HomeMy WebLinkAbout981'~
.. )\[) \ •/ t "'rP' ...
Resolution NO . Cf6/ •
A RESOLUTION of the City Council
City of Kent, Washington, supporting
planning program commonly called the
Kent Business Improvements Program".
of the
a
"Downtown
WHEREAS, the Kent City Council adopted a policy plan
titled, Kent Central Business District Plan, on May 20, 1974 by
Resolution 764; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kent and the Greater Kent Chamber
of Commerce jointly sponsored an organization expressly formed to
work on implementing the Kent Central Business District Plan,
which organization is known as the Kent Development Association,
Inc.; and
WHEREAS, the Kent Development Association, in
conjunction with the City of Kent and the Greater Kent Chamber of
Commerce has worked on an implementing strategy for the Central
Business District Plan, and
WHEREAS, a planning program, funded by Kent's Housing .
and Community Development Block Grant Program and the City of Kent
has been prepared and supported by the Kent Development
Association through a vote of its membership on June 19, 1982; and
WHEREAS, this planning program implements goals,
objectives and policies from the Central Business District Plan
and has as its main theme, the use of a planned physical
improvement program to create a new and more unified community
image for downtown Kent and to promote the core business area as a
more active, pleasant and unique place to shop; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DO
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the planning program known as the
"Downtown Kent Business Improvements Program•, attached hereto, is
supported by the City Council as the functional plan for
revitalizing a part of Kent's Central Business District.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Kent,
Washington, at its regular meeting held l.-<~v-" (. ( 9.>5 d----•
I
Concurrence by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this
day of Y~v-!93 ;A
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
)
) ss:
)
I, l'hAR,eC)e;I).Y.eJ, City Clerk of the City of Kent,
Washington hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true,
full and correct copy of a Resolution adopted by the council of
the City of Kent, Washington at a meeting held according to law at
Kent, Washington on the 1 day of 1\lo J , 1982, as the
same appears on file and of record in this office.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
affixed the corporate seal of said City this 0 day
of ~oJ , 1982.
City of
Kent, Washington
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~'~ F:STEPHDiJULIOiy ATTORNEY
3624-94A
- 2 -
Contents
BACKGROUND 2
Focusing on Issues •..........•..
Identity-Unified Appearance ......... .
Adjacent Residential /Non Competitive Stance .
Dis-united Zones
Auto Access ..
Shopper Profile
Parking ...
Business Mix.
ECONOMICS 6
Potential: Loss or Gain
2
2
• 3
3
. 4
• • 4
5
5
Market Area ...................... 6
Business Mix, Sales Performance, Market Analysis .. 7
Improvement Potential ................. 8
Potential Budget ......••...........• 9
DESIGN 10
Defining a Strategy
Financing .•...
Shopping Connections .
Improvement Plan •.•••..
Plan Components . . . . . . .
Income and Payment Schedule.
IMPLEMENTATION 20
Building a Stronger Image
New Dire~tions .. .
L.l. D ...... .
P.B.J.A. . ... .
City Participation
Phase II • . • .•.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 29 ----------------
• 1 0-11
. • 13
• . 14-15
• 16-19
• • 2G--21
22
23
24
25
27
Downtown Kent
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Prepared for:
CITY OF KENT
Kent, Washington
City of Kent
I sa bel Hogan -Mayor
City Council
Tom Bailey
Bernie Biteman
Billie Johnson
Jon Johnson
Dan Kelleher
Tim Leahy
Dave Mooney
Date: May 1,1982
Report Prepared by:
MAKERS
Architecture and Urban Des1gn
Smith Tower Second Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
Telephone (206) 623-7843
DNA
MAKE {mak), v, 1. To bring 1nto existence by shapmg
material. combLnLng parts, etc. 2. To form in the mind.
a judgement or plan. 3 To Judge or 1nfer as to the
nature, mean1ng, etc 4. To compose, form, as a
des1gn 5 To constitute, to bring mto a certa1n form
or condLUon 6. To cause. to construct
Dennis Neifert and Associates
First Avenue Kent, WA
2
----------Background--------
Focusing on Issues
The Kent Downtown Groups have
been interested in planning a
downtown improvement program
since the early 1970's. In 1974 a
downtown plan was adopted to
begin the improvement process
and in 1980 a preliminary
revitalization concept was
prepared for comment. Before
implementation could begin,
however, business and property
owners felt a need to better
understand the true implications
and benefits of revitalization. The
purpose of this study is to define
these potential benefits and to
outline an effective and system-
atically planned program for
improving the business area.
