden
l.rily fee ronron#^nnl
r
and Kent MeMGFlal Park Bulldmg for a total of 80,000 square feet Two (2) histor
Da+ k aR d CJ rcmn#^n Plan
Kent owns or leases 1,434 acres of park land The ma)orlty of this park land is
natural resource land while the remaining is distributed between Community and
Neighborhood Parks Recreation Facilities and undeveloped land. Since 2000, over
87 acres of additional Park land have been acquired. Park land from the Panther '
Lake Annexation effective Jul 2010 is included in the inventory below. The City's
park land is generals broken down into the following categories:
Park&Open Space 10-6 t
Figure 4: Total Parks by Classification
ECommunity Parks
1% m Neighborhood Parks
00 m Indoor Recreation Facility
m Outdoor Recreation Facility
m Natural Resource
60% Undeveloped
m Golf Course
Community Parks - A park that serves the entire City of Kent and includes
facilities or amenities that are not offered elsewhere in the city. Amenities will vary
at each park and may include boating, swimming, fishing, group picnic shelters,
play equipment, trails, sport courts and ball fields. Access to the park is by car,
public transit, foot or bicycle. Off-street parking is provided. There are eight
Community Parks with a total of 111.9 acres.
Facility Location Acres
1. Arbor Heights 360 east 2.82
2. Green River Parks
Anderson Park valley 0.30
Briscoe Park valley 7.00
Cottonwood Grove valley 0.77
Russell Woods Park valley 7.00
Three Friends Park valley 1.00
Van Doren's Landing Park valley 10.00
3. Lake Meridian Park east 16.02
4. Morrill Meadows east 16.31
5. Old Fishing Hole YgMu 5.70
6. Town Square Plaza valley 0.77
7. Urban Core Parks
Burlington Green* valley 0.22
Castlereagh Park* valley 0.21
Park&Open Space 10-7
First Avenue Plaza valley 0.60
Kaibara Park* valley 0.56
Kherson valley 0.58 ,
Rosebed Park* valley 0.23
Sunnflord Park valley 0.21 '
Titus Railroad Park valley 0.30
Uplands Extension* (Rotary Basketball & Lions
Skate) valley 4.10 ,
Yangzhou Park* valley 0.21
S. West Fenwick Park (includes West Hill Skate Park) west 37.00
Total 111.91 ,
* Leased Land
Neighborhood Park - A park designed to meet the active and passive recreation
needs of an immediate neighborhood. A neighborhood is defined by surrounding '
arterial streets and access is usually by foot or bicycle. Parking spaces are typically
not provided unless on-street parking is not available, accessible or safe.
Neighborhood parks have amenities for casual activities that are not programmed '
or organized Amenities may include. play equipment, picnic tables hard courts
(basketball tennis) walking trails, and open grass areas There are 27
neighborhood parks with a total of 90.33 acres. ,
Facility Location Acres '
1 Canterbury Neighborhood Park east 2.08
2. Chestnut Ridge Park east 3.33
3. Commons Park val I e
A 2.66
4. East Hill Park east 4.62
5. Eastridge Park east 0.80
6. Garrison Creek Park east 5.00 '
7. Glenn Nelson Park west 10.00
8. Gowe Street Mini Park valley 0.10
9. Green Tree Park east 1.47
10. Green View Park east 1.10
11. Kiwanis Tot Lot #1 valley 0.60
12. Kiwanis Tot Lot #2 valley 0.41 ,
1 13. Kiwanis Tot Lot #3 east 0.75
14. Kiwanis Tot Lot #4 yalley 0.35
15. Linda Heights Park west 4.20 '
16. Meridian Glen Park east 5.47
17. Naden Avenue RV Park valley 0.70
18. Park Orchard Park east 7.22 '
19. Pine Tree Park east 9.80
20. Salt Air Vista Park west 2.00
21. Scenic Hill Park east 4.10
22. Seven Oaks Park east 0.50
23. Springwood Park east 10.00
24. Sun Meadows east 1.54 '
Park&Open Space 10-8 ,
25. Tudor Square Park east 4.70
' 26. Turnkey Park east 6.53
27. Walnut Grove east 0.30
Total 90.33
Recreation Facility - Buildings and parks used by the community for social,
cultural and programmed recreation. Outdoor recreational facilities are
distinguished from other parks by the scheduled nature of the facilities.
Recreational facilities include community centers, historic buildings, sports fields
and golf facilities. These facilities serve the entire City of Kent, and in some cases,
the region. Access to these facilities is by car, public transit, foot, or bicycle. Off-
street parking is provided. Riverbend is unique from the other recreational facilities
because it is an enterprise facility, which is a self-sustaining, revenue generating
facility that financially supports itself. Some of the facilities identified below include
open space which may developed in the future.
Square
' Facility Location Acres Fee
Indoor
1. Kent Commons valley 3.00 50,000
2. Kent Historical Museum yqHley 1.70 3,720
3. Kent Memorial Park Building valley 0.25 3,000
4. Kent Valley Ice Centre*** valley 3.60 65,154
5. Neely/Soames Historical House valley 1.00 2,256
6. Resource Center valley 0.44 6,000
7. Senior Activity Center valley 4.36 21,000
Subtotal 14.35 151,130
Outdoor
S. Kent Memorial Park valley 10.95
' 9. North Meridian Park Fields east 8.40
10. Service Club Park east 28.80
11. Russell Road Park valley 30.40
' 12. Uplands Playfield valley 2.30
13, Wilson Playfields east 11.49
Subtotal 92.34
' Golf Course
13. Riverbend Golf Complex-18 holes valley 131.00 11,296
14. Golf Par 3, Driving Range, Mini-Putt valley 36.00 1,800
Total 273.69 164,226
*** City Leased Land
Natural Resource - Parks that are passive in nature and include areas of
openness, environmentally sensitive areas, or wildlife habitat. Amenities include
passive recreation elements such as benches, bird watching platforms, fishing,
trails, and open green areas.
Park&Open Space 10-9
Facility Location Acres ,
1. Anderson Greenbelt valley 4.00
2. Campus Park east 16.50
3. Clark Lake Park (includes Lake rental 2.06) east 129.11
4. Eagle Scout Park valley 0.50
5. Foster Park valley 4.00 ,
6. Green River Natural Resources Area** valley 310.00
7. Green River Corridor/Trail valley 39.35 ,
S. Ikuta Property Donation valley 0.90
9. Interurban Trail valley 10.35
10. Kennebeck Avenue valley 0.10
11. Lake Fenwick Park west 141,34
12. Mill Creek Canyon Park east 107.25
13. North Meridian Park east 67.06 ,
14. Old Fire Station west 0.21
15. Puget Power Trail valley 20.00
16. Springbrook Greenbelt valley 5.00 '
17. West Canyon Open Space west 5.00
18. Willis Street Greenbelt* valley 4.00
Total 864.67 '
* Leased Land; ** Publrc Works Managed
Undeveloped - Land area acquired by the city that has not yet been developed or ,
programmed for recreational use.
Facility Location Acres '
1. 132nd Avenue Park (Dow Property) east 4.56
2. 277th Corridor Park east 4.58
3. Eagle Creek Park east 1.00 '
4. Hopkins Open Space east 1.34
5. Kronisch Property west 0.70
6 Midway Reservoir (W. Hill Neighborhood Park) west 9.67 ,
7. Naden Ave. Property valley 6.45
8. Rainier View Estates east 1.17
9. Riverview Park valley 14.40 '
10 Valley. Floor Community Park & Ball fields valley 50.05
Total 93.92
Urban Center & Green River Subareas '
Kent contains two distinct areas comprising several parks These areas are
included in the inventory above under Community Parks. Kent's downtown includes '
10 darks which together, forms the Urban Center Community Parks. Parks within
the Urban Center collectively provide a variety of amenities such as play areas,
picnic tables, skate and basketball facilities and passive open green areas During
Park&Open Space 10-10 ,
' festivals and other events downtown these parks serve as gathering places and
key focal points.
The Green River features 13 parks stretching from Briscoe Park at the northern city
limits to the 277`h trail connection at the southern limits. Several of the parks
' provide passive green space, two are undeveloped and the remaining provide a
variety of amenities for fishing, play, barbecues picnics and bicycling. Each of
' these subareas provides a distinct experience for park users based on the area.
Potential Annexation Areas PAA
King County manages approximately 734 acres of parks in the PAA. This number
' includes only 169.1 acres of North Green River Park which is located within both the
City of Auburn and the City of Kent PAA. Soos Creek Regional Trail/Cary Grant Park
at 522.45 acres, is located on the eastern edge of Kent's PAA, but serves a much
' greater area Figure 10.1 illustrates existing parks and recreation facilities.
' Park&Open Space 10-11
r�
W ~
U
P O LL ~
o r= ¢ z
>' d z z Q �` `�
LLILu
Y: z
w z z N a o 9xma v
W J Y Y O
U n 0 < < x
W aUaaai
IT _____--__ __-�NN_ I• ?III � 4
=- ..I ...� - t Y �sall, z9l
353Atl B6L f� - _ 5l -
Zol �w�1 -i PL`��I j � � _ �I
L mm • J�_ �� -f �F �, As�,Lv rq��
VWS aAV 00�-I
• nn
o- _ _ �' 2`' �1n1.m e I P E
11- �i •' �E -� '" ILL
m� I-1 ... I3srdAtl zsiw j� -�- -,Jw Y-� I-I�_-L 7 1
�i i I�-` J...�...i
a I o r I
�n�i � f � � 2„I L �,=o°""1 i,�-l.. mw _ III •III �'Tu1/FTI f:
�� `If � l i wI �I�'Ti''7�1),m9,1 /r,�tpp-�r �• �a° a rLF�-
a 3413Atl 4Z1�u i�rn a c E 9 u m I i
air -pmp o' msil m � ��I =ElasaA'v'Zo- a ;
OIL LA ka I E • / Ew I ,
Ps ae II- Qmt�ml � ��H ww o. ICI ! � � �� w� I �r-�,r ;ram • 'I2� •'I l
t, n 3s3n�9y lDE
_j I- 2 -i i y£ L� f -'L m 'I I �i� • 1� ,�- 'km yam'I a m
���I�w
y
-as3AVEol, IdE ' .....p.... T_ I-�F II a.l-I Im�� 1, d I',� wv 'I. i.. 11393ndiLb
ll' •
- mw T J. I I m iaa✓rasua9� �•�, I (-�)� I�� /_ 1�2• :I
-'� s ZI• � _ -n � f I_ I L.tr � l z 3§'anv ao� I
3AVI,ao 2F 0 m
��
TT113's am ......J
mWl\ � I '-I"'T II mW
o n- o. I'll o+w I_
-IP• L �' J� ll A
I_r • A41 Adlls
93:
T
FIIlA3 -�6Niwlmel� 'I f_rl'II�__ l a „ .,,R.,Pea
l l ysas- I
mlr.wm.. .µ�.
P.l •T_ Peal�ey d0_ ..».N11 ,., ». -e - r m Ia
AMH ReIIeAM 1 O a ai W�`m, AMjAape
m ..
d j W W'
• .... . .....................
n AMI-4RaIIsAM
C'........ ..
I / a h
L _5 0181SJ2l�lJt
�:� S �� �JI �, � / h• w ...............ti_
f�T =e_ I '� ��ec ��,. I� na9sH 'I
r • -- _ n r • r/ 9 _7 SA6 �E lE
'3 EI� I0
6cA
o m Y� �yclJ ' .ylip... •� �(
MILLI
� n u I� ,Z m �� d �"'1r�rI a • N m� J
s afN iT��(�tvv_!„H4y• �: , ,'/� c��_ �I--11 1 ill
I �I. I�rt
lilnm - I Q� IW E. \i'__?T-ILl I) IL�gbE N#" h I mI I�I
-- ci }l _ - ---
y-�S dMF�lauaed --ate_I Il Ff la.a q m I �•;..h��� 1_9A
� Bje - �_'i
�' V _ �� �` y�G��a.� �m C•�] •I Ut Isida4�hl ;'�L� 1-�ai
J,a••• _:� -
wIr_E� - ml� ��'.•
•YS'+•.
2 Z :;3E
r • Ioj• ,7
-� E`/ E •`WI,
- I m m_
�� _ Ki u � _ g't�J 'a _�� � °o a I��WIC
T L
��-3-F1_.�-Iylv el -1-i S 3AY�l_f.�9 �iW-1_• LI-BB fL61AMH
A teen aft swdie is loeated in an undeveloped park. An ind ened in 2001 on !an
T4e nuffibef and size of existing buildings available for r-eeteattatial aetivittes limit the number a
programs and pa4ttotpants that ean be served At the Resouree GefAef and several I facilities,
individuals and gtoups liave been �umod away routtiiely beeause of the laek of program spaee.
Seniees Plan, Gity resideniq iden4tfied the need for anothef conimunity eetiter like Kent Commons
ithin Kent.
ANALYSIS OF PARK LAND AND FACILITY NEEDS
The need for pafk ai+d feereatienal land and facilities Nvas estimated usiiig a vanety of me
r-esults of these methods wefe eompar-ed and then synthesized te define Et ptoposed land and f�cthty
st.,.,l1.,,,J for the next o ghA (8) ,
Lem of Serviee
in pfeviotis eamprehensive plans, Kent Lised a tiRlionally teeognized acceptable standard ffem th
The NRPA standafd was 39 3 aeres fef all types of park land (neighborhood, epen.
space, regional parks, etc.) per 1,000 people in ih.e eotnmutiit�� The Gity of KeRt tised the NRPA
stafidard for many yeafs at, the basis fer the standafd okwenty (20) aeres pef 1,000 people (ten
The NRPA fie longer feeommends a standefd fef faeility and park land based an poptga6on FtAies.
developed by the conm:nmftv and used as a guide in planning. The Qt� uses the pr-eviotts standaf
Hsa .,clo.,. e „ „ land -for ., nei.,1,1,.,«1,,,,..J ...,«L
' Park&Open Space 10-18
if the City ehoeses to maintain this standafd of v�wfity (20) aeres pef 1,000 population. the City-&f
Kent would need,
fVQT RGt•CT based aSC A 2�72 GIT�, JVpC[ILIC[91S OI OT,L T.T.
475.9 aeres based on a 2000 r eno Pn A . ..l.,t.,,., f23 797
1,917.2 aeres based on ., 2010 ra. . ..1„tio „Foc,860 '
T 1993, tl,,, rity eyeeeded the 1, Pn st.,.,,a,,..,a f t,,.o.,t (20) aeres .• 1,000 by 0.72
NRPA standaid by 338 acres 'P+is equates to a less 4 4.7� aotes per 1,000 people. The fifst 1
Table 10.1).
Table
1993 T OS FOR PARK LAND
Nei .1,1,,.d,.,e D.,..«o„ti..., T,'.,d it.e., T.,,.ostmo.,t/eapit.. $151.52
('...,-Enti.,.t..D,,....o.,t..,., Fae l.tios hiye.,t„entl..,,.-.7t.,
Neighbofhead Park Lan n,.„osi1,nnnPopulation
n cres11 nnn , .,l„t..,, is.i9
!`_,.1Fvvlrfi�ciiS�S u„lo.✓1 nnn .. .,1.,t.,,., 8-55-6
Table 10.2 shows a eompafison of levels ef service (1.08), within the eity limits, with piojoetedd
population gFo ,46.
Park&Open Space 10-19
T.,h-z�able-i0.2
T EINT i llS OVER TWT✓ _
r-o'�Eourse 0,56 9-W 438 9-3-9 4.3-2 -.0-3-9
(holes"1000)
n eereatien Faoiliiie 2 3-3 342 4-.3-6 4.M -H 3 .�9
(square feetipefsen)
"opt 41,00 45,00 70,149 79,5-24 84;2-5 95,86 9
The 1993 level of.. „ for publio r o„r:,,.-, r� s o s 2.33 ., o +ae+ per- 1,000 .-. ..iwtth 95,500 s"afe feet of facilib, space available Pw use, this ineludes 2,400 square feet of the Pa
sqtwe feet pet 1,000 people WAh i+a added space sinee 1993, the LOS has dropped signifiean4ly-
b
etiffent level), the City would iieed to aequire 12 62 additional aefes in E)fder to meommodate
2010 are that unlos-s the City aequireadditional lapA, the LOS for park land will eentinue to diop. The Gtty of Kent needs to set a LOS
poptilation growth in the nwxt ten years. if the LOS staRclaFcl fof community parks and opeli spae
is set at 14.85 aef-es per 1,000 (the eufFoRt lovel), the City would Reed io aequ4e 1�76.2 aeres by
2010.
The population foreeagts for-
e
1 b.
agtfig populatioii will place additional demand on parks and facilities. This ha"
the Cit�, of Kent beeause the existing par4E and— open spaee invotAery itt the Potential Annexation
Area is not at the same LOS as the City LOS of twenty (20) aeres per 1,000 people. Most E3
f-a—cilittes, that serve!he Potential Annexatton Afea, are loeated�A4thiii the eurrent otty limits of Ke
' Park&Open Space 10-22
AS POPULATION CTzzUrsv-AND AREAS ARE A-NNEY-ED-znv40 714E E:ITrTRE
CITY PARKS DEPA WFA4ENT-MUST AC-Q!TIRE MORE LAND TO PROAZ4DE TTW-& 4
I ENTT'I OF SFRAgCE MANY PEOPLE CT400SE TO LIVE IN KENT FOR THE
MANY c v^ v
RECREATInn- AND QUALITY OF LIT ' HERE IC PEOPLE GO TO PARKS AAI11
xa�cz�r�-rrv-r� AND v� �r
CAN'T GET A PA -KP4G SPACE OR PICNIC TAPI T TATV BELIEVE THE 18,S U E
BE a r,SO ATTI) SIMPLY BY ADDING S FEMI A40RE SPACES AND TABLES t�F EMSTING PARKS 140IVT\TT7] OFTEN PAPAS CANNOT SAFELY O EFFICIENT
V ,
, � xaxo CANNOT c�xc r�zxxc�z7c�znx
ACCOMMODATE A IORF PARKING TYPICALLY PF.O4'EE T OWT WANT 'Ir TO BE
CLOSE TO !OTHERS WHEN "4N! A PICNIC AND DON'T WANT TO SEE TABLES
i irLrxz�-v-rt PICNIC,rcx'x� u
CPA CED TOO CLOSELY T!1/—rvcyETu-r'ER AS T14E POPULATION !NCRE A CTC' T-14E E
WILL PT A NEED TO ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL T AND ANTI DEVELOP PARKS AT THE
ESTABLISHED
LOS TO A4AINTAtN TAT' QUAi ITV OF THE CITY'S PARKS AND '
OPEN S PA CE CVCTEM
Park-Land Requirements by 2OW
and annoma4ioff afeas, and to ,.nunity pafk land where needed within established
`-�
�ZZ VLttVos. '
F 26,247 h . -201 n the ourfent PA A level of., e (i OS) vc•_16.32 /T OS !`r Gommunity Pai
eompafa-L.1 . rr t' 16.75 aeto ., 1,000 Inc „within the its,limits. (Note- * N.,.•th Gf-cen Pper , v '
Pafk aefeage and Sees Greek Pafk acreage witl,,i+i the AAA afe estimated.) Hov,ever-, th
,
per t h gFo.,h • to,. than the 14.01 ,,n1 , 0 1 T nnn nc '.ritl,in t_e is t� ,
H ' N 'b hh h d Pafk T� S f A ,i'r Kent's PA n 34 aeres per 1 nnn , onside tabl.,less than
V t' i OS F 1.00 . cre per 1000 n �,L,t,.,,,
,
e
the more efivir-otimentally sensitive and appealing sites Wfban devolopment also may enoroaeh
for athic-tte
1
e •
fields,
reeteational
,
Park&Open Space 10-23
The t OS standard makes Em assumption that the land n oa will be developed and usable. The-
' L nC assures that the ea_....._":t.. .lo develops, _r„teyelop ,7 land ,:I1 be aequire 1 U 1,,n (lone
�..• �, -� �r • \ l V I\µ YY LU\1V 4V ri]
i
' Park&Open Space 10-24
ntally sittye n o 1pnof atu i ,: .ten} systems.
�xn,
1r11 Vr 11 V1ll L1l,Sll . C�S�TB C�E�1\/11 VL 13µ�1SZ�V 11 Y11II1111[V'IR���JCy L11J�P1ZeCappropfiate, funding must be- identified fer aequisition and development of land f4 opetl spae&-affd
rvere4ienal f4eilities. The Capital impfovement Plan adopted annually by the Gitt, Gotmei
identifies an n..4...n plan, ith ., balaneed binding strategy. '
a
Level of Service (LOS)
Under the Growth Management Act (GMA), communities are responsible for
providing public facilities without decreasing levels of service below locally
established minimums (RCW 36.70A.020(12)). Measuring the adequacy of our
Parks and Open Spaces requires an established set of standards. Level of service
(LOS) standards are measures of the amount of a public facility which must be
provided to meet the community's basic needs and expectations. The GMA allows '
communities flexibility in establishing level of service standards that meet local
needs and expectations.
Over the past 30 years, the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) has
developed guidelines and standards for parks, recreation and open space. NRPA
first published guidelines in 1971 and revised them in 1983 through the Recreation,
Park, and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, to serve as a basis for developing
standards at the community level. The NRPA no longer recommends a standard for
facility and park land based on population ratios; however the NRPA recommends ,
that because every community is different, standards should be developed by the
community and used as a guide in planning.
The former NRPA guidelines are used throughout the United States, and Kent's
1994 Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan level of service standards were
developed with these standards, which represent the minimum for which a '
community should strive. The level of service standards established in the 1994
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan and adopted by City Council remain an
appropriate guideline today; however with the changing demographics of Kent the
City may want to consider establishing new standards or supplemental measures in
future years.
Future demand for park and recreation facilities is based on comparing projected ,
populations with Kent's park and recreation standards. Park and recreation needs
are related directly to the characteristics of a city's population. The City's
population isis projected to increase to 133,347 (or 133,857including all potential
annexation areas) by year 2031. Table 1 shows Kent's level of service from 1993-
2003 Table 2 shows Kent's level of service for the year 2009 and projections for
the year 2031. Table 2 is based on a reorganized park and open space inventory
that more accurately classifies park land based on current use and investment
(developed/undeveloped/athletic facilities/natural resource). While the park and
open spaces are broken down differently in the two tables the overall LOS numbers
are comparable and show a steady decline in the number of acres per 1000 people
and square feet per person as the population increases. ,
Park&Open Space 10-25 ,
Table 1: LOS 1993-2003
1993 1996 1998 2000 2003
Po ulation 41,000 45,000 70,140 79,524 84,275
Neighborhood Parks 2.53 ac. 1.58 ac. 1.56 ac. 1.45 ac. 1.13 ac.
13.72
Community Parks 18.19 ac. 18.4 ac. 14 ac. ac. 14.85 ac.
Golf Course holes 1000 0.56 0.6 0.38 0.38 0.32
Recreation Facilities (sq.
feet erson 2.33 2.12 1.36 1_2 1.13
Overall LOS LacresL100101 20.72 19.98 15.56 15.17 15.98
Overall LOS (sq. ft. erson Z.33 2.12 1.36 1.2 1.13
Table 2: LOS 2009 & 2031
2009 2031
Population 88,380 133,347
Natural Resource 9.2 ac. 6.5 ac.
0.92
Neighborhood Parks ac. .68 ac.
1.27
' Community Parks ac. .83 ac.
Recreation Facilities
Indoor (sq.
ft erson 1.86 1.13
Outdoor
acres 1000 2_8 1_9
1.05
Undeveloped ac. 0.70 ac.
Overall LOS (acres/1000 15.24 10.81
' Overall LOS
s .ft. erson 1.86 1.13
In order to maintain the current level of service of 15.24 acres per 1000 people, the
following amounts of additional park land would need to be acquired:
685 acres - 2031 pop of 133,347
693 acres - 2031 pop of 133,857 (includes potential annexation areas)
It is important to note that level of service standards are typically quantitative,
measuring the size amount or capacity of a facility. These standards represent
only one measure of a successful park system and do not address the quality or
investment in each facility. Future LOS standards that include both qualitative and
quantitative measures may more fully capture how Kent's parks and open spaces
are meeting the community's needs.
Park&Open Space 10-26
Neighborhood Service Areas
Another tool used to determine what and where improvements need to be made is
with the use of our Neighborhood Service Area Map. The City is divided into 48 ,
neighborhood service areas that are bounded by major arterial streets, geographic
features (steep topography, rivers etc.), and other barriers that would make it
difficult for users to reach the designated park for each area. This method breaks ,
the city into smaller service areas where parks facilities may easily serve a specific
neighborhood. Providing parks in each area allows residents to easily access a park
in their neighborhood. ,
While 24 of the areas are served by a neighborhood park, eight neighborhoods are
served by community parks (Three Friends, Van Doren's Landing Park, Russell
Woods Kent Memorial Park Russell Road Clark Lake Park Urban Center Parks and
Wilson Playfields) that have elements typically found in a neighborhood park. Four
neighborhoods have undeveloped or minimally developed community parks (132na ,
Street Park West Hill Eagle Creek, and Valley Floor Community Park), which will
service neighborhood needs when fully developed Five neighborhood service areas
are primarily industrial and no neighborhood parks are proposed in these areas
Two service areas are low density residential with agricultural or industrial land
uses and no designated neighborhood park. These areas have a combined
population of 156 people (2000 Census) and will be monitored for future park
needs. Four service areas have no park space (NSA #11, 21, 30, 41).
Within the Panther Lake area, three service areas have either no park land or the
parks serving the areas are deficient (NSA #4 9 16). The remaining service area
located entirely within the Panther Lake annexation area, is served by a community
park.
Neighborhoodparks are needed in seven Neighborhood Service Areas which
currently have no park space or are in need of additional amenities or
improvements, three of which are located in the Panther Lake Area (NSA #4, 9, 11,
16, 21, 30, 41).
Demographics
Considerable growth and large annexations over the past 20 years has significantly
increased Kent's population and the number of people our parks serve. Families
make up the majority of households in Kent with more seniors and children than ,
ever before Kent is also rapidly becoming more diverse with many different
cultures represented in the City. As our community becomes more diverse, as it
ages and families grow, the needs of the communitk in terms of parks and open '
space change Not only has the need for parks and open spaces increased with the
population future park investments need to also consider the increasingly diverse
population and the growing numbers of seniors and children. ,
Park Land Reguirements
Population forecasts indicate a need to acquire all types of park lands to maintain the '
City's current LOS Urban development may encroach upon or preclude the
preservation of and public access to the more environmentally sensitive and
Park&Open Space 10-27
appealing sites Urban development may also encroach upon or otherwise preclude
the purchase and development of close-in suitable lands for athletic fields,
recreational centers, and other more land-intensive recreational facilities. Where
appropriate, funding must be identified for acquisition and development of land for
open space and recreational facilities The 2010 Parks & Open Space Plan's short-
and long-term capital recommendations identify key acquisitions and capital projects
as well as potential funding sources that will help maintain the current LOS. The
Capital Improvement Plan adopted annually by the City Council identifies an action
plan and a balanced funding strategy.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
spfiflgfor the 1995 Comprehensive Plan, the City of Kotit eoiidueted an addittEffial telephone sHn,ey i
Sefviees Plan. There Aso were direet mailings; displa�,s boaids and conunepA sheets made availa---
te the pablie 4 City and regional f4eilities, an open hoLise, and pubtic heaiings on tl+e draft pleii an
„rVT1LL\rLL below
1
Parks,Goffiprehensive
Plan,
the City 0� Kent oondueted
.1. limits ...-7 within the PAAsorviee afea The sutvey sample ..l..ded 398 households that
wl.11.
randomly d-raw-H from votef registration lists. The surve), is statistieally aecufate within a range!"ut was also obtained Aa !ke Atly 1999 Kent Parks and ReereEttion Study, an
Presoiited below under"General Results".
Approximately o 0
of the pa4ieipants are very satisfied with Kent's paiks and J
satisfied; 399
moderately and 0 are uiisatisfied Unsatisfied respondenis fflen�tofi the need
bioyolifigJ ) and Park,Parks used most often mokide Lake Meridian
West Feftwick ), Rdvefbeod Golf Park; J Russell Park; ) '
' Park&Open Space 10-28
Suggested improvements to existing parks itielude additional pienie tables, play equipmeK
patking, Thirty six, 0 percent of tesidetifs use Kent Genimons, and0
Center Socz y(609%) e�,..dents s tkey attended festivals and spectal events ; , Ken
..,7 over half F 1t the City should offer more.
Fundi"
nppto.J aately 731Try of all respondents to the 1999 Kent narks and ue..raatio,, Study survey
with top priorities to athletie fields and Clark Lake Park aeEluisition and development l4wivewr-,
owererespotidentsprimari ,
0 of respondents A+H4 to build a nev,
swimming pool. Of these respondents, 0
,zo are willing to pay ati additional $50.00 per year fe-
..1 and otie halt of the respondent-, ;...1;...,te they prefer to pay f.., the pool. r,tl, user Fes
All respondeRls assigned the highest priority to yeuth athletics, youth4een programs, before and
aft-ef sehool programs, swilxt ifig, and programs fer the physically and development
,.,,"lam
Ga. .rth Mana-gemenc
Over one lialf 0
suffiefetit to meet projeeted populatieii grom4h over the next five (5) years, if the Gity does not
This s to 4n0% „+the relents ...r,., holies sting F eilitiesar
,
cmr:c�-csn:Tzicvd-cscca:r.—raiS-c.,...t,.�..�..., .... �.,.., ... ..... .��Y^....,,..,.., ....., .,
1,14 who don't know. Citizens state that i
more areas are amexed, Hew parks need to be provided in those annexed areas in the 1994
eondtieted for the 1995 Comprehensive Plan, o of the respondeflts Mt that the level ef seBiee
,
(r nc) standard should not be ro,a,,,eel.
DISPLAYS AND COMMENT SHEETS
in 2000 displays were ..laee,a in the lobby of the Kett n ,,,..t,....., r ibr r.r Ke t ror.,.,,,,.,+ '
Resource Center; Senior Aetivity Genter, and City Hall. Similar input to the telephone survey w
b Su ided adding more swings, lighting
included safe Nvalking tf ails, trail conneetiens to parks,and existing bA Pelds, and renovating existing tennis eourts Requests f6f Rew parics and fee'
4iborheods, and other trails; more fafflity
bioyele trails� more open e >
Park&Open Space I0 29 ' I
' Park&Open Space 10-30
park; open
mefe
7, >
...Creek Dark parks; ote;naooi gynuiasi 1131S', all Weather Spott field; foek tfimbingw aU--,
volleyball, and ...t,.on+„r. ..tl, 1-:l.,r ,
PUBLIC HEARING AND MIEDIA COMMENTS
in june 2000, requests 4E)m the publie heeAng ineluded aequir-ing land a!E)Hg Sees Greek Par4i,
extending the ♦r,,.l to conneet ..:41, Lake Men d;..n Da& and n„P,,:t.n . input from residents outs de-
b
e >
asseetations. Similar input to the telephone stwvoy was reeeived ffom 4fteet mail respenses.
ineFease youth and f�mily progfam offerings, impr-oyo existing youth ba4lfiolds; provide a restioe
and coneesstoft 4 Commons Pla��field, provide more basketball and Soeeer and to neighborl,
ballfields t;3f teens; expand the indoef patlE, and provide mofe aeeessible play equtpffleftt.
ITV STAFF COMMENTS
eammepAs ffeffi Park and pFogiam patrons. In addition, staguses City sites and Sfmilar mput to olhe telepkone sun-ey was reeetved ft-em City staff-. City staff heftfs and Fe
PadE
f4eility needs mei4iofied ate baaing eages; !A tengis eetirts; off leash Elog Park with dog wast
disposal; fit walking paths; vehiele neass to Bfiseoe Park; youth tfaek field; 9,N4X f4eility; East llil
skate park, speetal eve� park; -fiAl basked3all eoufts; and model aifplaneiboa� faei!45� Despito
eritieal need to develop new par4is ead &644ies, staff eemmented ihat the life eyele upgrades t
existing parks and fiwilities must not be saefifieed.
PARK PR40RI-TIPES
The most ffeEtuently re"ested priorities for-new development in the next five (5)years ifielude:
New nrl.n and C,,:li4:on .. r:4:,,n and .leyel,,p en+. '
,
More play equipment ., n;
loe skating rink;
Park&Open Space 10-31
Lighted rt,l r' fields baseball, softball, seeeef, and ,.•r..);
Nemv silvimmifig of
I0 T .l 1' L,r 4 .1 + nr.,l
b b f
Teen .7 youth progt ns and 1'.. .1it
High priofAies -f-or- ne", faeilities and parks ineltide an iiidoor and outdoor teen-eentoi, eommunity
patics;
b
r ;
equipment; and wiidiife areas and open
are r n.1 more Writ e rnl•.lo and benches
pafic 4nalysis of surN results is usually the first 4ep in det-m-'ng the iieed for new parks;
fitoilities, an,, r�,,asibilttv studies, analysts of st rds and public demand generally
CONCLusio
The inpiA 4om these methods were eampared to the mven�ory and level ef ser-viee standaf:d an
analyzed io define prietities for- the next eight (9)
eafs listed in Table 10.3 The availability of
funds J
Table 10.3
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE unIOR4TTcc
D 1 hb 1, ...1 ..afks at(`nr,rerbu* 1 22'� Cr + li' r u'll /L' r+l lx7 ram.•\ Cw . ...
� , vrrccs�c�czzzcr[oc'[aca@ rrucc.�, ,�
metA
dule fat!play e --tipment a-nct expand existing Play
Develop lighted +l.l ♦'' fields n+r' .
l,o Senice !__Lb C r,.r., Park;
�
skating,0 Develop a youth and teen park on the kast Hill for-
' Park&Open Space 10-32
vviLu uVL u LvuJl Vl\LL, LUuy 14 U new JYY 111111 LL11g pool;
-
oballenged
prograf235
C b audits in existing ;
G 4 41, Soes Greek T-Fail to Lake Nl d Park; d
i µ3lV 1Y1V11u1U11\ CLI IlY UIItI
LL,lr llfleLliu to lVV\ Nlefrill Meadows LLl1l1 FC[JrtC11�L.G,
ighbedqlood Park.
The building of a city's parks and open spaces is largely directed by community
values, priorities, and resources. Kent has worked with the community in an
ongoing dialogue In order to gauge residents' parks and open space values. Over
the years we have relied upon surveys, workshops, questionnaires and consultation '
with the Parks and Human Services Committee. Feedback has been valuable in
setting priorities and allocating resources. Opportunities to take part in each stage
of the planning process were advertised on the City's phone system and website, in
the Kent Reporter, within utility mailings, through h targeted emails and through
various postings at park facilities.
Park Plan Survey
A survey was taken during the spring of 2009 in order to obtain the community's
ideas and opinions about the existing parks system, deficiencies, and priorities for ,
the future. The survey was made available online at the City's website, and written
surveys were available at parks facilities and distributed to neighborhood groups.
A total of 631 responses were received, 45 percent of which noted that they were
citizens of Kent. Due to the nature of the distribution of the survey, it is not a
statistically valid survey. However, it does provide a sense of the community's '
desires and needs. Respondents rated trails, open space and natural areas as
extremely important followed by major parks and small neighborhood parks. The
top three needs expressed in the survey were a swimming facility, an off-leash dog
park and park security and maintenance.
Public Workshop
In addition to the survey, a public workshop was held in September 2009 to further '
refine the areas of focus in the Park Plan and supplement the comments received
through the survey. Participants were given a comment sheet with specific
questions about the different elements of the plan that were presented at the
meeting. Participants commented on the need to maintain our existing facilities
and to make use of underutilized areas. They also expressed a desire for better
connectivity between parks and throughout the City. '
Website
The City's website was utilized as a tool for ongoing communication regarding the
status of the update process. Survey results were posted as well as the draft Parks
& Open Space Plan. Email notices were sent to interested survey participants at
i '
Park&Open Space 10-33
each milestone in the update rocess inviting the public to participate and provide
P P 9 P P P
additional input.
h community's arks and open space needs short- and long-
term order to address the v p p p a
term recommendations and funding options are discussed in the Park and Open
ISpace Plan.
Opportunities for Regional Coordination
Coordination with school districts neighboring_jurisdictions, other public agencies
and private organizations is an important piece of Kent's strategy in providing a
high level of service to our residents and users. Regional coordination is identified
in the goals and policy section of the plan (P&OS Goals 20, 21).
' There are some needs that warrant a regional approach to meeting demand for
specific types of parks. The trail systems (Green River & Interurban) in Kent
require extensive coordination with King County and neighboring jurisdictions due
to our combined interest in providing an interconnected trail system that functions
as one parks facility for people throughout the region.
The need for a dog park serving the east hill of Kent, Covington and unincorporated
King County is another area where a regional solution would best serve park users.
A regional dog park would allow resources to be pooled and prevent duplication in
services where one larger facility may more effectively meet the need of several
iurisdictions.
Urban forest restoration is another area that would benefit from intergovernmental
coordination. As Kent embarks on creating an urban forest management plan,
coordination with other jurisdictions who are also implementing urban forestry
programs will provide us a greater understanding of how plans have functioned in
other areas.
Kent will continue to explore other areas where regional coordination may better
serve the residents of our City and users throughout the region.
PARK AND RECREATION GOALS AND POLICIES
The goals aftd polieies of this oloffwnt address paf4Es; open ;
Park&Open Space 10-34
lneofperation of unique
WILDLIFE RESOURCE GOALS & POLICIF
e Wildlife,
human is
activities,
Coal Mos 1- '
sV
4'A iffl S-fYC2
Park, aoos Q. t n,rn ��,. „k .,a rI...�r. r,.a„ n,,,.v
, ,
,
f'.,.rJvs�r-aD,P'OS 72-
t
Park&Open Space 10-35 ,
, PCOAer Lake,
T❑nu.iw andd/'7....7.Lake
OPEN SPACES Alh� URBAN SEM%VTORS GOALS & POLICIES
Develapment of a high qualit�,, diver-sified and intereemeeted park system that pf!eserves an
Poliey MOS 3.22 Memase linkages of tvat&, in stmoP bikes lanes-, oi- othep ex-Wing o
l ,. . a eonneetions , .,t . o.,..al cfreei6 and olgen.Voce ilwhin developed e.
al„ ,. i7 e Green A. l4711 (;,reek Ga .,, l',. ,.1 d g , Creek eoiwidoi. Ha Toke
,
that .l.. fie both sides. „f it e Coven River Valley and r!e k ; 7r44-7-2"_&6-'rid0v
Gofll I OS 4?
,
tell, impffet pork dild jaeilitk-s bogr-o Me iqios� swiable sites we lost �o
developmeHt Suitable sites-ineludcweeded undeveloped .,,a sensitive Iamb along the
Park&Open Space 10-36
i
r
R
Gai i , , ,hil Ceityoif n,l �� Z272HdIRSTORIC & CULTURAL RESOURCES GOALS & POLICIES
r
heritage, is a pfiorit�y of the Gtty�
Coal
1
all
J t1 Do�vwown t•m 7 „r oniong „r7 r
grwVs-
rate
rl„ .,� r
Coal MOS-6: r
r
Park&Open Space 10-37
J
atdiz t..., 4F)ese ..., .n.ul�a.N. ..
,
wey
T}BLAND COS mnn n rrrec SYSTEMS GOALS & nnUCIE
to b features, pubite )
.a.st,...i.. ,-h,.()L t4o (;ity
GoatMOS 72
eenters both wAm Kent and withiii the region.
,.4 t..,,,7s usijig „1., .,,tom 4+7 D t D rights 4At Oiii Ci cc T.u,1 . 1471 Gr.reL
T
G. u:veo X,.t, rn, A,, ii_on4nni
r
T
r
�`..,e T,.J..
crcc-rrcrctxrr
Park&Open Space 10-38
ttioods
.
Clork Lake, Lake Aferidion alld Panther Lake m e4er io provide a high q�fcihi�v divowe
soomp- ling 4.t, K, e;ivimnmeHk4, i
Goal MOS-4:
Fit
i Tro veme,lls
b r,
, equtpme.i6 ..
Developmefft of a high
diversified reereational system for- all abilities, ages and interest
e
«.t< of the C'tti
Goal M9S 9:
Park&Open Space 10-39
,
PaMher L`e
Rivei�, ,
Goalne.nc 14.
pkqt-
Poliev MOS 40.11 Develop cfAiettofffethties that meet the higheNt quality, stwqda;tk, and
reereatioiial ...............
jgHr,.,,...,,,,t.. and u,,.. o.. , 1140e use, . ,.,,, ,.f,.
Goal Mos H..
. .
Park&Open Space 10-40
n .i ht,,,,.
s7 JI leve& and e .t, ..a.. ..t..On ayeeo i '1 hc`r'yis
..
o at kirge at ImWitkq&ons Mid
, , and high sehool& ivtAm
Kew and !he Potmkq
AnnexationAwo
and other awheiiee
,
Coal n c.nc 12.
Where appffVrtate, develop cmd-operaie Veeializedpark and reereatioHol om�e;Trise y that meet
skffthfg, and y h„H„,.
5, ,
.1 basis
Poky MOS 13.1: Aeqw�� and 6kvelop V&,ks �o meet the level efisoo+tee needs as Keilt
popu1 h.,.,. i. and
.. annexed
Park&Open Space 10-41
meet the leve4, ofiserwee
whole
RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS GOALS & POLICIF
Development of high quality reoreational piograms and serviees that meet all cotyu:Hunity grotip
CofilMos it-
m ,
, meetmg foeilitiei, eki�, rr r
P;�ogronq aetivitieiftn-all abilities., age,
s
CULTURAL ARTS PROG RAMS AND RESOURCES GOALS & POLICIES
D 1 r F l,'gh ,.I;t.. diversified ,I+„ .,1 afts F ;I;t;a ra progiatrl.,,r inerease
Park&Open Space 10-42
.,fi. l*
.
Policy MOS 15.2: Develop N#ategies that will suppoi,t and asskt loeol af&ts and 6w
,.bl.., „eeesi awl,.,,v...,,,.;,.r;em
1
1
1
1
r
Park&Open Space 10-43
. .
fiimishpubheploeesuia
DESIGN AND ACCESS STANDARDS GOALS .e. POLICIES
feattires that aecount far Design and developmei4 of fkilittes th4 are ae6essible, safe, dftd easy!E) maintain, with life eye4e
s,
Goal Mos I Q•
�eEfttrrErnert�.�
j
eo6ts-
Park&Open Space 10-44
''
and othervionda
a 1
I
CreatingFWANCIAl RESOURCES AND COORDINATION GOALS & POLICIES
effeetwe and effieient methods of acquiring, b b
interests,
of the City.
. , avallable HieAods-, groil4h imp6wtjco�l
Park&Open Space 10-45
lvepe„f., ,l
a„ -s
s
i
,
,,,i,,..,..,.. „f'.,mo leis .l,,m.
1
R
rw
6ffo..,,a., ovquirenien�s
■
Park&Open Space 10-46
s
..t o
, s
skotmd .
The followingaoals and policies express how the City's park and open space system
would best develop over the coming years and details measurable steps toward
achieving these goals.
Overall Goal: Encourage and provide opportunities for local residents to participate in
life- enrichment activities via the development of park land and recreational facilities,
preservation and enhancement of environmentally sensitive areas, professional
programming and the optimum utilization of community resources
I. Park & Recreation Facilities Goals & Policies 1
Develop a high-quality, diversified recreational system for all abilities ages and
interest groups.
Goal P&OS-1: '
Work with other agencies to preserve and increase waterfront access and facilities,
Policy P&OS-1.1: Cooperate with King County, Kent, Federal Way and
Highline School Districts, and other public and private agencies to acquire and
preserve additional shoreline access for waterfront fishing, wading, swimming,
and other related recreational activities and pursuits, especially on the Green
River Lake Fenwick Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, and Panther Lake.
Park&Open Space 10-47
Policy P&OS-1 2• Develop a mixture of opportunities for watercraft access
including canoe kayak sailboard and other nonpower-boating activities,
especially on the Green River Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, and
Panther Lake, where practicable.
Goal P&OS-2:
Work with other ublic agencies and private organizations including but not limited to
the Kent and Federal Way School Districts, to develop a high-quality system of athletic
facilities for competitive play.
Policy P&OS-2 1• Develop athletic facilities that meet the highest quality
standards and requirements for competitive playing for all abilities age groups
skill levels, and recreational interests.
Policy P&OS-2.2: Develop field and court activities like soccer, football,
baseball basketball, softball tennis roller hockey, and volleyball that provide
for the largest number of Participants and allow for multiple use where
appropriate.
Policy P&OS-2 3• Develop where appropriate a select number of facilities
that provide the highest standard for competitive playing possibly in
conjunction with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other
public agencies and private organizations.
Goal P&OS-3:
Develop, maintain, and operate a high-quality system of indoor facilities that provide
activities and Programs for the interests of all physical and mental capabilities, age,
and interest groups in the community.
Policy P&OS-3.1: Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor community
centers, such as the Senior Activity Center and Kent Memorial Park Building,
that Provide arts and crafts, music, video, classroom instruction, meeting
facilities, eating and health care, day care, and other spaces for all age groups,
including preschool, youth, teens, and seniors on a year-round basis.
Policy P&OS-3.2: Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor recreational
centers, such as Kent Commons and the Kent-Meridian Pool, that provide
aquatic, physical conditioning, gymnasiums, recreational courts, and other
Park&Open Space 10-48
athletic spaces for all abilities, age groups, skill levels, and community interests
on a year-round basis.
Policy P&OS-3.3: Support the continued development and diversification by
the Kent Highline, and Federal Way School Districts of special meeting,
assembly, eating, health, and other community facilities that provide
opportunities to school-age populations and the community at large at
elementary, middle and high schools within Kent and the Potential Annexation
Area.
Policy P&OS-3.4: Develop and operate special indoor and outdoor cultural
and performing arts facilities that enhance and expand music, dance, drama,
and other audience and participatory op2oortunities for the community at large.
Goal P&OS-4:
Where appropriate, develop and operate specialized park and recreational enterprises
that meet the interest of populations who are able and willing to finance them.
Policy P&OS-4.1: Where appropriate and economically feasible (i.e., self-
supporting) develop and operate specialized and special interest recreational
facilities like golf, ice skating frisbee golf, mountain biking and archery ranges.
Policy P&OS-4 2• Where appropriate initiate with other public agencies and
private organizations joint planning and operating programs to determine and
provide for special activities like golf, archery, gun ranges off-leash areas,
model airplane flying areas frisbee golf, mountain biking and camping on a
regional basis. t
Goal P&OS-5:
Develop and operate a balanced system of neighborhood and community parks, with
active and passive recreational opportunities throughout the City.
Policy P&OS-5 1• Acquire and develop parks to meet the level-of-service
needs as Kent's population grows and areas are annexed
Policy P&OS-5 2: Identify neighborhoods bordered by arterial streets and
geographic features that act as natural barriers. Set aside neighborhood park
land within each neighborhood to meet the levels-of-service.
Park&Open Space 10-49
Policy P&OS-5 3• Develoop amenities in parks for individual and group use,
active and passive uses while representing the best interests of the
neighborhood or community as a whole.
Policy P&OS-5 4• Encourage new single-family and multifamily residential,
and commercial developments to provide recreation elements.
II Open Space and Greenway Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality, diversified and interconnected park system that preserves and
sensitively enhances significant open spaces greenways and urban forests. The
establishment of greenways as urban separators is a strategy that promotes
connectivity of Kent's open space system.
Goal P&OS-6:
Establish an open space pattern that will rovide definition of and separation between
developed areas and provide open space and greenway linkages among park and
recreational resources.
Policy P&OS-6 1• Define and conserve a system of open space and greenway
corridors as urban separators to provide definition between natural areas and
urban land uses within the Kent area.
Policy P&OS-6 2• Increase linkages of trails, in-street bikes lanes, or other
existing or planned connections with greenways and open space, particularly
along the Green River, Mill Creek Garrison Creek and Soos Creek corridors;
around Lake Fenwick Clark Lake Lake Meridian Panther Lake, and Lake
Youngs; and around significant wetland and floodways such as the Green River
Natural Resource Area (GRNRA).
Policy P&OS-6 3: Preserve and enhance, through acquisition as necessary,
environmentally sensitive areas as greenway linkages and urban separators,
particularly along the steep hillsides that define both sides of the Green River
Valley and the SE 277"/272nd Street corridor.
Goal P&OS-7:
Identify and protect significant recreational lands before they are lost to development.
Park&Open Space 10-50
Policy P&OS-7.1: Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with
private landowners to protect land and resources near residential
neighborhoods for high-quality, low impact park and recreational facilities
before the most suitable sites are lost to development. Suitable sites include
wooded, undeveloped, and sensitive lands along the Green River, Soos Creek,
Garrison Creek, and Mill Creek Canyon corridors, and lands adjacent to the
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) power line rights-of-way.
Policy P&OS-7.2: In future land developments, preserve unique
environmental features or areas, and increase public use of and access to these
areas. Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with private
landowners to protect unique features or areas as low impact publicly
accessible resources, particularly along the Green River, Soos Creek, Garrison
Creek, Mill Canyon, and SE 277t"/272nd Street corridors.
III. Trail and Corridor System Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality system of multipurpose park trails and corridors that provide
access to significant environmental features, public facilities, and developed
neighborhoods and business districts.
Goal P&OS-8:
Create a comprehensive system of multipurpose off-road and on-road trail systems
that link park and recreational resources with residential areas, public facilities,
commercial and employment centers both within Kent and within the region.
Policy P&OS-8.1: Where appropriate create a comprehensive system of
multipurpose off-road trails using alignments of the Puget Power rights-of-way,
Soos Creek Trail Mill Creek Trail, Lake Fenwick Trail, Green River Trail,
Interurban Trail Parkside Wetlands Trail, and Green River Natural Resource
Area (GRNRA).
Policy P&OS-8.2: Create a comprehensive system of on-road trails to
improve connectivity for the bicycle commuter, recreational, and touring
enthusiasts using scenic collector, and local road rights-of-way and alignments.
Policy P&OS-8.3: Provide connections from residential neighborhoods to
community facilities like Kent Commons the Senior Activity Center, the Kent-
Meridian Pool schools parks and commercial districts.