Downtown Kent is one of the
Seattle metropolitan region's
original small city business
centers, and before the beginning
of post-war urban sprawl, it was
an independent regional service
center. Along with the rest of its
metropolitan area, the City of
Kent has grown significantly in
the past quarter century, but the
downtown has not expanded as
fast. The area still retains its
original small city setting.
This setting is in many ways the
downtown's most marketable
quality and should be retained by
the theme of any improvement
program. The functional purpose
of an improvement plan should
be to reorganize and strengthen
the promotional, historic and
amenity features of the existing
Major Issues 1---' ----------~ ---------· ~---l
• IDENTITY: The business area lacks the visual appeal and interest features
which form a positive lasting image in the customers mind.
• UNIFIED APPEARANCE : The business area does not attract customers with
a unified appearance which defines shopping , parking, pedestrain or
community use areas.
• ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL: Residential areas exist some distance from the
business area. Shoppers must drive to the business area, and be attracted
away from competitors.
• NOt+-COMPETITIVE STANCE: Business and property owners have not done enough
to attract or promote new business. Those activities are
occuring elsewhere and are taking business away.
• DIS· UNITED ZONES : The business areas two shopping zones are separated
and neither helps the other attract business.
business area while improving its
economic performance. To build
a successful improvement pro-
gram, however, requires that
several neglected issues be
addressed. These issues are
discussed as follows.
Identity
The existing downtown, although
compact and for the most part
still intact from earlier days, has
done little to improve or promote
its continuing identity. Few people
identify the downtown as a
uniquely pleasant or interesting
place to shop, or view the area as
a first choice shopping destina-
tion. This image needs to
change, and potential
customers must begin identify-
ing downtown Kent as a
"prime" shopping area. The
promotion and strengthening of
its existing small town atmo-
sphere is an effective way to
develop this new identity.
Unified Appearance
The potential benefits of a unified
image, and for the most part any
sense of visual identity, is cur-
rently nonexistent in the down-
town. Many things contribute to a
unified appearance including con-
sistently designed public improve-
ments, high visibility and design
of improvements, lighting themes,
the general appearance of
aggressive merchandising and a
uniformly well maintained busi-
ness area. Kent lacks these.
Some owners and businesses
have improved, others have not,
and Meeker Street has a series of
obviously temporary improve-
ments. The area does not appear
unified and vital because not
enough attention has been given
to its business image. Customers
tend to see the area's fragmented
identity as a reflection of
community pride and interest,
and as an indication of how
merchants and owners feel about
their customers.
A goal of the improvement
program must be to build a
unified image. It should be clear
to potential shoppers that down-
town Kent is pulling together. The
property owners and merchants
must understand that the new
business which benefits one
merchant is also good for the
total area.
Adjacent Residential
Unlike many similar areas, down-
town Kent does not have the
advantages of close-in residential
development. Residents coming
to shop live far enough away that
the downtown is not their only
nearby choice. When they choose
between downtown or another
area, downtown Kent frequently
lacks the appeal and array of
merchandise necessary to be the
first choice destination. Without
some change in either the
proximity of close-in residential
customers (not a quick solution)
or an improved shopper image
for the downtown, customers will
continue to select other equally
convenient but more attractive
and organized shopping areas.
Attracting these residential
customers is the downtown's
most important issue. A well
planned improvement project and
promotional strategy can go a
long way toward enticing shop-
pers to consider downtown as a
first choice.