Park&Open Space 10-51
Policy P&OS-8 4• Work with Renton Auburn, Tukwila, Federal Way, Des
Moines Covington, King County, and other appropriate jurisdictions to link and
extend Kent trails to other community and regional trail facilities like the Green
River, Interurban, and Soos Creek Trails.
Policy P&OS-8 5• With proposed vacation of right-of-way and street
improvement plans consider potential connectivity with existing or proposed
trail corridors parks, and neighborhoods.
Policy P&OS-8 6• Link trails with elementary and middle schools, the
downtown core and other commercial and retail activity centers on East and
West Hills.
Policy P&OS-8 7• Extend trails through natural area corridors like the Green
River Mill Creek Garrison Creek and Soos Creek, and around natural features
like Lake Fenwick Clark Lake, Lake Meridian and Panther Lake in order to
provide a high-quality, diverse sampling of Kent's environmental resources.
Policy P&OS 8.8: Revise development regulations so that key trail links, that
are identified within the corridor map are provided to the City during the
development approval process.
Goal P&OS-9:
Furnish trail corridors trailheads and other supporting sites with convenient
amenities and improvements.
Policy P&OS-9.1: Furnish trail systems with appropriate trailhead supporting
improvements that include interpretive and directory signage, rest stops,
drinking fountains restrooms, parking and loading areas, water, and other
services.
Policy P&OS-9.2: Where appropriate, locate trailheads at or in conjunction
with park sites, schools and other community facilities to increase local area
access to the trail system and to reduce duplication of supporting
improvements and amenities.
Park&Open Space 10-52
Policy P&OS-9.3: Design and develop trail improvements which emphasize
safety for users and are easy to maintain and easy to access by maintenance,
security, and other appropriate personnel, equipment, and vehicles.
IV. Historic and Cultural Resources Goals & Policies i
Develop a high-quality, diversified park system that includes preservation of
significant historic and cultural resources, as well as programs to recognize the City's
multicultural heritage.
Goal P&OS-10:
Preserve, enhance, and incorporate historic and cultural resources and multicultural
interests into the park and recreational system.
Policy P&OS-10.1: Identify, preserve, and enhance Kent's multicultural
heritage traditions and cultural resources including historic sites, buildings,
artwork views monuments and archaeological resources.
Policy P&OS-10.2: Identify and incorporate significant historic and cultural
resource lands sites artifacts and facilities into the park system to preserve
these interests and to provide a balanced social experience. These areas
include the original alignment for the interurban electric rail service between
Seattle and Tacoma the James Street historical waterfront site, and the
Downtown train depot, among others.
Policy P&OS-10.3: Work with the Kent Historical Society and other cultural
resource groups to incorporate community activities at historic homes and sites
into the park and recreational program.
Goal P&OS-11:
Incorporate man-made environments and features into the park and recreational
system.
Policy P&OS-11.1: Incorporate interesting, man-made environments,
structures activities and areas into the park system to preserve these features
and to provide a balanced park and recreational experience Examples include
the earthworks in Mill Creek Canyon Park and art in public places.
Park&Open Space 10-53
Policy P&OS-11.2: Work with property and facility owners to increase public
access to and utilization of these special features.
V. Cultural Arts Programs and Resources Goals & Policies
Develop high-quality, diversified cultural arts facilities and programs that increase
community awareness attendance, and other opportunities for participation.
Goal P&OS-12:
Work with the arts community to utilize local resources and talents to increase public
access to artwork and programs.
Policy P&OS-12.1: Support successful collaborations among the Arts
Commission, business community, service groups, cultural organizations,
schools, arts patrons, and artists to utilize artistic resources and talents to the
optimum degree possible.
Policy P&OS-12.2: Develop strategies that will support and assist local artists
and art organizations. Where appropriate, develop and support policies and
programs that encourage or provide incentives to attract and retain artists and
artwork within the Kent community.
Goal P&OS-13:
Acquire and display public artwork to furnish public facilities and other areas and
thereby increase public access and appreciation.
Policy P&OS-13.1: Acquire public artwork including paintings, sculptures,
exhibits, and other media for indoor and outdoor display in order to expand
access by residents and to furnish public places in an appropriate manner.
Policy P&OS-13.2: Develop strategies that will support capital and operations
funding for public artwork within parks and facilities.
VI. Wildlife and Natural Preservation Goals & Policies
Incorporate and preserve unique ecological features and resources into the park
system in order to protect threatened plant and animal species, preserve and enhance
Nfish and wildlife habitat, and retain migration corridors for local fish and wildlife. Such
incorporation is intended to limit habitat degradation associated with human activities.
Park&Open Space 10-54
Goal P&OS-14:
Designate critical fish and wildlife habitat resources and areas.
Policy P&OS-14.1: Identify and conserve critical fish and wildlife habitat
including nesting sites, foraging areas, and wildlife mitigation corridors within
or adiacent to natural areas, open spaces, and developed urban areas.
Policy P&OS-14.2: Acquire, enhance 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.
Policy P&OS-14.3: Enhance fish and wildlife habitat within parks, open
space and environmentally sensitive areas by maintaining a healthy urban
forest with native vegetation that provides food, cover, and shelter, by utilizing
best management practices.
Goal P&OS-15:
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-15.1: Preserve and protect significant environmental features
including environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, open spaces,
woodlands shorelines waterfronts, and other features that support wildlife and
reflect Kent's natural heritage.
Polio P&OS-15.2: 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 Resource Area (GRNRA), and the '
shorelines of Lake Meridian Panther Lake Lake Fenwick, and Clark Lake.
Goal P&OS-16• Develop and maintain an Urban Forestry Management Program.
Policy P&OS-16 1 Connect people to nature and improve the quality of life in
Kent by restoring urban forests and other urban open spaces.
Park&Open Space 10-55
Policy P&OS-16 2 Galvanize the community around urban forest restoration
and stewardship through a volunteer restoration program.
Policy P&OS-16 3 Improve urban forest health, and enhance urban forest
Iona-term sustainability, by removing_ invasive plants and maintaining
functional native forest communities.
VII. Design and Access Goals & Policies
Design and develop facilities that are accessible, safe and easy to maintain, with life-
cycle features that account for long-term costs and benefits.
Goal P&OS-17:
Design park and recreational indoor and outdoor facilities to be accessible to all
physical capabilities skill levels, age groups income levels and activity interests.
Policy P&OS-17 1- Design outdoor picnic areas fields courts playgrounds,
trails,parking lots restrooms and other active and supporting facilities to be
accessible to individuals and organized groups of all physical capabilities, skill
+� levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests.
Policy MOS-17.2: Design indoor facility spaces, activity rooms, restrooms,
hallways parking lots and other active and supporting spaces and
improvements to be accessible to individuals and organized groups of all
physical capabilities, skill levels age groups income levels and activity
interests.
Goal P&OS-18:
Design and develop park and recreational facilities to be of low-maintenance
materials.
Policy P&OS-18.1: Design and develop facilities that are of low-maintenance
and high-capacity design to reduce overall facility maintenance and operation
requirements and costs.
Policy P&OS-18 2• Where appropriate use low-maintenance materials,
settings or other value-engineering considerations that reduce care and
security requirements while retaining the natural conditions and environment.
Park&Open Space 10-56
i
Policy P&OS-18.3: Where possible in landscaping parks, encourage the use
of low maintenance native plants.
Goal P&OS-19:
Identify and implement the security and safety provisions of the American Disabilities
Act (ADA), Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), and other
standards.
Policy P&OS-19.1: Implement the provisions and requirements of the
American Disabilities Act (ADA), Crime Prevention through Environmental
Design (CPTED), and other design and development standards that will
improve park safety and security features for users, department personnel, and
the public at large.
Policy P&OS-19.2: Develop and implement safety standards, procedures, i
and programs that will provide proper training and awareness for department
personnel.
Policy P&OS-19.3: Define and enforce rules and regulations concerning park
activities and operations that will protect user groups, department personnel,
and the public at large.
Policy P&OS-19.4: Where appropriate, use adopt-a-park programs,
neighborhood park watches, and other innovative programs that will increase
safety and security awareness and visibility.
VIII. Fiscal Coordination Goals & Policies
Create effective and efficient methods of acquiring, developing, operating, and
maintaining facilities and programs that distribute costs and benefits to public and
private interests.
Goal P&OS-20:
Investigate innovative methods of financing park and recreational requirements,
including_iomt ventures with other public agencies and private organizations, and
private donations.
Policy P&OS-20.1: Investigate innovative, available methods, such as growth
impact fees land set-a-side or fee-in-lieu-of-donation ordinances, and
Park&Open Space 10-57
interlocal agreements to finance facility development, maintenance, and
operating needs in order to reduce costs retain financial flexibility, match use
benefits and interests, and increase facility services.
Policy P&OS-20 2: Where feasible and desirable, consider joint ventures with
King County Kent Highline, and Federal Way School Districts regional state
federal and other public agencies and private organizations including for-profit
concessionaires to acquire and develop regional facilities (i.e., swimming pool,
off-leash park, etc.).
Policy P&OS-20 3• Maintain and support a Park Foundation to investigate
_grants and private funds, develop a planned giving program and solicit private
donations to finance facility development, acquisition, maintenance, programs,
services, and operating needs.
Goal P&OS-21:
Coordinate public and private resources to create among agencies a balanced local
park and recreational system.
Policy P&OS-21.1: Create a comprehensive, balanced park and recreational
system that integrates Kent facilities and services with resources available from
King County Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other state, federal,
and private park and recreational lands and facilities, in a manner that will best
serve and provide for the interests of area residents.
Policy P&OS-21.2: Cooperate, via joint planning and development efforts,
with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other public and
private agencies to avoid duplication, improve facility quality and availability,
reduce costs, and represent interests of area residents.
Goal P&OS-22:
Create and institute a method of cost/benefit and performance measure assessment
to determine equitable park and recreation costs, levels of service, and provision of
facilities.
Policy P&OS-22.1: In order to effectively plan and program park and
recreational needs within the existing city limits and the potential annexation
area, define existing and proposed land and facility levels-of-service (LOS) that
Park&Open Space 10-58
differentiate requirements due to the impacts of population growth as opposed
to improvements to existing_facilities, neighborhood as opposed to community
nexus of benefit, requirements in the City as opposed to requirements in the
Potential Annexation Area.
Policy P&OS-22.2: Create effective and efficient methods of acquiring,
developing, operating, and maintaining park and recreational facilities in ,
manners that accurately distribute costs and benefits to public and private user
interests. This includes the application of growth impact fees where new
developments impact level-of-service (LOS) standards.
Policy P&OS-22.3: Develop and operate lifetime recreational programs that
serve the broadest needs of the population and that recover program and
operating costs using a combination of registration fees, user fees, grants,
sponsorships donations, scholarships, volunteer efforts, and the use of general
funds.
t
I
1
Park&Open Space 10-59
CHAPTER EIGHT
CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT
The Capital Facilities Element is a required element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, mandated
by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). This element contains goals and
policies related to the provision and maintenance of public services and capital facilities required to
adequately support anticipated growth during the next twenty (20)years The goals and policies of
this element are consistent with the Land Use, Transportation, and Park & Open Space Elements
Further, the Capital Facilities Element, in its incorporation of the Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) by reference and partial publication addresses the development activities undertaken by the
City to accommodate the demand for public services. The CIP is updated annually to coincide
with the Council budgeting process. The CIP lists adopted and funded capital and operating
projects with costs and revenues identified over a six (6)year period.
While the Capital Facilities Element includes summary information, inventories and levels-of-
service pertaining to parks, open space, and transportation facilities; more comprehensive
consideration of these policy areas are provided in the Park & Open Space and Transportation
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Other City-provided services and facilities are considered
more fully within this element. Some of these services and facilities are internal to the effective
fiinctiomng of Kent City government, but most services and facilities considered in this element
serve the public directly.
The Capital Facilities Element contains goals and policies to guide the provision and maintenance
of public services and capital facilities with performance measures for assessing the adequacy of
public services and capital facilities to meet population and employment growth. The Capital
Facilities Element considers over the next twenty(20) years the performance of public services and
related capital needs in maintaining or elevating the provision of public services according to
adopted level-of-service(LOS) standards.
Capital Facilities 8-1
REQUIREMENTS OF THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT ACT
The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires the Comprehensive Plan to identify existing and
future public facilities needed to be consistent with the Land Use Element. Updates of the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP), which contains a list of adopted capital projects including costs and
projected revenues, are incorporated into the Capital Facilities Element through the annual
budgeting process by City Council ordinance. The GMA requires that services and facilities
provided to residents and businesses by adjacent jurisdictions and public agencies must also be
considered. Several providers of public services and facilities serve Kent, and the operating plans
of these agencies are referenced in the Comprehensive Plan.
Concurrency and Levels-of-Service
One of the goals of the GMA is to have public services and capital facilities provided concurrent
with or prior to development. This concept is known as "concurrency," also called "adequate
public facilities". In the City of Kent, concurrency requires 1) services and facilities which serve
the development to be in place at the time of development (or for some types of facilities, a
financial commitment to be made to provide for services and facilities within a specified period of
time) and; 2) services and facilities which serve the development to have sufficient capacity to
serve the development without decreasing level-of-service (LOS) below minimum standards
adopted in the Capital Facilities Element. In order to make use of the LOS method, the City selects
the way in which it will measure performance of each service or amount of each type of facility
(i.e., response time, acres, gallons, etc.). It also identifies the current and proposed LOS standard
for each measurement The standards adopted should be considered to reflect the quality of life
against which performance of services or provision of facilities are measured for concurrency.
The GMA specifically requires concurrency for transportation facilities. The GMA, through the
Countywide Planning Policies (specifically LU-29) requires all other public services and facilities
to be "adequate" (see RCW 19.27.097, 36 70A.020, 36.70A.030, and 58.17.110) Concurrency
management will ensure that sufficient public service and facility capacity is available for each
proposed development.
Capital Facilities Planning and Finance
The GMA requires cities and counties to approve and maintain a six (6) year capital facilities plan
which includes requirements for specific types of capital facilities, measurable level-of-service
(LOS) standards, financial feasibility, and assurance that adequate facilities will be provided as
population and employment growth occurs. The Annual Budget Document and six-year Capital
Capital Facilities 8-2
Improvement Program (CIP) fulfill the GMA requirement for facilities planning; but, in addition,
these documents serve as a foundation for City fiscal management and eligibility for grants and
loans These documents and the Capital Facilities Element provides coordination among the City's
many plans for capital improvements, including other elements of the Comprehensive Plan,
operating plans of departmental service providers, and facilities plans of the State, the region, and
adjacent local jurisdictions.
The CIP identifies the location and cost of needed facilities, and the sources of revenue that will be
used to fund the facilities. The CIP, which is a component of this Element, is approved through the
annual budgeting process. Subsequently adopted amendments to the CIP and the Annual Budget
Documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this Element. The Capital Facilities Element
contains or refers to LOS standards for each public service and facility type, and requires that new
development be served by adequate services and facilities. Operating plans of the City and other
public services and facilities providers also contain information associated with levels-of-service.
The Annual Budget Document and Six-Year CIP contain broad goals and specific financial policies
that guide and implement the provision of adequate public services and facilities.
The CIP must be financially feasible; in other words, dependable revenue sources must equal or
exceed anticipated costs. If the costs exceed the revenue, the City must reduce its levels-of-service,
reduce costs, or modify the Land Use Element to bring development into balance with available or
affordable facilities.
The GMA mandates forecasts of future needs for capital facilities and the use of standards for
levels of service of facility capacity as the basis for public facilities contained in the CIP(see RCW
36.70A 020 [12]). As a result, requested public services and facilities detailed in the CIP must be
based on quantifiable, objective measures of service or facility capacity, such as traffic-volume
capacity per mile of road and acres of park land per capita, or average emergency response times.
BACKGROUND
Population And Service Areas
The City of Kent population has grown through annexations, in-migration and births to 84,275 as
of 2002. Kent's Planning Area, which includes the Potential Annexation Area (PAA), has a 2000
population of 103,521. Based on estimates from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the
projected population for the Kent Planning Area in 2020 is anticipated to number approximately
124,903. Some service agencies of the City and other public service providers have different
geographic boundaries and may therefore assume different service population figures. Operating
Capital Facilities 8-3
plans of these service providers should be referenced for more accurate population and service area
information. Maps provided in this Element indicate service areas for agencies servicing homes
and businesses within Kent, its PAA, and adjacent areas.
Setting the Standards for Levels-of-Service
Because the projected demand for public services and capital facilities will be largely influenced by
the appropriate level-of-service (LOS) measure adopted in the Capital Facilities Element, the key
to adequate and timely provision of public services and capital facilities is the establishrnent of
measurable and achievable LOS standards LOS standards are measures of the quality of life of the
community. The standards should be based on the Community's vision of its future and its values.
The final legal authority to establish LOS standards rests with the City Council, because the City
Council enacts the LOS standards that reflect the Community's vision.
Selection of a specific LOS to be the "adopted standard" during the original Comprehensive Plan
Capital Facilities Element drafting was accomplished by a 12-step process The process could be
described in brief as an assessment of inventoried City facilities and population, along with the
costs of funded capital projects, including "non-capacity" projects that were under consideration at
that time. The LOS standards were reflective of strategic capital facilities programming in the
early 1990s. While capital improvement programs and capital facilities plans will continue to
reflect strategic needs for capital projects during six (6) year cycles, many of the present levels-of-
service reflect robust performance measures. Such performance measures are oriented toward
assessing the quality of public services, and proposed capital projects would be expected to
maintain or improve the level-of-service.
Every year, as required by the Growth Management Act, department service providers reassess
land use issues, inventories of public services and facilities, level-of-service standards, and
projected revenues to determine what changes, if any are needed The capital facility operating
plans of the City of Kent, and other providers of services and facilities to Kent homes and
businesses, contain technical information used in such reassessments, and are incorporated into the
Capital Facilities Element by reference.
Capital Facilities 8-4
DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES, INVENTORIES AND
LEVELS-OF-SERVICE BY SERVICE TYPE
Measuring performance of and citizen satisfaction with City services has provided important
indicators of achievements and needs for public services, and by extension, capital facilities.
Budget requests for service programs and facilities are responsive to performance measures, which
are impacted by growth. As will be frequently noted, many of the previously used measures for
establishing level-of-service standards were more reflective of existing capital facilities inventories
than of the performance of public services and provision of facilities that continue to directly
contribute to the quality of life in Kent Services or facilities operating below the established
minimums for levels-of-service could be an indication that a need may exist for service
improvements, programmatic changes, new or improved facilities, or a re-evaluation of the level-
of-service standards. The current LOS for each service or facility may be found in the operating
documents referenced in this Element, and in the City of Kent Performance Measurement Report.
Police and Corrections
The City of Kent Police Department provides a variety of patrol, investigative and community
education services to Kent and neighboring jurisdictions as appropriate The Police Department
also provides correctional services, programs and facilities for the detention and rehabilitation of
criminal offenders. The City of Kent Police Department has been periodically re-accredited by the
nationally-recognized Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA), for
the quality of its performance on several objectives relating to field and administrative police work,
and community involvement. This accreditation enables the Police Department to access grant
funding, additional risk management training, and decreased operating insurance costs. The
Corrections Division is pursuing a separate accreditation from the American Corrections
Association that would entitle access to grant funding.
Police Services and Facilities Inventory
The Police Department serves Kent residents and businesses through its Patrol, Investigations, and
Administrative Support Divisions. The Police Department contracts 911 emergency response
through Valley Communications The Police Headquarters building is located on the City Hall
campus at 232 Fourth Avenue S. The City of Kent Corrections Facility is located at 1201 South
Central The Police/Fire Training Center is located on the East Hill at 24611 116`" Avenue SE.
Figure 8.1 illustrates the location of police services areas and facilities. Police facilities are listed
in the Table 8.1.
Capital Facilities 8-5
Table 8.1
POLICE FACILITIES
Facility Name Location Capacity
Evidence Area- City Hall 220 Fourth Avenue S 1,250 s.f.
Midway Substation 25440 Pacific Highway S 750 s.f.
North Hill Substation 20676 - 72 Id Avenue S 132 s.f,
Police East Hill Substation 24611 - 116th Avenue SE 880 s.f.
Police Headquarters 232 Fourth Avenue S 18.000 s.f.
Police/Fire Training Center 24611 - 116t Avenue SE 8,000 s f
Firing Range 24611 - 116"'Avenue SE 3,670 s.f.
West Hill Substation 26512 Military Road S 910 s.f.
Sprmgwood Substation 27405 - 129 ' Place SE,#23 850 s.f.
*Panther Lake Substation 21006 - 132° Avenue SE 3,850 s.f.
* Potential conversion of Fire Department Logistics Building.
Correctional Services and Facilities Inventory
The City of Kent Correctional Facility (CKCF) capacity is one hundred-thirty (130) beds. The
correctional facility has an intergovernmental contract with the Federal Marshal's Office Due to
the opemng of the Federal Correctional Facility in SeaTac, federal prisoners are housed at the
CKCF infrequently The average length of stays at the CKCF increased from 14 days in 2001 to
15 days in 2002. The Kent Police Department has focused efforts to address the increasing
demands for jail capacity. The CKCF Programs Division added day reporting and work crew
programs in 2002 to the existing electronic home detention, work release and work time credit
programs. The CKCF is undertaking the challenge of becoming a fully-accredited correctional
facility through the American Corrections Association, with an audit planned for the third quarter
of 2003. Accreditation for the CKCF would provide increased access to grant funding and reduced
liability insurance costs. Correctional facilities are listed in Table 8 2 and their locations are
illustrated in Figure 8 1 Performance measures for Police LOS standards are found in Table 8.3.
Capital Facilities 8-6
�11� J S1 2 AVES m g
la
�Fnters£ ,y atek5.wa YS"
d u
• E F
F
Y _
�u
ssAVE m m i��/ RO c ��
x _
m r
.............. Interstate 5
• \ � a; �64a
W Valley W`r
J W Valley
_ Valley FWY m m
road = i— MP R IraC
76 AVE S
Rol o^ y I
mad •• r_—'~+^= 'x� ��'�»( o I v
ems,/�j� E V Iley
Valle
L Spnn brook RD
— 1 �
104 VES � I
5 „8'sr7son RD
06 A1�
SIN
ti y
116 vE 5
rr 4AVE-SE T y m 1zAA
t�1
m v
N i�vr�y F D9 1 5E l r'
-00
140 A SE
1 AVE SE
IT
� n
b mm x
n� =m ema M r cn ° O tsJ
(zm
� z j� N
Dx m
m C
s°a33 D+ o CrJ y
'gym � D�
' s< D O C) F
y � D r_
- I
D
Table 8.2
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
Facility Name Location Capacity
Correctional Facility 1230 South Central Avenue 130 beds
Corrections Annex 8309 South 259 Street 3,093 s.f.
Kent Municipal/Aukeen District Court 1210 South Central Avenue 4,051 s.£
Table 8.3
POLICE LOS STANDARDS
Performance Measure LOS Standard
Responsive Police Average response times to Top 6 minutes or less to scene from
Service Priority Calls receipt of emergency call
Community Sense Annual Citizen Satisfaction 85% of respondents indicate
of Safety Survey respondents' perceived feeling "somewhat safe" to
level of safety very safe" in Kent
As of 2002,the Kent Police Department is satisfactorily meeting both of the LOS standards.
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICES
The City of Kent Fire Department is responsible for delivering fire protection and emergency
medical services to the City, and to the geographic area within King County Fire District #37 that
includes the City of Covington. Fire Suppression & Emergency Medical Response units provide
the most directly recognizable services to homes and businesses in Kent and other service area
jurisdictions. Other fire districts adjacent to Kent may provide response assistance as requested.
The Emergency Management Office and Fire Prevention Office carry out several objectives,
including assessment and reduction of potential fire and life hazard risks through educational
outreach programs and development plan inspections throughout the City. The Kent Fire
Department received accreditation offered jointly by the International Association of Fire Chiefs
(IAFC), the Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI), and the International
Cities/Counties Management Association(ICMA).
Capital Facilities 8-9
Fire & Life Safety Services and Facilities Inventory
The City owns six(6) fire stations: Station 71 (in the southern portion of Downtown Kent); Station
72 (Lake Meridian area); Station 73 (West Hill), Station 74 (East Hill), Station 75 (east, near
Covington); and Station 76 (north, in the industrial area). A seventh station is located in Fire
District #37 and is owned by the Fire District. Each station is equipped with at least one fire
engine or ladder truck that carries emergency medical supplies and equipment. Each station is
staffed with a minimum of three (3) personnel 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. Each station
has future capacity for additional staffing. Fire District 937's Capital Facilities Plan identifies two
(2) future stations that will serve the City. Station 78, which will open in January 2008, will be
located in the City of Covington and will serve the east side of the City of Kent. There is also a
proposed station serving the North Benson/Panther Lake neighborhood. The North
Benson/Panther Lake station will be inside the potential annexation area for the City of Kent. The
Fire District is currently collecting level-of-service fees for the future construction and purchase of
land for these projects In addition, Stations 75 and 76 have a King County Medic One paramedic
unit housed in the station. Each unit is staffed with two (2) personnel. These units are part of the
countywide Advance Life Support (ALS) system. Table 8 4 lists each station, location, number
and type of units in service, total station capacity, and minimum staffing. Figure 8.2 illustrates
locations of fire and life safety services and facilities
Current data collection for the level-of-service indicates that the Fire Department is not meeting the
standard. The Kent Fire Department is refining its data collection and analysis support functions in
order to identify areas in need of capital and operating improvements. Such improvements would
be pursued to meet the established levels-of-service. Performance measures for fire and life safely
LOS standards are found in Table 8.5.
Police/Fire Training Center
The Police/Fire Training Center is located on East Hill at 24611 116`h Avenue Southeast at Station
74 The Center, housed in an 8,000 square foot building, provides audio and visual equipment and
other facilities for in-service training for City of Kent police officers and fire fighters. Instruction
is conducted by Kent Police and Fire Department personnel, and by nationally known instructors
from organizations such as the International Association of Police Chiefs and the State Fire
Service. In addition to providing a facility for training City of Kent personnel, the training center
also accommodates a satellite training program sponsored by the Washington State Criminal
Justice Training Commission.
Capital Facilities 8-10
Q
W �
Z Z rim ~ pro'
p O
r l
Z Z Q mmc
r�l z U)C)0 .6 a
a0< gEgtq ~ r�/�
rLv r+w a Jwa�F #oa rE .yam W
C) c UELLiLLY
�• SAS W
p 4€m
U � L. s• o � 2tY��` � Ir.•`^�
F V1
"� EewA aEC N�aaP 6PWi.a LE F+�gA{+aP�a wap*33fON
w
�� ( 353lttl 4
3S Atl MI .0�• _ � �_
J 11I �.♦
u� r 4JI r
� ml—� i lim P — rU •r'
63Aq 9tt /I Imo'• }iI' .L+ :
I
�.—_- - s3nvwa ••.�-
oa rowayndg •,4� ,, M +:
S 34Y
..�.
�aa ogn3 4^'•6�W'',� m�
F-0a
w I BN RzI " P—I"NHI
� �4
` N
Pao-0�aa dfl = Pearll dN
W
AMHAaIIeAM "'' m — -^�_ —• AhLd Aalle 7
.� v
SalRsLalum »�............f...,/
�,..�•� and ss
� � ob ••' •k v.r I—'1.1
s AMu?va _ ale;sjalu�
s3nv
I
m E 9L
m L_ S K1--l9t a 'Wi/
Table 8.4
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY FACILITIES
Facility Location Units in Capacity Minimum Staffing
Name Service
Station 71 504 West Crow Street Engine 71 and 4 Bays 5—(3)Engine(2)Aid
Aid 71
Station 72 25620-140`h Avenue SE Engine 72 3 Bays 3—Engine
Station 73 26512 Military Road S Engine 73 3 Bays 3—Engine
Station 74 24611-116'h Avenue SE Ladder 74;Aid 3 Bays 6—(3) Laddei,(2)Aid
74, and (1)Battalion Chief
Battalion Chief
�- Station 75 15635 SE 272"d Street Engine 75 3 Bays 3—Engine
Station 76 20676-72"d Avenue S Engine 76 3 Bays 3—Engine
Station 77 20717- 132"d Avenue SE Engine 77 3 Bays 3—Engme
Corner of 180`h Avenue SE Proposed
Station 78 and SE 2561h Street Engine 3 Bays Operational 1/l/08
North
Benson/Panther In area of 108`h Avenue SE To Be To Be
Lake Area and SE 216"' Street Determined Determined To Be Determined
i
Capital Facilities 8-13
I
Table 8.5
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY LOS STANDARDS
Performance Measure LOS Standard
Structure Fires-All Response Time by First due apparatus with a minimum of 3
percentage(fractile) firefighters will arrive on scene within 7
minutes of initial dispatch on 80%of incidents.
Structure Fires—Single-family Response Time by Effective Response Force of 16 firefighters
residential and standard percentage(fractile) will arrive on scene within 10 minutes of initial
commercial dispatch on 80%of incidents
Structure Fires—Commercial Response Time by Effective Response Force of 18 firefighters
target hazards percentage(fractile) will arrive on scene within 10 minutes of initial
dispatch on 80% of incidents.
Structure Fires—High risk Response Time by Effective Response Force of 21 firefighters
target hazards percentage(fractile) will arrive on scene within 10 minutes of initial
dispatch on 80%of incidents
Advanced Life Support—Life Response Time by Effective Response Force of 5 to 6 firefighters
threatening percentage(fractile) will arrive on scene within 10 minutes of initial
dispatch on 80%of incidents
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES - GENERAL GOVERNMENT
The City of Kent Operations Department manages several facilities and buildings necessary to the
administrative and maintenance functions of the City These include City Hall and the City
Council Chambers, and the Centennial Center; all located in the heart of Downtown Kent. Table
8.6 below lists the name, location and capacity of each facility:
Table 8.6
CITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICES
NAME LOCATION CAPACITY
City Hall 220 - 4th Avenue South 35,230 s.f.
City Hall Annex 302 West Gowe Street 4,045 s f
Centennial Center 400 West Gowe Street 71,600 s.f.
Capital Facilities 8-14
PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
The City of Kent Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department manages parks and open
Space resources, as well as the Senior Activity Center, Kent Commons, Kent Resource Center, and
Riverbend Golf Complex; provides a wide range of recreational programs throughout the facilities;
and administers funding in support of a variety of community service activities. Details for
community service activities can be found in the Human Services Element, the Housing Element,
and the 2003-2007 Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development. The 220W
lnteftm C fell nsi e Parks o e,.,.eatio s. Community Sery.,,` Plan Park & Open Space Plan
and the Park & Open Space Element of the Comprehensive Plan provides greater detail about
facilities and LOS standards.
PP arks and Recreation Facilities
e City of Kent owns and leases __ oc 7 acres of._._o_:,.i_._w_,_,._.�,_ood park land .,_n 1,247.3 acres
co..,.runity park laid 1,434 act es of parkland within the current City limits King County owns
0.5 acres located in Kent. Within Kent's Potential Annexation Area (PAA). King County owns 734
acres of park land The Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department manages a wide
variety of facilities located on park land, including the Senior Center, Kent Commons, Special
Populations Resource Center, play fields, and traits. The Park & Open Space Element contains a
current inventory of lands leased and owned by the City. Figure 10.1 and 10.2 of the Park& Open
Space Element illustrate locations of parks and recreation facilities.
Parks and Recreation Level-of-Service Standards
The City of Kent Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department generally pursues land
acquisitions to meet anticipated demand for open space based upon estimated population growth.
As suitable land becomes available for development, the Parks, Recreation and Community
Services Department considers purchases in balance with the anticipated population growth for the
entire City. More detailed levels-of-service for Parks and Recreation services and facilities are
provided in the Park & Open Space Element and the i tefim 2000 !`...........m,ensiye n.,.v,.
Recreation e. C,,..,.n, 4ty Cervices ni Park& Open Space Plan.
Capital Facilities 8-15
PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES
The City of Kent is one among several providers of public utility services, for water distribution
and storage, sewerage, and stormwater management. Other public providers adjacent to City of
Kent utilities franchise areas coordinate with the City of Kent Public Works Department through
mterlocal service agreements. Privately-provided services such as energy distribution and storage,
cable television, and telephone services are discussed in the Utilities Element.
Sanitary Sewer Facilities
The service area of the City of Kent Sewer Utility encompasses twenty-three (23) square miles and
includes most of the incorporated City, as well as adjacent franchise areas within unincorporated
King County. Since the existing collection system already serves most of the City's service area,
expansion of this system will occur almost entirely by infill development, which wilt be
accomplished primarily through developer extensions and local improvement districts. In general,
the existing sewer system is sized based on existing standards which will carry peak flows
generated by the service area for ultimate development. However, the City of Kent
Comprehensive Sewerage Plan has identified various undersized lines, as well as others that
require rehabilitation King County-METRO has assumed the responsibility for interception,
treatment, and disposal of wastewater from the City of Kent and communities throughout south,
east and north King County at the South Treatment Plant located in Renton. Therefore, the City
does not incur any direct capacity-related capital facilities requirements or costs for sanitary sewer
treatment. METRO pump stations in Pacific, Black Diamond, and three (3) in the vicinity of the
South Treatment Plant (Interurban and New Interurban) serve South Kng County.
King County will provide additional wastewater capacity to serve a growing population in the
Puget Sound area by constricting a new North Treatment Plant in the north service area (to be
located in the vicinity of the boundary of King and Snohomish counties) and by expanding the
South Treatment Plant to handle additional flow from south and east King County. The North
Treatment Plant is anticipated to provide a capacity of thirty-six (36)million gallons per day (mgd)
when operational in 2010, and the expansion of the South Treatment Plant in the year 2029 will
increase system capacity from one hundred fifteen(115) mgd to one hundred thirty-five(135) mgd.
Two conveyance improvements serving the South Treatment Plant are scheduled for completion
both in the near-term and long-term The improvements of Sections 1. 2. and 3 of the Parallel
Auburn Interceptor are anticipated to be completed by 2004, and the planned three (3) to five (5)
mgd expansion of effluent storage capacity is projected to be completed by 2029
Adjacent sewer utilities providing service to Kent homes and businesses include Soos Creek Water
& Sewer, the City of Auburn, Lakehaven Utility District, Midway Sewer District, the City of
Tukwila and the City of Renton Service connections exist between the City of Kent and these
service purveyors, and interlocal agreements ensure continuous service. A complete inventory of
sanitary sewer facilities and appropriate levels-of-service are found in the City of Kent
Comprehensive Sewerage Plan, and operating comprehensive plans of adjacent purveyors of sewer
service These documents are on file with the City of Kent Public Works Department Figure 8.3
illustrates the locations of the sanitary sewer service areas and facilities.
Capital Facilities 8-16
¢ qq L
LILL Il7 U FWCK
—
W �O Z�•voo oC�o�o�J��`v�6nrif �o to(o w
jr XOQo06zmYi7tU)wZOWU U)UU
ZW
Q U)
z O�wU)F L/) LuZLw¢
vIti
mo<e
2 ¢Q ziz B
'ZoWco �w¢c)
H WWV)D o-
~F�z pY�:3�zyO m
CC O W W W—n W W W¢O�
�mY�� nv0a Mu 'F�Y':�� U~^✓wU�W]
mw Be 3AV BPt
39 3AV
ovt
�J1 -
. j•' y
3 tl zc. y
yy -1
vvz�i 711 !
S 3AV 9tl --� �l�r-` ���:• I I wm a
�l 3S3htl WI
S���+—
�-4- 3A 4 90t
r 089oa9 �� 1 r
AMi 6ellen h :f•
Ca aIIGA3
m! I BN RBa
_ 53Atl 3L $
Ceo+llea dfl m = PE all
m J w l o� AM�rWIIe I
AM �aIRA M y / : r
3 V FAMVaYeA Mrt
S eke;s,a -
-
m g0.5t6 �1�
sae I .s�•
y
s3ntl roa
_ _ rep %U `gi
Stormwater Management Facilities
The majority of the City of Kent is located within the Green River watershed, with stormwater
flowing either directly to the Green River or to the Green River via a tributary creek. A smaller
portion of the City. generally located west of I-5, flows either to Massey or McSorley Creeks,
which drain directly to Puget Sound. Significant creek systems draining to the Green River are:
Johnson Creek;
Midway Creek;
Mullen Slough;
Mill Creel:(Auburn);
Mill Creek(Kent);
Springbrook/Garrison Creek;
Soosette Creek;
Soos Creek/Meridian Valley Creek; and
The "Lake Meridian Outlet" Creek.
The last three creeks listed are tributary to Big Soos Creek, which in turn drains to the Green River
east of Auburn. Figure 8.4 illustrates the drainage basins of Kent's storm drainage service area.
The stormwater system is comprised of an extensive network of ditches, pipes, and stormwater
quantity and quality control facilities which connect individual parcels with the City's surface
water systems. The City also owns, operates and maintains several regional quantity and quality
control facilities. These are the Green River Natural Resources Area (GRNRA), the Upper and
Lower Mill Creek Detention Facilities, the 98th Avenue Garrison Creek Detention Facility, the
Meridian Meadows Detention Facility, and the South 259th Street Detention Facility, the
Horseshoe Acres Pump Station and the constructed wetland at Lake Fenwick.
Using the City's GIS database records, the Drainage Master Plan (DMP) indicates a total of 17
City-wide drainage basins within the planning area (corporate limits) totaling approximately 28
square miles. In addition, the storm drainage system consists of approximately 285 mites of
pipeline along with an extensive system of open channels. The DMP was structured to first look at
the existing watersheds and drainage basins, determine the subbasins within the watershed, analyze
any open channel components (receiving water) for insufficient capacity, determine and prioritize
projects needed to reduce flood risks, improve water quality, enhance fish passage and
instream/riparian habitats, and efficiently serve planned growth, determine alternative
solutions to alleviate potential flooding, and determine cost —effective solutions to the identified
needs. Each project within the DMP has been reviewed for multiple benefitsthenthen given
either a "High, Medium, or Low" ranting. Further details on each project are located in
Chapter 7,Table 7-1 of the DMP. Total project costs range from $52 Million to 5 67 Million.
The City has operated a stormwater utility since 1981 as a means of financing the design,
construction, operation, and maintenance of the City's surface water system Fees are collected
based on specific subbasin location, type of development, and percent impervious surface
coverage. Revenue is used for operation and maintenance activities and capital improvement
programs.
Specific requirements (level-of-service standards) for on-site stormwater management and stream
protection are contained in the City's 2002 Surface Water Design Manual, which is a modified
Capital Facilities 8-19
version of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Portions of the stormwater
system are improved to these standards as public and private development projects are constructed.
These standards will be adjusted as necessary to meet equivalency requirements of the Washington
State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington(20015)in
the future.
The Drainage Master Plan (DMP) encompasses all Capital Improvement Program (CIP) related
projects for stormwater systems with the city limits. The 2008 DMP replaces the 1985 DMP and
the Capital Improvement Programs completed individually for the Mill, Garrison, Springbrook
Creek and Soos Creek Basin CIP. The 2008 DMP has incorporated elements of the CIP, such as
flood conveyance needs for open channels, determination of replacement needs of the City's
stormwater pipe system, drainage facility requirements of the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP), and levee repair and replacement needs for flood protection along the Green River.
The DMP further recommends specific projects for enhancing critical areas and fish passage and
addresses engineering staff needs to oversee such projects.
Program components of the DMP include compliance with the Washington State Department of
Ecology (DOE)-mandated Nation Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase lI
Permit and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Programs. These unfunded federally mandated
programs were included in the DMP to determine if there were deficiencies in the City's current
operation and maintenance and monitoring programs and identify subsequent additional workload
and staff requirements needed to fully meet the permit requirements. The DMP has included
recommendations to meet the required elements of the TMDL and NPDES Phase iI Permit for
tracking, monitoring, maintenance, and operation elements including the necessary resources to
meet these needs.
Critical area habitat protection is an important aspect of water quality, habitat protection and flood
protection. To be successful in improving the water quality of the streams and open channel
systems within the City, there is a continuing priority of acquisition of buffers along the main
stream corridors. Section 8 of the DMP further discusses the needs of this program and
provides areas of potential expansion of habitat protection. As properties become available, the
City's environmental engineering section will continue to pursue grant funding and work
towards the protection of habitat and water quality.
The existing stone drainage pipelines, approximately 285 miles, form a labyrinthian connection of
pipes, catch basins, and manholes under the public right of ways with the ability to alleviate the ,
surface flooding that would occur on the city streets As these pipes age and reach their service life,
a replacement program has been established by the PW Operations and Maintenance staff to repair
or replace segments of the pipes each year. During the life of the pipe system, segments may be
targeted also for improvements before the end of the service life, usually due to inadequate
capacity after years of development. An analysis was completed of the existing storm drainage
pipes within the City.A total length of 135,000 feet of 18" or larger diameter pipe was anatyzed for
capacity and 55,350 feet or 41% has failed to meet the minimum requirements for passing a 25-
year storm event. These systems are noted within the DMP for updating.
As a result of the 1998 listing of Chinook Salmon and Bull Trout listing under the Federal
Endangered Species Act, the City has been participating in various regional salmon restoration
efforts, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers GreenlDuwamish Ecosystem Restoration
Program and the steering committees for Watershed Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA) 8 and 9.
WRIA 8 includes the watersheds of the Cedar and Sammamish Rivers as well as Lake Washington.
Capttal Facilities 8-20
m
0 0 0
N 01 41
z ry
Q+ C
r,il FBI F- Z x s s A
WWW 11 Q m v m zo<`n
Qr� yyWyyyy W Z m UK �s �� � g Rs� EmS � I�1 :7
I� FM•M rl Q m s m m^' c 0 m N �m �� �/ L'"
�= ia o __ `m `m s
z
U W J
�(�_ C� �CCU CTC
�Z
C a U 0 0;o r no nn�ca_o �Y e�p ✓�
W•:. JJ�W'�m��J��� �E3��
U a+ O¢mUo (7x—�Y Oa
393AV `
3S 3Av t
3S vwO �dl�� �+� ;+•
L 36
I �
o Iaa os9
-353nv 9o�l
Oii MOWS uutlg � _�_ -1 -�.� � � � ..1 T� �L���•�
___ � � r � _ Q S3Nt G /'�•••
IF
L
Oa all lT i�LL L9
y
t I I PeWIRFl
L m AM all
a IW
Q FaIRAM � -� i Coy
AVE
m
........ ....
FFF
Cad SR 556 - _
e '
�� % •� �a r y � z l P � y -I
��. •a - I —= � �a IIw •� �
o,
-� 9L r/ s 19L b MH
WRIA 9 includes the Green/Duwamish River Watershed as well as some nearshore area of Puget
Sound. The salmon recovery plans will require capital expenditures for various stream restoration
Projects There is a possibility of federal and state matching funds for these projects.
King County and its cities(including Kent)also participate in the King County Flood Control Zone
District. The District is funded by a property tax on parcels county-wide. The principal
responsibility of the District is the maintenance and repair of all levee systems within King County
In addition,the City is involved in other regional programs to provide an expanded greenway along
' the Green River. This involvement may require future capital expenditures.
The inventory of current stormwater management facilities is on file with the City of Kent Public
Works Department.
Stormwater Management Facilities Financing Options
The City has operated a stormwater utility since 1981 as a means of financing the design,
construction, operation, and maintenance of the City's surface water system. Fees are collected
based on specific subbasin location, type of development, and percent of impervious surface
coverage. Revenue is used for operation and maintenance activities and capital improvement
programs.
A number of funding options are available to the City to meet the needs of a fully functional
stormwater program. The options typically used are street funds, general funds, special
assessments (Local Improvement Districts), special fees, general facility charges, fees in lieu of
on-site detention, public — private partnerships, conventional debt, special grants and loans, and
stormwater utility charges. A further discussion of these types of funding follows:
A Street Fund sets aside a portion of the drainage infrastructure often constructed with streets, and
the street department tends to provide system maintenance in the right of way. However,
stormwater management is not the primary function of a street department, and competing
demands for these limited street finds may not be the most appropriate means to actively promote
the City's ongoing objectives in stormwater management. Therefore, securing funding for the
DMP through the street find is not an option.
The General Fund, as with the street fund, is a non-dedicated funding source for stormwater
programs, is subject to competing demands on an annual basis, and therefore proves to be an
unreliable source for ongoing comrmtments. The City currently does not use the general fund as a
revenue source for the stormwater program and it is assumed this will not be a source of firture
drainage program funding.
The third type of funding is special assessments, also known as Local Improvement Districts
(LID). LIDS are most appropriate for specific capital improvements that benefit identifiable
geographic service areas. By nature, these options are voluntary, that is, the property owners
choose through a vote whether or not to accept the assessment on themselves. This restriction
causes program funding to be unreliable, furthermore, the assessed valuation basis of charging
provides only a loose nexus between the amount charged and the benefit received. The City
currently is assuming that no funding will be secured from the use of Special Assessments or Local
Improvement Districts for the DMP implementation
Capital Facilities 8-23
A fourth funding option would involve the City charging special fees for operating activities such
as inspections. These fees are best applied when they are set to recover the costs, or a portion of
the costs, of the specific activity for which payment was received Special fees are not generally
intended to fund an ongoing stormwater program in its entirety; however, they would be well
suited for the recovery of specific program-related costs The DMP is currently not funded through
Special Fees, and using a conservative funding approach, these Special Fees are not included as a
funding source at this time.
General Facility Charges (GFC) are one time fees paid at the time of development and are intended
to recover an equitable share of the costs of existing and planned future facilities that provide
capacity for growth. They are an essential tool used to recover the cost of growth from growth
Estimated future revenues from the GFC are expected to average S860,000 per year. Current
estimates are for a potential of approximately 13,000 additional ESUs within the City, and GFCs
for those could be a source of revenue in the next 10 years assuming that the development will
occur in that time period. A high estimate using the City's current GFC per ESU would generate
approximately $16 million over 10 years, assuming all development would occur within the next
10 years.
Creating a fee in lieu of on-site detention is another method of funding required capital projects
The fees are most appropriately used to fund regional facilities through the payments of developing
properties. These fees are collected when a developing property decides not to construct facilities
to mitigate runoff on site. As such, fees in lieu must be used in concert with requirements for on-
site mitigation and a community's goals favoring regional facilities over on-site solutions. When a
property does construct such facilities, the fee is not charged. While effective in funding a part of
(regional) infrastructure construction, fees in lieu are not a reliable source for ongoing stormwater
programs. Due to the high cost of the purchase of buildings and real estate for additional new
regional detention facilities, and the potential for widening of stream channels and expansion of
existing regional detention facilities, additional regional detention facilities are not included in the
DMP.
Another funding option is a Public/Private Partnership for funding a portion of the DMP. This
partnership is a different approach to funding stormwater capital construction and results in joint or
private funding of specific improvements. This approach helps mitigate the direct impacts of new
development. While a popular idea, in practice it is difficult to persuade private development to
fund stormwater projects if other funding alternatives are available to the City. Estimates of future
funding developed from public/private partnerships are not incorporated into the drainage fiord as
there would be no guarantee of a level of funding able to fund the projects and programs included
within the DMP.
A Conventional Debt, such as revenue bonds and general obligation bonds, is available to fund
stormwater capital construction. While these mechanisms are well suited for funding large capital
construction projects, an ongoing revenue stream is required to support the annual debt service
owed on the amount borrowed. The low estimate for incurring conventional debt is $10 million
over the next 10 years for the DMP. The high estimate is a series of new revenue bonds issued
every 2 to 3 years depending on the project need over the next 10 years. The high estimate would
be approximately $ 218 million generated in conventional debt to fund implementation of the
DMP.
Capital Facilities 8-24
Special Grants and Loans could be used as a supplement to conventional debt service. Special
grants and loans may be an important option for the City. Many state and federal programs are
available for applications, including the Centennial Clean Water Fund, the Public Works Trust
Fund, the State Revolving Fund, the Flood Control Assistance Account Program, and the Federal
319 Non-point Source Program. These programs draw more applications every year than there are
available funds, and they are highly competitive Most of the assistance programs award aid in the
form of low interest loans that still require an ongoing revenue stream to support payback or a
percentage of matching contributions by the City Although the DMP will continue to pursue
special grants and loans funding sources, it is risky to base future revenue funding on past success
of securing grants. A low estimate of grant availability is $50,000 per year, and a high estimate is
$500,000 per year.
The stormwater utility service charge provides a significant portion of the stormwater management
costs The utility service charges are recovered through ongoing rates to utility customers. This
option is and could continue to be a financially independent entity free of reliance on the other City
funds, with all of its revenues dedicated to surface water management programs and capital
construction Currently, the City receives approximately$8.6 million in stormwater utility services
charges per year, a low estimate assuming that the rate would not change. A high estimate,
including future growth as stated within the GMA, would include an assumed increase within the
utility rate to increase revenues collected to $12 million per year.
The City's existing rate structure features area- or basin-specific rates, a density multiplier, and an
impervious surface area basis. Details of the rate structure can be found in Section 10.5 of the
DMP Under the existing rate structure, all customers pay a uniform base rate, $2.57 per month.
Additionally, a basin specific rate is charged ranging from $1.68 per month to $5 05 per month.
There are 17 basins and these basins are grouped into eight different basin specific rate categories.
Refer to Section 10.5 of the DMP and Kent City Code 7.05.090 for additional information.
The key assumptions used within the rate study are as follows: a customer base annual growth rate
of 0.58 percent, an annual inflation rate of 4 percent, personnel benefits costs escalation of 6
percent per year, construction cost escalation of 5 percent per year, and an annual fund earnings
rate of 2.5 percent. The Capital Improvement Projects for stormwater systems and the drainage
component of the street projects are assumed to be implemented over a 10-year period (2009 to
2018). Finally, system replacement funding will be equal to annual depreciation expense.
Water Supply, Distribution, and Storage Facilities
The service area of the City of Kent Water Utility encompasses twenty-four (24) square miles and
serves most of the incorporated City. Some small areas of unincorporated King County and the
City of Auburn are also served by the City of Kent Water Utility. Adjacent franchise areas of
neighboring water purveyors serve the remainder of Kent and the PAA. To the east, the service
area boundary coincides with the boundary of Water District No. 111 and the Soos Creek Sewer
and Water District. To the north, the service area boundary coincides with the mutual Kent/Renton
and Kent/Tukwila city limits. To the west, it coincides with Hrghlme Water District's boundary,
' and to the south, the City's service area boundary coincides with the City of Auburn, and
Lakehaven Utility District.
The principal sources of water supply for the City's proprietary water system are Kent Springs and
Clark Springs. During high demand periods, the capacity of these two sources is exceeded, and
supplemental well facilities are activated. These sources are adequate to meet current and near
Capital Facilities 8-25
W
w
-
F
Lm Ln 0 Z2
2 § W Um>m>�� `m6)❑ "Ae wed
O FWF��II QR' (1 C'r CN �> d `md0 � S�En S
V1+ F61 r� C/IJFWY� OJ„ 0(J e^- :Wl LL
Z'/1COO
F U /�^� Z 2i OFF- UILLF yNicu 'mU�i O{c � sr' �/
V] ry,Cy� WzU
0. W F_Q W LL
c)aYMd
4 .14
�33�ay33a{Loa��mp���¢�x��
v
f y —� 1 J � \
1 { 3
M ham' •L
- 353 b9Z i
'S3't�tl BDCi J Oil ._ R O�J I 17t
,—J �z�� S3Atl BDL
- .; .............Lp S Etl c?4 r
141,
BN Rsil
r
S 3Atl 9L
AM ,LIRA M m N �.r.^� AMd X-Ile
b5 —�
/ 9 ale 7V a •S/L...:..Y ... _..........
lsia
3 nv ss
v o > 3�.
p � '
� l
5 w' � S3Atl Z m� •� �S't+n.� ��'� .�Lr�
' future peak day demands, however, they are insufficient to meet long term peak day demands. In
2002, the City executed an agreement to participate as a partner along with Tacoma Water Utility,
Covington Water District, and Lakehaven Utility District in the Green River Second Supply Water
Project. Water from this source of supply, coupled with the City's existing sources, is sufficient to
meet the City's long-term peak day demand projections.
System wide, annual water consumption is roughly 2.7 billion gallons, with average day demands
of 7.5 million gallons per day and peak day usage of approximately 13 75 million gallons per day.
Utilizing current land use and population projections for 2030, annual use would rise to 3.6 billion
' gallons, or 9.9 million gallons per day. Existing water supply can produce roughly three times this
amount, or 30 million gallons per day; however, additional storage reservoirs will be needed to
deliver tlus water to customers.
' Water system interties are presently available with the Highline Water District,the City of Tukwila,
the City of Renton, the Soos Creek Sewer and Water District, Water District No. 111, the City of
' Auburn, and the City of Tacoma. However, based on water use projections developed for the
Water System Plan, these interties would only be required to serve as emergency back-up if
problems with existing sources were to arise.
The water distribution system exists throughout the City's service area. Expansion will take place
almost entirely through infill development, which will be accomplished primarily through
�. developer extensions. Most of the remaining projects identified in the City's Comprehensive
Water System Plan would be constructed to provide water service at existing levels of service.
However, several key improvements to the system have been identified. Proposed projects
include construction of a new maintenance facility on Kent's East Hill,development of a new
640 pressure zone on the East Hill to improve water pressures at high elevations, a new
reservoir on the West Hill to meet increasing storage demands, and water main replacements,
including upsizing older portions of the distribution system to improve capacity.
The Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) list developed for the Comprehensive Water System Plan
was based on identifying: 1) system deficiencies via a hydraulic modeling analysis, 2) long-term
maintenance and operations needs, and 3) projects that are required to meet local, state and federal
' requirements. The existing water system has and continues to provide clean, safe, and reliable
water; however, improvements to the system are needed to improve it for future development and
meet existing requirements. The costs of improvements to the water system range from $150-
million to $160 million in 2008 dollars, and funding of these protects will be accomplished through
a combination of water rate increases and bonding.
A Comprehensive Water System Plan update is required by the Washington State Department of
Health (DOH) every six (6) years. The City's most recent Water System Plan was submitted to
DOH in 2002completed in 2008 Adjacent water utilities providing service to Kent homes and
businesses include Soos Creek Water & Sewer, the City of Auburn, Lakehaven Utility District,
Highline Water District, King County Water District #111 and the City of Renton Service
connections exist between the City of Kent and these service purveyors, and interlocal agreements
ensure continuous service Water supply service area and facilities serving Kent's Planning Area
are illustrated on Figure 8 5. A detailed inventory of current water system facilities, and City water
rights records, and operating plans of adjacent service agencies are on file with the City of Kent
' Public Works Department. As noted previously, the purchase of additional water rights from the
' Capital Facilities 8-26
W
�¢ of
W "
W
Q N m3_"am
z o tome Frj
[� Q o ° �co
v v 11 a
w 7 Z c0
"� 11 Q F-p oU op
zpy z N .-. HJ Vocsi m.ct
IW W yz rt O cs U m 2 E.
IU-d7N0YSli
V , •70
U €E IN
W d
� � N
�-�w • l fir: ,�.�� � y�' Y d6�Av L
•3s �A)V 66L �.� / _ �wnn��
-. . .... mJN �JI : C F • OP -m
� `m e •I\w d J : lL 1 ,gym w IJ j
a-v 3 32-M ti •o a ���y-y(v'aJ�C W='���--C�y�i`- : S
- AY i2L o a 1 a m
as3nr9L'( _' 3a r—Yam^\w y CI I;�� � a '�1�--,/¢mow• I�.a A 1� � �
�.�I •I �f'f 11� • 3A`Ck9 man- �— /�o _L�a•r
c�a '� � lal � w •• Lvc? �w- k¢n lI i�(
�o w 7 F\ pia m _ �•F_o-m •`m _
m I � (I�� _�] '•�' alT C"l W 9� It i35 M.VZI{,
asl�sogt.mw `•...".. •a as os�g-- ��1i�l I �!-/ 3ntleoL
i v�i a '_n� I I, x c S3Atl 4JL `R(I r �EJ
....im
:
rll o
mi$ m S3AV9L
?� 6aIRAM w O m AM-J 6alle-d---�YE(J
ani W •W I l
IT
'mobJOE
\�.11 I\ C•. S E _jam -C E �(� �u i YJ�ro' E�_ rFaI
1mw .{ co
Q
a• G7 1" _u � IIi � � '-
w
ti
q
L
Tacoma P5 Pipeline project will provide a sufficient supply of water for future peak demand for the
next twenty years.
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
' Within the City there are city, state, county, and private roads totaling 273.38 centerline miles. Of
those that the City maintains, there are 48.02 lane miles of Principle Arterials, 116 51 lane miles of
' Minor Artenals; 129.84 lane miles of Collectors, and 241.91 lane miles of Residential roads. There
are also nine (9) bridges in Kent. A complete assessment of transportation facilities is considered
in the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan
' anticipated in 2004. Figure 9.1 and 9 3 found in the Transportation Element illustrates Kent's
transportation facilities.
PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE
' Most of Kent's residential areas are served by the Kent School District No. 415. The Renton
School District serves students from an area of Kent near the north city limits, and Kent students
residing along the western city limits attend Federal Way Schools or Highline Schools. Kent
' students residing along the southern city limits might attend Auburn Schools. Most school districts
also have historically considered acceptance of transfer requests or waivers for students residing in
households located outside of district boundaries. Detailed inventories of school district capital
facilities and levels-of-service are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) of each school
district. The CFPs of the Kent, Auburn and Federal Way School Districts have been adopted as
' part of the City's Capital Facilities Element. Updates of the CFPs of these three (3) districts reflect
changes in their CIPs, and school impact fees assessed on residential development within Kent are
adopted annually. CFPs for other school districts serving Kent households are incorporated by
reference, although no school impact fees are collected by these school districts for residential
development within Kent. Estimated total student enrollment figures of Kent's Planning Area
households for each school district are provided in the Table 8.7 below.
' Locations of schools within the Kent School District and the boundaries of other school districts
serving Kent's Planning Area are illustrated in Figure 8.6.
Table 8.7
' ESTIMATED STUDENT ENROLLMENT
Kent Auburn Federal Highline Renton
' School School Way School School
District District School District District
District
' Estimated Total Kent
Planning Area Resident 16,909 108 1,912 314 56
Student Enrollment
' Capital Facilities 8-29
PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE '
The City of Kent is served by the King County Library System in the 22,500 square foot Kent
Library building at 212 2nd Avenue West, which was built in 1992. Replacement of a portion of
the roofing for the Kent Library is anticipated to occur during the next ten years. The King County
Library System is planning to develop 10,000 square feet of library space in the East Hill area,
pending passage of a bond measure scheduled tentatively for March 2004, The Covington Library '
facility, which serves many Kent East Hill residents,would also become the largest library in South
King County after a planned 15,000 square foot expansion. Detailed information regarding the
King County Library System is available on the internet at www.kcls.org. '
Location of the Kent Library building and King County libraries located in proximity to Kent's
Planning Area are illustrated in Figure 8.6. '
Capital Facilities 8-30 '
' CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN COSTS & REVENUES
The following section outlines the capital costs and financing for the public facilities which are
' provided by the City of Kent per the most recent Capital Improvement Program (CIP) (see Figure
8.7 and Table 8.8). This type of information for the Kent,Auburn and Federal Way School districts
is available in the districts' capital facilities plans, which have been adopted by reference as part of
the Capital Facilities Element.
Figure 8.7
2004 -2009 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
PROJECT COST STATISTICS
(In 000's)
Transportation
18%
' Utility Fund Projects
35% -r '- Public Safety
8%
Parks, Recreation&
General Government Community Seances
21% 18%
1
' Table 8.8
2004-2009 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
Projects 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
Transportation 11,220 2,804 1,521 2,599 2,768 1,853 22,765
Public Safety 80 240 9,745 200 200 200 10,665
Parks,Recreation 3,891 2,789 5,595 3,568 3,323 3,796 22,962
' &Community Services
General Government 1,010 985 8,047 954 11,093 4,637 26,726
Utility Fund Projects 1,737 10,063 4,229 6,122 21,593 2,647 46,392
Total Projects 17,938 16,881 29,137 13,443 38,977 13,133 129,510
' Not included in this plan:
Estimated$40,000,000 voted bond issue for Public Safety
' Capital Facilities 8-33
FINANCING '
The revenue sources that are available to the City of Kent for capital facilities include taxes, fees
and charges, and grants. Title 3 of the Kent City Code, Revenue & Finance, specifies the '
collection and allocation of revenue sources. Some sources of revenue for capital facilities can also
be used for operating costs. A comprehensive list of revenue sources and a discussion of
limitations on the use of each revenue source is contained in the Capital Improvement Program '
(CIP). Existing City revenues are not forecast, nor are they diverted to capital expenditures from
maintenance and operations.
The financing plan for these capital improvements includes the revenues listed in the pie chart ,
below(see Figure 8.8 and Table 8.9). The chart lists the major categories of Capital Improvement
Projects (CIP)revenue sources and the amount contributed by each source. ,
Detailed project lists and financing plans are contained in the Capital Improvements Program
(CIP). As noted earlier, annual updates to the CIP and City Budget Document are incorporated by ,
reference into this Capital Facilities Element.
Figure 8.8 L
2004—2009 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SOURCES OF FUNDS ,
(In 000's)
Other ,
PW Trust Sources Capital
Fund Loan 2% Inpro�ement Fund
8% 10% Street Fund '
7%
a-�x
- Utility Funds
18%
k
Bond Proceeds
41°/u • Internal Sennce
Funds
Grants 4%
Capital Facilities 8-34 ,
' Table 8.9
SOURCES OF CIP FUNDS
Sources of Funds 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
Capital hnpiovementPund 2,191 2,219 2,280 2,293 2,353 1,927 13,263
1 Street Fund 1,320 1,804 1,521 1,399 1,468 1,203 8,715
Utility Funds 1,737 8,563 2,979 6,122 2,593 1,397 23,392
Internal Semce Funds 745 765 940 734 873 667 4,724
' Grants 1,225 470 2,440 1,555 1,050 L200 7,940
Bond Proceeds 18,737 29,000 5,000 52,737
PW Trust Fund Loan 9,000 1,500 500 11,000
Other Funding Sources 1,720 1,560 240 840 1,640 1,739 7,739
Total Sources of Funds 17,938 16,881 29,137 13,443 38,977 13,133 129,51[0
Not included in this plan:
Estimated$40,000,000 voted bond issue for Public Safety
1
' Capital Facilities 8-35
PUBLIC SERVICES & CAPITAL FACILITIES GOALS AND POLICIES '
GENERAL GOALS & POLICIES
Goal CF-1:
As the City of Kent continues to grow and develop, ensure that an adequate supply and range of
public services and capital facilities are available to provide satisfactory standards of public
health, safety, and quality of life
Policy CF-1.1: Assess impacts of residential, commercial and employment growth on
public services and facilities in a manner consistent with adopted levels-of-service. ,
Policy CF-1.2: Ensure that public services and capital facilities needs are addressed in '
updates to Capital Facilities Plans and Capital Improvement Programs, and development
regulations as appropriate
Policy CF-1.3: To ensure financial feasibility,provide needed public services and facilities
that the City has the ability to fiend, or that the City has the authority to require others to
provide
Policy CF-1.4: Periodically review the Land Use Element to ensure that public services '
and capital facilities needs, financing and levels-of-service of the Capital Facilities
Element are consistent and adequate to serve growth where it is desired '
Policy CF-1.5: Coordinate the review of non-City managed capital facilities plans to ,
ensure consistency with the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan
Goal CF-2:
Base standards for levels-of-service upon the appropriate provision of public services and facilities
as outlined in the operating comprehensive plans of the City and other providers of services and '
facilities to Kent and its Potential Annexation Area
Policy CF-2.1: Establish levels-of-service appropriate to the core mission of City '
departments in their provision of services and access offacilities to the public. '
Policy CF-2.2: When appropriate and beneficial to the City, its citizens, businesses, and
customers, pursue national organizational accreditation for all City of Kent agencies
providing public services and facilities. Such accreditation should be linked with
performance standards applied by City agencies. ,
Capital Facilities 8-36 ,
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-3:
Encourage effective non-capital alternatives to maintain or improve adopted levels-of-service.
Such alternatives could include programs for community education and awareness, energy
' conservation, or integration of methods and technologies to improve service delivery
Goal CF-4:
Ensure that appropriate funding sources are available to acquire or bond for the provision of
needed public services and facilities.
' POLICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES GOALS & POLICIES
Goal CF-5:
Ensure that residents, visitors and businesses in Kent continue to feel safe throughout our
community
Policy CF-5.1: Establish, maintain, and monitor effective .services and programs with the
goal of increasing the sense of safety throughout our community Such services and
programs should be consistent with other Comprehensive Plan goals and pohctes
' Goal CF-6:
Establish, maintain and strengthen community relationships through direct contact opportunities,
' community awareness, education and volunteer programs.
' Policy CF-6.1: Establish and maintain direct contact between representatives of the Police
Department and concerned citizens, community groups, schools, business operators, local
media, and human services providers
Policy CF-6.2: Establish and maintain community education programs that promote the
awareness of public safety, community-based crime prevention, domestic violence
prevention, alcohol and substance abuse, and available human services for impacted
populations
Policy CF-6.3: Establish and maintain volunteer programs that meet the Police
Department objectives of increasing community awareness, involvement, public safety, and
crime prevention
Capital Facilities 8-37
Goal CF-7: ,
Maintain responsive, quality patrol service throughout Kents service area and other areas
requiring response capability assistance ,
Policy CF-7.1: Consider average response times as a level-of-service measure in
assessing needs for patrol service improvements. '
Policy CF-7.2: Maintain or improve annually-calculated average response times to ,
emergency calls, where potential loss of life or confirmed hazards exist.
Policy CF-7.3: Maintain or improve annually-calculated average response times to non- ,
emergency calls, where no immediate danger or potential loss of l fe is indicated
Policy CF-7.4: Coordinate with the City Information Technology Department and the ,
Valley Communications Center to improve response times.
Policy CF-7.5: Periodically evaluate the effectiveness of existing patrol practices, and
research best practices as appropriate. ,
Policy CF-7.6: Provide staff training as needed to incorporate best practices that will '
improve responsiveness ofpatrol services
Policy CF-7.7: To improve long-term patrol service effectiveness, work with various ,
members of the community to improve staff awareness of localized issues and community
resources '
Goal CF-8:
Provide effective and professional investigation services
Policy CF-8.1: Consider annually-calculated crime clearance rates as a level-of-service '
measure in assessing needs for patrol service improvements
Policy CF-8.2: Maintain or improve annually-calculated Part I crime clearance rates,
which is a measure of the rate of arrests or clearances for reported crimes ,
Policy CF-8.3: Periodically evaluate the effectiveness of existing investigations practices, ,
and research best practices as appropriate.
Policy CF-8.4: Provide staff training as needed to incorporate best practices that will ,
improve responsiveness of investigations services.
Capital Facilities 8-38 '
Policy CF-8.5: To improve long-term investigations service effectiveness, work with
various members of the community to improve staff awareness of localized issues and
community resources.
Goal CF-9:
Provide effective corrections services that protect the community and reduce repeat offenses among
corrections clients.
' Policy CF-9.1: Coordinate with the Kent Municipal Court to ensure appropriate
correctional processes and facilities are available for criminal offenders.
Policy CF-9.2: Maintain or improve facilities available for the incarceration of criminal
offenders If additional facilities capacity is necessary, coordinate with other agencies to
Ilocate and provide appropriate facilities for the purposes of incarceration
Policy CF-9.3: Establish and maintain effective alternative s to incarceration for lesser
criminal offenses.
Policy CF-9.4: Periodically evaluate the effectiveness of existing corrections practices,
and research best practices as appropriate
' Policy CF-9.5: Provide staff training as needed to incorporate best practices that will
improve responsiveness of corrections services
Policy CF-9.6: Acquire and maintain accreditation through the American Corrections
' Association.
' FIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICES GOALS & POLICIES
Goal CF-10:
Ensure that residents, visitors and businesses in Kent continue to feel safe and prepared for
emergency response throughout our community
Policy CF-10.1: Establish, maintain, and monitor effective services and programs with the
goal of increasing the sense of life safety and emergency preparedness throughout our
community Such services and programs should be consistent with other Comprehensive
Plan goals and policies
Capital Facilities 8-39
Goal CF-11: Establish, maintain and strengthen community relationships through direct contact ,
opportunities, community awareness, education and volunteer programs
Policy CF-11.1: Establish and maintain direct contact between representatives of the Fire '
Department and concerned citizens, community groups, schools, business operators,
developers and building contractors, local media, and human services providers
Policy CF-11.2: Establish and maintain community education programs that promote the !
awareness of life safety,fire prevention, hazardous materials, and available human services
for impacted populations of emergency events. !
Goal CF-12:
Promote an understanding that preventative measures and appropriate responses to emergency
events are a critical factor in limiting the extent of impacts resulting from an initial event.
Goal CF-13: !
Establish and maintain responsive, quality fire and life hazard prevention services throughout
Kent's service area and other areas. !
Policy CF-13.1: Maintain or improve the level of confidence citizens have in their ability !
to respond to personal or household emergencies
Policy CF-13.2: Maintain or improve the level of confidence citizens have in their ability !
to respond to natural or man-made disasters that could impact their community.
Policy CF-13.3: Periodically evaluate the effectiveness of existing fire and life hazard
prevention practices, and research best practices as appropriate.
Policy CF-13.4: Provide staff training as needed to incorporate best practicer that will '
improve responsiveness offire and life hazardprevention services.
Policy CF-13.5: To improve long-term fire and life hazard prevention service effectiveness, ,
work with various members of the community to improve staff awareness of localized issues
and community resources ,
Goal CF-14:
Provide effective, efficient, equitable and professional fire suppression and emergency medical
response services throughout the City of Kent Fire Department service area.
Capital Facilities 8-40
r
' Policy CF-14.1: Consider the response time percentage as the primary level-of-service
measure in assessing needs for fire suppression and emergency medical response service
improvements
Policy CF-14.2: Maintain or improve the level-of-service to emergency calls, where fire or
' other community safety hazards are reported to exist
' Policy CF-14.3: Maintain or improve the level-of-service to personal emergency medical
calls, where no immediate danger exists to the community-at-large.
' Policy CF-14.4: Periodically evaluate the effectiveness of existing fire suppression and
emergency medical response service practices, and research best practices as appropriate
Policy CF-14.5: Provide staff training as needed to incorporate best practices that will
improve responsiveness of fire suppression and emergency medical response services.
' Policy CF-14.6: To improve long-term fire suppression and emergency medical response
service effectiveness, work with various members of the community to improve staff
awareness of localized issues and community resources.
t
PARKS, RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES
GOALS & POLICIES
The goals, policies and levels-of-service (LOS) appropriate to the services provided by the Parks,
Recreation and Community Services Department are contained in the Park & Open Space;
Housing; and Human Services Elements of this Comprehensive Plan.
PUBLIC UTILITIES SERVICES GOALS AND POLICIES
rGoal CF-15:
Ensure that public utilities services throughout the City, its Potential Annexation Area (NA) and
other areas receiving such services are adequate to accommodate anticipated growth without
significantly degrading the levels-of-service for existing customers
Policy CF-15.1: Establish, maintain, and monitor effective provision of public utilities
services and facilities.
Policy CF-15.2: Coordinate the planning and provision of public utilities services and
' facilities with other agencies providing such services to Kent and PAA homes and
businesses
Capital Facilities 8-41
r
Policy CF-15.3: Consider existing demand units in assessing levels-of-service for future r
provision ofservices and facilities
r
Goal CF-16:
Foster recognition of the significant role played by natural features and systems in the appropriate '
siting, design and provision of public utility services.
Policy CF-16.1: Educate City staff, developers, and other citizens on the interaction r
between natural features and systems, such as wetlands, streams, and geologically
hazardous areas, and the provision ofpublic utility services '
Goal CF-17: '
Coordinate with individuals and organizations to create a long-term, sustainable strategy for local
and regional natural resource protection
Policy CF-17.1: Continue to evaluate operating plans, programs, regulations, and public
facility designs to determine their effectiveness in contributing to the conservation and ,
recovery ofspecies listed under the Endangered Species Act.
Policy CF-17.2: Continue to participate in regional and Water Resource Inventory Area r
planning efforts to support the conservation of listed species. ,
Policy CF 17.3: Continue to participate in local and county wide flood control efforts to
support the repair and maintenance offlood control facilities.
Goal CF-18:
Support environmental quality in capital improvement programs, implementation programs, and '
public facility designs to ensure that local land use management and public service provision is
consistent with the City's overall natural resource goals.
Policy CF-18.1: Protect and enhance environmental quality via maintenance of accurate ,
and zip-to-date environmental data associated with public services and facilities
Policy CF-18.2: Provide public service agencies with general and site-specific r
environmental information to identify possible on and off-site constraints and special
development procedures as early in the facility planning process as is possible.
r
Capital Facilities 5-42
' Policy CF-18.3: Indemnify the Ciry from damages resulting from development in naturally
constrained areas. To the extent possible or feasible, require accurate and valid
environmental Information.
Policy CF-18.4: Continue a periodic storm drainagelenvironmental inspection program to
ensure constant maintenance and upkeep of storm systems and on-going compliance with
' general environmental processes.
' Policy CF-18.5: Ensure that decisions regarding fundamental site design are made prior
to the initiation of land surface modifications Grade and fill permits, which do not Include
site development plans, may be issued by the City where such activities do not disturb
sensitive areas, such as wetlands
1 Policy CF-18.6: Require site restoration if land surface modification violates adopted
policy or if development does not ensue within a reasonable period of tame.
Policy CF-18.7: As additional land is annexed to the City, assign zoning designations,
plan for appropriate public fatalities locations and capacities an a manner that will protect
natural resources and environmentally sensitive areas
' Policy CF-18.8: Continue to support waste reduction and recycling programs in City
fatalities, and In the Cary at large, to meet State and County waste reduction and recycling
goals
1 Policy CF-18.9: Work cooperatively with tribal, federal, state and local jurisdictions, as
well as major stakeholders, to conserve and work towards recovery of ESA listed
Ithreatened and endangered species
Goal CF-19:
' Protect and enhance natural resources for multiple benefits, including recreation,fish and wildlife
resources and habitat,flood protection, water supply, and open space.
' Policy CF-19.1: Maintain the quantity and quality of wetlands via current land use
' regulation and review, and increase the quality and quantity of the City's wetlands resource
base via incentives and advance planning
Capital Facilities 8-43
Policy CF-19.2: Protect wetlands not as isolated units, but as ecosystems, and essential
elements of watersheds Base protection measures on wetland functions and values, impact
on water supply quality and quantity, and the effects of on-site and off-site activities '
Policy CF-19.2: nen jurisdictional boundaries are involved coordinate wetland ,
protection and enhancement plans and actions with adjacent jurisdictions and the
Muckleshool Indian Tribe
Policy CF-19.3: Maintain rivers and.streams in their natural.state Rehabilitate degraded
channels and banks via public programs and in conjunction with proposed new ,
development.
Policy CF-19.4: On a regular basis, evaluate the adequacy of the existing public facilities
operating plans, regulations and maintenance practices in relation to goals for water j
resource and fisheries and wildlife resource protection When necessary, mods these
plans, regulations and practices to achieve resource protection goals
Policy CF-19.5: Protect the quality and quantity ofgroundwater used for water supply.
Policy CF-19.6: Update the City of Kent Critical Areas Maps as new information about
aquifer recharge areas and wellhead protection areas becomes available ,
Policy CF-19.7: In accordance with GMA regulations, update public facilities operating
plans and regulations to identify, protect, and preserve wildlife species and areas of local
significance.
Policy CF-19.8: Protect the habitat of native and migratory wildlife by encouraging open
space conservation of beneficial habitat through public capital improvement projects.
Goal CF-20: '
Ensure that public facilities development on lands adjacent to the shorelines of the Green River are
compatible with shoreline uses and resource values, and support the goals and policies of the City
of Kent's Shoreline Master Program ,
Policy CF-20.1: Minimize the loss of vegetation with development and operation of new
public facilities. Continue to recognize the value of trees and other vegetation in protecting
water quality.
Capital Facilities 8-44
Policy CF-20.2: Promote and support a systematic approach to enhancing the City-owned
facilities through carefully planned plantings and ongoing maintenance of street trees,
" public landscaping, and greenbelts Require the use of native and low water use
vegetation.
Policy CF-20.3: Require protection of ecologically valuable vegetation, when possible,
during all phases of public facilities development In cases where development necessitates
the removal of vegetation, require an appropriate amount of native or low water use
landscaping to replace trees, shrubs, and ground cover, which were removed during
development
Policy CF-20.4: Record and protect established greenbelts associated with public facilities
to preserve existing natural vegetation in geologically hazardous areas, along stream
banks, wetlands, and other habitat areas, and where visual buffers between uses or
Iactivities are desirable
Goal CF-21:
' Regulate development of public facilities in environmentally critical areas to prevent harm, to
protect public health and safety, to preserve remaining critical areas, and enhance degraded
critical areas in the City
Policy CF-21.1: Encourage appropriate enhancement of existing environmental features
such as rivers, streams, creeks, and wetlands
Goal CF-22:
' Implement and maintain a stormwater management program that assures compliance with the
requirements of the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit which is part of
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Program administered by the Washington State
Department of Ecology.
' Policy CF-22.1: Reduce the discharge ofpollutants to the maximum extentpracticable.
' Policy CF-22.2: Use all known, available, and reasonable methods of prevention, control
and treatment to prevent and control pollution of waters of the state of Washington.
Policy CF-22.3: Implement an education program aimed at residents, businesses,
industries, elected officials, policy makers, planning staff and other employees of the City.
The goal of the education program is to reduce or eliminate behaviors and practices that
cause oi-contribute to adverse stormwater impacts.
' Capital Facilities 8-45
Policy CF-22.4: Provide ongoing opportunities for public involvement through advisory
councils, watershed committees, participation in developing rate-structures, stewardship
programs, environmental activities or other similar activities '
Policy CF-22.5: Implement an ongoing program to detect and remove illicit connections, '
discharges, and improper disposal, including any spills not under the purview of another
responding authority, into the municipal separate storm sewers owned or operated by the '
City
Policy CF-22.6: Develop, implement, and enforce a program to reduce pollutants in
stormwater runoff from new development, redevelopment and construction site activities
Policy CF-22.7: Develop and implement an operations and maintenance program that '
includes a training component and has the ultimate goal of preventing or reducing
pollutant runoff
from municipal operations
Policy CF-22.8: Develop a comprehensive long-term stormwater monitoring program ,
The monitoring program will include two components stormwater monitoring and
targeted Stormwater Management Program effectiveness monitoring.
Policy CF-22.9: Produce an annual report which includes the city' detailed Stormwater
Management Plan, tracking elements, and documentation of compliance with the Phase li
permit
Goal CF-23:
Encourage environmental sensitivity and low-impact development principles in the design and ,
construction of all projects.
Policy CF-23.1: Encourage participation in low-impact development and environmentally !
sensitive builderprograms
Policy CF-23.2: Adopt development standards that minimize environmental impacts of '
development through an appropriate balance of regulations and incentives Incentives '
could be tied to compliance with criteria applied throughout the development process.
Policy CF-23.3: Set public facility projects of the City as an example by incorporating '
techniques of low-impact development design, construction, operation and maintenance
Goal CF-24:
Capital Facilities 8-46
' Promote Low-Impact Development and limited disturbance of natural hydrological systems, so that
water quantity and quality are protected throughout the development process and occupation of the
site
Policy CF-24: Establish site design criteria for allowing natural hydrological systems to
function with minimum or no modification
Policy CF-24.2: Promote the use of rain gardens, open ditches or swales, and pervious
driveways and parking areas in site design to maximize infiltration of stormwater and
minimize runoff into environmentally critical areas.
Policy CF-24.3: Promote inclusion of passive rainwater collection systems in site and
' architectural design for non potable water (gray-water) storage and use, thereby saving
potable (drinking) water for ingestion
Goal CF-25:
Provide water to the Citys existing customers and for fiiture development consistent with the short
and long range goals of the City
IPolicy CT-25.1: Maintain a constant supply of municipal water for existing and fiiture
customers and future development consistent with the short and long range planning goals
of the City.
Policy CF-25.2: Identify capital improvement projects needed to meet the potable water
' supply and fire protection needs of current customers and the forecast for future demand
within the areas served by the City of Kent Water System
Policy CF-25.3: Identify and implement finding mechanisms necessary to construct
capital improvement projects to meet existing and fiiture system requirements and projected
growth.
Policy CF-25.4: Implement a maintenance program to ensure the system is operated as
efficiently as possible Utilize the City's Infrastructure Management System to 1) track
system component inventory, 2) record maintenance history and 3) produce preventative
maintenance work schedules for the water system infrastructure.
Policy CF-25.5: Ensure system capacity (i.e. sources, pump stations transmission mains,
etc) is sufficient to meet current and projected peak day demand and fire flow
conditions
Capital Facilities 8-47
Policy CF-25.6: Seek to meet future supply needs with existing and new sources of supply '
under the City ownership or partnering
Policy CF-25.7: Maintain an efficient water supply system through the identification and !
repair of distribution leakage and other water system losses, and reducing other system
water uses as they are proven cost effective.
Goal CF-26:
Protect public health and safety by providing an adequate supply of high quality water to the Citys
customers The City will pursue steps to ensure that it will continue to meet or exceed all water
quality laws and standards
Policy CF-26.1: Maintain a stringent water quality monitoring and cross-connection ,
control program consistent with current federal and state drinking water regulations
Policy CF-26.2: Maintain adequate water supply and infrastructure to meet water system
needs and fare flow demands throughout the areas served by the City
Policy CF-26.3: Utilize reasonable measures to protect the water system and the water
quality and quantity provided to customers Give priority to those security improvements
identified as being the most critical or those providing the most cost effective benefit to the
water system
Policy CF-26.4: Develop and maintain an emergency response plan to eliminate or reduce
the significant impacts to customers and the water system in the event of an emergency. '
Policy CF-26.5: Ensure staff are continuously available to respond to water system issues
and emergencies
Goal CF-27:
The City of Kent recognizes a clean water supply as a critical and finite resource and will secure
the health and safety of the customers through protection of existing and future groundwater '
resources from contamination
Policy CF-27.1: Participate in regional efforts to protect groundwater resources including
but not limited to the South King County Groundwater Committee.
Policy CF-27.2: Establish a groundwater monitoring network for early detection of
potential contamination in aquifers
Capital Facilities 8 48
1 Policy CF-27.3: Notify all applicable regulatory and emergency response agencies of the
Citys Wellhead Protection Areas.
tPolicy CF-27.4: Track and provide comments on land use applications within wellhead
protection areas Follow upon all of those identified as creating potential risk to the water
supply until protections are in place or are determined to not affect the water system
' Policy CF-27.5: Identify and track parcels of land identified as potential contaminant
sources in the Wellhead Protection Program Provide comments to applicable regulatory
agencies related to the protection and sustainability of the City's groundwater resources
Policy CF-27.6: Educate residents, businesses and the owners of identified potential
contaminant sources in wellhead protection areas about aquifer protection
Policy CF-27.7: Encourage the use of Best Management Practices in land management
activities to reduce the use ofpesticides and fertilizers
Policy CF-27.8: Promote the use of native landscaping to reduce the need for pesticide
and fertilizer application
Goal CF-28: Maintain the economic vitality of the City by ensuring adequate water supply is
I available to meet existing and future customer needs, and future development as projected to meet
the short and long range goals of the City.
Goal CF-29: Meet Water Use Efficiency Goals and implement additional water conservation
measures to ensure the efficient use of water resources.
IPolicy CF-29.1: Implement, evaluate and monitor measures to meet the City's adopted
Water Use Efficiency Goals.
Policy CF-29.2: Develop and implement on-going educational activities regarding
water conservation as identified in the Water System Plan This includes but is not
limited to the annual Water Festival, speaking at public forums and classrooms, booths
at fairs and theme shows, utility billing inserts, natural yard care programs and utilizing
the City's website
Policy CF-29.3: Provide rebates for low water use toilets and washing machines as
they apply to the Water Use Efficiency Goals
Policy CF-29.4: Promote the use of native and drought resistant plants in landscaping
in public and private projects to reduce the need for irrigation
Policy CF-29.5: Include consumptive water use data on customer bills to encourage
water conservation
Capital Facilities 8-49
Policy CF-29.6: Develop and implement a water rate structure that promotes the '
efficient use of water
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES & FACILITIES '
GOALS & POLICIES ,
The goals, policies and levels-of-service (LOS) related to the provision of transportation services
and facilities are contained in the Transportation Element of this Comprehensive Plan and the
future Comprehensive Transportation Plan to be completed in 2004.
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES GOALS & POLICIES
The City of Kent has established siting criteria for essential public facilities, which are defined by ,
the State in RCW 36.70A.200(1) to "include those facilities that are typically difficult to site, such
as airports, state education facilities and state or regional transportation facilities as defined in
RCW 47.06.140, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient
facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure
community transition facilities as defined in RCW 71.09.020." The following goals and policies
reaffirm Kent's commitment to a fair process for locating such facilities
Goal CF-30:
The City .shall participate in a cooperative inter jurisdictional process to determine siting of
essential public facilities of a county-wide, regional, or state-wide nature
Policy CF-30.1: Proposals for siting essential public facilities within the City of Kent or
within the City's growth boundary shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's
Comprehensive Plan during the initial stages of the proposal process.
Policy CF-30.2: When warranted by the special character of the essential facility, the City '
shall apply the regulations and criteria of Kent Zoning Code Section 15 04150, Special use
combining district, to applications for siting such facilities to insure adequate review,
including public participation Conditions of approval, including design conditions,
conditions, shall be imposed upon such uses in the interest of the welfare of the City and the '
protection of the environment
Capital Facilities 8-50
' Policy CF-30.3: In the principally permitted or conditional use sections of the zoning
code, the City shall establish, as appropriate, locations and development standards for
essential public facilities which do not warrant consideration through the special use
combining district regulations Such facilities shall include but not be limited to small
inpatient facilities and group homes
Goal CF-31:
The City shall participate in a cooperative inter jurisdictional process to resolve issues of
mitigation for any disproportionate financial burden which may fall on the jurisdiction which
becomes the site of a factlity of a state-wide, regional or county-wide nature.
Capital Facilities 8-51
City of Kent
Parks and Human Services Committee Meeting
KEN Minutes of April 15, 2010
W'.HI.�...
Council Committee Members Present: Chair Debbie Ranniger, Elizabeth
Albertson and Dennis Higgins
Debbie Ranniger called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m.
1. Minutes of March 18, 2010 - Approve
Elizabeth Albertson moved to approve the minutes of March 18, 2010. Dennis
Higgins seconded. The motion passed 3-0.
2. King County Grant Agreement for Safe Havens Services — Accept
Katherin Johnson, Manager of Housing and Human Services announced that
Safe Havens has a group working for them called "Friends of Safe Havens."
They are trying to raise funds to bridge the gap, as well as locating a non-
profit organization to operate the facility. Katherin added that there is only
enough money to get through the end of April, and this county grant will not
Ibe spent until May, unless bridge funding is received.
Jeff complimented the "Friends of Safe Havens" and staff for their
1 commitment in trying to locate funding to fill the funding gap for this year,
and looking for a fiscal sponsor that will allow Safe Havens to begin applying
for other human services funding through other municipalities.
Katherin shared information on supporters who are volunteering many hours
to find support. She explained the impact this closure has, not only on the
clients, but the entire region, as well as the staff who have been a part of the
facility for the past five years. Katherin stated that in order to keep it open
until the end of 2010, $100,000 is needed. If $50,000 is located by the end
of April, the center can operate until the other $50,000 is donated. A fiscal
agent is applying to as many cities as possible for funding.
Dennis Higgins moved to recommend accepting the King County WA,
Domestic Violence Grant of $10,000 to fund Safe Havens services, and
approving the expenditure of funds in the Safe Havens budget. Elizabeth
Albertson seconded. The motion passed 3-0.
3. 4Culture Grant Contract for Fourth of July Splash - Authorize
1 4Culture has awarded the Kent Arts Commission $6,500.00 to preserve arts
jobs through a competitive grant process. The funding comes through
4Culture from the National Endowment for the Arts distribution of American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. The money will allow professional
1
performers to be restored at the Kent's Fourth of July Splash festival at Lake
Meridian Park in 2010.
Elizabeth Albertson moved to recommend accepting the $6,500.00 grant '
from 4Culture to restore professional performances at the 2010" Fourth of
July Splash," and authorizing the . The motion passed 3-0.
4. Kent Station Sponsorship Agreement for 2010 Summer Concert
Performance - Authorize
Kent Station will sponsor the city's Take-Out Tuesday concerts in 2010. The
$6,000.00 will cover artistic fees and offset other expenses associated with
producing the concerts.
Dennis Higgins moved to recommend accepting the $6,000.00 sponsorship
from Kent Station to partially fund summer concert performances, and
authorizing the expenditure of funds in the Arts Commission budget.
Elizabeth Albertson seconded. The motion passed 3-0.
5. Park and Open Space Plan - Adopt
Jeff reported that the plan update process is an opportunity to re-examine
our vision for Kent Parks and prioritize our next steps for the short and long j
term future. It analyzes the most recent census information, provides an
updated park and open space inventory, updates level of service and goals
and policies and recommends long and short term capital projects. The plan
includes the four core themes previously discussed: Kent's Legacy, Athletic
Fields, Green Kent and Connectivity, and will be used to direct future
development, acquisition and renovation of parks and open spaces. Since
reviewing the draft plan with the Committee in January, it has been before
the Land Use and Planning Board on January 11, 2010 for workshop and on
March 8, 2010 for a pubic hearing. The Land Use and Planning Board voted
to recommend approval of the Park and Open Space Plan.
Jeff added that maps have been completed and incorporated into the plan,
broken down into three categories: Parks and Facilities, Implementation of
Short and Long Term Implementation, and a Connectivity Map relating to
trails, biking and paths. In addition, the Parks & Open Space Element and the
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan has been updated to
ensure consistency. Pursuant to the Growth Management Act, the Parks &
Open Space Plan must be incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan in ,
order for it to be used as a policy document for implementation purposes.
Elizabeth Albertson moved to recommend adopting the proposed ordinance
which adopts the Park and Open Space Plan and amends the Park and Open
Space Element and Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Dennis Higgins seconded. The motion passed 3-0.
6. Resource Center Building - Informational
2
t
1 Jeff explained that, as part of the 2010 Budget, all programs and staff from
the Resource Center were recommend to be consolidated to Kent Commons.
Office space was completed and will move at the end of the month. The
program space modifications will be completed in early May. Scheduling will
continue at the Resource Center until the programming space is completed.
The city now has the opportunity to explore short and long term options for
what to do with the Resource Center. No committee action was required. Jeff
Watling introduced options to consider: selling the property, or leasing the
building. The committee's initial response is to lease the building and not sell
it because of the poor real estate market. Jeff will proceed with the process
of leasing the building for a short-term solution, until a long-term decision
can be made in the future.
7. First Quarter Reports - Informational
Jeff Watling, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services,
highlighted some services from the first quarter of 2010. Kent Commons,
Facilities staff and Resource Center staff have transitioned into the
consolidation at Kent Commons very smoothly. Facilities has done an
incredible job of renovating the office and program space.
Human Services has the CDBG application process on line. The regional
affiliates partnered with eGov Alliance, a county-wide group to have the
process solely on line now. It not only helps staff on the review and report
side, but the applicants can submit one application to numerous local
funding.
There were 1,300 visits to the Youth/Teen Community Center at Phoenix
Academy.
I The Riverbend Golf Complex RFP for the restaurant closed on April 12, with
seven proposals submitted. Five will be interviewed next week. Staff will
bring the contract to Council in May. Rocco's Salsa Dogs is currently
providing food at the golf course.
In the Contributions Report, approximately $27,000 were received in
contributions for the first quarter of 2010. The majority of donations went to
Cultural and Recreation Division. These numbers are a testament of the
loyalty of our participants.
S. 2010 Budaet - Informational
Jeff asked the Committee for any specific questions or discussion he can
have in preparation for the budget workshop that night. Dennis Higgins
asked about the temporary transfer of the 5% sales tax revenue from CIP to
the General Fund. He asked what projects would be impacted. Jeff responded
that the impact would be to lifecycle projects within facilities capital projects.
Jeff will obtain details of what projects would be deferred for the workshop.
3
i
Elizabeth asked to discuss the elimination of the subsidy to the lunch
program at the Senior Center. Jeff responded that, as part of the contract
with Consolidated Food Management, Inc., the lunch program is a fee-based
program with a per day minimum. Often the minimum is not met, and the
city has to pay for them. The vendor has been approached to adjust the daily
minimum. Panera Bread has been catering lunches on Wednesdays. They are
pulling out because they can't lower their prices any further to help with the
subsidy. Staff is pursuing an arrangement with Los Agaves, a local Mexican
Restaurant, who can serve all kinds of cuisines. Staff will continue to pursue
additional local restaurants for lunch partnerships.
9. Director's Report
Cheryl dos Remedios, Visual Arts Coordinator, announced that that Mill Creek
Canyon Earthworks Park is one of 15 Puget Sound landmarks selected to
compete for $1,000,000 in preservation funding through the American
Express Foundation and National Trust for Historic Preservation. This is a
community participation donation. We get $5,000.00 for playing and could
get as much as $125,000 for the park. You can vote every day on the
following site until May 121 First you must be registered. Then, go to:
www.VoteEarthworks.com. Cheryl demonstrated how to vote and how to
invite friends on Facebook to vote.
An Earth Day event will be held Thursday, April 22 at the park from 7:00 to
8:30 p.m. with artwork viewing, music, and dance. On Saturday, April 24 is
the Earth Day clean up event.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. j
Respectfully submitted,
Ttci PetwAl I
Teri Petrole
Council Committee Secretary
4
Parks and Human Services Committee Agenda
KtNT Chair Deborah Ranniger - Elizabeth Albertson — Dennis Higgins
April 15, 2010
5:00 P.M.
No. Description Action Speaker Time Page
1
1. Approve Minutes of March 18, 2010 Yes Council 05 1
2. King County Grant Contract for Safe Havens Yes Katherin Johnson 05 5
Services - Authorize
3. 4Culture Grant Contract for Fourth of July Yes Ronda Billerbeck 05 29
Splash - Authorize
4, Kent Station Sponsorship Agreement for Yes Ronda Billerbeck 05 45
2010 Summer Concert Performances -
Authorize
5. Park and Open Space Plan - Adopt Yes Jeff Watling/ Lydia 05 51
Moorehead
6. Resource Center Building - Informational No Jeff Watling 05 175
7. First Quarter Reports - Informational No Jeff Watling 05 177
8. 2010 Budget - Informational No Jeff Watling 05 197
9. Director's Report - Informational No Jeff Watling 05 199
1 Unless otherwise noted, the Parks Committee meets at 5:00 p.m. on the 3rd Thursday of
each month in Council Chambers East,
Kent City Hall, 220 4th Avenue South,
li Kent, 98032-5895
For information, please contact the Parks, Recreation and Human Services Department at
1 (253) 856-5100. Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City
Clerk's Office at (253) 856-5725 in advance. For TDD relay service call the
Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388
KENT
WASHINGTON
CITY OF KENT
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Environmental Checklist No.: #ENV-20010-1 Project: City of Kent
#RPSA-2100015 2010 Parks & Open
Space Plan/Park & Open
Space Element Update
Description: The City of Kent has initiated a non-project environmental review
for an update to the Parks &Open Space Plan (Parks Plan) which is being incorporated
into the Kent Comprehensive Plan. The Parks Plan covers all parks within the municipal
limits of Kent as well as within Kent's Potential Annexation Area, The Parks Plan will
guide future acquisition, development and redevelopment of parks and open spaces
over the next 20 years. It examines the existing parks and open space system,
assesses needs, establishes goals and policies, identifiesiong- and short-term capital
recommendations and details funding sources. The Parks Plan lists potential
development/redevelopment projects, whose scope for environmental review will be
determined separately. The summary of the plan updates the Park &Open Space and
Capital Facilities Elements of the Kent Comprehensive Plan.
The Draft Parks &Open Space Plan can be reviewed at Kent City Hall, Planning Division,
400 West Gowe Street, Kent WA 98032 between the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (253-
856-5454), or at the City's website, www.ci.kent.wa.us/parksplanningdevelopment/
index.aspx?id=2984.
Applicant: Lydia Moorehead
City of Kent Parks Planning
220 Fourth Ave S
Kent, WA. 98032
1 Lead Agency: CITY OF KENT
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable
significant adverse Impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement
(EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review
of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead
agency. This information is available to the public on request.
r
Determination of Nonsignificance
City of Kent Draft Parks &Open Space Plan/
Park&Open Space Element Update
#ENV-2010-1/#RPSA-2100015
There is no comment period for this DNS.
X This DNS is Issued under 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not act on this
proposal for 28 days from the date of this decision; this includes a 14-day
comment period followed by a 14-day appeal period as provided by WAC 197 11
680. Comments must be submitted by March 1, 2010
Responsible Official: Charlene Anderson, AICP
Position/Title: Planning Manager/ SEPA OFFICIAL
Address: 220 S. Fourth Avenue, Kent, WA 98029- , Telephone: (2 3) 856-5454
l�//iJ{_
Dated: February 13, 20010 Signature:
q����
APPEAL PROCESS: AN APPEAL OF A DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
MUST BE MADE TO THE KENT HEARING EXAMINER WITHIN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS
FOLLOWING THE DATE OF THIS DECISION PER KENT CITY CODE 11,03.520.
CONDITIONS/MITIGATING MEASURES: NONE
jm\S:\Permit\Plan\Env\2010\2100015-20010-idns.doc
1
1
2of2
Planning Services
Location:400 W Gowe• Mail to:220 4th Avenue South • Kent,WA 98032-5895
Permit Center (253) 856-5302 FAX- (253) B56-6412
KEN T www.ci.kent.wa.us/permitcenter
WASHINGTON pia' /� mp P(� c
PLANNING SERVICES Environmental®n.. meal Checklist
mot
Application Form
Public Notice Board and
Application Fee...See Fee Schedule
Please print in black ink only.
To III-- _ - -- - - ' - taff:
CITY OF KENT PARKS
2010 PARK & OPEN SPACE
Applic PLAN/ELEMENT UPDATE KIVA #
Recei% ENV-2010-1 #RPSA-2100015 Processing Fee:
(Charlene Anderson, Planner)
A. Staff review determined that project:
Meets the categorically exempt criteria.
t �as no probable significant adverse environmental impact(s) and application should be
processed without further consideration of environmental effects
_ Has probable, significant Impact(s) that can be mitigated through conditions.
EIS not necessary.
Has probable, significant adverse environmental impact(s). An Environmental Impact
Statement will be prepared.
An Environmental Impac Statement for this project has already been prepared.
� A lia
Signature of Responsible Official Date
B. Comments:
1 C. T pe of Permit or Action equested:
�o
��,
D. Zo�nin Distric
RECEIVED
GHI-I JANI 0 6 2010 psd4008 7112/06 p I of21
Ci V OF i ENT
To be completed by Applicant:
SEPA CONTACTS AND PROFESSIONALS
Please fill out applicable boxes for all different professionals:
Applicant Business Owner (if different from property owner)
Name Name.
Company Name Company Name.
Contact Person (tN GC��4Gcr Contact Person
Address ZZd <}a-1--Aj-e ,j Address j
City State LAl Zip: yp3 Z City. State, Zip:
Phone(s) -fitt( Fax ZS gam, trJu� Phone(s) Fax
Email �YViC01� ,L1ec G1 Cr Email
Property Owner#1 Project Contact (person recerving all project communications
Owner Name if different from applicant)
Company Name
Name
Contact Person
Company Name.
Address Contact Person
Address
City. State Zip
Phone(s) Fax
City State. Zip
Email Phone(s) Fax
Email
Property Owner#2
Owner Name Building Owner (if different from property owner)
Company Name Name
Contact Person- Company Name
Address Contact Person
City State, Zip' Address
Phone(s) Fax City State Zip.
Email Phone(s) Fax*
Email
Property Owner#3 (if more than 3 property owners, use '
additional sheets) Engineer
Owner Name Company Name
Company Name* Engineer Name
Contact Person ID# Exp. Date.