Non-Competitive Stance
The Kent metropolitan area t1as
grown steadily for the past two
decades, and planning projec-
tions show a continued steady
growth. Yet, the downtown has
changed very little. It remains a
collection of individual businesses
each planning their own course.
The area needs a coordinated
promotion program and a
competitive image.
Most new development has taken
place away from downtown and
the downtown has not responded
to the competition of this new
development. The downtown
needs to develop a competitive
attitude and promote the idea that
old customers are important and
new business and new customers
are essential.
New business development is not
limited to new construction. It can
also mean more sales in existing
stores, and the infill of under-
utilized downtown storefronts. To
attract new business, however,
the downtown must actively seek
that business, and in a sense,
•·'
I
{11
-.
Existing 1st Avenue 1982
demand its share of the market.
The danger, if the downtown
remains uncompetitive, is
someone else will attract not
only the area's growth market
but some of its existing
customers as well.
Dis-United Zones
The downtown contains two
distinct and almost unrelated
business zones: One along
Meeker Street as the main street
shopping area, and a second
along First Avenue whose image
is the historic downtown.
A major issue is that the areas
are not united in any physical,
functional or promotional way.
The retail strengths of one area
are not used to help the other,
nor are their business and
marketing powers combined to
provide a more substantial
identity to attract new business or
customers. Uniting these zones
through physical improvements
and theme ideas could build the
image of a larger, more interest-
ing and marketable downtown
and a more unified business
setting.
Defining The Shopper
Shopper j\ttitue~~
Shopper attitudes were deter-
mined from a telephone survey of
V_~cin!!Y_I\!!~P
Kent area residents. The survey
included questions on the:
• competitiveness of downtown
Kent with respect to other
areas,
• likes and dislikes of both fre-
quent and infrequent shop-
pers toward downtown Kent,
• characteristics of Kent area
shoppers,
As one might expect, Southcenter
is the number one choice for
comparison shopping goods. This
shows the advantage of concen-
trating many stores in one area.
I
NORTH
Project
Area
AUBURN
/
'"'
Project Area Map rii·-___.__,
; ·a.l~z= f 1 .-~eel<er SL - -1
'
·trrt. ~ It 'tit
Gowe St.
i:" ' \: illil
I II· : ... ; :1 II ~ ~-···-_; • ·-..,. _: ·--i : --.. --~ tl_
--!.!\!~ S.t. --;;;:J . 1:-
3
4
......... ] ILJJ · ... <. < .~ ~L l u 11111~1111111111111imn~~ .. ~~ .. ;1. ~ · . / c '','-'''' ,., ."' ... ""'"''· ,. ·fJ: . ·-· / 1 -~v~ _ ·· ., c: ·oD~--·.·0
: /;/~~-::: \';;;: ' : / ~ /; • .•.. -----?-;:;~:
• ~ r_ II ~ II • c•·,,.,:t•:
-'/::. / ~ (' -·--,.-.. .111 • ETAIL ONE' ' · • .".t·,: ~ ~B{ut,~u:.._._,. , _, 1 c~~E '\;;,\
•I Ill I II "'"""I(""' !TI'It!n :1 I I I I I I I I I fl I
'."'· : •. ':, • ' .. , .,...., -,. (') 0 (:'< "' C:.' .• ,., ,, .,. ~iii~ ; . ! c .·> .. ' ~b ::> ., ~ ~ ... ·:,,:·, ••
-: .1: ,'; Z' ..... ·. ~~
-l j If:, _. nm ~· l n~~--}J; -I·'·· 'i £l;; i'i [ . rJ 0 . . . . 'i\i.;':X''i,~~-1 ., _-~ __ ,~ ~;_:< : ! i
-, .r ... ,......,,~~~.~~.w~-·-tt ... !'!"'""= II _j ~ ~~ ~ J ;; ~ l1li+Hf·ltl 1 r 'l/,,, / .' >, \ ,j ' /// ' :I :· ' ft.·-~· I y 'I..GOVt'T 5 t;;CE ' ~ ......... X~~~ l' I { \;~, ,', : ·-~~~ ; 1 ~HIS JC
J ~~ ', ' : .,. Jt,>»-~ J <= •/'u '/_,...; · -J •• .• 1 ~--.. ~.1'1~ • /, .. /// I ' ~ II' . ( ' : ' 0 E. I ' . ~ •' .. . "' ·"J -~ ~!