Address Address:
City State Zip City. State Zip
Phone(s) Fax Phone(s) Fax
Email Email,
WHI-1 psd4008 7112106 p 2 or21
I
To be completed by Applicant:
SEPA CONTACTS AND PROFESSIONALS
Please fill out applicable boxes for all different professionals:
Engineer Consultant
Company Name Company Name
Engineer Name Engineer Name.
ID# Exp Date Contact Person.
Address Address
City State. Zip. City State- Zip:
Phone(s). Fax Phone(s) Fax
Email Email
Architect Other Professional
Company Name- Name
Engineer Name Company Name
ID#. Exp Date Contact Person
Address, ID#. Exp Date
City State Zip. Address.
Phone(s) Fax City- State. Zip
Email Phone(s) Fax
Email
Contractor
Company Name-
Engineer Name
ID#. Exp Date
Address
' City State* Zip
Phone(s): Fax
Email
Surveyor
Company Name
Engineer Name
Contact Person
Address
City, State Zip
Phone(s) Fax
Email
WHI-1 psd4008 7/12/06 p 3of21
City of Kent Planning Services
Environmental Checklist- Page 2
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT:
A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
1. Name of Project 2010 Park & Open Space Plan/ Park & Open Space Element Update
2. Name of Applicant: City of Kent
Mailing Address- 220 4'"Avenue S Kent, WA 98032 ,
Contact Person, Lydia Moorehead, Parks Planner Telephone (253) 856-5114
(Note that all correspondence will be mailed to the applicant listed above )
3. Applicant is (owner, agent, other): City of Kent Parks & Community Services Department
4 Name of Legal Owner. NA Telephone* NA
Mailing Address: NA
5. Location Give general location of proposed project (street address, nearest intersection of
streets and section, township and range).
The Park Plan covers all parks within the City of Kent's limits as well as the urban growth areas
6. Legal description and tax identification number
a. Legal description (if lengthy, attach as separate sheet):
Portions of Sections 35 and 36,Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W M , portions of Section
31, Township 23 North,Range 5 East, W. M, portions of Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 15, 23, 26,
30, 31, 32, and 35,Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M.; all of Sections 7, 8, 9, 16, 17,
18, 19, 20, 21,22, 27, 28, 29, 33, and 34, Township 22 North, Range 5 East,W M ; portions
of Sections2, 3, 10, 15, 16, 21, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 35, and 36, Township 22 North, Range 4
East,W M , and all of Sections 1, 11, 12, 13, 14, 22, and 24, Township 22 North, Range
4East, W M , in King County, Washington.
b. Tax identification number: None, Park Plan covers entire City & UGA's
7. Existing conditions: Give a general description of the property and existing improvements, size,
topography, vegetation, soil, drainage, natural features, etc (if necessary, attach a separate
sheet)
The City of Kent is the fourth largest city in King County with a population of 88,380 people
covering 29 square miles The annexation of the Panther Lake Area in July 2010 will add an
additional 24,000 people and five square miles. Kent has grown from an agricultural community
into a major industrial center for warehouse, customer service and distribution companies. Over
the past several decades Kent has developed an established network of parks, open spaces
1
City of Kent Planning Services
Environmental Checklist— Page 3
and recreation facilities totaling more than 1,300 acres In addition to providing parks and open
spaces, Kent offers a wide variety of recreation programs Kent's service goes beyond city
limits, serving the entire Kent School District and portions of the Highline and Federal Way
School Districts.
8. Site Area. The Park Plan is applicable to all areas within the City of Kent and the UGA.
Site Dimensions NA
9. Project description- Give a brief, complete description of the intended use of the property or
project including all proposed uses, days and hours of operation and the size of the project and
site (Attach site plans as described in the instructions)
The 2010 Parks & Open Space Plan will serve as a guide for future acquisition, development
and redevelopment of parks and open spaces over the next 20 years. The plan examines
Kent's existing park and open space system, assesses needs, identifies long- and short-term
capital recommendations and details potential funding sources In addition, the details of the
plan will serve as an update to Chapter 10, the Parks & Open Space Element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan Minor changes (plan references) will be made to Chapter 8, the Capital
1 Facilities Element, so that the Chapters are consistent
10. Schedule- Describe the timing or schedule(include phasing and construction dates,if possible).
rThe Plan includes short(10 year)and long-term(20 year)capital recommendations which will be
used in developing the Parks CIP, however no specific scheduling of projects are included.
Detailed schedules will be developed as part of the City's annual CIP process
11. Future Plans- Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion or further activity related to
or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain
rThe Plan will be updated periodically to meet GMA and RCO requirements and to respond to
growth or changes in circumstances
r12. Permits/Approvals• List all permits or approvals for this project from local,state,federal, or other
agencies for which you have applied or will apply as required for your proposal.
DATE
AGENCY PERMIT TYPE SUBMITTED* NUMBER STATUS**
r
r
r
*Leave blank if not submitted
**Approved, denied or pending
r
r
City of Kent Planning Services
Environmental Checklist— Page 4
13. Environmental Information- List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal
The Plan lists potential improvement projects that may require a separate environmental review.
The scope of environmental review for each project will be determined separately, as each
project progresses.
14 Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals
directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain
No.
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 5 AGENCY USE ONLY
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep
slopes, mountainous, other
The Park & Open Space Plan covers the entire city limits and urban
growth areas The city consists of a valley floor, hillsides and plateaus
on each side of the valley.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Steep slopes can be found within the study area Specific
environmental impacts to slopes would be determined prior to each
project commencing
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay,
sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural
soils, specify them and note any prime farmland
The Green River valley is partially filled by post-glacial alluvial deposits.
Three main depositional units have been identified in the subsurface.
younger alluvium, the Osceola mudflow, and older alluvium silty sand
' and gravel deposited along the margin of the Vashon stade glacier
along the western valley margin. The East and West hills are
comprised of glacial till and other glacial depositis overlying bedrock
principally consisting of tertiary sedimentary rocks
d Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
Within the city limits, there are areas with sever slopes Slope stability
would be reviewed during the environmental assessment of individual
protects.
e Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or
grading proposed. Indicate source of fill
This plan does not involve fill or grading Specific impacts will be
assessed at the time of individual project implementation
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so,
generally describe
Specific impacts will be assessed at the time of individual project
implementation
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces
after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
i
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist—Page 6 AGENCY USE ONLY
NA
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the
earth, if any.
Specific impacts will be assessed at the time of individual project
implementation.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.,
dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke)during construction and
when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give
approximate quantities if known.
Specific impacts will be assessed at the time of individual project
implementation
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
NA
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to
air, if any.
Measures will be identified at the time of each individual project
implementation.
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of
the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, salt water,
lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide
names If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
The Plan covers the entire City limits which include several
surface water bodies, however, specific environmental impacts
for individual projects will be determined at the time of project
implementation
2) Will the project require any work over,in or adjacent to(within 200
feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach
available plans
Some of the projects listed in the Parks & Open Space Plan will
be within 200 feet of surface water bodies; however, specific
environmental impacts will be determined at the time of individual
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 7 AGENCY USE ONLY
project implementation.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be
placed in or removed from surface water orwetlands and indicate
the area of the site that would be affected Indicate the source of
fill material.
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if
known.
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note
location on the site plan
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to
surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated
volume of discharge
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to
ground water? Give general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities, if known
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
Iindividual project implementation
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground
from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example. domestic
sewage, industrial, containing the following chemicals . ;
agricultural, etc) Describe the general size of the system, the
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if
applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s)
are expected to serve
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation.
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 8 AGENCY USE ONLY
c. Water Runoff(including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method
of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known)
Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters?
If so, describe
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so,
generally describe
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface,ground,and runoff
water impacts, if any:
Design of projects will confirm to City code requirements to minimize
impacts to surface, ground, and runoff water
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site•
_x_Deciduous tree* alder, maple aspen, other
x_Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
_x Shrubs
_x_Grass
_x Pasture
_x Crop or grain
_x Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush,skunk cabbage,other
_x_Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
_x_Other types of vegetation
The Plan covers the entire city which contains a wide variety of
vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 9 AGENCY USE ONLY
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of individual
project implementation
c List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Specific impacts to endangered or threatened species will be determined
at the time of each project implementation
d Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to
preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any
Landscaping for individual projects will be determined at the time of each
project
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site-
In the City and PAA, many varieties of birds and animals have been observed.
The Parks & Open Space Plan itself will not impact birds or animals Future
parks project impacts will be evaluated at the time of project implementation
Birds. hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
tMammals deer, bear, elk, beaver, other.
Fish. bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
b List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the
site
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of individual
project implementation
c Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain
The City is within the Pacific Flyway.
c. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any
Specific environmental impacts and measures to preserve wildlife will be
determined at the time of individual project implementation
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a What kinds of energy(electric, natural gas, oil,wood stove, solar)will be
used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will
be used for heating, manufacturing, etc
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 10 AGENCY USE ONLY
The Plan will not require energy, however future projects will be
evaluated at project implementation
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If so, generally describe.
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of
this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy
impacts, if any-
Specific energy conservation features will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation Generally, the Park & Open Space
Plan will work to increase the availability of alternative means to travel,
including walking and bicycling, reducing fossil fuel usage
7. Environmental Health
a Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of fire and explosion,spill, or hazardous waste, that could
occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None at this time. Specific seance requirements will be ,
determined at the time of individual project implementation.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health
hazards, if any
None at this time Specific measures will be determined at the
time of individual project implementation
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your
project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)?
Specific noise impacts will be determined at the time of individual
project implementation
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated
with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example-
traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 11 AGENCY USE ONLY
would come from the site
Specific noise impacts will be determined at the time of individual
project implementation.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any'
Specific measures will be determined at the time of individual
project implementation.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
Residential, commercial,industrial, and parks are predominant land uses
within the City
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe
Agricultural impacts will be determined at the time of individual project
implementation
d. Describe any structures on the site
The Plan is not site specific, it covers the entire City of Kent and the PAA.
e Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
No structures will be demolished as a result of the Park Plan
e What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The Plan covers the entire City and PAA and all zoning classifications.
f What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
The Plan covers the entire City and PAA and all comprehensive plan
designations
g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of
the site?
The Plan includes areas that are subject the shoreline master program.
Individual projects will consider specific shoreline master program
designations prior to implementation.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an"environmentally sensitive"
area? If so, specify.
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 12 AGENCY USE ONLY
The City and PAA include areas classified as environmentally sensitive
Specific environmental impacts will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
NA
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
NA
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
NA
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing
and projected land uses and plans, if any
The intent of the Parks & Open Space Plan is to implement parks
planning strategies consistent with the City's land use plan. As each
individual project is carried out, consistency with existing and projected
land uses will be considered prior to project implementation.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low income housing
None
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low income housing.
Specific impacts to housing will be determined at the time of individual
project implementation
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any
Measures will be determined at the time of individual project
implementation
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including
antennas; what is the principal exterior budding material(s) proposed?
The Parks Plan is a planning document. Any projects that might have ,
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 13 AGENCY USE ONLY
structures would be reviewed and evaluated at the time of project
implementation
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
The Parks Plan will not alter any views
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any.
Proposed measures will be developed if necessary during individual
project implementation.
11. Light and Glare
1 a What type of light or glare will the proposals produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur?
None. Individual projects will undergo separate environmental review.
b Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or
interfere with views?
No. Individual projects will undergo separate environmental review.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Individual projects will undergo separate environmental review
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any.
Proposed measures, if necessary, will be developed during individual
project implementation
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity?
Kent owns 1,348 acres of park and open space land throughout the City
Much of the City's parkland provides passive and active recreational
opportunities
b Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If
so, describe
The Park Plan does not intend to displace any existing recreational use It
is unlikely that the individual projects listed in the Plan would displace
existing recreational uses This would be analyzed further as each
project progresses
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR ,
Environmental Checklist—Page 14 AGENCY USE ONLY
c Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any.
It is the goal of the Parks Plan to provide adequate Parks and Open
spaces to meet the community's needs Seethe implementation strategy ,
within the Parks Plan for a list of specific projects
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state
or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so,
generally describe
The Berieter House&Mill Creek Earthworks Park are designated as local
landmarks
b Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
The Plan covers the entire City. Specific project impacts to historic sites
will be analyzed at the time of project implementation
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any.
Consistency with the historic and cultural resource goals and policies
within the Park Plan and Parks & Open Space element— Goal P&OS10
&11. Additional measures may be identified prior to individual project
implementation.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe
proposed access to the existing street system Show on site plans,if any.
The Plan covers the entire City and PAA including all streets and
highways serving these areas
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
The Plan covers the entire City and PAA including all public transit
facilities.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How
many would the project eliminate?
NA
d Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 15 AGENCY USE ONLY
existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally
describe (indicate whether public or private)
The Plan will not require new roads or street improvements Individual
project may require these improvements,which will be analyzed at project
' implementation
e Will the project use(or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water, rail,or air
transportation? If so, generally describe
The Plan will not, however individual projects may. This will be analyzed
prior to individual project implementation
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur
None. Individual project may generate additional trips, which would be
analyzed prior to project implementation
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any.
Measures would be identified prior to individual project implementation
15, Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for
example fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)?If
so, generally describe.
No Individual protects will analyze any increase in need for public
services prior to project implementation.
b Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public
services, if any
Measures will be identified prior to individual project implementation.
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site electricity, natural gas,water,
refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other
NA
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utilities
providing the service and the general construction activities on the site or
in the immediate vicinity, which might be needed.
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 16 AGENCY USE ONLY
Individual projects may require utilities. They will be identified prior to
project implementation
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I 1
understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision
Signature
Date:
i c
i
1
i
tCity of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 17 AGENCY USE ONLY
1 DO NOT USE THIS SHEET FOR PROJECT ACTIONS
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in
conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment.
jWhen answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the
types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a
greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented
Respond briefly and in general terms
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water,emission
to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances,
or production of noise?
The Park&Open Space Plan identifies potential projects for the next 10-
20 years Some of these projects may increase discharge to water,
emissions to air, and noise These will be analyzed prior to individual
project implementation
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are
Measures will be identified prior to individual project implementation.
2 How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals,fish, or marine
lifer
The Park Plan is not site specific, however individual projects listed in the
plan may affect plants, animals, fish or marine life When individual
protects are implemented, potential impacts will be analyzed.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or
' marine life?
Measures will be identified prior to individual project implementation
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The Park Plan would not deplete energy or natural resources.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources
are.
The Park Plan encourages the use of trails, greenways and corridors as
a means to access different areas of the City as an alternative to using
1 cars and fossil fuels
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally
City of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 18 AGENCY USE ONLY
sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for
governmental protection, such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic
rivers,threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,
wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Park Plan will be used over the next 10-20 years as a guide for how
we will develop and maintain parks and open spaces, many of which
include those areas described above The goals and policies contained
in the Park Plan and Parks& Open Space Element helps frame how we
will work to preserve wildlife, natural areas, habitat, greenways, historic
and cultural sites The goals and policies also include guidance on how
we will build on our current park system through acquisition of new
parkland, development of parks and redevelopment of existing parks
Specific park projects for the short-and long-term future can be found in
the implementation section of the Park Plan.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce
impacts are.
1) Adopt Green Kent, an urban forestry management program, which ,
covers Parks and Public Works land.
2) Re-invest in exiting parks and facilities so that they continue to provide
benefits to the community.
3) Explore public and private partnerships so that space and resources
are maximized
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use,
including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses
incompatible with existing plans?
The Park Plan looks at the use of existing parks and at the acquisition of
new parkland over then next 20 years for passive and active recreational
use The City has existing parks on Lake Meridian, Lake Fenwick, and
Clark Lake Existing and proposed uses either already meet or will meet
applicable land use and shoreline regulations and plans. Projects listed
in the plan will be further analyzed for consistency with existing plans
upon individual project implementation
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts
are
All projects will be reviewed for consistency with land use and shoreline
standards and plans Additional measures may be identified through
environmental review of individual projects prior to implementation
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation
or public services and utilities?
,The Plan will not increase demands for transportation or public services
I
iCity of Kent Planning Services EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Checklist— Page 19 AGENCY USE ONLY
and utilities Individual projects listed in the Plan will undergo separate
environmental review prior to protect implementation
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
Measures for individual projects may be identified prior to project
implementation
7 Identify, if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or
federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment
The Parks& Open Space Plan and Parks&Open Space Element will be
consistent with local, state and federal laws regarding the protection of
the environment Individual projects listed within the Plan will be reviewed
separately prior to project implementation.
P:\Planning\ADMIN\FORMS\SEPA\SEPA_CHECKLIST.doc (REVISED 12/08)
ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
PLANNING DIVISION
0 Fred N Satterstronn, AICP, Director
KEN
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
WASH in or >n
Phone- 253-856-5454
Fax 253-856-6454
iAddress, 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, WA 98032-5895
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REPORT
Decision Document
2010 PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLAN
CAPITAL FACILITIES AND PARK & OPEN SPACE ELEMENTSf COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ENV-2010-1, KIVA# RPSA-2100015
Charlene Anderson, AICP Responsible Official
I. PROPOSAL
The City of Kent has Initiated a non-project environmental review for an
update to the Parks & Open Space Plan (Parks Plan) which is being
incorporated into the Kent Comprehensive Plan. The Parks Plan covers all
parks within the municipal limits of Kent as well as within Kent's Potential
Annexation Area. The Parks Plan will guide future acquisition, development
and redevelopment of parks and open spaces over the next 20 years. It
examines the existing parks and open space system, assesses needs,
establishes goals and policies, identifies long- and short-term capital
recommendations and details funding sources. The Parks Plan lists potential
development/redevelopment projects, whose scope for environmental review
will be determined separately. The summary of the plan updates the Park &
Open Space and Capital Facilities Elements of the Kent Comprehensive Plan.
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Compliance with Kent's Comprehensive Plan, the Washington State Growth
Management Act (GMA), The Local Project Review Act (ESHB 1724 and ESB
6094), Kent's Design and Construction Standards (Ordinance 3927) 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 Design and Construction
Standards may require the deeding/ dedication of right-of-way for identified
improvements. Compliance with Title 11 03 and Title 11.06 of the Kent City
Code may require the conveyance of Sensitive Area Tracts to the City of Kent
in order to preserve trees, regulate the location and density of development
Decision Document
2010 Parks and Open Space Plan
Capital Facilities and Park and Open Space
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan
ENV-2010-1 RPSA-2100015
based upon known physical constraints such as steep and/or unstable slopes
or proximity to lakes, 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
The Proposal covers the entire municipal limits as well as the Potential
Annexation Area. The city consists of the Green River valley floor,
hillsides and plateaus on each side of the valley. The Green River
valley is an erosional trough of glacial origin, which is partially filled by
more than 400 feet of post-glacial alluvial deposits in the Kent area.
The East and West Hills are comprised almost entirely of glacial till and
other glacial deposits overlying bedrock.
Implementing capital projects may require fill and grading. Such
projects are subject to appropriate local, state and federal permits
which will be acquired at the time of implementation. Erosion
potential exists whenever soils are exposed. Projects will be subject to
the City of Kent standards for erosion and sedimentation controls to
minimize off-site soil transport. Specific environmental impacts and
appropriate mitigation measures will be determined at the time of
individual project implementation.
B. Air
The Proposal provides for several categories of parks and trails
accessible by foot or bicycle, helping to reduce usage of fossil fuels.
Several goals and policies included in the Proposal support a high
quality system of trails and corridors. Adoption of the Proposal is a
non-project action. Specific environmental impacts and appropriate
mitigation measures will be assessed at the time of application for
projects.
C. Water
The Proposal covers an area which Includes several surface water
bodies, including river basins, streams, lakes, and wetlands. Some of
the implementation projects will be within 200 feet of surface water
bodies. Design of projects will conform to City code requirements to
minimize impacts to surface, ground and runoff water. Some parks
incorporate storm drainage and other water features into the park
area. The Proposal includes goals and policies for preserving,
Page 2 of 5
Decision Document
1010 Parks and Open Space Plan
Capital Facilities and Park and Open Space
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan
ENV-2010-1 RPSA-2100015
protecting and acquiring environmentally sensitive areas. Specific
environmental Impacts and appropriate mitigation measures related to
water will be determined at the time of Individual project
Implementation.
D. Plants and Animals
A variety of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, grasses and
wetland plantings are present in the area covered by the plan. A
variety of birds and animals, Including Bald eagles, Chinook and Coho
salmon are known to be present within the planning area. The
Proposal includes goals and policies for developing and maintaining an
Urban Forestry Management Program, designating and conserving
critical wildlife habitat. Adoption of the Proposal is a non-project
action that is not anticipated to impact plants and animals. Specific
environmental impacts and appropriate mitigation measures related to
plants and animals will be determined at the time of individual project
implementation.
E. Noise
Noise will be generated during construction of individual park projects
and could be generated by active park use. Specific environmental
impacts and appropriate mitigation measures related to noise will be
determined at the time of individual project implementation.
F. Land and Shoreline Use
The Proposal covers the entire City and Potential Annexation Area, all
' comprehensive plan land use and zoning designations, properties
subject to the Shoreline Master Program, as well as critical areas. The
proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with
the Land Use Element, particularly in terms of planning recreational
facilities for the projected growth Adoption of the Proposal is a non-
project action that is not anticipated to have significant environmental
impacts. Implementation projects will be analyzed for compliance with
land use regulations, specific environmental impacts and appropriate
mitigation measures at the time of application.
G. Recreation
Kent currently has 1,348 acres of park and open space land, providing
passive and active recreational opportunities. The Proposal supports
maintenance of existing parks as well as acquisition or development of
new parks and open space land.
H. Historic and Cultural Preservation
The Proposal is a non-project action and includes goals and policies to
preserve, enhance and incorporate historic and cultural resources into
the park and recreational system. There are existing parks facilities
' Page 3of5
Decision Document
2010 Parks and Open Space Plan
Capital Facilities and Park and Open Space
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan
ENV-2010-1 RPSA-2100015
that are designated as local landmarks. Additional environmental
analysis will be appropriately conducted for individual implementation
projects. Should archaeological materials (e.g. bones, shell, stone
tools, beads, ceramics, old bottles, hearths, etc.) or human remains be
observed during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity
should stop. The State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation and the City should be contacted immediately in order to
help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the
resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to
archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44 and WAC 25-48) is
required.
I. 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 City addresses
the transit alternative by requiring that the Applicant accommodate
the needs for transit as expressed by King County Metro Transit.
The Proposal supports parks and trails which are accessible by foot
and bicycle as well as parks facilities accessed by transit and
automobile. Adoption of the Proposal is a non-project action that is
not anticipated to have significant environmental impacts. '
Implementation projects will include additional environmental analysis
as appropriate to assess impacts to the transportation system.
J. Public Services
The Proposal includes goals and policies encouraging creation of multi-
use parks and recreational facilities in concert with other public
agencies and service providers. Adoption of the Proposal is a non-
project action that is not anticipated to have significant environmental
impacts. Specific implementation projects will include additional
environmental analysis as appropriate to assess impacts to public
services.
K. Utilities
Utilities needed for parks projects may include electricity, natural gas,
water, telephone, sanitary sewer and refuse service. Adoption of the
Proposal is a non-project action that is not anticipated to have
significant environmental impacts. Specific implementation projects
will include additional environmental analysis as appropriate to assess
Impacts to utilities.
Page 4 of 5 '
' Decision Document
2010 Parks and Open Space Plan
Capital Facilities and Park and Open Space
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan
ENV-2010-1 RPSA-2100015
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 Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) and the Kent
Shoreline Master Program
3. Kent City Code Section 7.07 Surface Water and Drainage code
4. City of Kent Transportation Master Plan, Green River Valley
Transportation Action Plan and Six-year Transportation 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 International Building and Fire Codes
14. Kent City Code Section 15, Kent Zoning Code
15. Kent City Code Section 7.13 Water Shortage and Emergency
Regulations and Water Conservation Ordinance 2227
16. Kent City Code Sections 6.03 Improvement Plan Approval and
Inspection Fees
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. Kent City Code Chapter 11 06, Critical Areas
B. It is recommended that a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) be
issued for this non-project action.
KENT PLANNING SERVICES
February 8, 2010
CA•jm\\ S•\Permit\Plan\Env\2010\2100015decision doc
Page 5 of 5
I
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4. 2010
' Category Consent Calendar - 6H
I 1. SUBJECT: CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT, TRANSPORTATION, ORDINANCE - ADOPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adopt Ordinance No. regarding amend-
ment of the Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan to revise
' the inventory of streets and bridges and update language to reference the 2008
Transportation Master Plan.
I
I
I
I
3. EXHIBITS: Ordinance Economic & Community Development Minutes and
Agenda Packet from 4/12/10
I4. RECOMMENDED BY: Economic & Community Development Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
I5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? No Revenue? No
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
1
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
' City of Kent, Washington, amending the Capital
Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan
(CPA-2009-1(A)), relating to inventories of streets
' and bridges and the 2008 Transportation Master
Plan.
RECITALS
A. November 18, 2008, the City Council approved the 2008
Annual Docket Report. Included on the dockets was this amendment to
the Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan that revises
' the inventory of streets and bridges and updates language to reference
the 2008 Transportation Master Plan.
' B. The Growth Management Act ("GMA") requires the City to
establish procedures governing amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
that limit amendments to once each year unless certain circumstances
' exist. RCW 36.70A.130(2). This amendment is part of the annual
amendment process and is made in accord with Kent City Code 12.02.050.
C. On January 8, 2010, the City provided the State of
' 1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Capital Facilities Element
CPA 2009-1(A)
Washington with the required sixty (60) day notification under RCW '
36.70A.106 of the City's proposed amendments. No comments were '
received.
D. On March 1, 2010, the SEPA Responsible Official determined '
the proposal is procedural in nature and no further SEPA review is
required.
E. The Land Use & Planning Board considered the amendments '
at a workshop on January 11, 2010, and held a public hearing on March 8, '
2010. The Economic and Community Development Committee also
considered the matter on April 12, 2010. '
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, ,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
SECTION 1. - Incorporation of Recitals. The preceding recitals are
incorporated herein.
SECTION 2. - Amendment. The Capital Facilities Element of the '
City of Kent's Comprehensive Plan is amended as attached and
incorporated as Exhibit "A" to update the inventory of streets and '
bridges and references to the Transportation Master Plan.
SECTION 3. - Severability. If any one or more sections, sub- ,
sections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or
invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion
of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. '
2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Capital Facilities Element
CPA 2009-1(A) '
' SECTION 4. - Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws,
' codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and
section/subsection numbering.
' SECTION 5. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and
be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of passage as provided
by law.
SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR
' ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Capital Facilities Element
' CPA 2009-1(A)
PASSED: day of May, 2010. '
APPROVED: day of May, 2010.
PUBLISHED: day of May, 2010. ,
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. ,
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved ,
by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA ]ACOBER, CITY CLERK
P \Civil\Ordinance\CompPlanElementAmendCapitalFacilitiesElementstreetInventory docx
4 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ,
Capital Facilities Element
CPA 2009-1(A) '
EXHIBIT A
Tacoma P5 Pipeline project will provide a sufficient supply of water for future peak demand for the
next twenty years.
' TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
Within the City there are city, state, county, and private roads-total' 'r r=b-=??�� ^'•e:''.- :^.1=s Of
those that the City maintains are city and state sheets totaling 240.38 centerline miles,— tyre These
are 48-0348,92 lane miles of P-rmae+ple—Prinapal Arterials; 111.134+6451---_lane miles of Minor
' Arterials, 129.84149 63 lane miles of Collector Streets; and 240.3 1341.91- lane miles of Residential
readsStreets There are also nine fourteen (9l4 bridges in Kent. A complete assessment of
transportation facilities is considered in the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, and in
the Transportation Mastei Plan (TMP)which was artierpated-adopted in 20047une
2008. Figures 9 --and--9.3through 9 24 found in the Transportation Element illustrates Kent's
existing and planned transportation facilities
PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE
' Most of Kent's residential areas are served by the Kent School District No. 415, The Renton
School District serves students from an area of Kent near the north city limits, and Kent students
residing along the western city limits attend Federal Way Schools or Highline Schools. Kent
students residing along the southern city limits might attend Auburn Schools. Most school districts
also have historically considered acceptance of transfer requests or waivers for students residing in
' households located outside of district boundaries Detailed inventories of school district capital
facilities and levels-of-service are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) of each school
district. Thp CFPs of the Kent, Auburn and Federal Way School Districts have been adopted as
' part of the City's Capital Facilities Element. Updates of the CFPs of these three (3) diStnetS reflect
changes in their C['s, and school impact fees assessed on residential development within Kent are
adopted annually. CFPs for other school districts serving Kent households are incorporated by
reference, although no school impact fees are collected by these school districts for residential
development within Kent. Estimated total student enrollment figures of Kent's Planning .Area
households for each school district are provided in the Table 8 7 below
' Locations of schools within the Kent School District and the boundaries of other school districts
serving Kent's Planning Area are illustrated in Figure 8.6
Table 8.7
ESTIMATED STUDENT ENROLLMENT
Kent Auburn Federal Highline Renton
School School Way School School
District District School District District
District
Estimated Total Kent
' Planning Area Resident 16,909 108 1,912 314 56
Student Enrollment
' Capital Facilities - 8-30
EXHIBIT A_ pine Z o � 2
i
Policy CF-29.6: Develop and implement a water rate structure that promotes the '
efficient use of water
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES & FACILITIES i
GOALS &POLICIES i
The goals, policies, ar4—levels-of-service (LOS) and inventories related to the provision of
transportation services and facilities are contained in the Transportation Element of this ,
Comprehensive Plan-and the Transportation Master Plant^^ P�,tatiEM Plaff
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES GOALS & POLICIES '
The City of Kent has established siting criteria for essential public facilities, which are defined by i
the State in RCW 36 70A.200(1) to "include those facilities that are typically difficult to site, such
as airports, state education facilities and state or regional transportation facilities as defined in
RCW 47 06.140, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient ,
facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure
community transition facilities as defined in RCW 71.09.020." The following goals and policies
reaffirm Kent's commitment to a fair process for locating such facilities. '
Goal CF-30:
The City shall participate in a cooperative inter jurisdictional process to determine siting of ,
essential public facilities of a county-wide, regional, or state-wide nature
Policy CF-30.1: Proposals for siting essential public facilities within the City of Kent or ,
within the City's growth boundary shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's
Comprehensive Plan during the initial stages of the proposal process
Policy CF-30.2: When warranted by the special character of the essential facility, the City
shall apply the regulations and criteria of Kent Zoning Code Section 15 04 150, Special use '
combining district, to applications for siting such facilities to insure adequate review,
including public participation. Conditions of approval, including design conditions, i
conditions, shall be imposed upon such uses in the interest of the welfare of the City and the
protection of the environment
Capital Faciliitev 8-51
KENT
WAS HIN 0TO1
' ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MINUTES
March 8, 2010
' Committee Members Chair Jamie Perry, Elizabeth Albertson, Deborah Ranniger
Chair Perry called the meeting to order at 5.00 p m.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Albertson MOVED and Ranniger SECONDED to approve the March 8, 2010 Minutes.
Motion PASSED 3-0.
2. Panther Lake Annexation Zoning Comprehensive Plan Land Use & Zoning
Maps rAZ-2009-11 Hearing
Long-Range Planner William D. Osborne stated that staff anticipates going before City
' Council in May to adopt zoning prior to the effective date of annexation on July 1st.
Osborne discussed urban separators, the Land Use and Planning Board's (LUPB)
recommendation and consideration of citizen proposals.
Osborne stated that the City of Kent's Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plan and
regulations must be consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies (CPP) of King County.
He stated that Kent and other King County cities that comprise 70% of the population ratify
the CPPs which include Urban Separator Policies and the map designating those urban
separators. King County will begin the process of revisiting urban separators in 2014 at
which time the City will have opportunity to consider them.
Osborne stated that the LUPB adopted staff's Alternative 2 that provided Kent
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations consistent with existing King County Zoning and
then suggesting Kent Zoning that could best fit those designations One change between
Alternative 1 and 2 is that the balance of the former Panther Lake Elementary School site
located on the corner of 208`h and the Benson Rd would be designated as Community
Commercial, Mixed Use (CC-MU).
' Osborne stated that Kent is proposing to apply Mobile Home Park (MHP) designations for a
number of Mobile Home Park areas in the County that carry Single Family (SF) or
Multifamily (MF) Designations.
Osborne characterized each of the following citizen proposals defining them as- the Ruth
Proposal, the Holmberg/Morford Proposal, the Beckwith Proposal, and the O'Brien Proposal.
Osborne stated that staff has further considered their original Neighborhood Convenience
Commercial (NCC) zoning recommendation for the Ruth Proposal which addressed the
County's scale of development and included an option to consider Community Commercial,
Mixed-Use Zoning, as King County encourages a mix of uses both in their commercial
' Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning District Map designations.
Osborne stated that the property associated with the Herman Proposal is currently
designated R-4 in the County with staff not recommending any changes from the LUPB's
recommendation (of SF-4.5/SR-4.5).
Osborne stated that the Leever Proposal considers an area adjacent to an existing urban
separator The City is looking at urban separators as a countywide planning policy issue
and recommends addressing this proposal at some future time. Staff supports the LUPB's
original recommendation.
Osborne stated that the Bowditch proposal is an applaudable planning goal which
' encourages increasing land use intensity particularly in proximity to transit. He stated that
were staff to move forward on this proposal, approximately 650 to 700 parcels would need
notification to move forward with this proposal as written The actual development of
multifamily projects requires a significantly larger amount of area than a one parcel depth
and staff is reluctant to define exactly where in any given neighborhood adjacent to existing
or planned arterials where that line would be drawn. There is no certainty that this proposal '
would realistically encourage development of multifamily. Osborne asked the Committee to
clarify if they felt it would be desirable for staff to move forward on this for further analysis.
Osborne submitted for the record: 1) a letter dated April 12, 2010 from Stephen Bowditch to '
clarify the geographic extent of his proposal, 2) An email dated April 8, 2010 from Mike
Rountree in support of the Ruth Proposal, 3) An email dated April 10, 2010 from Marcia
Prater in support of the Ruth Proposal, (4) An email dated April 12, 2010 indicating '
opposition to the Bowditch proposal, (5) one email in opposition to the Herman Proposal,
and (6) one letter via email and hard copy from William and Candi McKay indicating their
opposition to the O'Brien proposal. Osborne assured Perry that the Committee would be '
provided copies of those submittals.
With regard to the Ruth proposal, Osborne spoke about an option to apply a Community
Commercial/Mixed Use character which encourages more pedestrian orientation with '
relaxed parking standards for the commercial at the southeast corner of southeast 192"d
Street and 108th Avenue This designation allows for more flexibility.
Ranniger MOVED and Albertson SECONDED a Motion to Open the Public Hearing.
Motion PASSED 3-0. Perry declared the Public Hearing open.
William Prater, PO Box 1804, Bellevue, WA 98009 submitted a letter for the record in ,
support of the Ruth Proposal asking for consideration to include their lot as part of the Ruth
proposal He stated that he would like additional zoning options applied to his property, as
he prepares to sell his home
Mike Rountree, 10847 SE 192nd St , Renton, WA spoke in support of the Ruth proposal '
requesting his property be included in the Ruth proposal to give him more flexibility and
options to market his property as multi-use '
Larry Armstrong, 19637 116th Avenue SE, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to the O'Brien
proposal as it would destroy Panther Lake and the surrounding habitat
Gary Johnson, 19645 116th Avenue SE, Renton, WA spoke in opposition to the O'Brien ,
proposal He stated that Panther Lake needs protection to survive.
William McKay, 19821 116th Avenue SE, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to the O'Brien
proposal He stated that the lake area is an ignored and neglected resource with sensitive
areas, wetlands and wildlife habitat which needs to be protected and preserved by
maintaining the area as a greenbelt and urban separator.
Jon Ruth, 19400 108th Avenue SE, Renton, WA upon receiving clarification from Osborne on
the zoning classifications for his property, Ruth stated that he supports staff's option for the
Ruth proposal and would encourage staff to consider including the Rountree and Prater ,
property as part of the Ruth proposal
Mark Duncan, 221 South 28th Street, Tacoma, WA questioned the permitting process for
property located in the Panther Lake Annexation area Perry deferred to Satterstrom to '
address his permitting concerns
Cham Farkas, 11011 SE 192nd Street, Kent, WA asked staff to define the boundaries of the
Ruth proposal, stating that she would like her one-third acre parcel to be included in the
Ruth proposal. Osborne stated that the Farkas property is currently zoned (R-12) 12 units
per acre in the County, and that commercial designations for the Farkas parcel had not been
analyzed to this point in time. Osborne stated that inclusion of the Farkas parcel in the
Ruth Proposal would require further staff consideration and another public hearing. Staff
and the LUPB's recommendation are to adopt (MRG) Multifamily Residential Garden Density
16 units per acre zoning which allows apartments for that property. ,
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010 ,
Page 2 of 6
Christian Etheridge 21642 148th Avenue SE Kent, WA stated that he owns the Side Track
' Pub and Eatery at 1081h and 208th. He stated that he legally carries a license for tabletop
card gaming under King County statutes. He stated that he has carried this license for two
years, building up his business through holding Texas Hold-um tournaments. Etheridge
voiced his concern that with the annexation, he would no longer be able to hold this license
which has become very important to his business.
Perry stated that legislation has allowed house-banked card games within the annexation
area. Perry further stated that Etheridge's establishment is not house-banked, so therefore,
he would not be allowed to continue with his license She stated that there is no venue to
allow grandfathering of the license, as the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) has not given
' Kent the ability to do that.
Dan Barrett 11436 SE 208th Street, Kent, WA stated that at one time the Board of the
Pantera Lago Homeowners Association and a board member from the Association of
' Manufactured Homeowners (a statewide organization) advocated for the interests of 72,000
Washington residents who own manufactured and mobile homes Barrett stated that he
and his colleagues from the Pantera Homeowners Association support Alternative One (1) as
' it pertains to mobile home parks within the annexation area.
Barrett stated that staff's narrative omits a 15 unit mobile home park at 11320 SE 208th
Street, encircled by Pantera Lago Estates, known as East Hill Estates with a different owner.
Barrett suggested adding East Hill Estates to the narrative under Alternative 1 in order to
avoid any question arising from its omission.
Jim Down, 11214 SE 196th Street, Renton, WA spoke in opposition to the Ruth and O'Brien
proposals He stated that the O'Brien proposal would create the potential for higher
densities that would exacerbate flooding and drainage issues The Ruth proposal would
increase traffic volume and create access issues to the Ruth property. Parking would
become problematic.
011ie Burton, 11007 SE 196th Street, Renton, WA stated that the City needs to take
measures to correct drainage and maintenance issues with respect to a drainage ditch (tile)
that runs from 196th Street to the Benson Highway. Burton stated that although he is not
opposed to new residential development, no further development should occur within the
vicinity of Panther Lake until the drastic drainage problem is fixed Mr. Burton submitted a
' letter for the record dated April 12, 2010 opposing zoning changes in the Panther Lake
Drainage Basin and a copy of an 1893 deed showing Panther Lake and the drainage ditch.
Valerie Matinlussi, 11220 SE 204th Street, Kent, WA stated that Panther Lake is a 10,000
' year old glacier made lake with a natural shoreline that needs protection. Development
could turn the lake into a toxic waste health hazard from the pouring of pollutants and
storm water runoff into the lake She alluded to her opposition to the O'Brien proposal.
Robert Matin7ussi, 11220 SE 204th Street, Kent, WA on behalf of himself and his wife Valerie
spoke against the O'Brien proposal. He stated that the lake needs protected and it has a lot
to offer the community Matinjussi voiced concern that too much development will result in
' increased pollutants and contaminants and destroy natural habitat He asked that the
zoning for Lake Jolie should remain R-1.
Paul Morford, PO Box 6345, Kent, WA stated that he has no vested interest in the property
defined as the Holmberg/Morford proposal He stated that he had read and submitted for
the record a letter written by Shupe Holmberg with Holmberg and Baima Engineering on
behalf of his neighbor proposing zoning that his neighbor desired for his property. Morford
stated that he would recommend MR-G zoning for this property which would be greater than
or equal to the zoning that King County currently allows and would comply with the GMA
Osborne stated that staff recommends that the LUPB recommendation stand.
' Ken Nelson, 11441 SE 196th Street, Kent, WA spoke on behalf of his wife Carol and himself
in opposition to the O'Brien proposal, stating that the R-1 or the City's equivalent zoning
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010
Page 3 of 6
should stand out of respect for the topography of Panther Lake, a large drainage basin. ,
Nelson submitted three pictures for the record with the view from two of those pictures
facing south and one facing north from his property.
Camille O'Brien, 19619 116th Avenue SE, Renton, WA stated that her proposal requests that ,
both sides of 1161h be zoned SR-6 for consistency O'Brien stated that she enjoys the lake,
the habitat and wetland area. She stated that if zoning were to change to SR-6 there are
factors in place to protect the lake, citing the Critical Areas Ordinance, the Shoreline
Management Act, and setback requirements O'Brien stated that she would be fine with a ,
SR-1 zone as long as there is consistency. She stated that she would be fine with SR-1 as
long as there is consistency.
Ranniger MOVED and Albertson SECONDED a Motion to Close the Public Hearing. t
Motion Passed 3-0.
Perry stated that a motion is in order for submittal of some exhibits Whereupon, ,
Albertson MOVED to enter into the record Mr. 011ie Burton's two page letter
protesting the proposed Panther Lake drainage basin properties and an original
plat map from July 3, 1893; and entered into the record three (3) photographs '
submitted by Mr. Ken Nelson taken on or around 11441 SE 196th Street residence.
Motion PASSED 3-0.
After deliberating, Ranniger MOVED to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
and Zoning Districts Map Designations per the recommendation of the Land Use
and Planning Board's Alternative Two with the following amendments and
changes: Adopting the Ruth Proposal with a CC-MU zoning, adopting the
Holmberg/Morford (Toshi) proposal for Low-Density Multifamily (MR-G) zoning,
adopting the Leever Proposal for Single Family Residential/One Dwelling Unit Per
Acre (SR-1) zoning, and adopting corresponding Comprehensive Plan Land Use '
Map Designations of; Mixed Use (MU) for the Ruth Proposal, Low Density
Multifamily (LDMF) for the Holmberg/Morford Proposal, and Urban Separator (US)
for the Leever Proposal. Albertson SECONDED the MOTION. Motion PASSED 3-0.
3. Capital Facilities Element Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transportation ,
rCPA-2009-1 f Al l
Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that this is a housekeeping amendment to the
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan to update the inventory of roads and
bridges and to reference the 2008 Transportation Master Plan.
Albertson MOVED to recommend to the Full Council approval of an amendment to '
the Capital Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan related to
inventories of streets and bridges and reference to the 2008 Transportation
Master Plan as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Board. Ranniger
SECONDED the Motion. Motion PASSED 3-0.
4. Countywide Planning Policies, Amendments, Allocation of Regional Services ,
and Facilities, and Growth Targets
Anderson stated that amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies come before the City
Council periodically and have been approved by the Growth Management Planning
Committee (GMPC) and King County (KC) The current motions approved by the GMPC ,
adopts a work program and schedule to address a policy framework for allocation of
regional services and facilities and update existing policies and Table LU-1 in the
Countywide Planning Policies to provide the most current housing and employment targets
for the period of 2006-2031.
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010
Page 4 of 6
Ranniger MOVED to recommend to the full Council ratification of amendments to
the Countywide Planning Policies approved under Growth Management Planning
Council (GMPC) Motions No. 09-1 and 09-2 adopting a work plan and schedule to
address the policy framework for allocation of regional services and facilities and
' updating existing policies and Table LU-1 to provide for housing and employment
targets for the period 2006-2031. Albertson SECONDED the MOTION. Motion
PASSED 3-0.
S. Deferral of Certain Development Fees rSCA-2009-21
Principal Planner Matt Gilbert stated that a discussion before the Economic and Community
Development Committee in January considered the challenges facing developers in these
difficult economic times and contemplated potential solutions the city might enact to
address some of those challenges and lessen the financial impacts to builders and home-
buyers
Gilbert stated that it has been Kent's practice to collect mitigation fees early in the
development process requiring a major outflow of cash for the builder Gilbert stated that
staff is recommending deferring those mitigation fees in order to lessen financial impacts
related to a range of impacts that include, water system development, storm system
development, traffic system and school impact fees. Gilbert stated that mitigation fees can
be tracked
' Gilbert stated that water connection fees are fees for service, and Parks and Sidewalk
mitigation fees require payment prior to the subdivision of land, therefore those fees are
not included in the fee deferral recommendation.
Gilbert stated that staff recommends deferring fees for Single Family homes. The fees for a
typical single family home are about $20,000 with about $15,000 used for mitigation
payments with the remainder used for plan review fees, inspection fees, and administrative
costs Gilbert stated that deferring the mitigation payments until the sale of those homes
would not impact the general fund that pays for staff time to provide the review and
inspection services.
Gilbert stated that staff is proposing if a builder wishes to defer fees that the builder
authorize the City to record a lien against their property for the amount of fees owed that
would be paid upon sale of the home through an escrow process whereby any liens would
' be cleared and the city would be paid Gilbert stated that the City's legal department is
drafting language to clarify this procedure and to incorporate language that would require
builders to notify buyers through the normal disclosure process that those fees would be
' paid before title is transferred
Gilbert stated that in establishing a new fee collection system staff is considering the costs
associated with lien recordation and staff time with an estimated cost to the city of $140 for
' each lien or approximately 1.5 hours of staff time plus recording fees, and that this fee
amount may need to be revised if more time is ultimately needed to create and track each
lien
' Perry stated that the ECDC will hold a public hearing on this issue in May.
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association, Bellevue, WA clarified that the deferred fees
are not added to the cost of a home, concurred with staff that the builder needs to disclose
this information to the homebuyer and stated that the builder is obligated to pay those fees
not the homeowner If the builder goes bankrupt, the lien remains on the title which would
have to be cleared out of escrow.
Hans Korve, DMP Engineering, 726 Auburn Way N, Auburn, WA stated that this proposal will
impact those folks he represents with projects still out there He spoke in favor of staff's
proposal suggesting that staff consider bundling sidewalk and park fees with the other fees
as discussed so that only one payment needs to be made.
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010
Page 5 of 6
Albertson MOVED to direct staff to prepare development related fee deferrals for
consideration in a public hearing before the ECDC. Ranniger SECONDED the '
Motion. Motion PASSED 3-0.
6. Economic Development Report
Economic & Community Development Director Ben Wolters stated that the economy is
slowly making a positive turn He stated that the City has received a proposal from Exotic
Metals, an aerospace manufacturer in Kent. He stated that they have purchased a building '
next door to their existing facility as part of a plan for expansion that would add 100 new
employees. Wolters stated that Improvements to the building won't trigger the threshold of
half the appraised value that would trigger additional flood plain regulations. Wolters stated
that staff is working with them to expedite their permitting and answer any other questions
Wolters stated that he believes this is part of a larger national and regional picture citing
that in March the manufacturing index grew to 59 6%, an increase of 3.1 percent compared ,
to February. An index of 50% or higher Indicates growth and when that index drops below
50% the Industry is contracting. Wolters stated that although manufacturing is picking up
across the board it is not necessarily an Indicator of new employment Within the
manufacturing industry, existing staff are being worked hard to meet new order ,
requirements leading to signs of pending burnout which will break the industry and
necessitate hiring additional staff
Wolters stated that staff and development partners Heinz Mortensen and L & N Architects ,
conducted a site tour on April 2Dd with four representatives from the General Service
Administration (GSA) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). He stated that the
GSA and FAA were impressed with staff's proposal. Wolters stated that the GSA and FAA
will rank the sites they have toured; inform the market place of their ranking in order for
those markets to determine if they wish to remain in the competition based on their
ranking. ,
Wolters stated that the City received 40 new residential permit submittals in March, the
largest number submittals for homes in over 3 years.
Informational Only '
7. Downtown Zoning Discussion
Planning Director Fred Satterstrom stated that the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) ,
zone is the downtown urban centers dominant commercial zone The DCE zone (created in
the 90s) allows intense urban style development with few restrictions Development
standards allow virtually 100% site coverage with no height limitations and reduced parking ,
standards
Satterstrom stated that since development standards were less restrictive the city
implemented a design review process to control the aesthetic environment. Uses in the '
DCE zone include a broad range of retail uses, offices, personal services, multifamily such as
condominiums, apartments, senior housing and retirement homes
Perry directed staff to prepare a report for the next Committee meeting on DCE zoning as ,
well as the design review standards and process Perry stated that it is time to reevaluate
the DCE zone for relevancy with Ranniger suggesting allowing Mixed-Use in the NCC zone.
Informational Only
Adiournment
Perry Adjourned the Meeting at 8:05 p.m.
Pamela Mottram
Economic & Community Development Committee Secretary
P\Planning\ECDC\2010\Minutes\04-12-10_Min doc
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010 '
Page 6 of 6
• Economic & Community Development
KENT Committee Agenda
WAs1i. � G,D-
Councilmembers: Elizabeth Albertson . Deborah Ranniger . Jamie Perry, Chair
Monday, April 12, 2010
5:00 P.M.
Item Description Action .Speaker Time Page
1. Approval of the March 8, 2010 Minutes YES Jamie Perry 5 min 1
2. Panther Lake Annexation Zoning YES William Osborne 20 min 7
Comprehensive Plan Land Use &
Zoning Maps [AZ-2009-1]
SECOND PUBLIC HEARING
3. Capital Facilities Element YES Charlene Anderson 5 min 57
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Transportation [CPA-2009-1(A)]
4. Countywide Planning Policies, YES Charlene Anderson 10 min 71
Amendments, Allocation of regional
Services and facilities, and growth targets
5. Deferral of Certain Development Fees YES Matt Gilbert 10 min 103
[SCA-2009-2]
' 6. Economic Development Report NO Ben Wolters 5 min G
Information Only
7. Downtown Zoning Discussion NO Fred Satterstrom 5 min G
Information Only
Planning and Economic Development Unless otherwise noted, the Pla g Committee meets the a
2nd Monday of each month at 5:00 p.m. in Council Chambers East, Kent City Hall, 220
4th Avenue South, Kent, 98032-5895.
For information on the above item(s), the City of Kent's Website can be accessed at
httD //kentwa.igm2 com/citizens/Default aspx or contact Pamela Mottram or the respective
project planner in the Planning Division at (253) 856-5454 or as indicated on the agenda.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office at (253) 856-5725 in
advance For TDD relay service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388
ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
PLANNING DIVISION
IIS7
KENT Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Director
4 A E H N�T Q v Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
Phone, 253-856-5454
Fax- 253-856-6454
Address, 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, WA 98032-5895
April 6, 2010
To: Chair Jamie Perry and Economic & Community Development
Committee Members
From: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
' Subject: Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element - Amendment
Street/Bridges Inventories & Reference to Transportation Master Plan
[CPA-2009-1(A)]
MOTION: I move to recommend/not recommend to the full Council
approval of an amendment to the Capital Facilities Element of the Kent
I Comprehensive Plan related to inventories of streets and bridges and
reference to the 2008 Transportation Master Plan as recommended by
the Land Use & Planning Board.
SUMMARY: After holding a public hearing on March 8, 2010, the Land Use &
Planning Board recommends approval of an amendment to update the Capital
' Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan related to inventory of streets by
total centerline miles and lane miles by street type, number of bridges, and the
reference to the 2008 Transportation Master Plan.
' BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND: At their November 18, 2008 meeting, the City Council approved
the 2008 Annual Docket Report as recommended by the Planning & Economic
Development Committee on November 10, 2008 This proposed amendment to the
Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan seeks to revise the
' inventory of streets and bridges and update language to reference the 2008
Transportation Master Plan (TMP). The SEPA Responsible Official has determined
the proposal is procedural in nature and no further SEPA review is required.
Staff will be available at the April 12th meeting to further discuss these
amendments.
CA\pm S ',Permdl Plan�COMP PLAN AMENOMENTS�2009�CPA-2009-1(A)PubhcWks_Street-lnventonesiECDClecdcO41210 doc
Eric Minutes and Packet from 3/8/10 LUPB Meeting
cc Ben Wolters, Economic & Community Development Director
Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, C D Director
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
Project File CPA-2009-1(A)
' ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
PLANNING DIVISION
• Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director
KENTCharlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
r >, I A„r C1 I Phone 253-856-5454
Fax 253-856-6454
Address 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent,WA 98032-5895
AGENDA
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD
HEARING & WORKSHOP
MARCH 8, 2010
7:00 P.M
LUPB MEMBERS: CITY STAFF
Dana Ralph, Chair Fred Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director
Jack Ottini, Vice Chair Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Mgr
Steve Dowell William D Osborne AICP, Long Range Planner
Navdeep Gill Lydia Moorehead, AICP, Parks/Open Space Planner
Jon Johnson Gloria GouldWessen,AICR Plan ner/GIS Coordinator
Aleanna Kondelis-Halpin Kim Adams Pratt, Assistant City Attorney
Barbara Phillips Pamela Mottram, Administrative Secretary
This is to notify you that the Land Use and Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing
followed by a Workshop on MONDAY, MARCH 8, 2010 in Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers
East and West, 220 4'r Avenue South, Kent, at 7.00 P M. The public is welcome to attend the public
hearing and all interested persons may have an opportunity to speak Any person wishing to submit
oral or written comments on the proposed amendments may do so prior to or at the meeting
The agenda will include the following item(s)
1 Call to order
' 2 Roll call
3 Approval of the February 22, 2010 Minutes
4 Added Items to Agenda
5 Communications
' 6 Notice of Upcoming Meetings
7 PUBLIC HEARING:
1. CPA-2009-1(A) Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Charlene Anderson)
' Consideration of an amendment to the Capital Facilities Element of Kent's
Comprehensive Plan to update inventories of lane miles and bridges and
reference to the 2008 Transportation Master Plan
2. CPA-2009-1(B) Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Lydia Moorehead)
Consideration of adoption of the Parks and Open Space Plan, and an
amendment to the Parks & Open Space and Capital Facilities Elements of
Kent's Comprehensive Plan and incorporation of the Parks and Open
Space Plan into the Kent Comprehensive Plan
8 WORKSHOP:
' 1 CPZ-2007-2 Midway Development Regulations(Charlene Anderson)
Discussion of Kent City Code District Regulations Chapter 15 - Kent
Zoning Code Sections 15 03, 15 04, 15 05, 15 06 and 15 07, and the
Zoning Districts Map and the Land Use Map as it pertains to Pacific
Highway South (aka Midway)
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City in advance for more information For TDD
relay service for Braille call 1-600-833-6385, for TDD relay service for the hearing impaired, call 1-800-833-6388 or call the
City of Kent Planning Services directly at(253) 856-5499(TDD)
For further information or copes of the staff report(s) or text of the proposed amendment(s) contact the Planning
Division office at(253)856-5454 You may access the City's website for documents pertaining to the Land Use and Planning
Board at hind `,kentwa iam2 cormcitizeris/Default asux9Deua imenilD=1004
ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT '
Ben Wolters, Director
PLANNING DIVISION
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director '
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
K E N T WAS 0TO 1Phone 253 856-5454
win
Fax 253-856-6454
Address 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, WA 98032-5895
March 1, 2010
TO: Chair Dana Ralph and Land Use and Planning Board Members
FROM: William D. Osborne, AICP, Long-Range Planner
RE: CPA-2009-1(A) Capital Facilities Element Inventory of Streets
March 8, 2010 Public Hearing
MOTION: Move to Approve/Deny/Modify the proposed amendments to the
Capital Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan related to inventories
of streets and bridges and reference to the 2008 Transportation Master Plan as
proposed by staff.
BACKGROUND: The revision proposes to update the Capital Facilities Element
inventory of streets by total centerline miles and lane miles by street type, number
of bridges, and the reference to the 2008 Transportation Master Plan. Please note
that based on discussions with the Public Works Engineering staff, the proposed
amendment changes slightly the data that were provided In the original docket
application.
I
SUMMARY: At their November 18, 2008 meeting, the City Council approved the
2008 Annual Docket Report as recommended by the Planning & Economic ,
Development Committee on November 10, 2008. This proposed amendment to the
Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan seeks to revise the
inventory of streets and bridges and update language to reference the 2008
Transportation Master Plan (TMP). The SEPA Responsible Official has determined
the proposal Is procedural In nature and no further SEPA review Is required. The
amendment was discussed in the January 11th Land Use & Planning Board '
workshop.
CA/WO/pm S\Permit\Plan\COMP_PLAN_AMENDMENTS\2009\CPA-2009-1(A)PubltcWks_Street-Inventories\LUPB\03-08-10_CPA-2009-1(A)StaffRpt clot ,
Eric Dkt-2008-1 Application and attached material
Staff correspondence dated July 20-29, 2009, and attached street inventory figures
cc Fred N Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Dlr
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Mgr
Tim LaPorte, Public Works Director
Cathy Mooney, Sr Transportation Planner
Lydia Moorehead, Parks Planner
Tacoma P5 Pipeline project will provide a sufficient supply of water for future peak demand for the
next twenty years.
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
Within the City there are city, state, county, and private roads tetaliiig ""O Ge tc''.ine mile • Of
' those that the City maintains are city and state streets totaling 240.38 centerline miles,—_i#sere These
are 48 9 48 92 lane miles of Rigae+ple—Principal Arterials; 1 1 1.13444- -1--_lane miles of Minor
1 Arterials; 129,81149.63 lane miles of Collector Streets, and 240 3 1241 91 lane miles of Residential
readsStreets There are also n+ne—fourteen (414) bridges in Kent. A complete assessment of
transportation facilities is considered in the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, and in
the C- tiT n Transportation Master Plan (TMP) which was anticipated—adopted in 22804June
2008. Figures 9.1 and—9 3through 9 24 found in the Transportation Element illustrates Kent's
existing and 0anned transportation facilities.
PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE
tMost of Kent's residential areas are served by the Kent School District No. 415. The Renton
School District serves students from an area of Kent near the north city limits, and Kent students
' residing along the western city limits attend Federal Way Schools or Highline Schools Kent
students residing along the southern city limits might attend Auburn Schools. Most school districts
also have historically considered acceptance of transfer requests or waivers for students residing in
households located outside of district boundaries. Detailed inventories of school distnct capital
' facilities and levels-of-service are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) of each school
district. The CFPs of the Kent, Auburn and Federal Way School Districts have been adopted as
part of the City's Capital Facilities Element Updates of the CFPs of these three (3) districts reflect
I changes in their C1Ps, and school impact fees assessed on residential development within Kent are
adopted annually. CFPs for other school districts serving Kent households are incorporated by
reference, although no school impact fees are collected by these school districts for residential
development within Kent. Estimated total student enrollment figures of Kent's Planning Area
households for each school district are provided in the Table 8.7 below
Locations of schools within the Kent School District and the boundaries of other school districts
serving Kent's Planning Area are illustrated in Figure 8.6.
' Table 8.7
ESTIMATED STUDENT ENROLLMENT
Kent Auburn Federal Highline Renton
School School Way School School
District District School District Distnct
District
Estimated Total Kent
I Planning Area Resident 16,909 108 1,912 314 56
Student Enrollment
copua/Facdu'es 8-30
1 -
Policy CF-29.6: Develop and implement a water rate structure that promotes the '
efficient use of water
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES & FACILITIES
GOALS &POLICIES
l �
The goals, policies, an —levels-of-service (LOS) and inventories related to the provision of
transportation services and facilities are contained in the Transportation Element of this ,
Comprehensive Plan-and the Transportation Master Planfutufe C-ofnpfeheflsk,e T�-ansperzatianrP',a^
te be otgnipleted
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES GOALS & POLICIES ,
The City of Kent has established siting criteria for essential public facilities, which are defined by
the State in RCW 36.70A.200(1) to "include those facilities that arc typically difficult to site, such
as airports, state education facilities and state or regional transportation facilities as defined in
RCW 47.06 140, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient
facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure 1
community transition facilities as defined in RCW 71.09,020 " The following goals and policies
reaffirm Kent's commitment to a fair process for locating such facilities.
Goal CF-30:
The City shall participate in a cooperative inter jurisdictional process to determine siting of '
essential public facilities of a county-wide, regional, or state-wide nature
Policy CF-30.1: Proposals for siting essential public facilities within the City of Kent or ,
within the City's growth boundary shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's
Comprehensive Plan during the initial stages of the proposal process
Policy CF-30.2: When warranted by the special character of the essential facility, the City
shall apply the regulations and criteria of Kent Zoning Code Section 15 04 150, Special use
combining district, to applications for siting such facilities to insure adequate review,
including public participation Conditions of approval, including design conditions, ,
conditions, shall be imposed upon such uses in the interest of the welfare of the City and the
protection of the environment
Capital Facilities 8-51
arrg�
Planning "ervices
i ,
,�
Location:400 W. Gowe • Mail to.220 4th Avenue South • Kent,WA 98032-5895
® Permit Center(253)856-5302 FAX-(253)856-6412
�KENT www.ci kent.wa.us/permitcenter
WASHIXOTON ® �gy p Amendments
�+
PLANNING SERVICES Docket Form for d'.9®6.®06.�ments
to the Comprehensive Plan
Please print in black ink only. a d Development Regulations
' Application Name: d/,4FiT�L FtgC. leln 750VIT Docket#: 7Y_* -'�
OFFICE USE ONLY QrnD� -7-„� OFFICE USE ONLy,
Date Application Received: Q-/-06 , I" I Received by: ( Gy'f) 71Pi'1(q l2b—AW
Applicant: P741
Name CAV MOONeyel'ry &I RenT Daytime Phone. X S S 6y
Mailing Address: PWF� � Fau rA Ave S Fax Number X 6500
City/State/Zip: ICPni WA g 032-9995 Signature. C
Professional License No E-mail: (,yy Yet V Gi {Cen ' Lt�A-us
Agent/Consultant/Attorney: (mandatory If primary contact Is different from applicant)
' Name. Daytime Phone
Mailing Address- Fax Number:
City/State/Zip E-mail:
Signature
Please provide a statement in the space provided below or on an attached sheet as needed for the
suggested change(s) to the comprehensive plan or development regulations with regards to the
relevant criteria listed below:
• Detailed statement of the proposal and reason How the change would be compliant with the
' for the amendment; Growth Management Act;
• Anticipated impacts of the change, including How the change would be compliant with the
the geographic area affected and issues Countywide Planning Policies, and
presented; How functional plans (e g subarea plans, utility
• Why existing comprehensive plan and plans) and capital improvement programs (e g.
development regulations should not continue in transportation improvement program) support
effect or why existing criteria no longer apply, the change.
' Recommend an update to the Capital Facilities Element to show current data
as identified by a Public Works Operations inventory of Streets which was
conducted in the summer of 2008 Also please delete the reference to an
anticipated 2004 Comprehensive Transportation Plan and replace that with
the 2008 Transportation Master Plan The changes requested are on pages
8-24 (Transportation Facilities) and 8-39 (Transportation Goals and Policies).
Drafts of suggested Updates are attached on a separate sheet.
These changes will rovide the most up-to-date data that is available for
Inclusion In the next update of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
tPUBLIC WKS ENGR (C Mooney) DKT-2008-1
cx1-2 Ch 8-Cap Fac Elem - Kent Comp
Plan Text Amdmts-ref to the
Transportation Facilities Section.
Contact (WO) 9/08
Suggested 2008 updates to the Capital Facilities ,
Element of the (Cent Comprehensive Plan
Page 8-24 - Transportation Facilities
Within the City there are city, state, county and private roads. Of those that
the City maintains are city and state streets totaling 245.3 centerline miles.
There are 53.95 lane miles of Principal Arterials; 116.25 lane miles of Minor
Arterials; 145.04 lane miles of Collector Streets; and 244.24 lane miles of
Residential Streets. There are also fourteen (14) bridges in Kent. A '
complete assessment of transportation facilities is considered in the
Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element and in the Transportation Master
Plan which was adopted in June 2008. Figures 9.3 through 9.24 found in the
Transportation Element illustrate-V+ Kent's existing and planned transportation
facilities.
L �
Page 8-39 --- Transportation Services and Facilities Goals
and Policies '
The goals, policies and levels-of-service (LOS) related to the provision of ,
transportation services and facilities are contained in the Transportation
Element of this Comprehensive Plan and the Transportation Master Plan.
31
' Osborne, William
From: Cordova, Jim
' Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 5:55 PM
To: Mooney, Cathy
Cc: Osborne, William; Burke, Charlie; Palowez, Kurt
Subject: RE- Street miles by classification
Cathy
Charlie and I communicate constantly and we are actually impressed with how close the 2
completely disparate database reports came in totals. The differences, we already know why but
the fix to make them equal is a several year drill down. Either of us can explain the different
figures from our respective software. When you are talking 1 mile with 4000 features I feel
really good about the results. We are working at Improving the GIS and Centerline PMS
constantly. I think that because lane miles are a data driven compilation from Centerline, it is
better at this time to stay constant with that source and eventually we will be In agreement.
I just put a confidence rating of high on both systems by performing this analysis - so it was well
worthwhile.
aim Cordova, GIs Analyst
Design Engineering I Public Works Department
220 Fourth Avenue South, Kent, WA 98032
' K E N T Phone 253-856-5526
t www.choosekent.com
1 PLEASE CON51DFSi THE ENVIRONNENT 13FFORE PRINTTNG THIS E-fdATL
' From: Mooney, Cathy
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 4:06 PM
To: Cordova, Jim
Subject: FW: Street miles by classification
1 Jim,
I sent Bill Osborne the copy of the Centerline Mlles & Lane Miles you worked up for me but I
recommended that he stay with the other database because that matches what he used In the
Comprehensive Plan last year and the year before.
Since we can't make them match, we might as well be consistent in this particular document.
I will continue to work with Charlie Burke to see why his database is so different from the GIS
' one.
Thanks again for this data.
j Cathy
From: Mooney, Cathy
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:44 PM
To: Osborne, William
Cc: Anderson, Charlene; Mullen, Steve
Subject: RE: Street miles by classification
t
32 ,Unfortunately I still don't have a clear answer for you. I'm leaving on vacation in about 2 hours
so I'm going to send you all the Information I have. I received the latest inventory from the
pavement management specialist, Charlie Burke, who takes a physical inventory of the condition
of every street each year. He measures and records it as he does this. That's one set of
numbers. I also received the latest numbers of by functional classification from GIS, Jim
Cordova. This includes new streets which have been built in the last year and accepted by the
City as public streets. That's a different set of numbers.
The two sets of numbers are close but not the same. The two guys cannot reconcile the two
sets of numbers. They each believe their numbers to be the correct ones and they have never
been able to get them to match over the years.
Sorry I couldn't solve this before I had to leave. Personally, I would go with the pavement
management specialist's numbers.
Whichever numbers you choose to use, do not count Alleys, Ramps, nor streets which are ,
Outside City Limits. Also, GIS shows individual numbers for the 3 sub-sets of Collectors. We
would prefer that these 3 Collector types be combined as the Pavement Management database
shows.
I will forward the numbers by separate email.
Cathy 4
From: Osborne, William
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 12:00 PM
To: Mooney, Cathy ,
Cc: Anderson, Charlene
Subject: Street miles by classification
Cathy,
As I review the docketed amendment to the Capital Facilities Element relating to the amended
Transportation Master Plan and Transportation Element, I note a discrepancy between the road
inventory figures in the documents. Would you please review these documents (particularly
noting Figure 9.3 on page 9-20 in the updated Transportation Element) and clarify the
discrepancy?
<< File: DI<t-2008-1_Application.pdf>>
1 « File: Chapter9-TransportationElement-AIISections-OrdinanceNo3884doc>>
Thanks,
William D. Osborne, AICP, Planner
<<OLE Object: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)>> Planning Services I Community Development Department
220 Fourth Avenue South, Kent, WA 98032
Direct 253-856-5437 1 Main 253-856-5454
2
Functional Class and Pavement Length Summary
1 City of Kent - November 20,2008
Functional % Centerllne Lane
-Classification- --Length- Miles Miles
Principle Arterial(City) 39 950 47 32
Minor Arterial 162 38 98 11832
1 Collector 283 68 18 14564
Residential 499 12028 24385
Alleys 1 6 3 93 786
Totals/Averages- 241.00 563 25
Source Centerline
Functional Class and Pavement Length Summary **
City of Kent - July 27,2009
Functional % Centerline Lane
-Classification-- -Length- Miles Miles
Principle Arterial(City) 42 1017 4892
Minor Arterial 141 3387 111 13
Industrial Collector 55 13 14 3349
Residential Collector Arterial 11 9 2856 60 02
Residential Collector 11 5 2774 56 12
Residential 49 7 11951 240 31
Ramos 03 063 1 09
Alleys 1 9 4471 826
' Outside City Limits 1 0 2 29 6 22
Totals/Averages- 1000 240.38 5 55.56
*Source City of Kent GIS
Transportation Comp 2009.xlsx
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
March 8, 2010
1. Call to Order Chair Ralph Called the meeting to order at 7:15 p m.
' 2. Board Members Present: Chair Dana Ralph, Vice-Chair Jack Ottini, Steve Dowell,
Navdeep Gill, Jon Johnson, Aleanna Kondelis-Halpin, Barbara Phillips
Staff Members Present: Charlene Anderson, Jeff Watling, Lydia Moorehead, Kim Adams
Pratt and Pamela Mottram
3. Approval of Minutes
Johnson MOVED and Dowell SECONDED a Motion to approve the February 22, 2010
Minutes. Motion PASSED 7-0.
4. Added Items None
S. Communications None
6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings
Anderson stated that the Economic and Community Development Committee unanimously passed
an amendment to approve the Cottage Housing Demonstration Ordinance to allow flexibility in the
I maximum number of cottage housing units The issue will go to City Council March 16", for
approval.
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
7.1 CPA-2009-1(A) Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that this is a housekeeping amendment that amends
the Capital Facilities Element of Kent's Comprehensive Plan to correct the number of lane miles
and bridges in the City, and reference the most current Transportation Master Plan. Ralph
opened the Public hearing. There were no speakers.
7.2 CPA-2009-1(B) Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Parks and Open Space Planner Lydia Moorehead stated that the purpose of the Parks and Open
Space Plan update is to solidify the City's vision for Kent Parks. The Plan was adopted in 2000.
' The update seeks to address the transition from where we are now into the next 20 years. The
update is a requirement of the Growth Management Act.
Moorehead stated that the City conducted a public survey and held a public workshop this past
spring and fall She stated that staff emailed, published notices in the paper and published
information on the aty's website for interested parties Moorehead stated that the Plan and Parks
and Open Space Element has been presented to the Parks and Human Services Committee, at a
City Council Workshop, and at a Land Use and Planning Board workshop
Moorehead stated that the Plan outlines four major core themes. The first core theme is
' maximizing and reinvesting in the City's legacy system. Moorehead stated that the City has a
great network of existing parks and open spaces that need to be maintained. One thing staff
noticed from the public survey was that security and maintenance were top priorities for park
users. Redevelopment and renovation of the City's existing parks is one short-term priority in the
plan.
Moorehead stated that the second core theme is to manage Kent's Urban Forests in partnership
twith the Cascade Land Conservancy. The Green Kent plan is currently under development and
will create a stewardship plan for a publically owned urban forest. Moorehead stated that a large
majority of Kent's inventory consists of undeveloped and natural resource areas.
Land Use and Planning Board Hearing
March 8, 2010
Page 1 of 2
Moorehead stated that the third core theme is athletic fields. The City is looking for opportunities 1
to maximize acreage and the City's investment via partnerships with other agencies such as
school districts , and looking at how the City can utilize technology to maximize space usage.
Moorehead stated that the fourth core theme is Connectivity for Kent's citizens, our users, our
greenways and parks. As Kent becomes more urbanized it is important that those connections ,
are there This Plan introduces a broad theme of connectivity that will require detailed work down
the line to establish how that connectivity will happen
Moorehead stated that the Update includes a reorganized Parks Inventory that includes
acquisitions within the last ten years. The Goals and Policies have been updated to include Green
Kent, Greenways and Trails development, and a 20-year Needs Analysis.
Moorehead stated that the Implementation Strategy is a balance between acquisition,
development and redevelopment One of staff's main focuses in the next 10 years is to look at
the funding situation, keeping redevelopment as a top priority while maintaining a more balanced
approach for the long term.
Moorehead stated that staff is looking at a substantial update to the Park and Open Space
Element of the Comprehensive Plan that incorporates a summary of the Park Plan, with a minor
amendment to the Capital Facilities Element to change references to the Plan and to update Park
acreage.
Parks and Community Services Director Jeff Watling stated that the City has communicated with
the Kent School District with respect to utilizing the Kent-Meridian and Kentridge High Schools'
sites to create a 4 to 5 acre lit synthetic athletic facility for multi-use purposes. The economy
cannot fiscally support pursuing this multi-use facility endeavor at this time
Watling stated that staff's short term strategy to replace those fields lost by development of the
ShowWare Center is to utilize some single use athletic facilities such as the baseball fields at Kent
Memorial Park, and field space at the Phoenix Academy for the soccer season this year.
Chair Ralph declared the Public Hearing open. There were no speakers. ,
Ottini MOVED and Johnson SECONDED a Motion to Close the Public Hearing. Motion
PASSED 7-0. '
Kondelis-Halpin MOVED to adopt the proposed amendments to CPA-2009-1 (A) and (B)
as presented by staff. Phillips SECONDED the MOTION. Motion CARRIED 7-0.
Adjournment
Ralph declared the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
Secretary of the Board
P\Plammnq\LUPB\2010\Minutes\03-08-10-LUPB-Minutes doc
f
t
Land Use and Planning Board Hearing
March 8, 2010
Page 2 of 2
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6I
1. SUBJECT: SR 516 & 4T" AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
WITH MAGNAN CONSULTING SERVICES - AUTHORIZE
' 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorize the Mayor to sign the consultant
services agreement with Magnan Consultant Services Inc., in the amount of
$25,147.50 for the purpose of providing materials testing and inspection services
related to the SR 516 and 4th Avenue Improvements project.
Public Works Engineering designed this intersection improvement project as part
of Kent Station Project mitigation. Work of this nature historically has been done
by State Certified testing laboratories.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works memo dated 4/2/10 and Consultant Agreement
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue?
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
' Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
` DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy ] LaPorte P E , Public Works Director
• Phone 253-856-5500
KENT Fax- 253-856-6500
"SI'I A G-°" Address- 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: April 2, 2010
To: Chair Debbie Raplee and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: April 19, 2010
From: Pete Tenerelli, Construction Manager
Through: Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E., Public Works Director
Subject: SR 516 and 41h Avenue Improvements Consultant Agreement
with Magnan Consulting Services Inc.
Motion: Authorize the Mayor to sign a consultant services contract with
Magnan Consultant Services Inc., in the amount of $25,147.50 for the
purpose of providing materials testing and inspection services related to
the SR 516 & 4th Ave. Improvements Project with concurrence of the
language therein by the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
Summary:
Public Works Engineering designed an intersection improvement project as part of
Kent Station Project mitigation. The construction of this project involves materials
testing and soils engineering/Inspection that is beyond the expertise of City staff.
Magnan Consultant Services Inc., possesses this expertise and was selected through
a competitive process based upon their qualifications. Roadway construction
projects routinely require quality assurance Inspections and materials testing for
various aggregates and paving products in addition to compaction testing for in-
place materials. This work has historically been accomplished by State Certified
testing laboratories, of which Magnan Consultant Services, Inc., is one of several.
To the degree possible, City of Kent forces will be used to perform those non-
laboratory inspection tasks.
Budget Impact:
Currently in Budget
i
KENT
H I N G T[)N
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
between the City of Kent and
Magnan Consulting Services Inc.
L THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation
(hereinafter the "City"), and Magnan Consulting Services Inc. organized under the laws of the
State of Washington, located and doing business at 312 4th Street SE, Suite B, Puyallup, WA
98372, Phone: (253) 255-3932/Fax: (253) 840-3949, Contact: Thomas Magnan (hereinafter
the "Consultant").
I. DESCRIPTION OF WORK.
Consultant shall perform the following services for the City in accordance with the
following described plans and/or specifications:
The Consultant shall provide inspection and materials testing services for the SR
516 and 4th Avenue Improvements Project. For a description, see the Consultant's
Scope of Work which is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference.
Consultant further represents that the services furnished under this Agreement will be
performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices within the Puget Sound
region in effect at the time those services are performed.
II. TIME OF COMPLETION. The parties agree that work will begin on the tasks
described in Section I above immediately upon the effective date of this Agreement. Upon the
effective date of this Agreement, Consultant shall complete the work described in Section I by
June 30, 2011.
III. COMPENSATION.
A. The City shall pay the Consultant, based on time and materials, an amount not to
exceed Twenty Five Thousand, One Hundred Forty Seven Dollars and fifty cents
($25,147.50) for the services described in this Agreement. This is the maximum
amount to be paid under this Agreement for the work described in Section I above,
and shall not be exceeded without the prior written authorization of the City in the
form of a negotiated and executed amendment to this agreement. The Consultant
agrees that the hourly or flat rate charged by it for its services contracted for herein
shall remain locked at the negotiated rate(s) for a period of one (1) year from the
effective date of this Agreement. The Consultant's billing rates shall be as
delineated in Exhibit B.
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 1
(Over $10,000)
B. The Consultant shall submit monthly payment invoices to the City for work t
performed, and a final bill upon completion of all services described in this
Agreement. The City shall provide payment within forty-five (45) days of receipt of ,
an invoice. If the City objects to all or any portion of an invoice, it shall notify the
Consultant and reserves the option to only pay that portion of the invoice not in
dispute. In that event, the parties will immediately make every effort to settle the
disputed portion.
IV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The parties intend that an Independent
Contractor-Employer Relationship will be created by this Agreement. By their execution of this
Agreement, and in accordance with Ch. 51.08 RCW, the parties make the following
representations:
A. The Consultant has the ability to control and direct the performance and
details of its work, the City being interested only in the results obtained
under this Agreement.
B. The Consultant maintains and pays for its own place of business from which
Consultant's services under this Agreement will be performed.
C. The Consultant has an established and independent business that is eligible
for a business deduction for federal income tax purposes that existed before
the City retained Consultant's services, or the Consultant is engaged in an
independently established trade, occupation, profession, or business of the
same nature as that involved under this Agreement.
D. The Consultant is responsible for filing as they become due all necessary tax
documents with appropriate federal and state agencies, including the Internal
Revenue Service and the state Department of Revenue.
E. The Consultant has registered its business and established an account with ,
the state Department of Revenue and other state agencies as may be
required by Consultant's business, and has obtained a Unified Business
Identifier (UBI) number from the State of Washington.
F. The Consultant maintains a set of books dedicated to the expenses and
earnings of its business.
V. TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement, with or without
cause, upon providing the other party thirty (30) days written notice at its address set forth on
the signature block of this Agreement. After termination, the City may take possession of all
records and data within the Consultant's possession pertaining to this project, which may be
used by the City without restriction. If the City's use of Consultant's records or data is not
related to this project, it shall be without liability or legal exposure to the Consultant.
VI. DISCRIMINATION. In the hiring of employees for the performance of work under
this Agreement or any subcontract, the Consultant, its subcontractors, or any person acting on
behalf of the Consultant or subcontractor shall not, by reason of race, religion, color, sex, age,
sexual orientation, national origin, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability,
discriminate against any person who is qualified and available to perform the work to which the
employment relates. Consultant shall execute the attached City of Kent Equal Employment
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 2
(Over $10,000)
Opportunity Policy Declaration, Comply with City Administrative Policy 1.2, and upon completion
of the contract work, file the attached Compliance Statement.
VII. INDEMNIFICATION. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its
officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries,
damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of or in
connection with the Consultant's performance of this Agreement, except for that portion of the
injuries and damages caused by the City's negligence.
The City's inspection or acceptance of any of Consultant's work when completed shall not
be grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW
4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or
damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant
and the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's liability
hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence.
IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE
INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONSULTANT'S WAIVER OF
IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF
THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY
NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement.
VIII. INSURANCE. The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the
Agreement, insurance of the types and in the amounts described in Exhibit C attached and
incorporated by this reference.
IX. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION. The City will provide its best efforts to provide
reasonable accuracy of any information supplied by it to Consultant for the purpose of
completion of the work under this Agreement.
X. OWNERSHIP AND USE OF RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS. Original documents,
drawings, designs, reports, or any other records developed or created under this Agreement
shall belong to and become the property of the City. All records submitted by the City to the
Consultant will be safeguarded by the Consultant Consultant shall make such data, documents,
and files available to the City upon the City's request. The City's use or reuse of any of the
documents, data and files created by Consultant for this project by anyone other than
Consultant on any other project shall be without liability or legal exposure to Consultant.
XI. CITY'S RIGHT OF INSPECTION. Even though Consultant is an independent
contractor with the authority to control and direct the performance and details of the work
authorized under this Agreement, the work must meet the approval of the City and shall be
subject to the City's general right of inspection to secure satisfactory completion.
IXII. WORK PERFORMED AT CONSULTANT'S RISK. Consultant shall take all
necessary precautions and shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and
subcontractors in the performance of the contract work and shall utilize all protection necessary
for that purpose. All work shall be done at Consultant's own risk, and Consultant shall be
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 3
(Over$10,000)
responsible for any loss of or damage to materials, tools, or other articles used or held for use in
connection with the work.
XIII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
A. Recyclable Materials. Pursuant to Chapter 3.80 of the Kent City Code, the City
requires its contractors and consultants to use recycled and recyclable products whenever
practicable. A price preference may be available for any designated recycled product.
B. Non-Waiver of Breach. The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of
any of the covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement, or to exercise any option
conferred by this Agreement in one or more instances shall not be construed to be a waiver or
relinquishment of those covenants, agreements or options, and the same shall be and remain in
full force and effect.
C. Resolution of Disputes and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. If the parties are unable
to settle any dispute, difference or claim arising from the parties' performance of this l
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, including all appeals, 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 VII of this Agreement.
D. Written Notice. All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the
parties at the addresses listed on the signature page of the Agreement, unless notified to the
contrary. Any written notice hereunder shall become effective three (3) business days after the
date of mailing by registered or certified mail, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to
the addressee at the address stated in this Agreement or such other address as may be
hereafter specified in writing.
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 Consultant.
G. Entire Agreement. The written provisions and terms of this Agreement, together
with any Exhibits attached hereto, shall supersede all prior verbal statements of any officer or
other representative of the City, and such statements shall not be effective or be construed as
entering into or forming a part of or altering in any manner this Agreement All of the above
documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement. However, should any language in any of
the Exhibits to this Agreement conflict with any language contained in this Agreement, the terms
of this Agreement shall prevail
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 4
(Over $10,000)
H. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant agrees to comply with all federal, state, and
municipal laws, rules, and regulations that are now effective or in the future become applicable
to Consultant's business, equipment, and personnel engaged in operations covered by this
Agreement or accruing out of the performance of those operations.
fI. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts,
each of which shall constitute an original, and all of which will together constitute this one
Agreement.
IN WITNESS, the parties below execute this Agreement, which shall become
effective on the last date entered below.
CONSULTANT: CITY OF KENT:
By: By:
(signature) (signature)
Print Name: Print Name: Suzette Cooke
Its Its Mayor
(title)
DATE: DATE:
NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: NOTICES TO BE SENT TO:
CONSULTANT: CITY OF KENT:
Thomas Magnan Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E.
Magnan Consulting Services Inc. City of Kent
312 4`h St. SE Suite B 220 Fourth Avenue South
Puyallup, WA 98372 Kent, WA 98032
(253) 255-3932 (telephone) (253) 856-5500 (telephone)
(253) 840-3949 (facsimile) (253) 856-6500 (facsimile)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kent Law Department
Magnan-SR 516&4f°/Tenerelll
i
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 5
(Over$10,000)
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 i
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.
By signing below, I agree to fulfill the five requirements referenced above.
Dated this day of , 20
By:
For:
Title:
Date:
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS - 1
CITY OF KENT
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
NUMBER: 1.2 EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1998
SUBJECT: MINORITY AND WOMEN SUPERSEDES: April 1, 1996
CONTRACTORS APPROVED BY Jim White, Mayor
POLICY:
Equal employment opportunity requirements for the City of Kent will conform to federal and
state laws. All contractors, subcontractors, consultants and suppliers of the City must guarantee
equal employment opportunity within their organization and, if holding Agreements with the City
amounting to $10,000 or more within any given year, must take the following affirmative steps:
1. Provide a written statement to all new employees and subcontractors indicating
commitment as an equal opportunity employer.
2. Actively consider for promotion and advancement available minorities and women.
Any contractor, subcontractor, consultant or supplier who willfully disregards the City's
nondiscrimination and equal opportunity requirements shall be considered in breach of contract
and subject to suspension or termination for all or part of the Agreement.
Contract Compliance Officers will be appointed by the Directors of Planning, Parks, and Public
Works Departments to assume the following duties for their respective departments.
1. Ensuring that contractors, subcontractors, consultants, and suppliers subject to these
regulations are familiar with the regulations and the City's equal employment opportunity
policy.
2. Monitoring to assure adherence to federal, state and local laws, policies and guidelines.
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS - 2
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 , 20
By:
For:
Title:
Date:
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS - 3
Exhibit A
SCOPE OF WORK
Kent Project Number �fG 3QQ
(Sd��yllp) /�Kf9 ��'i" S'"i�77d� OFYSIT��
Attend pre construction meetings.
Attend and participate in periodic project progress meetings.
Provide on-site construction inspection and recommendations regarding construction materials as
requested.
Observe handling and placement of materials Provide density tests to confirm compaction and testing
specifications requirements
Photograph construction materials and methods as appropriate or as directed by the Owner's
Representative.
Sample imported material to evaluate and confirm specification requirements. This includes laboratory
testing for each material type encountered and/or imported to the site. Testing methods shall be
performed according to the current applicable standards.
If defined in the Contract, provide Construction Management Services
tProvide miscellaneous professional services related to this project as directed by the Construction
Manager, i.e. weld, reenforcing, and coating inspections
Provide verbal,electronic and/or paper reports as defined in "DELIVERABLES" below.
DOCUMENTS TO BE FURNISHED BY THE CONSULTANT
Provide to the owner within two hours of discovery, notification of failing test results related to
materials testing, concrete cylinder breaks or other critical test results as determined by the Owner's
Representative. Written and graphic materials test reports shall clearly indicate the specified range of
the various materials being tested and how or where the actual test samples fell within the specified
range In situ materials compaction reports shall include their stationing within project limits. Routine
test reports shall be submitted at the same time as invoices that encompass the same time period.
As directed by the Owner's Representative, provide photographic evidence of various materials and
methodologies
If included in the contract, provide Construction Management Services including budget tracking, daily
report summaries, field measurements and pay estimate documents and/or preparation.
Provide invoices to the City in a timely fashion and in the type and manner prescribed by the
• Construction Manager. The minimum requirements will include the hours and fees as described above
along with the City's project number and an accounting of the total contract sum, amount invoiced-to-
date and remaining contract balance.
Provide time sheets with each invoice that verify Consultant employee(s), day, date and times worked, i
hourly rate, total per day, mileage; tests performed and test fees,along with day and date, and any
other pertinent information required to verify invoiced charges.
1
Exhibit E
Consultant Fee Determination - Summary Sheet
(Lump Sum, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, Cost Per Unit of Work)
Project: SR5I6 and 4th Avenue Improvements
Direct Salary Cost (DSC):
' Classification Man Hours RAW
Chief Inspector 100 X 95.00 $ — 950.00
CL I Inspector _ 1000 X 74.00 7,40000
CL 1 Document Control _22 5 X l55.00 1,237.50
Mileage 320.0 X 050 160.00
X
X
--- X ---—
Total DSC = $ _ 9,747.50
Overhead (OH Cost -- including Salary Additives):
OH Rate x DSC of % x $ 9,74750 0.00
Fixed Fee (FF):
FF Rate x DSC of % x $ 9,74750 0.00
Reimbursables:
Itemized 250.00
consultant Costs (See Exhibit G): 15,150.00
Grand Total 25,147.50
Prepared By Date 3/& 3//0
DOT Form 1089 EF Exhibit E-1 G f)�F; AIL
Revised
6ro5
CITY OF KENT 2010 RATE SHEET 1-1-10 TO 12-31-11 MCSI
MCSI Rates are based on the certifications that Inspectors have and the complexity of the project or if muluble projects are
being inspected by one Inspector below are rates we use for King County& SPU on there projects
INSPECTOR CLASIFICATIONS STRAIGHT RATE TIME& HALF DOUBLE TIME
CL I Inspector 10 to Iwo ICC certs S 7400 S 9990 $ 11100
CL 2 Inspector/three to four ICC certs $ 76 00 $ 102 60 $ 11400
CL 3 Inspector/five to six ICC torts $ 7800 S 105 30 $ 117 00
CL 4 Inspectors seven or more ICC certs S 8000 $ 10800 $ 12000
CL 5 Inspector I Geo•Engineer $ 8200 S 11070 S 12300
Chief Inspector/CEO $ 9500 $ 12850 S 14250
Iravel expences from office to job site and back to office 50 per mile or the current DOT rates
DOCUMENT CONTROL STRAIGHT RATE TIME& HALF
CL I Document specialist $ 5500
CL 2 Document specialist $ 6500
Document specialist CL2 is rates for federal funded projects meeting the LAG manuel requirements
Document specialist CLI ,s rates for non federal funded projects
DITBet Materials expences as binders,paper,etc at invoice plus 15%
Thomas R Magnan/ CEO
Magnan Consulting Services Inc
312 4th Street South East
Puyallup,Nt'a 98372
Office 253-840-4020 j
Fax 253-840-3949
[oNsb[n�G
setvl[Es
y53-255-393?
MAGNAN CONSULTING SERVICES INC
' tf, &'J, U"q . Tyr & &.,"a' .
Inspection & Document control Budget
For
SR 515 & 4`h Ave Improvement
Budget is based on 10 working days at 10hrs a day for an Inspector
Budget:
Chief Inspector to set up, oversight, and close out 10 hrs x $95.00=$950.00
Site Inspector CL 1 on site continuous 100hrs x $74.00 =$7400.00
Vehicle expense 32 miles a day x 10 days —320 miles x .50 = $160.00
Budget Inspection $ 8,510.00
Optional Document Control
Budget:
CLI Document Control Specialist 10 days x 2.25 hours a day =22.5 hrs
22.5 hrs x $55.00 = $ 1,237 50
Budget Document Control $I,237.50
Keeping an mind that this is a budget only, charges are based on actual hours worked
and figuring a 10 hr day which the Contractor could do The chief Inspector starts the
project with the Inspector and CM team to insure that the Inspector fits with other team
members and to set up a communication. and operational protocol The time to set that
up will depend on the complexity of the project.
Thank you for the opportunity
' Thomas wlagnan /CEO
x.. .... . . .7--�
--- .. ...... 3-12-2010
312 4`h Street SE Suite B Puvallun, Wa 98372 253-255-3932 / fax 253-840-3949
Thomas.Magnan@magnanconsulting.com
EXHIBIT C
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENTS
Insurance
The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement,
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which
may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder
by the Consultant, their agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Consultant 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. The City shall be named as an
Additional Insured under the Consultant'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
Consultant 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, $2,000,000 general
aggregate.
l
1
EXHIBIT C (Continued)
C. Other Insurance Provisions
1 The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following
provisions for Automobile Liability and Commercial General Liability
insurance;
1. The Consultant'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 Consultant's
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
2. The Consultant'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 Consultant and a copy of the endorsement
naming the City as additional insured shall be attached to the
Certificate of Insurance. The City reserves the right to receive a
certified copy of all required insurance policies. The Consultant's
Commercial General Liability insurance shall also contain a clause
stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against
whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the
limits of the insurer's liability.
D. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not
less than ANII.
E. Verification of Coverage
Consultant 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 Consultant before commencement of the work.
F. Subcontractors
Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or
shall furnish 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 Consultant.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6J
1. SUBJECT: TACOMA SECOND SUPPLY PROJECT HYBRID FILTRATION AND
BOND SALE - AUTHORIZE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorize the Mayor to sign all documents to form
and construct the Hybrid Filtration alternative for the Tacoma Second Supply
project, to participate with the SSP partners to select the most economically
advantageous bonds and to issue those bonds as necessary to complete
construction of the Hybrid Filtration alternative.
The SSP partners have determined that hybrid filtration is the best option for the
Green River supply to meet these requirements. This is an unfunded mandate
from the Federal Government. Tacoma and the SSP partners are obligated to
fund the construction of the treatment facilities, and Kent is a partner with
contractual obligations to participate in the project with its share of the funding.
Kent's share will total approximately $19 million dollars or approximately 11% of
the total project cost.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Memo dated 4/14/2010
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue?
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
1
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte P E , Public Works Director
• Phone 253-856-5500
K E N T Fax 253-856-6500
Address, 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: April 14, 2010
To: Chair Debbie Raplee and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date April 19, 2010
From: Brad Lake, Water Superintendent
Through: Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E., Public Works Director
' Subject: Tacoma Second Supply Project (SSP) Hybrid Filtration and Bond
Sale
Motion:
Move to authorize the Mayor to sign all documents necessary to form and
construct the Hybrid Filtration alternative for the Tacoma Second Supply
project, to participate with the SSP partners to select the most
economically advantageous bonds and to issue those bonds as necessary to
complete construction of the Hybrid Filtration alternative.
Summary: Tacoma and the Second Supply Project partners have been evaluating
several different options for the treatment of the Green River Water supply. The
' water supply must meet the EPA requirements for long term treatment of surface
water sources to ensure removal or inactivation of cryptosporidium. This removal
must be completed by 2014. This requirement is to protect public health.
The SSP partners have determined that hybrid filtration is the best option for the
Green River supply to meet these requirements. This is an unfunded mandate from
the Federal Government. Tacoma and the SSP partners are obligated to fund the
construction of the treatment facilities, and Kent is a partner with contractual
obligations to participate in the project with its share of the funding.
There is significant financial benefit for Kent to participate in a $169 million bond
sale with the other SSP partners. Better bond rates are anticipated. Kent staff
should be directed to proceed with the bond sale Kent's share will total
approximately $19 million dollars or approximately 11% of the total project cost,
and pursuant to our cost share agreement.
Budget Impact: The funds for payment of the debt service required by this bond
sale have been included in the current rate structure for the Kent water system, as
described in the 2008 rate analysis by FCS Group and the 2008 Kent Water System
plan, approved by the Kent City Council.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6K
1. SUBJECT: FAIRWAY CREST BILL OF SALE - ACCEPT
1 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the Bill of Sale for the Fairway Crest
pro3ect for 6 sanitary sewer manholes, 617.3 linear feet of sanitary sewer line,
234 linear feet of new street, 3 storm sewer manholes, 6 catch basins,
8,143 cubic feet of detention pond storage, and 686 linear feet of storm sewer
line.
3. EXHIBITS: Bill of Sale
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
4
^A�mi
KENT
WASHINGTON
MAIL TO:
1 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: a14'-
220 4Te AVENUE SOUTH
KENT,WASHINGTON 98032
PROJECT: Fi6v-Vv,(u 6/e5
LOCATION:
TAX ACCT NO:
BILL OF SALE
CITY OF KENT
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
THIS INSTRUMENT made this lXyAx IC h( day of N(oy p%,n�t5^v 20 0 by
and between YWct I Cv- - k.-L-C
hereinafter called "Grantors", and City of Kent, a municipal corporation of King County, State of
Washington,hereinafter called "Grantee":
WITNESSETH:
That the said Grantors for a valuable consideration,does hereby grant,bargain,sell to
Grantee the following described improvements:
A. WATE,RMAINS: N/P/ together with a total of gate valves at$
each, hydrants at$ each and/or any other
appurtenances thereto.
ON FROM TO
(street,esmt, etc)
Including linear feet at$ per LF of
(size& type) waterline.
B. , SANITARY SEWERS: Together with a total of manholes at
$ 113oC1 each and /or any other appurtenances thereto.
1 of 4
Bill of Sale
ON SG• 2C0
cO�S+• � FROM F. U F �2L4 ""' St
th
PY-Wa it S1YZ� j �� L` TO S� ZS b
(street,esmt, etc)
Including lP I-1 • 3 linear feet at$ 25 ov per LF of
(size&type) PVC sewer line.
C. STREETS: Together with curbs,gutters,sidewalks,and/or any other appurtenances
thereto.
ON SE 25S Sfi FROM E ef' 1214 T`I We, S U TO -k4 e. P—�e1 U P St t�� �`•
(street,esmt,etc)
Including 2'3 q centerline LF at$ 1 C-�b b per LF of�00 +
(type)streets, 1L0 Feet asphalt roadway.
A STORM SEWERS: Together with a total of 3 manholes at$ )1 IOC
each or a total of U2 atch basins at$ S+aC2 each,
N Pt LF of biofiltration Swale or drainage ditch with a total cost of$
8i ILl',� CF of detention pond storage with a total cost of$_ ,and/or any
other appurtenances thereto.
SE Zq'Db1"1 &+ $
ON p,,- u eSl�reet S FROM & 0r- 1241 � SE TO SE Z�O(o�'� Si�,
(street,esmt, etc)
Including 2 b•a q4•2ligear feet at$ 15.00 Z30 oo per LF of 12t
(size& type) ' V 0-16 . sewer line.
To have and to hold the same to the said Grantee,its successors and assigns forever.
The undersigned hereby covenants that it is the lawful owner of said property; and that the
same is free from all encumbrances;that all bills for labor and material have been paid;
that it has the right to sell the same aforesaid;that it will warrant and defend the same
against the lawful claims and demand of all person.
The Bill of Sale is given on consideration of the agreement of the Grantee for itself,its
successors and assigns to incorporate said utilities in its utility system and to maintain them
as provided in the applicable City Ordinances.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed on
this day of f\uv rw.Gsr r ,20 t- ;
2 of 4
Bill of Sale
ADDENDUM TO BILL OF SALE
CITY OF KENT
The figures used on the Bill of Sale for �FGL� y-,J G.� C Y eS
SAC 1 `a-+ project dated �h � ��2 bC�3 ,were
based on the"As-Built" Engineering Plans dated for
the same said Gr r W project.
the
undersigned P.E. or land surveyor is the person responsible for the preparation of the Bill
of Sale and is an employee of 1:)O'1 ) 1 NG • , the firm
responsible for the preparation of the "As-Built" Engineering Drawings.
sJ
ignature
e �
4 of 4
Bdl of lale
i
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6L
1. SUBJECT: PUNJAB BILL OF SALE - ACCEPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the Bill of Sale for the Punjab Plat for
6 gate valves, 1 hydrant, 725 linear feet of watermain, 12 sanitary sewer man-
holes, 1170 linear feet of sanitary sewer line; 450 linear feet of new street,
4 storm sewer manholes, 4 storm sewer catch basins, 9000 cubic ft of detention
pond storage, and 340 linear feet of storm sewer lines.
1
1
3. EXHIBITS: Bill of Sale
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
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
rMAIL TO:
CITY OF KENT
' ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
ATT N:
22D - 4T" AVENUE SOUTH
WASH I N CI T O N KENT, WASHINGTON 98032
Project: Punjab Plat
CITY or- RENT Permit #:--2040T91, adsv�V3
_ MAR o 9 2010 Location. Reith Rd and 36`h Ave S
ENGINEERING C)EPT Parcel # multiple .
BILL OF SALE
CITY OF KENT
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
THIS INSTRUMENT made this day of J OLVIWLA 20 ID by and between
hereinafter called
"Grantors", and City of Kent, a municipal corporation of King County, State of Washington, hereinafter called
"Grantee
WITNESSETH:
That the said Grantors for a valuable consideration does hereby grant, bargain, sell to Grantee the following
described improvements:
A. WATERMAINS:
Together with a total of 6 gate valves at $ 200 each, 1 hydrants at
' $ 5,000 each and/or any other appurtenances thereto.
ON FROM TO
(street, easement, etc.)
35T" PL S and easement 3ST"PL S Reith Rd and 36ih Ave S
Including 725 linear feet at $ 80 per LF of 8"diameter
(size & type) DI waterline.