I ~ ~ > ·1 ~~ ! ,_. . . 1: /;:'~ .' i/ ' ~ '' · ~ f · I • / //; '· I·
.. j .. _ . '·· ••. ;~ ~, . .~l~ ~II-/ ,= r,l,r
1
[_ j ~ ~ ' ...... ~11 ~I f I - : // ;!,1 II . lr'
J ''I < " -//• "'.· ••• ••• I
··: ~--__,_.-..,~·~ ··--~· uw. ··~·-·· ·--· ••I ··-~ ..,.,-JII/I!FIIfiiiiTIIfiiiiTIIfiiiiT~~~ TIIUB!IlqfET
[
l ' < '. ' ' " -~ " ' < ' < "' "' " ~-"-"'"'-";~ ., ' • '< " ·:li ,;
1 r1 r·l r-~-" ' \ :: ............ ·: (l 1/' fl ··· -1:' *1 ' I 1 · · ·. I
Land Use Zones
Legend
~ ............... Retail
mm OOUlillflii. ••• Governmental
r~:~,',:i~::_;_;.'<-;-(7] P k L-.-----~·· ......... l .:·.~ ·==-&··....... •• • .. .. ar s
E-. a ... Office/Service
C.B.D .... Central Business District
However, concentration alone is
not enough, as shown by SeaTac
Mall and Village which is never a
first choice. Probably this is due
to the lack of a good east-west
freeway access and fewer major
department stores.
At this time, the East Hill areas
are not competitive with down-
town Kent, because the com-
parison goods stores found in
the Kent downtown do not
exist in the East Hill areas.
When shopper attitudes toward
Kent are summarized in terms of
their likes and dislikes,
convenient location and pleasant
atmosphere are its assets while
short term on-street parking
problems and limited shopping
selections are its liabilities. It was
also interesting to note that 54%
of those under 35 shop most
often for clothing and apparel in
Southcenter and downtown Kent
is the most popular for people
over 55. This is an interesting
point to consider when one notes
that a lack of new shoppers is
one of the area's major problems.
Overall Role of Kent C.B.D.
For consumers who want com-
parison shopping goods without
driving too far from home, the
Kent C.B.D. offers a limited
concentration of stores. The
pedestrian-oriented atmosphere is
also appealing and differentiates
it further from the newer areas
within Kent. The Kent C.B.D. is
the only place to shop for people
who want those characteristics.
Of course, many people want a
wide selection and are willing to
drive to Southcenter. For some
things, convenience matters more
than shopping atmosphere and
there are East Hill areas and
West Kent Mall. Thus, the Kent
C.B.D. is in an intermediate
position. It is more convenient
than Southcenter with a selection
of merchandise which is not
matched nearby.
Auto Access
Auto access to the C.B.D. is
hampered by a need to have
better signing to direct shoppers
to the downtown. Several new
traffic improvements are planned
which will route unwanted traffic
around the C.B.D. Those im-
provements will undoubtedly
reduce vehicular congestion
problems in the larger C.B.D.
area. However, since one of the
downtown's major problems is
visual identity and attracting
customers into the area, the
same improvements which make
it convenient for commuter traffic
to bypass the C.B.D. will also
make it convenient for shoppers
to do the same. The local
business community should
press local agencies to have
good identification and access
signing Installed along the
exiting freeways and in all new
traffic improvements. The signing
should designate access routes
and serve to remind shoppers
about the downtown. ...
... "' t: t: !.. Q) Ill
Shopper Profile
CIJ CIJ ::J !..
::J 0. 0' CIJ 0' 0. Q) 0.
CIJ 0 !.. 0.
!.. .c: .... 0
Ll.{/1 c.c: -{/1
SHOPPING FREQUENCY C.B.D.