B. SANITARY SEWERS:
Together with a total of 12 manholes at $ 2,500 each and/or any other
appurtenances thereto.
ON FROM TO
(street, easement, etc.)
35T"PL, easement, Reith Rd 35T" PL S 38T" Ave S
Including 1,170 linear feet at $ 60 per LF of 8"diameter
(size & type) PVC sewerline
Bill of Sale
Iof5
C. NEW STREETS:
Together with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and/or any other appurtenances
ON FROM TO
(street, easement, etc.)
35T" PL S South end West end
Including 4SO linear feet at $ 400 per LF of 20-28" AC pavement
(size & type) S'sidewalk, 6" curb and nutter (improvement).
D. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS:
Together with lights, trees, landscaping (except residential streets) and/or any other appurtenances
ON FROM TO
(street, easement, etc.)
35u' P1 S South end
Including linear feet at $ per LF of street trees
(size &type) (improvement).
1
E. STORM SEWERS:
Together with a total of 4 manholes at $ 1,500 each or total of 4 catch
basins at $ 1,500 each, 0 LF of biofdtration swale or drainage ditch with
a total cost of$ 6,000 9,000 cubic feet of detention pond storage with a
total cost of$ 25,000 and/or any other appurtenances thereto
ON FROM TO
(street, easement, etc.)
Reith Rd At 36T"Ave S
Including 340 linear feet at $ 52 per LF of 12" and 19" diameter
(size & type) PVC and DI sewerline.
To have and to hold the same to the said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever.
The undersigned hereby covenants that it is the lawful owner of said property; and that the same is free
from all encumbrances, that ail bills for labor and materials have been paid; that it has the right to sell
the same aforesaid; that it will warrant and defend the same against the lawful claims and demand of all
person(s).
The Bill of Sale is given on consideration of the agreement of the Grantee for itself, its successors and
assigns to incorporate said utilities in its utility system and to maintain them as provided in the applicable
City Ordinances. The City accepts the items subject to staff approval and completion of a 2 year
maintenance period
Bill of Sale
2 of 5
iIN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed on this
qTl' day of )W-fAZa/-/ , 20 /y
c
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed on this
day of , 20
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SS
COUNTY OF KING )
' On this day of MW/fe-17'Oe 20 Id before me, the
undersigned A Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally
appeared M166 _G 0,4 g4 G ® to me known to be the individual described in and
who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she signed and sealed this
instrument as his/her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned
GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of Ai 4r1 20 M
1
4648000eeoelAloo,Q
�� �o • Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
NOTAR
PUB LIC My Commission Expires:
••i,',®�,�A�AS���°eta
Bill of Sale
3 of 5
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SS
COUNTY OF KING j
On this day of , 20 , before me, the
undersigned A Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally
appeared and to me to be the
and respectively of
the that executed the foregoing
instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said
for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that
they are authorized to execute the said instrument
Witness my hand and official seal hereto affix the day and year first above written.
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My Commission Expires:
The Bill of Sale is given and accepted pursuant to a motion duly made, seconded, and passed by the City
Council of the City of Kent, King County, Washington, on the day of
20
'a
Bill of Sale
4 of 5
•
KENTT
WA S H I N O T a H
ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION
' CITY OF KENT
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
' The figures used on the Bill of Sale for Pun)ab Plat project
dated December 2009 for the same said
project. Larry McAndrews the undersigned
P.E. or land surveyor is the person responsible for the preparation of the Bill of Sale and
is an employee of CHS Engineers. LLC , the firm
' responsible for the preparation of the record drawings.
i Q to
' Sign re F
(Engineer stamp required) � �y' •_
•' IS•fr'.Y1 /
' Bill of Sale
5 of 5
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
' Category Consent Calendar - 6M
' 1. SUBJECT: SCENIC HEIGHTS (AKA SCENIC HILL) SEWER EXTENSION BILL OF
SALE - ACCEPT
' 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the Bill of Sale for the Scenic Hill Sewer
Extension protect for 2 sanitary sewer manholes, and 203.5 linear feet of sanitary
sewer line.
1
3. EXHIBITS: Bill of Sale
' 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
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
' DISCUSSION:
' ACTION:
' Page 1 of 3
' KENT
WASHINGTON
MAIL TO:
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
ATTN:
220 4rn AVENUE SOUTH
KENT,WASHINGTON 98
' �5 34Z�
n
PROIECT.ScewiG lie a��S /Ak04"CIEEc Fit((
$Ga,0& bon
LOCATION:-T'amn� St, cc+
Kensl nyian Aue
' TAX ACCT NO:
BILL OF SALE
' CITY OF ICENT
KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON
' THIS INSTRUMENT made this /U'r day of 20_Z_,by and
between
hereinafter called"Grantors",and City of Kent,a municipal corporation of King County,State of
Washington,hermafter called"Grantee":
' WITN> SSETH:
That the said Grantors for a valuable consideration,does hereby grant,bat gain,sell to
' Grantee the following described improvements:
A. WAIL,RMAM: together with a total of gate valves at$
each, hydrants at$ each and/or any other
' apputtenances thereto.
ON FROM TO
(street,esmt,etc)
' Including linear feet at$ per LF of
(size&type) waterline.
' B. SANITARY SE1VIM: Together with a total of Z manholes at
$ '?-Soo each and/or any other appurtenances thereto.
' ON —Fo" , St. FROM 'evtSl ncS n /due TO
(street,esmt,etc)
Including Z03.S linear feet at$ _per LF o
f P) l✓ldn
' (size&type) ?y G sewer line.
C. STREETS: Together with curbs,gutters,sidewalks,and/or any other appurtenances
thereto.
' ON FROM TO
(street,esmt,etc)
Including centerline LF at$ per LF of
(type)streets, Feet asphalt roadway.
A STORM SEWERS: Together with a total of manholes at$
each or a total of catch basins at$ each,
LF of biofiltration swale or drainage ditch with a total cost of$
Page 1 of 3
Bill of Sale
Dln Vi Jdlc
Page 2 of 3
CF of detention pond stornge with a total cost of$ and/or any
other appurtenances thereto.
ON FROM TO ,
(street,esmt,etc)
Including linear feet at$ per LF of '
(size&type) sewer line.
To have and to hold the same to the said Grantee,its successors and assigns forever.
The undersigned hereby covenants that it is the lawful owner of said property;and that the '
same is free from all encumbi ances;that all bills for labor and material have been paid;that
it has Clio right to sell the same aforesaid;that it will warrant and defend the same against the
lawful claims and demand of all pet son. '
The Bill of Sale is given on consideration of the agreement of the Grantee for itself,its
successors and assigns to incorpoi ate said utilities in its utility system and to maintain them as
provided in the applicable City Ordinances.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed on this
/ f N day of 2007
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)SS
COUNTY OF KING
On this V day of 1 20 before me,the
undersigned A Notary Public in and for the St e of W shington,duly commissioned and
sworn,Personally appeared�r0,ty L\A'M to me known to be the
individual desct ibed in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged to me
that he/she signed and sealed this instrument as liis/het free and voluntary act and deed for
the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
GIVEN under my hand and official seal this AL day of f1YNt I 20
4AV"I
Not N tary Public i an for the
state off Water, State of Washington,iesidmg at ,
HEATHER MIHOMAS
My Appointment Expires Apr 17,200g
My Commission Expires:_
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ,
)SS
COUNTY OF KING ) '
On this day of 20 before
me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,duly commissioned
and sworn,personally appeared and '
to me known to be the and
respectively of the
that executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free
and voluntary act and deed of said for the uses and
purposes therein mentioned,and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute the said
instrument.
Page 2 of 3 '
Bill of Sale
n me
Page 3 of 3
Witness my hand and official seal hereto affix the day and year first above written.
Notary Public in and for the
State of Washington,residing at
My Commission Expires:
The Bill of Sale is given and accepted pursuant to a motion duly made,seconded,and passed
by the City Council of the City of I{eat,King County,Washington,on the
day of 20
' Page 3of3
Bill of Sale
Jun 06 07 0904a DMR Inc 253-333-2206 p 2 ,
40
WASH 1 N G T O H ,
ADDEND17NI TO BILL OF SALE
CITY OF IENT
KING COUNTY,V�_A.SDINGT4iN C ,
The figures used on the Bill of Sate for J i i V 5 cue �X 1v1Qr)
-project dated.V 9)O�j� were ,
based on the"As-Bunt"Enbineering Plans dated for
the same said project, '
) the '
undersigned P.E.or land surveyor is the person responsible for the preparation of the Rill
of Sale and is an employee of Dok.f -;(AUfr,)tol ao�ojf � , L n�, the firm ,
responsible for the preparation of the"As-Built"Engineering Drawings- �
-- 0
Signature a,
19258
�4NAL .�'i�`a'
rrs JANUARY 9,20ng
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6N
1. SUBJECT: KENT HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS -
CONFIRM
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirm the Mayor's appointment of Ted Schwarz,
David Watson and Broderick (BJ) Phillips to the Human Services Commission.
Mr. Schwarz will serve on the commission as a member from the Education
community and his term will expire on January 1, 2013.
' Mr. Watson will serve on the commission as a Youth member and his term will
expire on January 1, 2011.
Mr. Phillips will serve on the commission as a Youth member and his term will
expire on January 1, 2011.
3. EXHIBITS: Memorandum
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Cooke
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
' 5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
' Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
' ACTION:
1 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
Suzette Cooke, Mayor
' Phone 253-856-5700
Fax 253-856-6700
' Address 220 Fourth Avenue S
KENTKent, WA 98032-5895
W A 5 ENT
J i-( N
1 TO: Jamie Perry, Council President
City Council Members
FROM: Suzette Cooke, Mayor
DATE: May 4, 2010
RE: Appointments to the Human Services Commission
' I am requesting approval of my appointment of Ted Schwarz, David Watson and
Broderick (BJ) Phillips to the Kent Human Services Commission.
' Mr. Schwarz is a Panther Lake resident and is currently employed as a Counselor at
Renton Technical College. Ted has a long history of community involvement
' through the Kent School District, South King County National Alliance for the
Mentally III, Kent Parks, and was previously employed with Valley Cities Counseling
and Consultation. Mr. Schwarz remains committed to assisting various social
service agencies and looks forward to his appointment to the Human Services
Commission I am pleased to appoint Mr. Schwarz to represent the Education field
on the Human Services Commission. His term will expire January 1, 2013.
David Watson is a sophomore at Kent Meridian High School and Kent resident.
David is very involved at KM with DECA, National Honor Society, Student Body
Council and the Technology Academy. Mr. Watson participates in football, cross
country track and field, wrestling and Judo. His current studies include honors
English and history, pre-calculus, biology and chemistry, marketing, French and
Jazz band. David's interest in the Human Services Commission is to understand the
process and offer support from a youth perspective upon reviewing community
needs. I am pleased to recommend David to represent youth in our community on
the Human Services Commission. David's term will expire January 1, 2011.
Broderick (BJ) Phillips attends Kent Meridian High School where he excels in
academics BJ has an interest in the Human Services Commission and the support
the commission provides in the Kent community. He is eager to serve his
community and will serve as a youth member on the commission. BJ's term will
expire January 1, 2011.
I am pleased to submit Ted Schwarz, BJ Phillips and David Watson for your
' confirmation to the Human Services Commission.
i
1 Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
' Category Consent Calendar - 60
' 1. SUBJECT: CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION REAPPOINTMENT - CONFIRM
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation the Mayor's re-appointment of
Pauline Thomas to the Kent Civil Service Commission.
Ms. Thomas' term will expire April 30, 2016.
3. EXHIBITS: Memorandum
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Cooke
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
' DISCUSSION:
' ACTION:
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
Suzette Cooke, Mayor
Phone 253-856-5700
Fax 253-856-6700
Address 220 Fourth Avenue S
KEN T Kent,WA 98032-5895
WA S I I J I-ON
TO' Jamie Perry, Council President
City Council Members
FROM. Suzette Cooke, Mayor
DATE* May 4, 2010
RE Re-Appointment to the Civil Service Commission
I am requesting your approval of my re-appointment of Pauline Thomas to the Civil
' Service Commission
Pauline Thomas was first appointed to the Civil Service Commission in May of 2002
Since that time she was re-appointed to an additional six year term that expired the end
of April Pauline and her husband are long time Kent residents that operated a
business in downtown for many years She is employed with the Auburn School District
as an Elementary School Principal. She has a long history of community service, was
active for many years in the Kent Chamber of Commerce and Kent Kiwanis Pauline
also serves on the Board of Trustees for SKCAC Industries.
It is my pleasure to re-appoint Pauline for an additional six-year term that will expire
April 30, 2016
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6P
' 1. SUBJECT: VERDANA (AKA BRIDGES) MODIFICATION TO PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE - ADOPT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adopt Ordinance No. regarding approval of
the Revised Major Modification to the Verdana Planned Unit Development (PUD)
(PUD 2004-4(R)). On March 15, 2010, the Hearing Examiner issued Findings,
Conclusions and a Recommendation of approval with conditions of the revised
Verdana PUD Major Modification to construct a commercial development within
the future development tracts of the original PUD. The revisions include
clustering of buildings and parking to the interior of the site, reduction of total
impervious surfaces, reduction in total number of buildings, increased open
space, installation of solid screen and visual screen landscaping, and identification
of a unified design concept. Council voted on April 20, 2010, to adopt the
Hearing Examiner's recommendation with two modifications.
The two modifications are described in Recital D and are incorporated in
Section 2, subsections 1 and 2, in the attached ordinance. Staff directs your
' attention to those provisions to confirm the modification language concurs with
the intent of your previous motion.
3. EXHIBITS: Ordinance
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Hearing Examiner
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? No Revenue? No
Currently in the Budget? Yes No X
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
' Counalmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
' ACTION:
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
1 City of Kent, Washington, granting a revised major
modification of the Verdana Planned Unit
Development located at 12200 SE 304th Street,
Kent, Washington (PUD-2004-4(R)).
RECITALS
A. The Verdana Planned Unit Development (PUD) (PUD 2004-
` 4(R)) received approval with conditions for a 378 lot single family
residential development and Future Development Tracts on February 16,
2006 (the "2006 PUD Approval"). Kent 25 LLC/Kent 160 LLC (Applicant)
submitted a request for a major modification of the PUD on September 12,
2006. The City Council denied the major modification request without
prejudice by Ordinance No. 3874 on February 19, 2008. The Applicant
filed a Land Use Petition Act (LUPA) appeal of the City Council's action in
King County Superior Court on March 10, 2008.
B. The Applicant submitted a revised request for major
' modification on July 2, 2009 (Revised Major Modification). The City's SEPA
responsible official analyzed the environmental impact of the Revised Major
Modification under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Ch 43.21C
RCW. The City issued an addendum to the City's October 16, 2007 Revised
Mitigation Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) on December 31,
2009. The Addendum determined that the impacts of the Revised Major
Modification are consistent with the type of development analyzed under
1 Verdana PUD —
' Approve Revised Major Modification
the October 16, 2007 MDNS, and concluded that adequate environmental
analysis has been conducted under SEPA. ,
C. A community meeting was held regarding the Revised Major
Modification on October 13, 2009, and an open public hearing followed on
March 3, 2010. The hearing examiner issued findings, conclusions, and a '
recommendation of approval with conditions on March 15, 2010
(Recommendation). The Recommendation is attached as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein.
D. On April 20, 2010, the City Council voted to adopt, with
modifications, the Recommendation and approve the Revised Major
Modification. The first modification to the Recommendation is to clarify
that the conditions attached to the approval of the Revised Major ;
Modification are in addition to the conditions originally imposed in the 2006
PUD Approval. The second modification is to clarify that the traffic
conditions imposed on the Revised Major Modification relate only to revised
improvements required for the Revised Major Modification. Traffic
conditions imposed in the 2006 PUD Approval are governed by the 2006
PUD Approval. If the development envisioned by the Revised Major
Modification occurs prior to the development envisioned by the 2006 PUD
Approval, traffic improvements adjacent to the Revised Major Modification
will be constructed consistent with the 2006 PUD Approval and the Revised
Major Modification. ,
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
2 Verdana PUD —
Approve Revised Major Modification '
ORDINANCE
SECTION 1. - Recitals Incorporated as Findings. The foregoing
recitals are incorporated by this reference.
SECTION 2. - Decision. The hearing examiner's findings,
conclusions and recommendation (Recommendation), dated March 15,
2010, is attached and incorporated as Exhibit "A." The City Council
adopts the Recommendation approving the Revised Major Modification with
the following modifications:
1. Council imposes conditions A. 1 through 9 and B.1 through 3
in addition to the conditions imposed in the 2006 PUD Approval.
2. Council modifies Condition B. 1 to clarify that construction of
improvements prior to a certificate of occupancy for the commercial
' development is related to additional improvements only required by the
commercial development and not to those improvements originally
required by the 2006 PUD Approval.
B. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A COMMERCIAL
' CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THE APPLICANT SHALL:
1. Construct required road and utility improvements
adjacent to and onlyef serving the commercial development
within the future development tracts as required through the
February IS, 2006 Verdana PUD approval and the Revised
MDNS issued October 16, 2007, including any mitigation (EMA
' or EMF) charges.
SECTION 3. - Severability. If any one or more sections, sub-
sections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or
invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion
of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect.
3 Verdana PUD -
Approve Revised Major Modification
SECTION 4. - Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws,
codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and ,
section/subsection numbering.
SECTION S. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and
be in force five (5) days from and after its publication as provided by law. ,
SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM: t
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of May, 2010.
APPROVED: day of May, 2010.
PUBLISHED: day of May, 2010.
4 Verdana PUD -
Approve Revised Major Modification
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P\Civil\Ordinance\Verdana-PUDMajorModiflcationApproval docx
1
1
I
t
1
1
I
' 5 Verdana PUD —
Approve Revised Major Modification
EXHIBIT
1 LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER
Theodore Paul Hunter
� Hearing Examiner
CITY OF KENT
WASHINGTON
In the Matter of the Application of ) No. PUD-2004-4(R)
KIVA#RPP4-2091934
Kent 25 LLC / Kent 160 LLC )
The Village at Bridges
(formerly known as Verdana)
For Approval of a Revised Request for ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS,
PUD Major Modification ) AND RECOMMENDATION
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
The revised request for major modification of a previously-approved Planned Unit
Development, PUD-2004-4, to include an assisted living facility and retail,
commercial, and office uses within future development tracts of PUD-2004-4,
' located at 12200 SE 304th Street, Kent, Washington should be APPROVED.
Conditions of approval are necessary to mitigate specific impacts of the proposed
development.
SUMMARY OF RECORD
Request:
Kent 25 LLC / Kent 160 LLC makes a revised request for major modification of a
previously-approved Planned Unit Development, PUD-2004-4, to include an assisted
living facility and retail, commercial, and office uses within future development
tracts of PUD-2004-4. The property subject to the requests is located at 12200 SE
304th Street, Kent, Washington.
Hearing Date:
The Hearing Examiner held an open record hearing on the request on March 3,
2010.
Testlmonv:
The following individuals presented testimony under oath at the open record
' hearing:
Sharon Clamp, City Planner
Virginia Haugen
Art Weichbrodt
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Heanng Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bndges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 1 of 32
Debbie Pratum
Mike Pratum
Corey Forsberg
Eric Pfaff
Mary Roberts
Michael Huey, P.E., Applicant Project Manager ,
Kevin Jones, P.E., Applicant Transportation Engineer
Katherine Orni, Applicant Planner and Development Manager
Kim Adams-Pratt, City Attorney, represented the City of Kent at the open record t
hearing. Mike Murphy, Attorney at Law, represented the Applicant at the open
record hearing.
Exhibits:
1. City Staff Report, dated February 24, 2010 ,
2. Revised Modification to Planned Unit Development Application, received July
2, 2009
3. Revised PUD Major Modification Description, undated
4. The Village at Bridges Revised PUD Major Modification Description, received
September 22, 2009
S. Village at Bridges Amendment to the Verdana Technical Information Report, '
dated July 2009
6. Large and Reduced Schematic Plans Set: Sheets A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4,
dated December 23, 2008 ,
7. Large and Reduced Plan Set: Sheets 1 - 10, Bridges PUD Major Modification
(Formerly Verdana), dated September 21, 2009
8. Large Plan Set: SSD Profile Exhibit, Bridges PUD Major Modification (Formerly
Verdana), dated January 14, 2010; and 124th Avenue SE Channelization
Exhibit, Bridges PUD Major Modification (Formerly Verdana), dated January
14, 2010
9. Comments from the City of Auburn
A. Email message from Elizabeth Chamberlain, Principal Planner, City of
Auburn, dated February 9, 2010
B. Letter from Elizabeth Chamberlain, Principal Planner, City of Auburn,
dated February 9, 2010
C. Email message from Joe Welsh, Transportation Planner, City of Auburn,
dated January 12, 2010
D. Email message from Joe Welsh, Transportation Planner, City of Auburn,
dated November 16, 2009
E. Letter from Chris Hankins, Senior Planner, City of Auburn, dated
December 18, 2007
F. Letter from Chris Hankins, Senior Planner, City of Auburn, dated
November 6, 2007
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(Ry RPP4-209I934
Page 2 of 32 ,
G. Letter from Michael Davollo, Director, Planning Building and Community
Department, City of Auburn, dated February 12, 2007
10. Public Comment
A. Email message from Ron and Carole Novak, dated January 17, 2010, with
response by Fred Satterstrom, City of Kent Planning Director, dated
January 22, 2010
B. Letter from Crystal Meadows Community Members, dated November 11,
2009
11. City Staff Comments, dated September 17, 2009 and July 8, 2009
12. City Routing Slip, dated July 8, 2009
13. Notice Documents
A. Notice of Public Hearing, dated February 20, 2010, with accompanying
affidavit of posting, dated February 19, 2010; Vicinity Map, undated;
Declaration of Service, dated February 19, 2010, and distribution list; and
' Email notice of publication, dated February 16, 2010
B. Notice of Staff Report distribution, accompanying Declaration of Service,
and distribution list, dated February 24, 2010
14. Notice of Community Meeting, dated October 3, 2009, with accompanying
Email notice of publication, dated September 30, 2009; Email message from
Michael Huey, Project Manager, dated September 29, 2009; Distribution list;
Public Comments, dated October 13, 2009; and Sign-In Sheet, dated October
13, 2009
15. Mixed Use Design Review Decision Document, dated January 7, 2010
16. Addendum to Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, dated December
31, 2009
17. Revised SEPA Environmental Checklist, dated September 8, 2009
18. Verdana Planned Unit Development Application, received September 12,
2006
19. Email message from Dan Repp, Utilities Engineer, City of Auburn Public
Works, dated September 17, 2007, with attached facsimile from Dan Repp,
dated September 18, 2007
20. Letter from Beth Tan, City Environmental Engineer, dated July 16, 2007
21. City Council Resolution No. 3858, adopted May 16, 2005
22. Revised Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, dated October 16, 2007
23. Mixed Use Design Review Decision Document, dated October 9, 2007
24. Site Plans: Trail Plan, Sheet L1.05, dated July 6, 2007; Preliminary Site Plan,
Sheet S1.01A, dated July 6, 2007; Preliminary Landscape Plan, Sheet
L1.02A, dated July 6, 2007; Preliminary Landscape Plant Legend, Sheet
L1.01, dated May 4, 2007
25. Building Character Examples, Sheets A1.01 and A1.02, dated July 13, 2007
and May 1, 2007, respectively
26. Verdana Commercial Revised Transportation Impact Analysis, dated May
2007
27. Amendment to Verdana Technical Information Report, dated May 3, 2007
28. Wetland Assessment, dated September 20, 2004
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 3 of 32
29. Letter from Erin Fehringer, City Environmental Engineer, dated July 11, 2007
30. Wetland Buffer Averaging Plan, Sheet W1.01, dated May 4, 2007
31. Hearing Examiner Findings, Conclusions, and Decision, Verdana PUD 2004-4
and Subdivision SU 2004-11, dated February 15, 2006
32. City Staff Report, Verdana PUD — Major Modification Request, PUD 2004-4(R)
(KIVA #RPP4-2064281), and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Request, CE
2007-1, dated October 17, 2007
33. Hearing Examiner Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation, Verdana PUD
— Major Modification Request, PUD 2004-4(R), dated November 27, 2007
34. Kent 25 LLC Request for Reconsideration, dated December 2007
35. Hearing Examiner Response to Request for Reconsideration, dated December
11, 2007
36. Hearing Examiner Recommendation Upon Reconsideration, dated January 17,
2008
37. Hearing Examiner Revised Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation,
dated January 17, 2008
38. City Council Ordinance No. 3874, adopted February 19, 2008
39. Letter from Ron Novak, dated March 2, 2010
40. Letter from Kay L. Everson, dated March 2, 2010
41. City of Kent staff proposed revised condition of approval No. A-2, received
March 3, 2010
42. Project Schematics and Plans, received March 3, 2010, with attachments A —
P
43. "Olson Creek Marsh: the Jewel in Kent's Crown", submitted by Mary Roberts,
dated April 9, 2004
44. Email message from Kevin Jones, P.E., dated July 6, 2009
The Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions based upon
the testimony and exhibits admitted at the open record hearing:
FINDINGS
Application and Notice
1. Kent 25 LLC / Kent 160 LLC (Applicant) requests approval of a revised
request for a major modification (Revised Request) to a Planned Unit
Development (PUD), PUD-2004-4. PUD-2004-4 was approved with
conditions by the Hearing Examiner on February 15, 2006.1 The revised
major modification request (PUD-2004-4(R)) would modify the previously
approved PUD-2004-4 through development of approximately 13.21 acres
1 The PUD-2004-4 application proposed development of a PUD containing 386 detached single-family
lots, four sensitive area tracts, it recreation tracts, 22 landscape tracts, three stormwater tracts, one
utility tract, one sewer lift station tract, nine access tracts, and a future development tract. The
Hearing Examiner approved PUD-2004-4 with conditions on February 15, 2006. Conditions of
l approval limited the proposed development to 379 single-family residential lots and one future ,
i development tract. Exhibit 31.
i
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 4 of 32
within PUD-2004-4, consisting of four Future Development Tracts (FDTs):
Tracts LLL, MMM, NNN, and 000.2 Under the Revised Request, the tracts
would be developed with an assisted living facility and retail, commercial,
and office uses. PUD-2004-4 consists of 155 acres located at 12200 SE 304en
Street, Kent, Washington, on the west side of 124th Avenue SE, south of SE
288th Street, north of SE 304th street, and east of 118th Avenue SE. The
Future Development Tracts are located within the PUD at the northwest
corner of 124th Avenue SE and SE 304th Street in Kent, Washington.3 FDTs
LLL, MMM, NNN, and 000 are bounded by The Bridges (formerly Verdana)
residential development to the north, 124th Avenue SE to the east, SE 304th
Street to the south and Crystal Meadows plat to the west. Exhibit 2; Exhibit
4; Exhibit 7; Exhibit 31.
2. The Applicant submitted a previous request for major modification of PUD-
2004-4 on September 12, 2006, Following a revised recommendation by the
Hearing Examiner on January 17, 2008, the City Council denied the major
modification request without prejudice by adopting Ordinance No. 3874 on
I February 19, 2008. The Applicant filed a Land Use Petition Act (LUPA) appeal
of the City Council's action in King County Superior Court on March 10, 2008.
In subsequent meetings with the Applicant, City staff determined a revised
PUD major modification application could be submitted. The Applicant
submitted a revised request for major modification on July 2, 2009, Exhibit
1, Staff Report, page 3; Exhibit 2; Exhibit 4; Exhibit 31; Exhibit 37; Exhibit
38,
3. The City of Kent (City) published notice of a community meeting on the
Revised Request hosted by the Applicant in the Kent Reporter on October 3,
2009. Exhibit 14, The City posted notice of the open record hearing
associated with the Revised Request on the subject property on February 19,
2010.4 The City also mailed notice of the hearing to local agencies,
2 At the time of Hearing Examiner approval of PUD-2004-4 and preliminary plat SU 2004-11 with
conditions, the PUD 2004-4 contained one future development tract at the SE 3041h Street/1241h
Avenue SE intersection, with no uses specified for the tract. Under the revised PUD modification
proposal, PUD-2004-4(R), four future development tracts , Tracts LLL, MMM, NNN, and 000, take the
place of the single future development tract at the SE 3041h Street/1241h Avenue SE intersection.
Exhibit 4; Exhibit 7; Exhibit 31. The Applicant's SEPA Environmental Checklist states that a the
Applicant recorded a final plat for The Bridges (formerly Verdana) under King County File No.
I 20071220000095, and that the final plat contained Future Development Tracts LLL, MMM, NNN, and
000. Exhibit 17 The four future development tracts within the final plat total approximately 13.21
acres; the earlier single future development tract totaled approximately 13 30 acres Exhibit 4.
3 The property that contains the four future development tracts is identified by King County Parcel
Nos. 1OBS62-3960, 108562-3970, 108562-3980, and 108562-3990. Exhibit 2.
4 The City staff report states a revised Notice of Application for the minor revision to the major
modification request is not required. According to the staff report, the City mailed notice of
�I application for the original proposal to local, state, and federal agencies, published notice In the Kent
Reporter, and posted notice on the subject property on January 27, 2007. On July 7, 2007, the City
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 5 of 32
1
interested parties, and owners of property within 300 feet of the subject
property on February 19, 2010. The City published notice of the hearing in
the Kent Reporter on February 20, 2010. Exhibit 13.A.
SEPA Determination
4. The City analyzed the environmental impact of the Revised Request under
the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA), Ch. 43.21C RCW. The City
Issued an Addendums to the City's October 16, 2007 Revised Mitigation
Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS)6 on December 31, 2009. The '
Addendum analyzed whether impacts associated with the Revised Request
were evaluated under the October 16, 2007 MDNS. The Addendum
determined that Revised Request impacts are consistent with the type of
development analyzed under the October 16, 2007 MDNS, and concluded
that adequate environmental analysis has been conducted under SEPA.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6; Exhibit 16.
City Comprehensive Plan Designation
S. The proposed PUD is located within an area designated as an Urban Growth
Area under the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). Exhibit 1,
Staff Report, page 5. Urban growth areas are designated as areas and
densities sufficient to permit the urban growth that is projected to occur in
published a revised notice of application that identified the addition of two drive-through lanes in the
Kent Reporter, mailed notice to all parties of record, and posted notice on the subject property
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 12.
5 An"addendum" under SEPA is"an environmental document used to provide additional Information or
analysis that does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the
existing environmental document. The term does not include supplemental EISs. An addendum may
be used at any time during the SEPA process." Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-706.
6 The City reviewed the environmental impact of the initial proposal for a major modification of the ,
PUD, as required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Ch. 43.21C RCW, The City found that
with four conditions, the proposal would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the
environment, and issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) on September 19,
2007 MDNS conditions concerned payment of an environmental mitigation fee for the City's South
272nd Street - South 277th Street Corridor Project; payment of a pro-rata share of the cost of
resolving the High Accident Location (HAL) at the State Route (SR) 18 - SE 304th Street (west ramps)
interchange; modification of the 1241h Avenue SE frontage improvements to provide a southbound
right-turn pocket at the south entrance to the proposed commercial development; and minimization of
site grading. The MDNS condition related to payment of an environmental mitigation fee stated that
the fee shall be equivalent to 63 percent of actual trip generation, based upon the expectation that 63
percent of site-generated traffic would pass through the Kent city limits and that the project would
generate 176 or 240 vehicle trips. The City Issued a revised MDNS with four conditions on October
16, 2007. The City revised the MDNS to change the MDNS condition related to environmental
mitigation fee payment. The revised MDNS states that the environmental mitigation fee shall be
equivalent to 30 percent of actual trip generation, based upon the expectation that 30 percent of site-
generated traffic would pass through the Kent city limits and the project would generate 242 vehicle ,
trips. Exhibit 37.
I Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modiftcatlon (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 6 of 32
i
the county or city for the succeeding 20-year period. RCW 36,70A.110(2).
Each urban growth area shall permit urban densities and shall include
greenbelt and open space areas. RCW 36.70A.110(2). Urban growth should
be located first in areas already characterized by urban growth that have
' adequate existing public facility and service capacities to serve such
development, second in areas already characterized by urban growth that
will be served adequately by a combination of both existing public facilities
and services and any additional needed public facilities and services that are
1 provided by either public or private sources, and third in the remaining
portions of the urban growth areas. RCW 36.70A.110(3).
6. The City Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map designates the northern 63.22
acres of the proposed PUD site as SF-3 Single Family Residential, and the
southern 92.26 acres of the site as Urban Separator. Land adjacent to the
L north of the PUD is designated Single-Family 3 units per acre by the City
Land Use Map. The Land Use Map depicts the PUD site as annexed into the
City of Kent through City Ordinance No. 2743. FDTs LLL, MMM, NNN, and
000 are located entirely on property designated Urban Separator. The SF-3
comprehensive plan designation is equivalent to an SR-3 zoning
classification. The Urban Separator designation is equivalent to the SR-1
zoning classification. City Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element (revised
May 4, 2006), page 4-9; City Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Map, Figure 4.7,
page 4-53 (revised May 4, 2006); Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 14; Exhibit 7.
7. The City Comprehensive Plan contains Land Use Element goals and policies
relevant to the PUD major modification application.' Policy LU-14.8 ensures
that commercial and mixed-use developments adjacent to single-family
residential areas are compatible in height and scale. Goal LU-24 and Policy
LU-24.1 encourage land use that reduces automobile dependency, including
mixed use developments incorporating bike, pedestrian, and transit
amenities. Goal LU-31 establishes Urban Separator designations to protect
environmentally sensitive areas and to create open space corridors. Policy
LU-31.3 and Policy LU-31.7 require subdivisions within or adjacent to Urban
Separators to provide open space linkages within or to the Urban Separator
and to encourage well-designed land use patterns to protect and enhance
urban separators. City Comprehensive Plan, Land Use (revised May 4,
2006), pages 4-32 — 4-33, 4-35 — 4-36, 4-47, 4-51 — 4-52; Exhibit 1, Staff
IReport, pages 14 - 15.
7 The City staff report identified Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-14.8, Goal LU-24, Policy LU-24.1, Goal
LU-31, Policy LU-31.3, Policy LU-31.7, Goal CD-4, Goal CD-5, Goal CD-6, Policy H-2.2, Policy TR-5.4,
Policy TR-7.2, Policy TR-7.3, Policy ED-2.4, Policy ED-3.1, Policy ED-3.4, and Policy ED-3.6 as
applicable to the proposed revised major modification to the PUD. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 14 -
17.
Flndings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 7 of 32
8. The City Comprehensive Plan also contains community design, housing,
transportation, and economic development goals and policies relevant to the
PUD modification application. Goals CD-4, CD-5, and CD-6 encourage
designing new commercial projects to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists,
transit, and automobiles; development of mixed use areas that are vital and
attractive focal points of community activity; and ensuring that the scale, ,
layout, and character of commercial and mixed use development is
complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood. Housing Policy H-2.2
supports housing with appropriate amenities for individuals, families, and
children. Transportation Policies TR-5.4, TR-7.2, and TR-7.3 encourage
pedestrian and bicycle connections and trails to connect neighborhoods when
roads are not practical. Economic Development Policy ED-2.4 encourages a
connective land use pattern that integrates housing with natural amenities,
employment, shopping, and recreation. Policy ED-3.4 promotes alternative
transit opportunities between commercial and residential areas. Policy ED-
3.6 promotes walking opportunities. Policy ED-3.1 allows for small-scale
commercial establishments in neighborhood areas to provide services for
residents. City Comprehensive Plan, Community Design Element, pages 11,
13 - 14; City Comprehensive Plan, Housing Element, page 11; City
Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element, pages 35 - 36; City
Comprehensive Plan, Economic Development Element, pages 5 - 6; Exhibit
11 Staff Report, pages 16 - 17.
Zone Classification and Land Use
9. FDTs LLL, MMM, NNN, and 000 are located within the City's SR-1 Residential
Agricultural zoning district. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4. The purpose of
the SR-1 zoning district is to provide for areas allowing low density single-
family residential development. According to the City zoning code, SR-1
zoning shall be applied to those areas identified in the comprehensive plan
for low density development, because of environmental constraints or lack of
urban services. KCC 15.03.010. The SR-1 zoning district permits one
dwelling unit per acre, with a 34,700 square foot minimum lot area.' KCC
1S.04.170. Overall, 92.26 acres in the southern portion of the proposed PUD
are located within the City's SR-1 zoning district, and 63.22 acres in the
northern portion of the proposed PUD are located within the City's SR-3 j
Single-Family Residential zoning district. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4.
The purpose of the SR-3 zoning district is to stabilize and preserve single-
family residential neighborhoods, as designated in the comprehensive plan,
and to provide a range of densities and minimum lot sizes to promote
diversity and recognize a variety of residential environments. KCC
15.03.010,
s The City staff report states that a residential development within the same sized area as the PUD
FDTs typically could contain 16 residences plus associated impervious surface. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
page 20.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
i Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 8 of 32
i
PUD Standards
10. The intent of planned unit development is to promote diversity and creativity
in site design, protect and enhance natural and community features, and
encourage unique developments which may combine a mixture of residential,
I commercial, and industrial uses. The PUD process permits departures from
the conventional siting, setback, and density requirements of a particular
zoning district to achieve superior site development, create open space, and
encourage imaginative design by permitting design flexibility. KCC
I 15.08,400. PUDs are permitted in all zoning districts except the A-10
Agricultural zone, provided that PUDs in SR zones are only allowed if the site
is at least 100 acres in size, with some exceptions. KCC 15.08.400.A; KCC
15.08,400.C.
11. The uses principally permitted within the PUD are those that are permitted in >
the underlying zoning classification for the property, except for uses
permitted by KCC 15.08.400.13.4. KCC 15.08,400.A, Commercial uses may
be permitted In residential PUDs of 100 acres or more, but "shall be limited
' to those uses permitted in the neighborhood convenience commercial (NCC)
zoning district." KCC 15.08.400.B.4, The uses permitted in the NCC district
are Class I-A, I-13, and I-C Group Homes; rebuild/accessory uses for existing
dwellings; food and convenience stores (retail); eating and drinking
establishments (but not a drive-through); miscellaneous retail stores; liquor
stores; finance, insurance, and real estate services; personal services; home
day-care; day care centers; professional services; and municipal uses and
' buildings. KCC 15,04.020; KCC 15.04.070; KCC 15.04.090.9 Drive-
through/drive-up commercial/retail businesses other than eating or drinking
establishments are permitted within the NCC zone with a conditional use
permit. KCC 15.04.070.
Revised Request
12, Kim Adams-Pratt, City Attorney, stated for the City that the Applicant has
submitted a revised application for major modification of the PUD (Revised
Request),10 and that the Revised Request contains substantial changes from
the initial application for major modification. The Applicant submitted a
Revised PUD Major Modification Description (Revised Description), dated
September 8, 2009. City Planner Sharon Clamp testified that the Revised
9 The purpose of the NCC zoning district Is 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
1 neighborhood services in the comprehensive plan," KCC 15.03,010.
10 The City Council denied the previous application for a major modification of the PUD without
prejudice Exhibit 38. Kim Adams-Pratt, City Attorney, argued that the Washington Supreme Court
' decision in Hilltop Terrace Homeowners Ass'n v Island County, 126 Wn.2d 22 (1995) means the
Applicant's revised application is not barred under the resjudicata doctrine, as the Applicant's revised
application is sufficiently different from its initial application Statement of Ms. Adams-Pratt.
�I Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Wilage at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 9 of 32
t
Request is a significant revision because there are numerous changes from
q 9
the initial application, but a minor change because the overall nature of the
development proposal for the PUD future development tracts - commercial
and residential - has not changed. Exhibit 4; Testimony of Ms. Clamp;
Statement of Ms. Adams-Pratt.
13, Mike Murphy, Applicant Attorney, argued that the Revised Request is
materially changed from the initial application for major modification.
Michael Huey testified for the Applicant that since initial design, proposed
retail uses have been consolidated into the center of the proposed
commercial development, the stormwater detention pond associated with the
proposed development has been relocated for increased open space over the
initial design, and landscaping has been added to the proposed development.
Statement of Mr. Murphy; Testimony of Mr. Huey.
14. Katherine Orni, Applicant Planner/Development Manager/Representative,
testified that the Revised Request differs from the initial proposal through
greater clustering of proposed buildings, increased open space, and
decreased impervious surface as compared to the initial proposal. Ms. Ornl
testified that the detention pond has been moved to provide additional buffer
between the existing wetland and proposed development; more pedestrian
ways have been added; the proposed assisted living facility has been
relocated behind a landscaped area; the design incorporates "Northwest
design" features, large plazas, and connecting ways; and parking spaces
have been moved to the interior of the subject property. Ms. Orni added that
landscaping would be located adjacent to parking spaces. Ms. Orni also
added that proposed one-story buildings along 124th Avenue would buffer
proposed two-story buildings moved to the interior of the subject property.
Testimony of Ms. Orni,
15. The Revised Description explains that total PUD site area would still be
iS5.33 acres. According to the Revised Description, total future
development tract site area would decrease from 13.30 acres to 13.21 acres,
as revised; total impervious surface would decrease from 69 percent to 48
percent; and parking would decrease from 446 spaces to 398 spaces.
Proposed building footprints would be reduced from 20 percent of the site to
18 percent of the site. Proposed buildings would be decreased from nine to
seven buildings. Within the PUD's four future development tracts, the
Revised Description proposes commercial development limited to uses
allowed within the City's Neighborhood Convenience Commercial zoning
district. According to the Revised Description, the revised proposal clusters
proposed retail buildings tighter to provide more open space than the initial
proposal. Open space within the future development tracts would increase
from 4.12 acres under the initial PUD major modification application to 6.82
acres under the revised application. Open space within the entire PUD would
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 10 of 32
Increase from 77.15 acres to 83.97 acres, with 61.11 acres of passive open
space and 16.33 acres of recreational open space, compared to 59.47 acres
and 16.09 acres, respectively, under the initial proposal. Exhibit 4; Exhibit
7; Exhibit 36; Exhibit 42.
1 Revised Site Plan
16. The Applicant's September 21, 2009 revised site plan map depicts the
development proposal under the Revised Request. The revised site plan map
depicts seven buildings within FDTs LLL, MMM, NNN, and 000: Building A
(76,128 square feet), Building C (7,520 square feet), Building D (10,975
square feet), Building E (18,473 square feet), Building F (8,125 square feet),
Building G (13,631 square feet), and Building J (16,778 square feet). None
of the proposed buildings would exceed 35 feet in height. The Olson Creek
stream course and surrounding wetland and buffer bisect the area of
' proposed development within FDTs LLL, MMM, NNN, and 000. Olson Creek
would be protected by a 40-foot wide stream buffer and a 15-foot wide
building setback from the wetland buffer. Building J, a proposed office
building, would be located on the west boundary of the FDTs, with access
from SE 304th Street. A grasscrete emergency vehicle access lane would
extend north, adjacent to the east of proposed Building J. A pedestrian
bridge would cross the grasscrete emergency access to connect a public
plaza adjacent to Building J to the remainder of the proposed buildings
located adjacent to the east and north, across Olson Creek and wetland
areas. Buildings E and F, proposed mixed use office and retail buildings,
would be located adjacent to the east end of the proposed bridge. Building
A, an assisted living facility, would be located adjacent to the north of
Building E. A proposed detention pond would be located adjacent to the
north of Building A. Buildings C, D, and G, proposed retail buildings, would
be located adjacent to the east of Buildings A, E, and F, separated by a
central courtyard. 124th Avenue SE would lie adjacent to the east of
Buildings C, D, and G. A pedestrian plaza would be located between
proposed Building C and 124th Avenue SE. A pedestrian trail would lead
north from the pedestrian plaza to open space and residential development
' within the PUD. A pedestrian path would also be located adjacent to the
west of proposed Buildings F, E and A, and the proposed detention pond,
roughly parallel to the Olson Creek stream course. Internal roads would
connect proposed buildings, with parking spaces for vehicles. Overall, the
proposed development with FDTs LLL, MMM, NNN, and 00D would total
approximately 48,724 square feet of retail space; 26,778 square feet of
office space; and a 76,128 square-foot assisted living facility. Buildings
around the perimeter of the proposed development would be one-story;
buildings in the retail core (Buildings A, E, and F) would be two-story
buildings. Exhibit 7.
�I Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major ModiFrcabon (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)l RPP4-2091934
Page 11 of 32
1,
17. Photo schematics show that after development proposed under the Revised
Request, a person standing at the SE 304th/124t" Avenue SE intersection
roundabout looking north along 124th Avenue SE would see trees planted
along the west side of the road. A parking lot and pedestrian trails would be
located adjacent to the west of the trees, and the proposed commercial
development would be located along 124th Avenue NE adjacent to the north
of the trees. The parking lot would serve the proposed commercial
development; both the lot and the development would be surrounded by
landscaping, including trees. Exhibit 42.
18. Vehicles would access the proposed assisted living center through a driveway
from 124th Avenue SE to the assisted living facility. A driveway to the south
of the assisted living facility driveway would provide access to proposed retail
development. Another driveway would access proposed Building J from SE
304th Street. Exhibit 7.
19. Type I solid screen landscaping would be installed between proposed Building
J and the Crystal Meadows subdivision, including large evergreen and
deciduous trees, for a solid screen of vegetation between proposed
development and the subdivision. Type II visual screen landscaping would
be installed throughout proposed development within the FDTs, including
large and small deciduous and evergreen trees. Type II landscaping would
screen parking areas located along 124th Avenue SE and along SE 304th
Street from the street. Proposed development within the FDTs would also
include ornamental planting areas consisting of shrubs, groundcover,
perennials, and lawn. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 20 and 24; Exhibit 7.
Proposed Uses
20. The Applicant's Revised Description states that as proposed, anticipated uses t
within the future development tracts of the PUD could include, consistent
with KCC 15.08.400(B)(4): retail food and convenience stores; eating and
drinking establishments, with no drive-through eating and drinking
establishments; drive-through/up businesses; miscellaneous retail; liquor
store; finance, insurance, and real estate services, personal services; home
day-care or day-care centers; professional services, utility and transportation
facilities; public facilities; wireless telecommunications facilities, with a
conditional use permit; group homes; drive-in churches; and welfare
facilities, such as retirement homes, convalescent homes, or facilities for
rehabilitation or correction with a conditional use permit. Exhibit 4.
Current Status Construction Phasing and Occupancy
21. Michael Huey, Applicant Representative, testified that the final plat for '
subdivision SU 2004-11 has been recorded, and that some improvements
within the subdivision have already been bonded." Mr. Huey testified that
11 The Applicant recorded the final plat under AFN 20071220000095. Exhibit 4.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-20 91 934
Page 12 of 32
development under the Revised Request would be tied into the subdivision,
including pedestrian access and open space elements. Some civil
construction work for the residential portion of the PUD has already been
completed. The completed work includes detention ponds, roadways, and
lots. Portions of the PUD FDTs are currently used as a stockpile site for
topsoil and mineral dirt from the residential development, to be used for fill
as necessary to construct the proposed commercial development. Exhibit 1,
Staff Report, page 7; Exhibit 31; Testimony of Mr. Huey.
22. According to the Applicant's Revised PUD Major Modification Schedule of
Development (Schedule), the Applicant would submit detailed construction
and building plans if the PUD modification is approved. Construction of the
proposed PUD modification would begin in late 2010 or in 2011, followed by
first occupancy in 2012. The Schedule states that building construction may
be phased based on market conditions. Exhibit 3.
23. The Applicant's Schedule states that the Applicant anticipates the assisted
living facility would be owned and operated separately from proposed retail
and office buildings. Retail and office buildings may have separate owners
managing and leasing floor space. The Applicant would prepare design
covenants to meet architectural, lighting, open space and landscaping
requirements of the City's Mixed-Use Design Review process. A homeowners
association has been formed for the overall Bridges subdivision and PUD, and
the City of Kent has reviewed and approved Conditions, Covenants, and
Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the overall subdivision and PUD. The Applicant
would prepare similar covenants addressing continued maintenance of the
open space, parking lot, buildings, storm facilities, and other common areas
1 associated with the revised request for major modification of the PUD.
Exhibit 3.
Commercial PUD Criteria
24. KCC 15.08.400.I provides that "the criteria for approval of a request for a
major modification shall be those criteria covering original approval of the
permit which is the subject of the proposed modification." KCC 15.08.400.L
25. Pursuant to 15.08.400(C)(5)(a) KCC, a minimum of 35 percent of the total
j PUD site area (or in mixed use PUDs, 35 percent of the area containing
�! residential uses) is required to be provided as common open space. As
proposed under the Revised Request, 83.97 acres or 54.06 percent of the
total PUD site area would be set aside as open space. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
pages 11 — 12; Exhibit 4.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City oFKent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 13 of 32
Urban Separator Development
26. Residential areas within the PUD would be located to the west and north of
FDTs LLL, MMM, NNN, and 000. Pedestrian trails would extend between the
areas of the PUD to connect residential neighborhoods. A trail would extend
northwest and another trail would extend north from the FDT area to connect
to residential neighborhoods within the PUD. Exhibit 24.
27. For areas within urban separators, 50 percent of the unconstrained area
must be retained in perpetuity as common open space. KCC 12.04.778.C.8.
Of the 40.28 acres of unconstrained Urban Separator area, 20.14 acres must
be retained as common open space, under the City code. Of the 20.14
acres, 16.42 acres were recorded as open space with the urban separator
designation on the final plat. The Applicant would set aside another
additional 3.72 acres of common open space in other future development
tracts within the PUD. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 12; Exhibit 4.
Wetlands
28. Raedeke Associates, Inc. delineated six wetlands upon the PUD property
covering approximately 50 acres and reported their results in a September
20, 2004 Wetland Assessment. Raedeke determined that two of the
wetlands (Wetlands 1 and 2) satisfy the City criteria for a Category 2
wetland, and that four of the wetlands (Wetlands 3, 4, 5, and 6) satisfy the
City's criteria for a Category 3 wetland.iZ Wetland 1, the largest wetland, is
located adjacent to the future development tract. Wetland 1 would be
protected within a Native Growth Protection Area. Exhibit 7; Exhibit 24;
Exhibit 28; Exhibit 31.
29. According to the Hearing Examiner's February 15, 2006 decision, the City's
consultant reviewed the Raedeke delineation. The City's consultant
requested that Raedeke perform additional hydrologic monitoring. Based on
hydrologic monitoring results, Raedeke revised the wetland delineation to
incorporate additional area into Wetland 1. The City approved the revised
delineation on July 7, 2005. After reviewing the record, the Hearing
Examiner concluded that"the wetland boundaries were determined after a
stringent review process that involved the expertise of multiple wetland
professionals," and that"environmentally sensitive areas would be protected
In accordance with the regulations in place at the time of complete
application." Exhibit 31,
30. The western arm of Wetland 1 contains Olson Creek, which flows north
through a culvert beneath SE 304th Street into the western portion of the '
iz Raedeke delineated wetlands according to the 1993 City code. The City's critical areas code was
amended in 2006, following the City's receipt of a complete PUD application on October 13, 2004.
Exhibit 28; Exhibit 31.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 14 of 32 '
wetland. Olson Creek then flows off-site to the northwest Into the Green
River. According to the Raedeke Wetland Assessment, Olson Creek is
classified as a Class 2 stream without salmonids under the City critical areas
code.13 The Staff Report characterizes the on-site portion of Olson Creek as
non-salmonid. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 7; Exhibit 28; Exhibit 31.
31. The western arm of Wetland 1 containing Olson Creek and required buffers
bisects development proposed under the Revised Request. Proposed Building
J, parking, and landscaping would be located adjacent to the west of the
western arm of Wetland 1 and Olson Creek. The remainder of development
proposed under the Revised Request, including buildings, parking, and
landscaping, would be located east of the western arm of Wetland 1 and
Olson Creek. The portion of proposed development on the west of the
wetland would be connected to the remainder of the commercial
development to the east by a pedestrian foot bridge over the wetland.
Wetland 1 extends to the west and north adjacent to development proposed
under the Revised Request. Residential housing would be located adjacent to
the west and north of the wetland. Exhibit 7; Exhibit 42.
32. Development proposed under the Revised Request would impact 0.44 acre of
wetland buffer, requiring buffer averaging under Chapter 11.06 KCC. The
City approved a May 4, 2007 conceptual wetland buffer averaging plan on
July 11, 2007. A wetland buffer would also separate the wetland and Olson
Creek from adjacent retail and office building development. According to the
preliminary Wetland Buffer Averaging Plan map, all enlarged buffer areas
under the conceptual averaging plan (buffer give' areas) will be enhanced
with native wetland transitional plantings in the plant list on the preliminary
landscape plant legend, Sheet L1.01. Under the Revised Request, the 2007
approved buffer line would change slightly in the northeast corner of the
proposed Building J site, resulting in approximately 122.37 square feet of
reduced buffer and approximately 677.33 square feet of added buffer, for a
total surplus buffer of approximately 5,104.96 square feet. The City staff
report states that a final wetland buffer averaging and restoration plan must
be approved under Chapter 11.06 KCC prior to issue of any development
�j permits. Remaining wetland, stream, and wetland buffer would be protected
within a Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA). Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page
8; Exhibit 7; Exhibit 30,
Topography
33. The Staff Report describes topographical conditions on the proposed
development site. The southwest portion of the site contains a 30- to 55-
1'
13 Raedeke delineated streams according to the 1996 City code. The City's critical areas code was
amended In 2006, following the City's receipt of a complete PUD application on October 13, 2004
Exhibit 28; Exhibit 31.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Vdiage at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)l RPP4-2091934
Page 15 of 32
foot high slope ranging from 13 to 33 percent grade, with the toe of the
slope located in Wetland 1. The east-central portion of the site contains a
slope as high as 44 feet, ranging from 20 to 33 percent grade. The top of
the slope lies along 1241h Avenue SE; the toe of the slope lies in Wetland 1.
The north portion of the site slopes to Wetland 1 at approximately 12 percent
grade. The staff report states erosion potential exists on the east and west
sides of the site and further investigation should be undertaken if
development is planned on an area with a risk of liquefaction generally
adjacent to Wetland 1. According to the staff report, the City and Applicant
will address liquefaction and erosion issues during development review.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 6.
Stormwater Facilities
34. The Applicant submitted an Amended Technical Information Report (TIR),
dated July 2009. The Amended TIR addresses the Revised Request.
According to the Amended TIR, the Revised Request proposes minor changes
to the PUD drainage basin boundary and decreases the amount of impervious
surface over the initial PUD modification request. Under the Revised
Request, the proposed detention pond would be relocated to the north
portion of the future development tracts. The pond would provide detention
and water quality treatment for all proposed development within the future
development tracts. Exhibit S.
35. Development within the future development tracts would use a pipe and
catch basin system to collect surface water runoff and route it to the
proposed detention pond. Stormwater runoff from the development pad
proposed for the west portion of the future development tracts would be
conveyed to the detention pond through a pipe under the pedestrian bridge.
Stormwater would be treated and discharged from the detention pond to the
onsite wetland, eventually flowing to Olson Creek. Stormwater would be
released from the west side of the detention pond at pre-development rates
to maintain wetland hydrology and water to Olson Creek. The detention
pond would be landscaped to blend with surrounding green spaces, with a
trail corridor along the top of the pond berm. The Stormwater conveyance
system would be designed to meet 2002 City Stormwater Design Manual and
1998 King County Stormwater Design Manual standards.14 Exhibit 4; Exhibit
5.
Access and Traffic
36. The driveway to access the proposed retail buildings and parking along 124th
Avenue SE would be located approximately 415 feet north of the SE 304th
Street/124th Avenue SE intersection. The driveway to access the proposed '
assisted living facility would be located north of the retail access driveway on
124th Avenue SE, approximately 400 feet north of the driveway to access
la The Revised Request is vested to these standards. Exhibit 5.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Ma1or Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 16 of 32
proposed retail buildings. A driveway to access proposed Building J would be
located along SE 3041h Street, approximately 350 feet west of the SE 3041h
Street/124th Avenue SE intersection. The City staff report states that SE
304th Street and 1241h Avenue SE are both under City of Auburn jurisdiction
1 following annexation on January 1, 2008. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 8;
Exhibit 7.
37. The Applicant submitted a Revised Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by
the Transpo Group In May 2007, to evaluate traffic impacts of the initial PUD
modification proposal and to respond to comments from King County, the
City of Auburn, and the City of Kent. The study analyzed existing traffic
volumes for the following intersections: SE 2841h Street/124th Avenue SE; SE
293rd Way/124th Avenue SE; SE 296th Way/1241h Avenue SE; and SE 3041h
Street/124th Avenue SE. According to the Transpo Group, King County will
replace the existing traffic signal at the SE 3041h Street/1241h Avenue SE
intersection with a roundabout, with construction scheduled for 2007. Due to
ongoing construction, the Transpo Group did not collect existing traffic
volumes at the SE 304th/124th Avenue SE and SE 2841h/124th Avenue SE
intersections. Instead, the Transpo Group estimated peak hour traffic
volumes at the SE 304th/124th Avenue SE intersection by Increasing May
2004 volumes by five percent per year for three years. The Transpo Group
estimated existing AM peak hour traffic volumes at the SE 2841h/124th
Avenue SE intersection by increasing August 2004 volumes by five percent
per year for three years, then increasing August 2004 volumes by a factor of
20 percent to reflect non-summer conditions. The Transpo Group estimated
existing PM peak hour traffic volume at the SE 304th/124th Avenue SE
intersection by increasing August 2006 volumes by 10 percent, because
schools generally generate fewer trips during the weekday PM peak hour
than the AM peak hour. Exhibit 26.
38. The Revised TIA estimated potential traffic impacts of proposed commercial
development based on the average trip rates for the "Shopping Center,"
"Assisted Living," and "Medical/Dental Office" ITE Land Use Codes.15
However, the Revised TIA stated that actual project trips generated would be
less than the trips associated with the ITE Land Use Codes, as the Revised
TIA assumed lesser linked trips between the different uses within the
commercial development than assumed under the ITE Codes. The Revised
TIA concluded that the proposed commercial development would generate
approximately 122 new weekday AM peak hour trips and 262 new weekday
15 The Transpo Group used average trip rates published In the ITE Trip Generation manual, 7th Edition
(2003). The Transpo Group estimated the traffic impact of the proposed commercial development
based on the following project description: commercial retail space totaling up to 55,000 square feet
gross leasable area, medical/dental office space totaling up to 25,000 square feet gross floor area, and
a 150-bed assisted living facility. The TIA states that the project would be completed and generate
traffic by 2009. Exhibit 26.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the Co of Kent
The Viiiage at Bridges- PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 17 of 32
PM peak hour trips.16 The Revised TIA also divided total trips per
intersection. In the AM peak hour, the Revised TIA concluded the proposed
development would contribute 36 vehicle trips to the SE 284th/1241h Avenue
SE intersection, 36 trips to the SE 293rd/124th Avenue SE Intersection, 42
trips to the SE 296th/124th Avenue SE intersection, and 64 trips to the SE
304th/124th Avenue SE intersection. In the PM peak hour, the Revised TIA
concluded the proposed development would contribute 80 vehicle trips to the
SE 284th/124th Avenue SE, 80 trips to the SE 293 d/124" Avenue SE
intersection, 93 trips to the SE 296th/124th Avenue SE intersection, and 127
trips to the SE 304th/124th Avenue SE intersection. Exhibit 26.
39, The Revised TIA determined that existing traffic at the SE 304th/1241h Avenue
SE intersection currently experiences Level of Service (LOS) B in the AM peak
hour and LOS A in the PM peak hour. Traffic at the SE 284th/124th Avenue SE
intersection currently experiences LOS B in the AM and PM peak hour.
Without the proposed commercial development, the Revised TIA estimated
that traffic at the SE 304th/124th Avenue SE intersection in 2009 would
experience LOS A in the AM and PM peak hour. Traffic at the SE 284th/124th
Avenue SE intersection in 2009 would experience a LOS B in the AM peak
hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. With the development, the Revised TIA
estimated that traffic at the SE 304th/124th Avenue SE intersection in 2009
would experience LOS A in the AM and PM peak hour. With the development,
traffic at the SE 284th/124th Avenue SE intersection in 2009 would experience
a LOS B in the AM peak hour and a LOS D in the PM peak hour. Traffic at the
SE 293 d/124th Avenue SE and SE 296th/124th Avenue SE intersections in
2009 would experience LOS D with or without the proposed development.
Based on King County intersection standards, LOS E or better is considered
acceptable intersection operation. Exhibit 26.
40. The Revised TIA determined that traffic at the northern driveway proposed
along 1241h Avenue SE would experience a LOS C in the AM and PM peak
hours. Traffic at the southern driveway proposed along 124th Avenue SE
would experience a LOS D in the AM peak hour and a LOS E in the PM peak
hour. Traffic at the proposed driveway to access the proposed development
along SE 304th Street would experience a LOS C in the AM and PM peak hour.
Exhibit 26.
41. The Applicant states in its Revised Description that the May 2007 Revised TIA
conservatively estimates traffic impacts based on uses allowed in the NCC
16 The Transpo Group assumed that the retail portion of the proposed commercial development would
attract some"by-pass trips", or trips already en route to another destination. Based on the average
by-pass rate for a shopping center published In the ITE Trip Generation Handbook(2,d Edition, 2001),
the Transpo Group approximately 34 percent of all retail trips would be by-passing the proposed
commercial development Thus, of 57 total new trips generated by the Shopping Center land use
code, Transpo Group concluded only 39 new trips would actually be generated by the proposed
commercial development. Exhibit 26
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
1 Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges— PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)l RPP4-2091934
Page 18 of 32
zoning district. The Revised Description states the Assisted Living,
Medical/Dental Office Building, and Shopping Center land use categories
reflect proposed uses on the site but would have generally higher trip
generation rates than what is proposed by the Applicant. In a letter dated
December 18, 2007, the City of Auburn determined that the May 2007
Revised TIA adequately addressed its concerns on trip generation and LOS
roadway impacts. Exhibit 4; Exhibit 9.E.
42. The City staff report states the driveway that would access the proposed
assisted living facility was relocated to the north in the Revised Request to
respond to City of Auburn comments about traffic using the driveway instead
of waiting in vehicle queues at the SE 304th Street/ 124th Avenue SE
intersection. An email message from Elizabeth Chamberlain, City of Auburn
Principal Planner, stated that the proposed traffic channelization plan was
acceptable to the City of Auburn, and the proposed north driveway on 124th
Avenue SE is acceptable in relation to the main entrance of the proposed
assisted living facility. Mike Murphy stated for the Applicant that traffic
studies submitted to date address City of Auburn concerns. Exhibit 1, Staff
Report, page 9; Exhibit 9.A; Statement of Mr. Murphy.
43. A February 9, 2010 letter from Elizabeth Chamberlain, City of Auburn
Principal Planner, requested a redesigned bike lane and sidewalk, and
resulting shifts in bike and road lane widths. The City staff report states
1 improvements would be constructed under the Revised Request, with review
of proposed improvements by the City in conjunction with civil construction
permit application submittal. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 10,
44. Kevin Jones, transportation engineer for the Applicant, testified that he
prepared an updated traffic review with actual traffic counts at the
roundabout intersection, analyzing traffic impact of development proposed
under the Revised Request. In an email message dated July 6, 2009, Mr.
Jones wrote that he reviewed traffic data collected on each leg of the SE
304th Street/1241h Avenue SE intersection, and calculated a three-day traffic
average, total entering volumes, AM peak hour approach volumes, and PM
peak hour approach volumes. Mr. Jones compared the actual data with the
May 2007 Revised TIA and with 2015 PM peak hour traffic volume forecasts
generated by a traffic model developed by the City. Mr. Jones found that at
the SE 304th Street/124th Avenue SE intersection, existing AM peak hour
traffic volumes (total entering) are very similar to PM peak hour traffic
volumes; existing AM peak hour traffic volumes (total entering) are much
less than initial 2009 without-project forecasts; and the City's 2015 PM peak
hour traffic volumes (total entering) are less than 2009 without-project
forecasts by 50 vehicle trips. Mr. Jones concluded in his email message that
based on these observations, without-project traffic volume forecasts more
reasonably reflect 2015 conditions than 2009 conditions, and thus the
Findings, Concluslons and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges -PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 19 of 32
analysis presented in the May 2007 Revised TIA addresses potential traffic
impacts of development proposed under the Revised Request, with build out
two or three years beyond 2009, as was initially forecast. Exhibit 44;
Testimony of Mr. Jones.
Public Comment
45. Virginia Haugen testified to her concern that the proposed development
would have significant environmental impacts, including impacts on wetlands
and tree removal, and that there would not be sufficient water to support the
proposed development. Art Weichbrodt, resident of the Crystal Meadows
community, testified to his concern that the proposed development would
result in an increase in emergency traffic, and that the proposed structure to
be built on the west side of the proposed commercial development would
interfere with views of Mt. Rainier. Mr. Weichbrodt testified to his
recollection of communication with City staff that the subject property would
not be developed. Mr. Weichbrodt added that his concerns might be
addressed in part by landscaping that would be required as part of a
proposed condition of approval." Testimony of Ms. Haugen; Testimony of
Mr. Weichbrodt,
46. Debbie Pratum, resident of 304th Street, testified to her concern that that
proposed commercial development is not needed by the residents of the
property surrounding the proposed development, as the residents already
have gas, food, and a Fred Meyer store in the area. Ms. Pratum added that
condominiums within a major development in the vicinity of the subject
property are not currently occupied. Ms. Pratum also testified to her concern
about traffic that would be generated by the proposed development,
including emergency vehicles, and her concern about sight distance limited
by hills along 304th Street. Testimony of Ms. Pratum.
i
47. Mike Pratum testified to express his concern that there not be any
development on the subject property, especially not commercial, Including a
prohibition on any alcohol sales. Mr. Pratum testified that the proposed
development would not benefit the surrounding community. Mr. Pratum
added that commercial development already exists on 312th Street, 132"d
Street, and Kent-Kangley Road, and some of this development is currently
without tenants. Mr. Pratum also testified that the subject property is not
currently served by sidewalks and only one bus serves the area through a
north-south route. Mr. Pratum added that construction of a roundabout in
17 Mr. Weichbrodt referred to condition No.9 proposed by City staff. As proposed, condition No 9
reads"Type I solid screen landscaping shall be installed between the westerly office building and
Crystal Meadows Subdivision, and Type II visual screen landscaping shall be installed throughout the
remainder of the site. Foundation landscaping shall be installed around the perimeter of all buildings."
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 33; Testimony of Mr. Weichbrodt,
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 20 of 32
the vicinity of the subject property since the initial PUD major modification
proposal would create a lack of openings in traffic flow, resulting in a lack of
opportunities to enter and exit the driveways of the proposed development.
Testimony of Mr. Pratum.
' 48. Corey Forsberg testified in favor of allowing the City of Auburn to annex the
subject property, expressing a concern that the City of Kent has no
constituents in the vicinity of the subject property. Mr. Forsberg testified to
his concern about traffic that would be generated by the proposed
development, that surrounding neighborhoods including Vintage Hills, Lea
Hill, and Crystal Meadows would not benefit from the proposed development,
and that the subject area should remain residential. Testimony of Mr.
Forsberg.
49. Eric Pfaff testified in favor of the proposed assisted living facility, saying that
the area could use child care services, medical services, or a police station,
for example, but the area does not need affordable housing, tattoo parlors,
or pay-day loan services. Mr. Pfaff testified in favor of the architectural
drawings for the proposed development and in favor of Incorporating
underground parking in the development. Mr. Pfaff also testified in favor of
working with the Applicant for a development responsive to community
concerns. Testimony of Mr. Pfaff.
50. In a letter dated March 2, 2010, Ron Novak wrote to recommend denial of
the Revised Request, based on City Code, the history of zoning on the
subject property, and information available at the time of initial PUD
approval. The letter expressed concern that the City Comprehensive Plan
does not designate the subject property as suitable for a NCC district, and
�1 that physical characteristics and expected uses of the NCC district are not
compatible with the Urban Separator designation, citing KCC 15,02.531. The
letter cited KCC 15.03,010 in reference to the City's Comprehensive Plan
designation for the subject property, and expressed concern that the City
Council did not intend NCC-type development in the Urban Separator
i designation on the subject property in adopting Ordinance No. 3685. The
letter expressed concern that density transfer from the future development
tracts to residential areas of the PUD were approved on the basis that the
property designated Urban Separator would include active recreation area
and open space. Exhibit 39.
51. The letter from Mr. Novak also expressed concern that the subject property is
located far from the main area of the City of Kent, and would be de-annexed
by the City of Kent and annexed to the City of Auburn. The letter noted
ongoing commercial development approximately one-half mile south of the
development proposed under the Revised Request, within the Lea Hill
neighborhood of the City of Auburn. According to the letter, development
Findings, conclusions and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
1 PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 21 of 32
j
proposed under the Revised Request is not compatible with surrounding
residential development. The letter urged a limit to flexibility of PUD
regulations. Exhibit 39.
52. In a letter dated March 2, 2010, Kay L. Everson wrote to recommend denial
of the Revised Request. The letter asserted that the area upon which the
PUD would be developed is unique, in that it contains environmentally
sensitive systems, including wetlands and wildlife habitat. The letter
expressed concern that existing systems be protected and that commercial
development not be allowed within PUD future development tracts. Exhibit
40.
53. An article titled "Olson Creek Marsh: the Jewel in Kent's Crown", dated April
6, 2004 and submitted by Mary Roberts, describes Olson Creek Marsh as an
area of"ecoregional" significance, with the following principle functions and
values, including groundwater discharge and recharge; diverse wildlife
habitat; storm and floodwater control for the entire watershed; aesthetic
values; and education and passive recreation opportunities. The article
j states Olson Creek Marsh is hydrologically connected to groundwater, and
increased development may alter base groundwater to modify systems
dependent on wetland hydrology. Exhibit 43.
54. A letter from residents of the Crystal Meadows Homeowners Association, ,
dated November 11, 2009, expressed opposition to any development of
commercial property on the subject property. The letter asserted the subject
property is projected to be annexed by the City of Auburn in the future; that
the proposed development is not needed as the commercial buildings
standing vacant in the City should be filled first; and that the proposed use
would have a negative impact on traffic and pedestrians. Exhibit 10.B.
Applicant Response
55. Mr. Murphy stated for the Applicant that the revised proposal for a major
i modification of the PUD was crafted over the past two years to meet
concerns of the City and the public. Mr. Murphy noted that the City of
Auburn will not annex the subject property, because the City of Kent does
not intend to de-annex the property. Michael Huey testified for the Applicant
that landscaping surrounding proposed Building J, the building within the
proposed commercial development that would be closest to residential
development, would be surrounded by landscaping that would obscure the
buildings but still allow views of Mt. Rainier. Statement of Mr. Murphy;
Testimony of Mr. Huey.
56. Mr. Jones testified for the Applicant that the Applicant traffic study evaluated
both a signalized intersection and the existing roundabout, and found that
both types of intersection permit entry onto 1241h Avenue SE from the
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges- PUD Ma]or Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 22 of 32
proposed development. Mr. Jones testified that driveways to the
1 development proposed under the revised major modification would be
located approximately 350 to 450 feet from the roundabout, and traffic
queues at the roundabout would not block driveways. Mr. Jones added that
he calculated necessary sight distance along SE 304th Street using a
conservative estimate - a speed ten miles per hour faster than the posted
speed along SE 304th Street - and that sight distance meets American
Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (ASHTO) standards,
adopted by the City of Auburn. Mr. Jones testified that in his professional
opinion as a traffic engineer, the proposed revised major modification of the
PUD would not unduly burden the traffic system in the vicinity of the
proposed development, and sight distance standards would be met along SE
304th Street. Testimony of Mr. Jones.
57. Ms. Orni testified for the Applicant that a criterion for review of a PUD major
modification proposal requires that the proposed PUD project have a
beneficial effect which would not normally be achieved by traditional lot-by-
lot development, as well as shall not be detrimental to present or potential
surrounding land uses as defined by the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Orni
testified that the criterion focuses on benefits of proposed development as
well as detriments, and that benefits of the proposed development would
include less use of gas and greater convenience (as proposed uses would be
located closer to residential uses than existing commercial and retail uses)
and greater opportunities for exercise within the proposed development (with
availability of the proposed pedestrian trail). Ms. Orni also testified that the
proposed revised PUD major modification would not be detrimental to
existing land uses, and that personal objection to the proposal does not
mean the proposal is a detriment to existing land uses. Testimony of Ms.
Orni.
' 58. The Applicant's Revised Description interprets KCC 15.08.400(B)(4) to mean
that residential development of 100 acres or more generates sufficient need
for conveniently located commercial services, so that residents could walk
and not need to depend upon cars to access services. The Revised
1 Description asserts that the closest retail development to the PUD - one-half
mile away - consists of predominantly very small retail spaces insufficient to
serve the large Lea Hill residential development. The Revised Description
also asserts that providing landscape tracts adjacent to the wetland and
buffer at the interior of the Urban Separator area within the PUD effectively
increases buffer size and provides more area to the wildlife corridor.
According to the Revised Description, approximately 52 percent of the
revised site plan is located in critical areas and their buffers, common open
spaces, and landscape buffers. Exhibit 4.
�I
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2 0 91 934
Page 23 of 32
Design Review
59. City Planning Services reviewed the revised PUD modification proposal under
the City's mixed use design review process for mixed use development with a
residential component. The Applicant submitted schematic drawings dated
December 23, 2008, but did not submit floor plans for the proposed assisted
living facility at the time of design review. According to the revised proposal,
the facility would include indoor recreation facilities and two landscaped
courtyards for private outdoor areas for residents. The Applicant's
application narrative states that all proposed buildings would share
architectural expression elements, with the theme incorporating elements of
Northwest influence and using a variety of materials. Proposed buildings
would use a variety of materials including brick, stucco, and wood siding.
Buildings would be constructed at a human scale and emphasize the
pedestrian scale of the surroundings. Varying roofline heights would provide
visual interest. Common signage would be used throughout the proposed
development. The assisted living facility would include residential design
elements such as wood wrapped windows, bay windows, gable roofs, and
trellises. According to the design review document, the revised landscape
plan and revised site plan give the appearance of structures situated around
green spaces rather than green spaces being added between structures.
Exhibit 15.
60. The Planning Manager for the City Community Development Department j
issued a Mixed Use Design Review Decision on January 7, 2010, approving
the mixed design review for the PUD modification with 16 conditions of
approval. Conditions call for strong pedestrian connections between
buildings, pedestrian corridors connecting high activity areas; landscaping;
expressing common design elements throughout the proposed development,
compliance with retail and office building design review criteria; compliance
with assisted living facility design review criteria; compliance with Village
sign standards; a detailed lighting plan; a detailed landscaping plan;
pedestrian plazas; and compliance with pedestrian pathways design review
standards. Exhibit 15.
Utilities
61. Puget Sound Energy would provide electric and gas service to the PUD. The j
City of Kent would provide water service, and sewer service would be
provided by the City of Auburn under a sewer extension agreement. Since
initial PUD approval, the Applicant revised the design and capacity of the new
sewer lift station to reflect additional flows from the proposed commercial
and assisted living development. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 10; Exhibit 4.
City Staff Recommendation
62. Ms. Clamp testified that the City of Kent has no current plan to de-annex the
subject property. Ms. Clamp added that the subject property is not very far
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 24 of 32
from a main boundary of the City of Kent, located at 282rd Street. Ms.
Clamp also added that the maximum residential density for the entire PUD
has already been achieved, so no additional homes can be constructed within
the PUD. Testimony of Ms. Clamp.
63. Ms. Clamp testified that City staff recommends approval of the proposed
major modification to the PUD, with conditions. The City staff report states
that with conditions, the proposed PUD is consistent with PUD development
standards set forth in KCC 15.08.400(C) and PUD review criteria in KCC
15.08.400(G)(2). Conditions of approval concern compliance with terms and
conditions of Mixed Use Design Review MUDR-2007-3(R), issued January 7,
2010, and the revised Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, dated
October 16, 2007; Low Impact Development techniques; landscaping; uses
allowed within the PUD; retail stores not permitted within the PUD; roadway
and utility improvements; sight distance at proposed new driveways; buffer
landscaping; wetland, stream, and buffer mitigation; wildlife passable fences;
and street, street lighting, water, sewer, and stormwater management
facilities. The City staff report states staff proposed a condition of approval
prohibiting liquor stores and auto-oriented retail stores normally associated
with gas stations due to strong public opposition to allowing these uses
within the development and to strengthen the intent to provide ready access
to everyday convenience goods and encourage alternatives to an auto-
oriented mode of transportation. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 19, 27, and
32 — 33; Testimony of Ms. Clamp,
64. City staff recommended a revision to proposed condition of approval A-2.
The proposed condition A-2 in the staff report states:
Where determined feasible by the Kent Public Works Department, the
applicant shall utilize Low Impact Development Techniques in construction of
the project, including but not limited to rainwater collection systems, porous
paving on sidewalks and trails, grass-lined open swales for stormwater
conveyance and water quality treatment.
1 As revised, A-2 would state:
The applicant shall utilize the following Low Impact Development Techniques
In construction of the project as described on page 11 of the applicant's
Revised PUD Major Modification Description dated 9/08/09: a grasscrete fire
access road,L8 open lawn areas planted with eco-lawn, pedestrian trails
constructed with porous pavement and where feasible grass-lined open
swales for stormwater conveyance and water quality treatment. The
is In an email message dated September 17, 2009, Kent Fire Prevention Services found that
grasscrete as shown on the Applicant's September 11, 2009 plans are acceptable to Fire Prevention.
Exhibit 11.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges PUD Major Modification (Revised)
I PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
' Page 25 of 32
applicant may use additional Low Impact Development Techniques where
determined feasible by the Kent Public Works Department.
Exhibit 41.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hold a hearing on an application for major
modification to Planned Unit Development (PUD) plans. Chapter 2.32 Kent City
Code (KCC); KCC 15.08.400.F.7; KCC 15.08.400.L2. For PUDs that propose a use
not typically permitted in the underlying zoning district as provided in KCC
15.08.400.B.4,19 the Hearing Examiner shall forward a recommendation to the City
Council, which shall have the final authority to approve or deny the proposed PUD.
KCC 15.08.400,F.7.
The Hearing Examiner's recommendation shall contain findings of fact and
conclusions based on those facts drawn from the record of the hearing prepared by
the Hearing Examiner. KCC 2.32.090.C.
Criteria for Review
Kent City Code (KCC) 15.08.400.G.2 sets forth the criteria the Hearing Examiner
must use to evaluate an application for a non-residential planned unit development
(PUD). The PUD request shall only be granted if:
a. The proposed project shall have a beneficial effect which would not
normally be achieved by traditional lot-by-lot development and not be --
detrimental to present or potential surrounding land uses as defined by
the comprehensive plan.
b. Unusual and sensitive environmental features of the site shall be
preserved, maintained, and incorporated into the design to benefit the
development and the community.
c. The proposed project shall provide areas of openness by the clustering of
buildings, and by the use of well-designed landscaping and open spaces.
Landscaping shall promote a coordinated appearance and break up
continuous expanses of building and pavement.
d. The proposed project shall promote variety and innovation in site and
building design. It shall encourage the incorporation of special design
features such as visitor entrances, plazas, outdoor employee lunch and
recreation areas, architectural focal points, and accent lighting.
e. Building design shall be based on a unified design concept, particularly
when construction will be in phases.
KCC 15.08.400.G.2.
I
19 KCC 15.08.400.6.4 permits commercial uses in residential PUDs of one hundred acres or more located in SR zoning
districts,as long as such commercial uses are limited to those uses permitted in the Neighborhood Convenience
Commercial(NCC)zoning district. KCC 15.08.400 B.4
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 26 of 32
i
Conclusions Based on Findings
A. With conditions, the proposed project would have a beneficial effect
which would not normally be achieved by traditional lot-by-lot
development and would not be detrimental to present or potential
surrounding land uses as defined by the comprehensive plan. Under
the SR-1 zoning classification for the subject property, which legislatively
implements the Urban Separator Comprehensive Plan designation for the
property, traditional lot-by-lot development on the subject property would
mean development of single-family residential dwellings on lots at least
34,700 square feet in size. A planned unit development (PUD) is allowed in
SR zoning districts on sites at least 100 acres in size, to promote diversity
and creativity in site design, protect and enhance natural and community
features, and encourage unique developments which may combine a mixture
of residential, commercial, and industrial uses. KCC 15.08,400; KCC
15.08.400.A; KCC 15.08.400.C. The Hearing Examiner approved PUD-2004-
4 with conditions on February 16, 2006.
The revised request for major modification of PUD-2004-4, PUD-2004-4(R)
(Revised Request) would result in a mixture of residential and commercial
uses within the PUD, while protecting wetlands and streams through required
buffers and setbacks and creating open space within the proposed
development. Commercial uses may be permitted in residential PUDs of 100
acres or more, but "shall be limited to those uses permitted in the
neighborhood convenience commercial (NCC) zoning district. KCC
15.08.400.B.4. Neighborhood convenience commercial uses proposed under
the Revised Request would be located within future development tracts
j (FDTs) of PUD-2004-4, adjacent to the south and west of 379 residential
units that will also be developed under the approved PUD. Conditions of
approval are necessary to ensure the proposed development is limited to
uses permitted in the NCC zoning district, and further limited to respond to
citizen concerns.
The proposed development would be accessible by pedestrian trails
connecting the FDTs to residential neighborhoods within the PUD, thus
reducing the need for automobile use to access services. Comprehensive
Plan Goal LU-24 and Policy LU-24.1 encourage land use that reduces
automobile dependency, including mixed use developments incorporating
bike, pedestrian, and transit amenities. While there is testimony in the
record that existing residents in surrounding communities are already well
served by existing commercial development in the area, there is also
testimony in the record that proposed development can benefit new and
future residents of the PUD. Neighborhood convenience commercial uses
would provide beneficial services for residents of the PUD and may be used
�i by residents of surrounding neighborhoods.
j
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 27 of 32
The Revised Request has changed significantly from the initial request for
major modification of PUD-2004-4. Under the Revised Request, total
Impervious surface would decrease within the FDTs; proposed building
footprints would be reduced; more open space would be created, including
passive and recreational open space; two-story buildings and parking would
be clustered in the interior thereby reducing visual impact on surrounding
properties; and solid screen landscaping would be installed, further reducing
visual impact on surrounding properties. Conditions of approval are
necessary to ensure development under the Revised Request is not
detrimental to present or potential surrounding land uses as defined by the
Comprehensive Plan.
Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure the Revised Request would
not be detrimental to present or potential surrounding land uses as defined
by the Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-14.8 ensures
that commercial and mixed-use developments adjacent to single-family
residential areas are compatible in height and scale, and Comprehensive Plan
Goals CD-4, CD-5, and CD-6 encourage designing new commercial projects
to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, and automobiles; developing
mixed use areas that are vital and attractive focal points of community
activity; and ensuring that the scale, layout, and character of commercial
and mixed use development is complimentary to the surrounding
neighborhood. Conditions of approval requiring compliance with City mixed
design review MUDR-2007-3(R) are necessary to ensure the scale, layout,
and character of the proposed development is complimentary to the
residential scale, layout, and character of adjacent PUD area and surrounding
area.
j Comprehensive Plan Goal LU-31 establishes Urban Separator designations to
protect environmentally sensitive areas and to create open space corridors.
Under the Revised Request, Olson Creek, surrounding wetlands, and wetland
buffers would be protected within a NGPA. Subject to City approval, the
Applicant would employ buffer averaging resulting in a surplus of wetland
buffer to mitigate for impacts to 0.44 acre of wetland buffer. Stormwater
runoff would be treated for water quality then released in surrounding
wetland to mimic and support natural hydrology. Significant changes made
from the Initial PUD modification proposal would result in more open space
within the PUD, and greater screening of the PUD from surrounding
development. Proposed pedestrian trails provide open space linkages within
or to the Urban Separator, consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-
31.3 and Policy LU-31.7. Development under the Revised Request would be
tied into the subdivision, including pedestrian access and open space
elements. With the relocation of the driveway access to the assisted living
facility, concerns about increased traffic adjacent to the assisted living facility
are alleviated. With updated traffic studies associated with the Revised
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges- PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 28 of 32 j
Request, City of Auburn concerns over traffic on SE 304th Street and 124th
Avenue SE have been addressed. Conditions of approval are necessary to
ensure that MDNS and City mixed design review MUDR-2007-3(R) conditions
apply to the proposal; Low Impact Development techniques are used;
landscaped buffers are established; only NCC zoning district uses are allowed
and liquor and gas station convenience stores are not allowed; roadway
improvements are constructed; and wetlands, streams, and buffers are
protected. Thus, the Hearing Examiner recommends that Revised Request
be approved with conditions, as the proposed project would have a beneficial
effect which would not normally be achieved by traditional development and
would not be detrimental to present or potential land uses as defined by the
Comprehensive Plan. Findings 1, 2, 4 - 21, 23, 25 - 32, 34 - 60, 62 - 64.
B. With conditions, unusual environmental features of the site would be
preserved, maintained, and incorporated into the PUD design. The
stream, wetland, and required buffers would be preserved in a NGPA and
incorporated into PUD design, as proposed development under the Revised
Request would be located west and east of the NGPA, with a pedestrian
footbridge connecting the west and east portions of the development.
Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure City review and approval of
the Applicant's wetland buffer averaging plan prior to development permit
issue, that the Applicant installs stormwater facilities for water quality,
detention, and release into the wetland according to City-approved plans,
and that the Applicant use low impact development techniques within the
proposed development. Findings 1, 2, 12 - 16, 28 - 32, 63 - 64.
C. With conditions, the PUD would provide areas of openness through
use of well-designed open space and landscaping. The proposed
commercial development would lie adjacent to a Native Growth Protection
Area (NGPA), proposed as part of the initial PUD that would contain the
proposed development. The Applicant has submitted preliminary landscape
plans for the proposed commercial development, including areas of openness
provided through landscaped pedestrian plazas. Greater clustering of
buildings and eliminating two of nine initially proposed buildings will create
greater open space within the proposed development than under the initial
proposal. As proposed, development under the Revised Request would meet
PUD open space requirements and common open space requirements for
areas within urban separators. Conditions of approval are necessary to
ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of Mixed Use Design
Review, including conditions for open space, and that Type I and Type II
screening landscaping is installed throughout the subject property. Findings
112, 12 - 16, 19, 23 - 32, 55, 58 - 50, 62 - 63.
D. With conditions, the PUD would promote variety and innovation in
site and building design, and would contain features that promote
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the C"of Kent
The Village at Bridges PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 29 of 32
i
community interaction. According to the revised proposal, the assisted
living facility would include indoor recreation facilities and two landscaped
courtyards for private outdoor areas for residents. The Applicant's
application narrative states that all proposed buildings would share
architectural expression elements, with the theme incorporating elements of
Northwest influence and using a variety of materials. Proposed buildings
would use a variety of materials including brick, stucco, and wood siding.
Buildings would be constructed at a human scale and emphasize the
pedestrian scale of the surroundings. Varying roofline heights would provide
visual interest. Common signage would be used throughout the proposed
development. The assisted living facility would include residential design
elements such as wood wrapped windows, bay windows, gable roofs, and
trellises. According to the design review document, the revised landscape
plan and revised site plan give the appearance of structures situated around
green spaces rather than green spaces being added between structures.
Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure strong pedestrian connections
between buildings; pedestrian corridors connecting high activity areas;
landscaping; expressing common design elements throughout the proposed
development; compliance with retail and office building design review
criteria; compliance with assisted living facility design review criteria;
compliance with Village sign standards; a detailed lighting plan; a detailed
landscaping plan; pedestrian plazas; and compliance with pedestrian
pathways design review standards. Findings 59 - 60, 63.
E. With conditions, the PUD would provide a unified design concept.
Conditions of mixed use design review for the proposed commercial
development require common design elements throughout the proposed
development. Findings 59 — 60, 63.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner
recommends that the City Council APPROVE the revised request for major
modification of a previously-approved Planned Unit Development, PUD-2004-4, to
Include an assisted living facility and retail, commercial, and office uses within
future development tracts of PUD-2004-4, with the following conditions:20
A. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The terms and conditions of Mixed Use Design Review MUDR-2007-
3(R), issued January 7, 2010 and the revised Mitigated Determination
of Nonsignificance dated October 16, 2007 shall apply to this proposal.
20 This recommendation includes conditions required to meet City Code standards as well as conditions
required to reduce unique project impacts,
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 30 of 32
i '
2. The applicant shall utilize the following Low Impact Development
Techniques in construction of the project as described on page 11 of
the applicant's Revised PUD Major Modification Description dated
9/08/09: a grasscrete fire access road," open lawn areas planted with
eco-lawn, pedestrian trails constructed with porous pavement and
where feasible grass-lined open swales for stormwater conveyance and
water quality treatment. The applicant may use additional Low Impact
Development Techniques where determined feasible by the Kent Public
Works Department.
3. Drive-through lanes shall include Type II landscaping in order to buffer
visual and auditory impacts to surrounding areas.
4. Uses allowed within the PUD shall be limited to those uses that are
principally permitted in the NCC zone and shall not include
conditionally permitted uses or special permit uses (i.e. churches and
gas stations) other than the proposed assisted living facility and two
drive-through lanes that are accessory to principally permitted uses
and public uses such as schools and parks.
5. Convenience stores, such as Seven-Eleven, Circle K, Quick Stop, and
The Pantry or similar types of auto-oriented retail stores typically
associated with a gas station are not permitted.
6. Liquor stores are not permitted.
7. Roadway improvement plans to be submitted with the civil
construction permit application shall meet the design requirements
related to lane width and sidewalk tapering contained in City of
Auburn's letter dated February 9, 2010.
8. Engineering plans must demonstrate adequate entering sight distance
in both directions at all proposed new driveways.
9. Type I solid screen landscaping shall be installed between the westerly
office building and Crystal Meadows Subdivision, and Type II visual
screen landscaping shall be installed throughout the remainder of the
site. Foundation landscaping shall be installed around the perimeter of
all buildings.
i
u In an email message dated September 17,2009, Kent Fire Prevention Services found that grasscrete as shown on
the Applicant's September 11, 2009 plans are acceptable to Fire Prevention. Exhibit 11.
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Nearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modification (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(Ry RPP4-2091934
Page 31 of 32
I -
B. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A COMMERCIAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
THE APPLICANT SHALL:
1. Construct road and utility improvements adjacent to or serving the
commercial development within the future development tracts as
required through the February 15, 2006 Verdana PUD approval and
the Revised MDNS issued October 16, 2007, including any mitigation
(EMA or EMF) charges.
2. Construct all wetland, stream and buffer mitigation and install all
required wildlife passable fences unless otherwise approved by the
Environmental Engineering Section of the Kent Public Works
Department.
3. Receive approval of the required As-Built Drawings for Street, Street
Lighting, Water, Sewer, and Storm water Management Facilities as
deemed appropriate by the Kent Department of Public Works.
DATED this L6 day of March 2010.
<�A
THEODORE PAUL HUNTER
Hearing Examiner
Sound Law Center
,I
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation
Hearing Examiner for the City of Kent
The Village at Bridges - PUD Major Modlflcation (Revised)
PUD-2004-4(R)/RPP4-2091934
Page 32 of 32
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 60
1. SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT FEE DEFERRAL, PUBLIC HEARING BY ECONOMIC &
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - APPROVE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorize the Economic & Community
Development Committee to hold a public hearing to consider deferral of
mitigation fees that the City collects for construction of single family homes.
The Economic & Community Development Committee has twice been briefed by
staff regarding creation of an option in the City's building permit process to defer
collection of mitigation fees for single family homes. The code changes necessary
to allow such deferrals require a public hearing, which would normally be held by
the Land Use and Planning Board. However, on April 12, 2010, the Committee
voted to hold the hearing itself. City Code allows such a change in venue when
approved by the City Council. Council authorization of this change will allow the
hearing to be held on May 10, 2010.
3. EXHIBITS: Economic & Community Development Committee Minutes of
4/12/10
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Economic & Community Development Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? No Revenue? No
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
1Z
KENT
W.l 5 H I N G T O N
ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MINUTES
April 12, 2010
Committee Members Chair Jamie Perry, Elizabeth Albertson, Deborah Ranniger
Chair Perry called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Albertson MOVED and Ranniger SECONDED to approve the March 8, 2010 Minutes.
Motion PASSED 3-0.
5
2. Panther Lake Annexation Zoning Comprehensive Plan Land Use & Zoning i
Maps rAZ-2009-11 Hearing
Long-Range Planner William D. Osborne stated that staff anticipates going before City
Council in May to adopt zoning prior to the effective date of annexation on July 1st.
Osborne discussed urban separators, the Land Use and Planning Board's (LUPB)
recommendation and consideration of citizen proposals.
Osborne stated that the City of Kent's Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plan and
regulations must be consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies (CPP) of King County.
He stated that Kent and other King County cities that comprise 70% of the population ratify
the CPPs which include Urban Separator Policies and the map designating those urban
separators. King County will begin the process of revisiting urban separators in 2014 at
which time the City will have opportunity to consider them.
Osborne stated that the LUPB adopted staff's Alternative 2 that provided Kent
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations consistent with existing King County Zoning and
then suggesting Kent Zoning that could best fit those designations. One change between
Alternative 1 and 2 is that the balance of the former Panther Lake Elementary School site
located on the corner of 208th and the Benson Rd would be designated as Community
Commercial, Mixed Use (CC-MU).
Osborne stated that Kent is proposing to apply Mobile Home Park (MHP) designations for a
number of Mobile Home Park areas in the County that carry Single Family (SF) or
Multifamily (MF) Designations.
I Osborne characterized each of the following citizen proposals defining them as- the Ruth
Proposal, the Holmberg/Morford Proposal, the Beckwith Proposal, and the O'Brien Proposal.
Osborne stated that staff has further considered their original Neighborhood Convenience
Commercial (NCC) zoning recommendation for the Ruth Proposal which addressed the
County's scale of development and included an option to consider Community Commercial,
Mixed-Use Zoning, as King County encourages a mix of uses both in their commercial
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning District Map designations.
Osborne stated that the property associated with the Herman Proposal is currently
designated R-4 in the County with staff not recommending any changes from the LUPB's
recommendation (of SF-4.5/SR-4.5).
Osborne stated that the Leever Proposal considers an area adjacent to an existing urban
separator. The City is looking at urban separators as a countywide planning policy issue
and recommends addressing this proposal at some future time Staff supports the LUPB's
original recommendation.
Osborne stated that the Bowditch proposal is an applaudable planning goal which
encourages increasing land use intensity particularly in proximity to transit He stated that
were staff to move forward on this proposal, approximately 650 to 700 parcels would need
notification to move forward with this proposal as written. The actual development of
multifamily projects requires a significantly larger amount of area than a one parcel depth
and staff is reluctant to define exactly where in any given neighborhood adjacent to existing
or planned arterials where that line would be drawn There is no certainty that this proposal
would realistically encourage development of multifamily Osborne asked the Committee to
clarify if they felt it would be desirable for staff to move forward on this for further analysis
Osborne submitted for the record: 1) a letter dated April 12, 2010 from Stephen Bowditch to
clarify the geographic extent of his proposal, 2) An email dated April 8, 2010 from Mike
Rountree in support of the Ruth Proposal, 3) An email dated April 10, 2010 from Marcia
Prater in support of the Ruth Proposal, (4) An email dated April 12, 2010 indicating
opposition to the Bowditch proposal, (5) one email in opposition to the Herman Proposal,
and (6) one letter via email and hard copy from William and Candi McKay indicating their
opposition to the O'Brien proposal. Osborne assured Perry that the Committee would be
provided copies of those submittals.
With regard to the Ruth proposal, Osborne spoke about an option to apply a Community
Commercial/Mixed Use character which encourages more pedestrian orientation with
relaxed parking standards for the commercial at the southeast corner of southeast 192nd
Street and 108th Avenue This designation allows for more flexibility
Ranniger MOVED and Albertson SECONDED a Motion to Open the Public Hearing.
Motion PASSED 3-0. Perry declared the Public Hearing open.
William Prater, PO Box 1804, Bellevue, WA 98009 submitted a letter for the record in
support of the Ruth Proposal asking for consideration to include their lot as part of the Ruth
proposal. He stated that he would like additional zoning options applied to his property, as
he prepares to sell his home
Mike Rountree, 10847 SE 192nd St , Renton, WA spoke in support of the Ruth proposal
requesting his property be included in the Ruth proposal to give him more flexibility and
options to market his property as multi-use.
Larry Armstrong, 19637 116th Avenue SE, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to the O'Brien
proposal as it would destroy Panther Lake and the surrounding habitat.
Gary Johnson, 19645 116th Avenue SE, Renton, WA spoke in opposition to the O'Brien
proposal He stated that Panther Lake needs protection to survive.
William McKay, 19821 116th Avenue SE, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to the O'Brien
proposal He stated that the lake area is an ignored and neglected resource with sensitive
areas, wetlands and wildlife habitat which needs to be protected and preserved by
maintaining the area as a greenbelt and urban separator.
Jon Ruth, 19400 108th Avenue SE, Renton, WA upon receiving clarification from Osborne on
the zoning classifications for his property, Ruth stated that he supports staff's option for the
Ruth proposal and would encourage staff to consider including the Rountree and Prater
property as part of the Ruth proposal.
Mark Duncan, 221 South 28th Street, Tacoma, WA questioned the permitting process for
property located in the Panther Lake Annexation area. Perry deferred to Satterstrom to
address his permitting concerns.
Cham Farkas, 11011 SE 192nd Street, Kent, WA asked staff to define the boundaries of the
Ruth proposal, stating that she would like her one-third acre parcel to be included in the
Ruth proposal. Osborne stated that the Farkas property is currently zoned (R-12) 12 units
per acre in the County, and that commercial designations for the Farkas parcel had not been
analyzed to this point in time. Osborne stated that inclusion of the Farkas parcel in the
Ruth Proposal would require further staff consideration and another public hearing. Staff
and the LUPB's recommendation are to adopt (MRG) Multifamily Residential Garden Density
16 units per acre zoning which allows apartments for that property.
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010
Page 2 of 6
Christian Etheridge, 21642 148th Avenue SE, Kent, WA stated that he owns the Side Track
Pub and Eatery at 108th and 208th. He stated that he legally carries a license for tabletop
card gaming under King County statutes. He stated that he has carried this license for two
years, building up his business through holding Texas Hold-um tournaments. Etheridge
voiced his concern that with the annexation, he would no longer be able to hold this license
which has become very important to his business.
Perry stated that legislation has allowed house-banked card games within the annexation
area Perry further stated that Etheridge's establishment is not house-banked, so therefore,
he would not be allowed to continue with his license She stated that there is no venue to
allow grandfathering of the license, as the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) has not given
Kent the ability to do that.
Dan Barrett, 11436 SE 208th Street, Kent, WA stated that at one time the Board of the
Pantera Lago Homeowners Association and a board member from the Association of
Manufactured Homeowners (a statewide organization) advocated for the interests of 72,000
Washington residents who own manufactured and mobile homes Barrett stated that he
and his colleagues from the Pantera Homeowners Association support Alternative One (1) as
it pertains to mobile home parks within the annexation area.
Barrett stated that staff's narrative omits a 15 unit mobile home park at 11320 SE 2081h
Street, encircled by Pantera Lago Estates, known as East Hill Estates with a different owner.
Barrett suggested adding East Hill Estates to the narrative under Alternative 1 in order to
avoid any question arising from its omission.
Jim Doan, 11214 SE 196th Street, Renton, WA spoke in opposition to the Ruth and O'Brien
proposals He stated that the O'Brien proposal would create the potential for higher
densities that would exacerbate flooding and drainage issues. The Ruth proposal would
increase traffic volume and create access issues to the Ruth property Parking would
become problematic.
011ie Burton, 11007 SE 196`h Street, Renton, WA stated that the City needs to take
measures to correct drainage and maintenance issues with respect to a drainage ditch (tile)
that runs from 196th Street to the Benson Highway Burton stated that although he is not
opposed to new residential development, no further development should occur within the
vicinity of Panther Lake until the drastic drainage problem is fixed. Mr Burton submitted a
letter for the record dated April 12, 2010 opposing zoning changes in the Panther Lake
Drainage Basin and a copy of an 1893 deed showing Panther Lake and the drainage ditch.
Valerie Matin]ussi, 11220 SE 204th Street, Kent, WA stated that Panther Lake is a 10,000
year old glacier made lake with a natural shoreline that needs protection. Development
could turn the lake into a toxic waste health hazard from the pouring of pollutants and
storm water runoff into the lake. She alluded to her opposition to the O'Brien proposal.
Robert Matin]ussi, 11220 SE 204th Street, Kent, WA on behalf of himself and his wife Valerie
spoke against the O'Brien proposal He stated that the lake needs protected and it has a lot
to offer the community Matin,ussi voiced concern that too much development will result in
increased pollutants and contaminants and destroy natural habitat. He asked that the
zoning for Lake Johe should remain R-1.
Paul Morford, PO Box 6345, Kent, WA stated that he has no vested interest in the property
defined as the Holmberg/Morford proposal. He stated that he had read and submitted for
the record a letter written by Shupe Holmberg with Holmberg and Baima Engineering on
behalf of his neighbor proposing zoning that his neighbor desired for his property. Morford
stated that he would recommend MR-G zoning for this property which would be greater than
or equal to the zoning that King County currently allows and would comply with the GMA.
Osborne stated that staff recommends that the LUPB recommendation stand.
Ken Nelson, 11441 SE 196th Street, Kent, WA spoke on behalf of his wife Carol and himself
in opposition to the O'Brien proposal, stating that the R-1 or the City's equivalent zoning
I ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010
Page 3 of 6
should stand out of respect for the topography of Panther Lake, a large drainage basin.
Nelson submitted three pictures for the record with the view from two of those pictures
facing south and one facing north from his property.
Camille O'Brien, 19619 1161h Avenue SE, Renton, WA stated that her proposal requests that
both sides of 1161h be zoned SR-6 for consistency. O'Brien stated that she en]oys the lake,
the habitat and wetland area. She stated that if zoning were to change to SR-6 there are
factors in place to protect the lake, citing the Critical Areas Ordinance, the Shoreline
Management Act, and setback requirements. O'Brien stated that she would be fine with a
SR-1 zone as long as there is consistency. She stated that she would be fine with SR-1 as
long as there is consistency.
Ranniger MOVED and Albertson SECONDED a Motion to Close the Public Hearing.
Motion Passed 3-0.
Perry stated that a motion is in order for submittal of some exhibits. Whereupon,
Albertson MOVED to enter into the record Mr. 011ie Burton's two page letter
protesting the proposed Panther Lake drainage basin properties and an original
plat map from July 3, 1893; and entered into the record three (3) photographs
submitted by Mr. Ken Nelson taken on or around 11441 SE 196th Street residence.
Motion PASSED 3-0.
After deliberating, Ranniger MOVED to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
and Zoning Districts Map Designations per the recommendation of the Land Use
and Planning Board's Alternative Two with the following amendments and
changes: Adopting the Ruth Proposal with a CC-MU zoning, adopting the
Holmberg/Morford (Toshi) proposal for Low-Density Multifamily (MR-G) zoning,
adopting the Leever Proposal for Single Family Residential/One Dwelling Unit Per
Acre (SR-1) zoning, and adopting corresponding Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map Designations of; Mixed Use (MU) for the Ruth Proposal, Low Density
Multifamily (LDMF) for the Holmberg/Morford Proposal, and Urban Separator (US)
for the Leever Proposal. Albertson SECONDED the MOTION. Motion PASSED 3-0.
3. Capital Facilities Element Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transportation
(CPA-2009-1(All
Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that this is a housekeeping amendment to the
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan to update the inventory of roads and
bridges and to reference the 2008 Transportation Master Plan
Albertson MOVED to recommend to the Full Council approval of an amendment to
the Capital Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan related to
inventories of streets and bridges and reference to the 2008 Transportation
Master Plan as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Board. Ranniger
SECONDED the Motion. Motion PASSED 3-0.
4. Countywide Plannino Policies, Amendments, Allocation of Regional Services
and Facilities, and Growth Targets
Anderson stated that amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies come before the City
Council periodically and have been approved by the Growth Management Planning
Committee (GMPC) and King County (KC). The current motions approved by the GMPC
adopts a work program and schedule to address a policy framework for allocation of
regional services and facilities and update existing policies and Table LU-1 in the
Countywide Planning Policies to provide the most current housing and employment targets
for the period of 2006-2031.
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010
Page 4 of 6
Ranniger MOVED to recommend to the full Council ratification of amendments to
the Countywide Planning Policies approved under Growth Management Planning
Council (GMPC) Motions No. 09-1 and 09-2 adopting a work plan and schedule to
address the policy framework for allocation of regional services and facilities and
updating existing policies and Table LU-1 to provide for housing and employment
targets for the period 2006-2031. Albertson SECONDED the MOTION. Motion
PASSED 3-0.
S. Deferral of Certain Development Fees fSCA-2009-21
Principal Planner Matt Gilbert stated that a discussion before the Economic and Community
Development Committee in January considered the challenges facing developers in these
difficult economic times and contemplated potential solutions the city might enact to
address some of those challenges and lessen the financial impacts to builders and home-
buyers.
Gilbert stated that it has been Kent's practice to collect mitigation fees early in the
development process requiring a major outflow of cash for the builder Gilbert stated that
staff is recommending deferring those mitigation fees in order to lessen financial impacts
related to a range of impacts that include; water system development, storm system
development, traffic system and school impact fees. Gilbert stated that mitigation fees can
be tracked.
Gilbert stated that water connection fees are fees for service, and Parks and Sidewalk
mitigation fees require payment prior to the subdivision of land; therefore those fees are
not included in the fee deferral recommendation.
Gilbert stated that staff recommends deferring fees for Single Family homes The fees for a
typical single family home are about $20,000 with about $15,000 used for mitigation
payments with the remainder used for plan review fees, inspection fees, and administrative
costs Gilbert stated that deferring the mitigation payments until the sale of those homes
would not impact the general fund that pays for staff time to provide the review and
inspection services.
Gilbert stated that staff is proposing if a builder wishes to defer fees that the builder
authorize the City to record a lien against their property for the amount of fees owed that
would be paid upon sale of the home through an escrow process whereby any liens would
be cleared and the city would be paid. Gilbert stated that the City's legal department is
drafting language to clarify this procedure and to incorporate language that would require
builders to notify buyers through the normal disclosure process that those fees would be
paid before title is transferred.
Gilbert stated that in establishing a new fee collection system staff is considering the costs
associated with lien recordation and staff time with an estimated cost to the city of 5140 for
each lien or approximately 1.5 hours of staff time plus recording fees, and that this fee
amount may need to be revised if more time is ultimately needed to create and track each
lien
Perry stated that the ECDC will hold a public hearing on this issue in May.
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association, Bellevue, WA clarified that the deferred fees
are not added to the cost of a home, concurred with staff that the builder needs to disclose
this information to the homebuyer and stated that the builder is obligated to pay those fees
not the homeowner If the builder goes bankrupt, the lien remains on the title which would
have to be cleared out of escrow.
Hans Korve, DMP Engineering, 726 Auburn Way N, Auburn, WA stated that this proposal will
impact those folks he represents with projects still out there He spoke in favor of staff's
proposal suggesting that staff consider bundling sidewalk and park fees with the other fees
as discussed so that only one payment needs to be made.
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 2010
Page 5 of 6
Albertson MOVED to direct staff to prepare development related fee deferrals for
consideration in a public hearing before the ECDC. Ranniger SECONDED the
Motion. Motion PASSED 3-0.
6. Economic Development Report
Economic & Community Development Director Ben Wolters stated that the economy is
slowly making a positive turn. He stated that the City has received a proposal from Exotic
Metals, an aerospace manufacturer in Kent. He stated that they have purchased a building
next door to their existing facility as part of a plan for expansion that would add 100 new
employees Wolters stated that improvements to the building won't trigger the threshold of
half the appraised value that would trigger additional flood plain regulations Wolters stated
that staff is working with them to expedite their permitting and answer any other questions.
Wolters stated that he believes this is part of a larger national and regional picture citing
that in March the manufacturing index grew to 59 6%, an increase of 3 1 percent compared
to February An index of 50% or higher indicates growth and when that index drops below
50% the industry is contracting. Wolters stated that although manufacturing is picking up
across the board it is not necessarily an indicator of new employment Within the
manufacturing industry, existing staff are being worked hard to meet new order
requirements leading to signs of pending burnout which will break the industry and
necessitate hiring additional staff
Wolters stated that staff and development partners Heinz Mortensen and L & N Architects
conducted a site tour on April 2"d with four representatives from the General Service
Administration (GSA) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). He stated that the
GSA and FAA were impressed with staff's proposal. Wolters stated that the GSA and FAA
will rank the sites they have toured; inform the market place of their ranking in order for
those markets to determine if they wish to remain in the competition based on their
ranking.
Wolters stated that the City received 40 new residential permit submittals in March, the
largest number submittals for homes in over 3 years.
Informational Only
7. Downtown Zoning Discussion
Planning Director Fred Satterstrom stated that the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE)
zone is the downtown urban centers dominant commercial zone. The DCE zone (created in
the 90s) allows intense urban style development with few restrictions. Development
standards allow virtually 100% site coverage with no height limitations and reduced parking
standards.
Satterstrom stated that since development standards were less restrictive the city
implemented a design review process to control the aesthetic environment Uses in the
DCE zone include a broad range of retail uses, offices, personal services, multifamily such as
condominiums, apartments, senior housing and retirement homes.
Perry directed staff to prepare a report for the next Committee meeting on DCE zoning as
well as the design review standards and process. Perry stated that it is time to reevaluate
the DCE zone for relevancy with Ranniger suggesting allowing Mixed-Use in the NCC zone
Informational Only
Adiournment
Perry Adjourned the Meeting at 8:05 p.m.
Pamela Mottram
Economic & Community Development Committee Secretary
P\Planning\ECDC\2010\Minutes\04-12-10_Min doc
ECDC Minutes
April 12, 201010
Page 6 of 6
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6R
1. SUBJECT: EXCUSED ABSENCES FOR COUNCILMEMBERS RAPLEE AND
THOMAS - APPROVE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approve an excused absence from tonight's
meeting for Councilmember Raplee and Councilmember Thomas.
3. EXHIBITS: Memorandum
4. RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
1 5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? N/A Revenue? N/A
Currently in the Budget? Yes No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
City Council
Debbie Raplee, Council President
. Phone 253-856-5712
K E N T Fax 253-856-6712
wA s H i N r o N Address 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent,WA 98032-5895
MEMORANDUM
TO: Suzette Cooke, Mayor
City Councilmembers
FROM: Debbie Raplee, Councilmember
DATE: May 4, 2010
SUBJECT: City Council Excused Absence
I would like to request an excused absence from the May 4, 2010 City
Council meeting. I will be unable to attend.
Thank you for your consideration.
Debbie Raplee
Councilmember
I
ne
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Consent Calendar - 6S
1. SUBJECT: GREEN RIVER LEVEE SCHEDULE 1C - ACCEPT AS COMPLETE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept the Green River Levee Schedule 1C Project
as complete and release retainage to SCI Infrastructure, Inc., upon receipt of
standard releases from the State and release of any liens The original contract
amount was $ 266,973 32. The final contract amount was $279,106.04.
3. EXHIBITS: None
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? X Revenue?
Currently in the Budget? Yes X No
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Kent City Council Meeting
Date Mav 4, 2010
Category Other Business - 7A
1. SUBJECT: S. 228T" ST. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION
AGREEMENT
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The City of Kent entered into an agreement with
the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) and the Union Pacific
Railroad (UP) for the City's S. 2121h St. and Willis Street Grade Separation
projects. Under the terms of the agreement the UP contributed $500,000
towards completion of the Willis St. project and $650,000 for the S. 212th St.
project.
Under federal law, railroads are responsible to pay 5-percent of eligible project
costs for construction of railroad grade separations.
This agreement is about to expire and FMSIB has been negotiating with UP to
transfer the $950,000 interest funds and the $170,000 of unconditional funds to
Kent's S. 228th St/UP Railroad Grade Separation Project for a total of $1,120,000.
FMSIB passed a motion approving this reallocation of funds at their March 19,
2010, meeting.
3. EXHIBITS: Public Works Memo dated 3/30/2010
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Director
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT
Expenditure? Revenue? X
Currently in the Budget? Yes _ No X
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to authorize the Mayor to enter into negotiations with the Freight Mobility
Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) to receive Union Pacific Railroad funds for
the S 2281h Street Railroad Grade Separation Project and to forego extension of
the existing FMSIB Agreement for the Union Pacific Railroad's contribution to the
S. 212th and Willis Street Grade Separation Projects.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte P E , Public Works Director
• Phone 253-856-5500
Fax 253-856-6500
KENT
W.S INGT°. Address 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
tDate: March 30, 2010
To: Chair Debbie Raplee and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: April S. 2010
From: Mark Howlett/Mark Madfai
Through: Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E., Public Works Director
Subject: South 228`h Street Union Pacific Railroad Grade Separation
Agreement
Motion: Authorize the Public Works Director to enter into negotiations with
the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board to receive Union Pacific
Railroad funds for the S. 228`h Street Railroad Grade Separation Project and
direct staff to forego extension of the existing FMSIB Agreement for the
Union Pacific Railroad's contribution to the S. 212th and Willis St. Grade
Separation Projects.
Summary: In April 2001 the City of Kent entered into an agreement with the
Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) and the Union Pacific Railroad
(UP) for the City's S. 212th St. and Willis Street Grade Separation projects. Under
the terms of this agreement the UP contributed $500,000 towards completion of the
Willis St. project and $650,000 for the S. 212th St project. Also included in the
agreement is UP funding for grade separation projects in Auburn, Tukwila, Pierce
County and Seattle/Port of Seattle. Under the agreement the UP paid $3,480,000 for
six projects and an additional $170,000 of uncommitted funds for a total of
$3,650,000. The funds were deposited inan interest-bearing account by FMSIB and
since 2001 the original $3,650,000 has accumulated approximately $950,000 in
interest.
Under federal law, railroads are responsible to pay 5 percent of eligible project costs
for construction of railroad grade separations Through this agreement, instead of
paying 5-percent, which, based on current estimates would be approximately
$1,000,000 for Willis St. and $1,600,000 for S. 2121h St., the UP would pay
$500,000 for Willis St. and $650,000 for S. 2121h St.
This agreement is about to expire and FMSIB has been negotiating with UP to
transfer the $950,000 interest funds and the $170,000 of uncommitted funds to
Kent's S. 228th St./UP Railroad Grade Separation Project for a total of $1,120,000. A
motion approving this reallocation of funds was passed by FMSIB at their March 19,
2010 board meeting. Kent Public Works is strongly in favor of this motion.
.ram
As a separate item the UP has proposed to extend the existing agreement for
another 5 years with their commitment of $500,000 for the Willis St. grade
separation project and $650,000 for the S. 212th St project in lieu of the federal "5-
percent rule". We estimate that this would save UP $1,450,000. The City would need
to find another source for this money.
The decision for the City is whether we want to continue under the original fixed
reimbursement amounts for the Willis and 212th projects, which UP will gladly agree
to, or do we want to forego extending the agreement and proceed under the federal
"5-percent rule" for grade separation projects, which may require future
negotiations with UP. Staff recommends foregoing entering into the extension and
proceeding under the federally mandated "5-percent rule".
Kent City Council Meeting
Date May 4, 2010
Category Other Business - 7B
1. SUBJECT: ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES AGREEMENT
® 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: King County has terminated its animal control
■ contract with Kent and other King County cities effective June 30, 2010. King
County has provided Kent with a new 2 '/z year contract that continues animal
control services, which include field and sheltering, beginning July 1st. Kent staff
has been participating on various committees to research options for animal
control. The research has centered around continuing a contract with King
County, creating a sub-regional model, or managing animal control on our own.
® 3. EXHIBITS: Regional Animal Services Study
�I 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.)
5. FISCAL IMPACT: $132,500
Expenditure? X Revenue?
Currently in the Budget? Yes No X
6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract with King County for anima
control services for the time period of July 1, 2010 to December 31, 201fY and
adjust the budget accordingly.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
1
1
Joint Cities-County Work Group for Regional Animal Services
Background/Introduction on Agreement in Principle to Provide a
Regional System
Animal control, sheltering and licensing are discretionary local services that historically
were provided by individual jurisdictions and King County. While discretionary, the
services address public health, safety, and animal welfare outcomes that are important to
our residents. After being approached by leadership of the Suburban Cities Association in
the mid 1980s, King County agreed to provide animal control, sheltering and licensing
functions on behalf of cities on a regional basis, in exchange for keeping all pet licensing
revenue.
' Current Service Arrangements
Thirty-five cities have an animal services contract with the County (Seattle, Renton,
Skykomish and Milton do not have contracts). Most cities contract for all three service
components* control, shelter, and licensing. Two cities contract for shelter only (Des
Moines,Normandy Park), one city contracts for shelter and field only (Newcastle). Five
cities currently purchase a higher level of animal control services (Auburn, Shoreline,
Kirkland, Tukwila, SeaTac).
The service arrangement has not been revisited since its inception and, over time, the gap
between system revenue and system cost has grown to a level that is not sustainable for the
County. In recent years, the County has contributed in excess of$2 million annually from
the County general find to support the services. Based on direction from the County
Council to enter into new cost-recovery arrangements with the cities, the County recently
issued termination letters to cities for the existing animal services contracts, effective
July 1, 2010.
Joint Cities-County `York Group
' In anticipation of the termination of contracts, a"Joint Cities-County Work Group for
Regional Animal Services" has been meeting since January to develop a proposed
"Agreement in Principle" for a new regional animal control system. This "Agreement in
Principle" is intended to define a new basis for animal services contracts that could, if
adopted by a sufficient number of cities, preserve the benefits of a regional animal services
system(see Attachment 1) The alternative to a regional model is that cities will have to
either operate their own individual systems or create subregional arrangements for service
delivery Under any delivery option—local, subregional or regional—cities will have to
begin paying something for animal services to continue.
' As the Work Group reviewed data about the present system, it became clear that cities face
very different circumstances with respect to animal services. some are very heavy users of
the shelter and control operations; others use it much less The reasons could relate to
demographics, behavior, the geographic proximity of the County shelter or nonprofit
shelters, or some combination of factors. The licensing revenue generated by the system
Document dated April 7, 2010 1
Prepared by King County
also varies dramatically among jurisdictions on a per capita basis, in part based on where ,
the County has in the past focused marketing efforts.
Economies of scale exist in providing animal services: the more cities that participate in a
regional system,the lower the costs are for everyone. Conversely, if the geographic
distribution of cities participating in the regional system starts to look like a patchwork,the
service delivery becomes more challenging and inefficient; at some point,the County will
not be willing or able to effectively provide service.
Summary of the Agreement in Principle
The "Agreement in Principle"represents a departure from "business as usual"in the
delivery of animal services by the County (see Attachment 2). The primary difference in
control services will be having animal control officers dedicated to each of four districts 5-
days per week(see Attachment 3), while allowing cities individually or collectively within
each district to contract for higher levels of service. Operations at the Kent shelter will be
improved with limited resources through closing the Crossroads shelter and concentrating
staff resources in Kent, expanding the foster and volunteer network, and instituting
practices to reduce the number of animals and their length of stay (such as fees for owner
surrenders, utilizing capacity at PAWS, and seeking collaboration with other private
animal welfare partners). Licensing functions will continue to include licensing
administration as well as marketing and education, with more incentive for cities to
participate in increasing licensing revenues.
The proposed system costs to be allocated are $5.6 million (annualized for 2010 —see
Attachment 4). This reflects a reduction of about $800,000 from estimates provided to
cities in early 2010, achieved through cost reductions and the County absorbing some
costs. The "Agreement in Principle" seeks to balance the different situations of cities by
proposing a cost allocation methodology based on both population and usage factors (a 50-
50 split). Licensing revenues ($3.2 million) are credited to jurisdictions based on the
residence of the person buying a pet license. A variety of allocations were considered
before arriving at this methodology. The County is proposing to provide transitional
funding to those participating cities that have the highest per capita costs. The County is
also proposing to provide enhanced licensing marketing support for cities with the lowest
licensing revenue per capita
The Agreement in Principle proposes a 2.5 year agreement, during which time the parties, a
through a Joint Cities-County Committee, will focus on increasing system revenue and
reducing system costs. The Agreement in Principle identifies several of these collaborative
initiatives, including an exploration of alternative licensing systems and ways to further
reduce shelter operation needs. Parties would be allowed to terminate for convenience
upon six months notice Contracts could be extended by mutual agreement for an
additional 2 years.
The Work Group concluded that to maximize system efficiency, a"menu" approach to the
purchase of services is not practicable For example, it is not efficient for a limited number
of field officers to drop animals at multiple shelters. Similarly, the more licensing systems
Document dated April 7, 2010 2
Prepared by King County
or different field systems the County shelter must interface with,the greater the
administrative complexities, inefficiencies, and costs.
' The Agreement in Principle is described in the attached tables and map, together with a
timeline and steps for adoption, and related information.
' Attachments:
' 1. Benefits of a Regional System
2. Outline of Terms for Agreement in Principle
3. Map of Control Districts
' 4. Estimated Annualized 2010 Regional Program Cost Allocation
5. Frequently Asked Questions
6. Timeline
Document dated April 7, 2010 3
' Prepared by King County
i
"Regional Animal Services of King County" '
Benefits of a Regional Animal Services System
Public Health and Safety ,
• Provides the ability to identify and track rabies and other public health issues
related to animals on a regional basis. Reduces public health threats through
routine vaccination of animals. '
• Provides capacity to handle unusual and multi-jurisdictional events involving
animals that often require specialized staff such as horse cruelty, animal
hoarding, loose livestock, dog-fighting and cock-fighting groups, puppy mills, '
illegal reptile vendor operations, animal necropsies and quarantine, holding of
animals as evidence in criminal cases, and retrieval of dead animals
Animal Welfare
• Reduces pressure on non-profit shelters by maintaining capacity at regional
public shelters. Non-profit animal welfare organizations contribute significantly '
through their own capacity and by accepting transfer of public-sheltered
animals for care and adoption, thereby reducing costs at public shelters.
• Provides for participation of a large corps of volunteers and foster homes. '
• Provides capacity for regional response to animal cruelty cases.
• Provides regional preparedness planning and coordination during '
emergencies and disasters.
• Provides additional regional capacity for seasonal events such as "kitten
season". '
• Avoids competition across jurisdictions for sheltering space and comparisons
across jurisdictions on outcome statistics
Customer Service '
• Provides a single access point for residents searching for a lost pet or seeking
help from animal control. Provides one single point of contact for citizen '
complaints.
• Maintains a uniform pet licensing program that is simpler for the public to
access and understand, with a broad range of services to encourage licensing: ,
marketing, partnering with third parties on points of sale for licenses,
canvassing, database management, and the ability to return animals to
owners in the field. ,
Document dated April 7, 2010
Prepared by King County
' Effective and Efficient Provision of Services
• Provides a low-cost spay and neuter program that serves the entire region,
' and is the key to reducing the population of homeless animals and reducing
the costs of the system over time.
• Reduces the demand on individual jurisdictions to respond to communications
' from the media, advocacy groups and other interested parties.
• Builds economies of scale to provide a full range of services, making it less
expensive to develop operations, training, licensing, and care programs than it
' would be for cities to duplicate services at the local level
• Use of volunteers and partnerships with private animal welfare organizations
' provide our region with the ability to promote the most humane treatment with
limited public resource.
• Provides a consistent level of service, humane animal care, and regulatory
approach countywide.
• Allows local police agencies to focus on traditional law enforcement.
1
Document dated April 7, 2010
' Prepared by King County
I E
77
a H 7 I
i
{
3
1
` gg •' t
PA
CE
04
' @ O
t
t
& � N
Ir
K Ei iE
/ O
co
K
a c o c V -
Joint Cities-County Work Group on Regional Animal Services ,
Proposed Timeline for Confirming and Adopting New
Interlocal Agreements
Date Item ,
March 31 Agreement in Principle
April 7 Review Agreement in Principle with City Managers and City
Administrators large city staff work group '
April 15 Updated agreement in principle circulated (if necessary based on input at
April 7 meetings)
End of Circulate draft form of contract based on Agreement in Principle to all '
April cities comments due May 7)
April 30 Initial statements of interest in contracting from cities, County
(including statement of whether city wishes to contract only for the first 6
months)
May 3 Adjusted costs circulated to all parties based on April 30 indications
of interest. If parties declining to participate result in an estimated 10%
or greater increase in total costs to be allocated as compared to the April 7
estimated cost allocation, request second statement of intent from cities
and County. '
May 14 Final draft contract circulated excluding final cost allocations
comments due May 21)
May 19 Second statement of intent, with any applicable upward limits each party
agrees to bear.
May 21 Results of 2"d statement of intent circulated to all parties
May 24-27 Parties confer and determine whether/how to proceed ,
June 3 Final form of contract circulated:for action.
Mid-late All participating jurisdictions act by approximately mid-June in order for
June agreement to become effective July 1 '
Document dated April 7, 2010
Prepared by King County ,
o0
E abi ai
° ,� E0c
SU N bD G •p N O
v O
y N E N •O f-+O•+ O id .�
cD oo o a aGi e�i avi >E
"ClW 0 l
vi Rt ^U^, +`� CL G 4� bD-0
sh ° J ° T bD
vy p '7 E-r O t=D
b WO
d
O T � CL D
U G
CJ1 b � \ bD G a) O
y 0 G D ++
W C ai d Y 4: m N v
U H b b o ° CIS vi
a0
-
o
o ~ G ° cd °
x
v Q C.)v tn O 0 -0 v �
° G Q N •r, v G ° ° ° f' O Q) O ' U Z w °: 7s
Zf— eoa N v oN owe
O Z Id + 'u o v o N 3 cd FD E o W v
W ° a a o ✓� E ° o bD o
w C o
W > o a o U ° °' b 0 c Z b y v c a b
W ci o b a
O W' o v ..f� v N v -o v v ° vCd Cu
U °al CD 0
v a 0
O .a 0 =4 3 m o aGi ° d avi v E
d' Q A Y o Y G E x U o. n :3 o by o a
C7 tl H M � 3 3 °
pLLJ
T O W h G ti
' .� •t7 O 4r C G c°d o O0 CD
O
rn cONa�Oi O
=Ll. y
o CO , 00 w o
> • Oa
.0 bD +QU W o °UaZ cj , (� o :9
o G 0 m p -r- ° v ', — G o
b0 O cd O 4+ u
p: E— w U 1) � ^ U L � � ,° as O -a O bD � y
ZD
cd W : v ar
F- -'G
_ u > o ai cad E �G b� ti > o v v
G _
p ° o v i a aGi GC;l
OQwY Ts a a _ � Y o CO v o a>i o 0
a u 2 a) o u : v o o
H •% O vi E „ g G G U +' li G r, W \ O O O
adi v ro v •v d v b yd N .>
O Pa' E" �vr UoW � naioD �> Z3 o° U o v U❑
>o .°n roQc
QU
m
ei a c
o o M
'v M
u OL
� ° oa
o
s. y
' P. Q 24 ck4
4o N W
(D m O N
0
U r a
bA
N A O CA
O O y J ct bA V V u U U }; b .�
LLI
cz
V N C. N .0 ,� f". y to ,
> W o oej
�n U 'L3 °
0 a-
Cd
n_ cli
Z cd H A bA � ,N_, o 'b O 0.0
M
bb .-� czt
s p O ' cn O •n U O V
W bVA V dl V N U •.� N .cD❑d m N
aj
Q p vV 4 N o G
0 O
C� LL 0-1
C 0) N U U •� r LLJ
}S_iN-- :=Ial
Ncu
V Z >' �-• N sV. U L' cVG p R" U `� U V
UI ti O O U b 5 v r O C6 p N y U 'n
F- ~ p D N cad 1--. W U ° •O —� ~ •ya Y y U ,
cn
F > ° o o F + U V . O y Zccd
hi
o y > o �
i o '
C)
0
N
v1 r C
CL
q —
p > Q m
�j cs o ce
O
U N '
o cl
Y 0 C
N O U
Q , U
cn
° w
"o v a� Ja) U
G
fn a� '� o v > .a
C110, 0 3 CD•O
Cd
' J Z > a i o s r o
o a b G
Q — 16
°
Z f >, 4� Q o 0 O >,
O Z Cd `n 2vn 'o s� a °
o � u > U
L1J 0 � o b >
w W o .2 u [ � b N a 13 o 'cl
' LL
O > A I � ° U
IrAu
IL
M � " d � .� "
a� °� o 0
O co o cl 4a � a�
LL
o > oo o o H .0 U
o
w N 4r r, o bA N rn
W O Y O N -O p U 40Cd
I- ~ Q. N n N
cn
O C 0r.
N
W Ni, O n O O P O d f
U) Z U 4,Nj U F:. O N
I y N
k y7 '
aw
O O is W a, O a W va U o o 0, o °
o o
°
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Q o o � o
0
N
U
� O c
U bD „ Ev
$�+
p c cl 0 cl
0
oa
i
U0 � o
� o �
a � 3
° m � -scl) a
o C
~ U ~ ,
¢, N
CII
7 �,
w
i bA
w
Lil
4,
Z o y TA w o y o
Qn
❑ c�t t"„ �' U O N
71
Q
L1JLU
LLJ
w LLJ
O Q.' a� d }, cS ri 0 bA
CD
IL
o o "
O Y - a o U
0 _ N CD
1
O Ll. O.��"i U ,' U N bA o bA
41
O 1-1
O F N N N
� w �
Z LL Q O bb F, «+ N�. cd ate+ t-+ C� 00 O cn Cl
00
O W ° °a sRO o ' o
Cd
cd
V U CV
W n O d O U N = FA N -05 '(D y ,
cd
~ N 3 G o o M
CA 04 Z N N 0
0
N T
C— O
QU
o o
� Y 1
cu
H �
�.q d 1
U FTr
p 1D l7�-dl. NN �Orm WWOYO..i11W u>M -W Nm Rr �W D NN �} A OOOO�A
L m V�NpnMNAlmOb hmm;Olml�'l060m ID+_Om NmNb PPmIO-b ONbm b b 0000 b
« Y�Na dFb Pmd Nw r, pp m �O AH a w' ddF v yWj y Q my � OCOD
N q
r'r
oG 000a �w o Q�o 0000 Cooa o 000Qaoo 0
�_C w$w2 e�iw Hw wo�Z wo w20000 w»wwoo2Hwo 0
7 y
L
aILC
f4iSE ° ° u Q I J
"�� l OO Oo QQ u��' 11
C , iAM Wz1MOOH�AM�N� �N g2 N�g��M� NZmN�� !d-��N�Z.oaPm O �_m PILJ-L
^ i ONi�3m N,O PfO ANNb m m Y^T l�
•B 'Y �p cd ONdACiN WN�Nj fJ�V OOm(7h O�N OV ONO^ N�ON10 mS�ON O �'1 L N UCi dmH�ddF�Ylm�wm0 w Np`N NP�KW mL<N SrV A F 0yy V
OON aV w `p ilowH, O , wT
U O pi �m eeppnm o^n^v>nm m° omyyyy�m°p'm'-w$'r �3mmmm mm.-my �gnbN F
•� C y C CSn�O�N�m� dQ wb ONw b'-nJmCd h OCIO <V Oin pry ON9l. ry
�dn4l. MOM 0 AK 0 hO['1 a 6i 0 t7 pj ^m l'l�(y LtOmr' O 01
UJ vO C U UN yCt _ Owwwwww w N � qln blN py w9wN�� wm wHw�wNw �y I(N
H N p
C( O � ° O W Ob CNIA V Nb 1�W m�lm e0�wm mm V NibM r NAmmM �OiO^ -NY N p)
U j °l a �OI N,UNNb Mm NN mN m mD'be-Nb emp 4�D[r�1�ry CPmi� fL
\ �/> U NPb C>1p bm�d O' bOP�O OMwN ^NN ^ r
tz
N m
P �N wF�AwN mN m Nm NQ,m�d'� CO T=ram p= w 199Hw^ W w wwH r M»wwww wwww we.v'm { a
0 f1 b O W�m 3an^v(ry� (V m pry .-wM m`d Cm oU {Ma.-Cm'1�dCfYw� HpO� OwOAP�pwb zo
EBW^ H�bl�b9 d.-b9W N b
aim q y
O C,
° �j� N N VIFmFgrA N ro
tt o �v C2rn w w� »v'ww NH"A N^PTa �w.-wwA iuovoLO Q� -- "vin m`tlb of v>
G N mar „y py _ a o N w
N W— y V H N O m � w•
O (O C H O N
tm'I(NOmNmf WW10 ��bmN F ONC n�
�p d �M 00m0�p N� blp
QIQ � 0°1 CO" NwHMFaRM;Ob ` NPI` wNH PwN mOC100 mNNrm� O�e00 JN b�� � H
U3 Oy QU= w�rHw� w K �KwwHN �iw�mw� w'yNVNwrN-VPIWy ' q
C O EU< IH
O w
7 ••
At
I
S
m a
4
a
C
O
' mac naLN Ep
o m ^
4 mU O7 YY�KNvi3 U atmUJL r�Zti}U mjY v>�-U Q a� 'o c c 9 � a i
Qm Olt>J%4U�h ti .40
c Li
0
OOZ°0 12 a m
vi y h J
N
@
/ !\
) §k
� \t
` \} \
f\
\\� \
§) § ;
i{\i2}j;l
!#)\!}egg
k|fif;2)~
))\\\\\\\}
� �
REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES AND STAFF
1 A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. MAYOR
C. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
D. PARKS AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE
E. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
F. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
G. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
H. ADMINISTRATION
REPORTS FROM SPECIAL COMMITTEES
KENT
WAS H 1 N O T O N
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES
APRIL 6, 2010
Committee Members Present: Jamie Perry, Tim Higgins
' The meeting was called to order by Jamie Perry at 4:10 p.m.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATED MARCH 16, 2010
Higgins moved to approve the minutes of the March 16, 2010 Operations Committee
meeting. Perry seconded the motion and Raplee concurred via email, which passed
3-0.
2. APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS DATED 3/15/2010 AND 3/31/2010
Higgins moved to approve the vouchers dated 3/15/2010 and 3/31/2010. Perry
seconded the motion and Raplee concurred via email, which passed 3-0.
3. MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO APPROVE THE REAPPOINTMENT OF ANDREW
HUTCHINSON TO THE LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
Ben Wolters explained the purpose of the Lodging Tax Advisory Board, a voice as to how funds
are used The funds primarily support tourism with a substantial amount going to Seattle
Southside, which is our south county tourism board Higgins further noted that he had
previous experience serving on the board and with the two gentlemen being recommended for
re-appointment and spoke highly of them.
Mr. Hutchinson has already served one term and would like to continue with his position, which
is to be filled by a representing business required to collect lodging tax monies. Mr.
Hutchinson is the General Manager at the Best Western at the Green. Filling this position, Mr.
Hutchinson's new term would expire on December 31, 2012.
Higgins moved to recommend to approve the reappointment of Andrew Hutchinson
to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Perry seconded the motion and Raplee
concurred via email, which passed 3-0.
4. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO APPROVE THE REAPPOINTMENT OF AARON
WATNE TO THE LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
Mr. Watne has already served one term and would like to continue with his position, which is to
be filled by a representing business required to collect lodging tax monies. Mr. Watne is the
General Manager at Town Place Suites by Marriott. Filling this position Mr. Watne's new term
would expire on December 31, 2012.
Higgins moved to recommend to approve the reappointment of Aaron Watne to the
Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. . Perry seconded the motion and Raplee concurred
via email, which passed 3-0.
1
Operations Committee Minutes
April 6, 2010
Page: 2
5. KING COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL UPDATE. INFORMATION ONLY.
Jeff Watling, Parks Recreation and Human Services Director and John Hodgson, Chief
Administrative Officer, provided the update of the continued discussion with King County and
regional cities affected Hodgson noted the letter received by King County cancelling their
animal control services, effective June 30, 2010.
The report outlining the recommended program terms and cost if cities choose to contract with
King County will be presented at a meeting tomorrow with the City Managers and
Administrators. Not having the exact numbers yet, Hodgson was told it would cost between
$200-300k annually to receive the current services with modifications That amount is over
and above revenues collected for license fees collected by all cities, which is $170k
Regional or sub regional services are still being considered as an option. In response to Perry's
question regarding breakdown, Hodgson does not believe the costs are itemized with an option
to fund specific services. He will know more tomorrow
Watling feels a definition of sheltering and field service needs to be defined prior to committing j
to providing local service. Some of the changes to the agreement include a distinct separation
of sheltering and field service There will be four districts within the region created with field
service agents assigned to each of those districts. The district Kent is in includes Burien,
SeaTac, Tukwila and some unincorporated areas The agreement will also be 2 1/2 years.
Kent is looking at a regional cost model with the other cities included in our district as well as
the cost for us alone. Outreach with kennel and vet owners is being suggested
A packet will be provided from King County at the meeting with a breakdown of sheltering,
field and licensing services There will be a six month buy out for any of the 32 cities not
wanting to participate in the agreement. King county will remain the county shelter for
unincorporated areas. They will keep the Kent facility for that use.
Staff will come to council on April 201h with more information and on April 30 the City's final
decision is to be submitted. Information will be provided to Council prior to the 20t
The meeting adjourned at 4:29 p.m. by Perry.
Pamela Clark
Operations Committee Secretary
i
i
i
City of Kent
Parks and Human Services Committee Meeting
[GENT Minutes of March 18, 2010
Council Committee Members Present: Debbie Ranniger, Elizabeth Albertsons
and Dennis Higgins
Debbie Ranniger called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m.
Added Items:
State Farm Youth Advisory Grant for Community Services - Authorize
Pomegranate Place (audience)
1. Minutes of February 18, 2010 - Approve
Elizabeth Albertson moved to approve the minutes of February 18, 2010. Dennis
Higgins seconded. The motion passed 3-0.
2. United Way of King County Homelessness Coordination Grant -
Authorize
Katherin Johnson explained that this United Way of King County grant for
$15,000.00 reimburses coverage of Jason Johnson's work planning and
coordinating efforts that address homelessness in South King County from July
through December 2009.
The agreement is coming to the City of Kent Parks and Human Services Committee
after completion of the work instead of ahead of the work because of the delay in
receiving the agreement from United Way. The work outlined in the agreement was
completed and all required reporting was submitted.
Dennis Higgins moved to recommend accepting the United Way of King County
Grant in the amount of $15,000.00 to fund coordination efforts in ending
homelessness in South King County, and authorizing the expenditure of funds in
the Housing and Human Services budget. Elizabeth Albertson seconded. The motion
passed 3-0.
3. Annexation Program Planning and Budget - Informational
Jeff Watling reported that planning is currently underway throughout the
department for the annexation of the Panther Lake area on July 1. Planning efforts
include:
• Park operations and maintenance of three new parks.
• Human Services needs in that area and current planning for the
2011/2012 funding cycle.
1
• Planning for a summer playground site and afterschool program sites in
2010.
• Strategic acquisition planning for future park development, and
• Planning within the City-wide Art Fund.
Though initial planning for these services needs to start months ahead, delivery of
these programs and services will not be done without budget approval. Committee
discussion and feedback for this informational agenda item will help staff in their
preparations for service delivery to this new area of Kent.
4. Architectural Services Agreement for Centennial Building Tenant
Improvement Projects - Authorize
Charlie Lindsey stated that in 2009, the Facilities Division began planning for office
space needs related to potential annexation of the Panther Lake area. Also, the new
Economic and Community Development Department was created by merging work
groups from two departments. With the annexation approved and taking effect on July
1, some renovation work is needed in the Centennial Center to better accommodate the
organization.
This renovation will allow us to locate work groups into contiguous spaces on the 3rd
and 41h floors of the Centennial Building. The three-phased process began by moving
the Fire Inspectors to the 4th floor in space vacated by downsizing Employee Services.
Design work is needed for this next phase of work on the 3rd floor. During this phase,
the Police Detectives will move to temporary space while the renovation is completed in
their space where the Building Services Division will be moved. Then, the remaining
space will be renovated for the Police Detective Division and moving the Detectives
back in.
Elizabeth Albertson moved to recommend authorizing the Mayor to enter into an
agreement with Broderick Architects for $29,800.00 to perform architectural services
for Centennial Building Tenant Improvement Projects. Dennis Higgins seconded. The
motion passed 3-0.
S. Facilities Capital Planning and Kent Commons Roof - Informational
As information only, Charlie Lindsey, Superintendent of Facilities explained that the
roof on the Kent Commons building is now over 30 years old and in need of
replacement. This has been identified as a Capital project for 2011. Design and
bidding will need to be initiated this year and the project would be completed in
2011.
6. Walk On (audience): Pomegranate Place
Gregory Blount , Executive Director of Manufactured Housing Community
Preservationists of Seattle attended the meeting to represent the community of ,
Bonel Mobile Manor, a manufactured housing development with 108 homes on 64th
Avenue South in Kent. The Bonel community is constructing a play court/gathering
space and plans to bring art pieces into their development. Mr Blount asked if the
city could participate in their programs. Jeff will have the city's Visual Arts
Coordinator and a Park Planner contact them to see if any assistance can be
provided.
2
1 7. Walk On: State Farm Youth Advisory Grant for Community Service
Programs - Authorize
Jeff explained that on March 16, representatives from State Farm Youth Advisory
Board presented a check to City Council for $42,339.02. The funds and agreement
missed being included in the Parks and Human Services agenda packet, so it had to
be a "walk on" item for Council recommendation.
This grant award will target juniors at Kentwood High School to fulfill their
community service requirements, and it will allow the city to partner directly with
students to further instill an appreciation for stewardship of our public spaces. The
Kent Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department will provide projects
that students may participate and partner . Focusing on the environment, projects
will range from tree restoration and planting, graffiti removal and prevention, to
recycling projects.
Dennis Higgins moved to recommend authorizing the Mayor to sign the State Farm
Youth Advisory Grant Agreement in the amount of $42,339.02 to fund community
service programs, and approving the expenditure of funds in the Adopt A Park
budget. Elizabeth Albertson seconded. The motion passed 3-0.
S. Director's Report
• As part of the budget process, programs and staff from the Resource Center
are being consolidated and moved to Kent Commons. The Facilities staff is
doing a great Job on the renovation. Resource Center staff will move in
sometime the first of April.
• Renovation is underway at the Kent Pool. The 40-year HVAC system is under
repair. A pool cover is being installed that will create energy savings. The
project was designed by an energy savings company (ESCO), McKinstry
Essention.
• On March 27, the community and staff will join members of the Off Leash
Dog Park Committee members to pull invasives at the off leash dog park site
on East Hill. The Funding Outreach Sub Committee continues to look for
financial partners and provisions for in-kind services to benefit the park.
• An Request for Proposals (RFP) will be advertised next week to contract a
new restaurant operator for the vacant restaurant at Riverbend Golf Complex
18 hole course.
The meeting adjourned at 6:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Teri Pet�o�
Teri Petrole
Council Committee Secretary
3
1 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES
Monday, April 5, 2010
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT- Committee Chair Debbie Raplee and committee members
Ron Harmon and Dennis Higgins were present The meeting was called to order at 4:04 p m
ITEM 1 — Approval of Minutes Dated March 15, 2010:
Committee Member Harmon moved to approve the minutes of March 15, 2010. The
motion was seconded by Higgins and passed 3-0.
1 ITEM 2 — Meridian Valley Creek Design — Consultant Agreement with The Watershed
Coml2anv:
Tim LaPorte introduced Matt Knox, Environmental Ecologist. Knox presented some photos of the
area noting that the Meridian Valley Creek project is located within the Meridian Valley Country
Club golf course just south of SE 243rd Place Knox further noted that the project involves
relocating approximately 230 LF of Meridian Valley Creek to address flooding impacts. The
consultant services contract with The Watershed Company is to complete the project design and
environmental studies needed to obtain the permits to construct the project. It is anticipated
I that the design would be completed by July of 2010 Higgins asked if it is the city's responsibility
to maintain this area on private property. Laporte stated that it is, because, the creek begins on
City right of way, runs through the Country Club and then back on to City property. The creek
also takes runoff from city right of way. He also noted that this project is listed in the Drainage
Master Plan and is funded out of the drainage fund The design and permit portion of the
contract is $68,391. Construction will cost between $190,000 and $260,000
Higgins moved to recommend that the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the
Consultant Services Contract with The Watershed Company for $68,391.00 to perform
design work on the Meridian Valley Creek project, upon concurrence of the language
therein by the City Attorney and the Public Works Director. The motion was seconded
by Harmon and passed 3-0.
1 ITEM 3 — Daniel & Horizon Safe Walking Routes to School:
Design Engineer, Nick Horn noted that Cesi Velez and Debra Leroy of the Police Department
worked on getting the original grant. He explained that the City has received grant monies from
the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and Congested Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
grant programs to construct a walking path for students using bicycles and or walking to George
T Daniel and Horizon Elementary schools. Horn, briefly explained what work would be done at
both schools.
In order for the City to receive monies from FHWA for the work, the Council must accept the
grant funds. The Safe Routes to School grant requires no matching funds from the City, but
1 there is a 13 5% match (or $47,250 00) required for the grant. The Safe Routes money (no local
matching funds required) will be used before the CMAQ funds will be applied Bieren further
noted that local matching funds will need to be provided to receive the CMAQ grant.
Harmon moved to recommend authorizing the Public Works Director to accept FHWA
Safe Routes to School Grant Funds totaling $893,775.00, and "CMAQ" Grant funds
totaling $350,000.00 for the George T. Daniel Elementary School, and Horizon
Elementary School, Safe Routes to School Projects; and authorize the establishment of
a budget for the projects. The motion was seconded by Higgins and passed 3-0.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES
Monday, April 5, 2010
ITEM 4 — East Valley Highway Improvements — Proiect Construction Federal Funding '
Grant:
Design Engineer, Nick Horn explained that the initial monies received for the improvements to
84th Avenue South were to cover the Preliminary Engineering phase of the project The amount
totaled $130,000.00 and was accepted by Council in December of 2006. Horn, showed location
maps and photo's of work currently being done
Horn stated that in order to be reimbursed for project expenses that will be incurred during the
Construction Phase, the Council must formally accept the Construction Phase of the grant, and
authorize the establishment of the budget Without accepting the Construction funds,
reimbursement for expenses from the Federal Government will not be possible.
Higgins moved to recommend authorizing the Public Works Director to accept the
Construction Phase portion of the Federal Highways Administration STP grants received
for East Valley Highway (84th Ave. South) Improvements, and authorize the
establishment of a budget for the same, directing staff to spend the money accordingly.
The motion was seconded by Harmon and passed 3-0.
ITEM 5 — Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Agreement for the James Street Crossing:
Ken Langholz, Engineering Supervisor explained that the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)
agreement includes installation of flashing pedestrian lights and additional concrete railroad
crossing sections at the James Street crossing. Reconstruction and widening of the crossing is a
component of the James Street at UPRR Non-motorized Improvements project. Council
authorized acceptance of a $235,000 grant from the Washington State Public Works Board for the
project Additionally, Council authorized a capital line item be included in the 2011 budget in the
amount of $235,000.00, for City matching funds
Harmon moved to recommend authorization for the Mayor to sign the agreement with
Union Pacific Railroad Company for reconstruction and widening of the existing James
Street crossing in the amount of $143,564 subject to terms and conditions approved by
the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was seconded by Higgins
and passed 3-0.
ITEM 6 — S. 2281h St. Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Grade Separation Agreement:
Tim LaPorte introduced Chad Bieren, City Engineer and Karen Schmidt who is the Executive
Director of the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) Karen joined the table in the
discussion. LaPorte presented a brief PowerPoint presentation giving an overview of various
timelines for the grade separation projects Staff is recommending that we continue ahead with
the South 228th Street Grade Separation. LaPorte stated that FMSIB has been holding money for
grade separation projects for over a decade and that the original agreement expired on Dec 31, ,
2009. The Union Pacific Railroad has agreed to extend the current agreement until 2015 The
funding agreement states that these funds are anticipated to be used by June of 2011, which isn't
realistic and could make it hard to hold on to funding. Schmidt stated that City staff is easy to
work with, creative and is continually looking out for the the best interest of its citizens.
There was a brief discussion between Councilmembers, Schmidt and staff. FMSIB is working as
an intermediary for Kent and will honor whatever staff chooses. Schmidt stated that she
understands how tough it is to come up with funding but it's important to look toward the future.
This item will be brought to other business at the next City Council meeting.
■ PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES
■ Monday, April 5, 2010
Higgins moved to authorize the Public Works Director to enter into negotiations with
the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board to receive Union Pacific Railroad funds
for the S. 228th Street Railroad Grade Separation Project and direct staff to forgo
extension of the existing FMSIB Agreement for the Union Pacific Railroad's contribution
to the S. 2121h and Willis St. Grade Separation Projects. The motion was seconded by
Harmon and passed 3-0.
Item 7 - Interim and Permanent Repairs to the Howard Hanson Dam — Resolution:
Public Works Director, Tim LaPorte gave a brief PowerPoint presentation explaining the history of
the dam repairs to date He further noted that this item will be brought to the council at the
Council meeting on April 6, 2010 The Corps of Engineers is proposing an interim grout curtain
I (believe it would last until 2015) at the dam and is looking for $44,000,000.00 in order to
complete this work. By adding in this curtain it will re-raise the odds of flooding in the valley of
1-140
Harmon moved to recommend that Council Adopt a resolution, in a form similar to that
presented to the Public Works Committee that requests the federal government and the
United States Congress provide for an immediate appropriation of forty-four million
dollars ($44,000,000.00) for interim grout work and related repairs to the Howard
Hanson Dam so that this work can be completed before the next flood season and
requests the United States Congress appropriate sufficient funds to provide for
permanent repair to the Howard Hanson Dam, and direct the Army Corps of Engineers
to make the Howard Hanson Dam permanent repair a priority project and expedite its
standard processes to assure the fastest and safest approach. The motion was
seconded by Higgins and passed 3-0.
Adiourned:
The meeting was adjourned at 5.25 p.m.
Cheryl Viseth
Public Works Secretary
1
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
I
EXECUTIVE SESSION
ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION
I
i
Z
i
1
1