Once a week or more
2-3 times per month
Once a month
Less than once a month
Never
12'1,
16%
29%
27%
1Li%
28% 72%
SHOPPER CHARACTERISTICS
Residence
Valley Floor
East Hill
North Auburn
Length of Stay
Less than 1 year
1-10 years
Over 10 years
13% 1Li%
SLi% 69%
3Li% 17%
100% 100%
5% 1Li%
53% 58%
Li2% 28%
100% 100%
ATTITUDE TOWARD C.B.D.
Assets
Convenient location 63 LiB%
Atmosphere of area 21 12%
Convenient parking 18 10%
Good stores 25 7%
Uncrowded 16 6%
Problems
Parking 23 26
Limited selection 14 18
Traffic 14 10
·--~--~-~"=· ---------
Parking
Unlike many business centers,
the Kent downtown is well served
by free public and private off-
street parking. the current
parking inventory shows approxi-
mately one parking space for
every 150 square feet of retail
space or 6.6 spaces per 1,000
square feet of gross leasable
area (GLA). The Urban Land
Institute in their "Dollars and
Cents of Shopping Centers" pub-
lication points out that between
5.5 and 6 parking spaces per
1 ,000 square feet of GLA is
considered optimum parking and
4.5 spaces acceptable in
community centers. Off street
parking is therefore not a problem
in Kent. There is, however, need
along Meeker Street for
convenient quick turn-over on-
street parking. This parking is
important to merchants because
a signficant portion of their
business is convenience oriented.
Close, easy access parking is
essential to those businesses.
(Some studies suggest that each
free parking space within 50 feet
of a business entry will generate
over $10,000 in yearly retail
sales.) Meeker Street parking
efficiency could be improved and
12 to 15 additional spaces added
if existing angle parking was
converted back to parallel
parking. Merchants have voiced
strong opposition to eliminating
the angle parking. They feel
angle parking is a good customer
convenience because it is easier
for shoppers to use than parallel
parking. This was supported
during the study's survey phase
by 18% of the downtown's
customers. Approximately 25% of
the downtown's shoppers,
however, list parking as a
problem. Since the street is the
only area of parking congestion,
there must be a significant group
of shoppers who would like to
see more Meeker Street parking.
Local merchants should consider
reviewing Meeker Street parking
to see if the benefits of conven-
ience parking are really worth the
potential for lost sales. In any
event the parking issue is not
serious. The downtown is
served by an adequate and
convenient parking inventory.
Business Mix
The Kent C.B.D. is still a
traditional retail district. The land
use inventory includes only minor
concentrations of business and
professional office uses. Why the
condition exists is beyond the
scope of this study, but it does
seem apparent that local retail
businesses, and especially res-
taurants would benefit from the
presence of more office workers
in the area.
The total business mix in the
downtown could be improved
by the additiqn of more quality
stores. A significant portion of
First Avenue's retail frontage is
underutilized. The street houses
several low volume businesses
who are not using their store-
fronts to advantage. The effect of
this mode of operation is to
detract from the total street's
shopping atmosphere. To a signi-
ficant extent the total C.B.D.
suffers from this same problem of
space underutilization. A tenant
improvement and promotion
program is badly needed to
upgrade the C.B.D.'s sagging
appearance and business
inventory.
]I
I
: I
: i I
I '·! J
' I i •
.0
L ----·---------~ ---~~-
Parking Tabulation Legend
398 Spaces ....................... IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJTiil
334 Spaces ....................... k ¥:¥:1
252 Spaces ....................... I////////////;)
984 Total Spaces ••o
Public Oft-Street
Pvt. Off-Street
On Street
Average Daily
Traffic
6
Potential • •
The economic analysis has been
prepared to achieve two major
goals. First, the analysis has
reviewed the status of the Kent
downtown within the larger metro-
politan region in order to assess
its potentials for future economic
growth. Secondly, the analysis
has helped to determine, on the
basis of the potential retail sales
growth, the scope and budget of
the proposed downtown
improvement program.
Kent Market Area
The relevant market area of the
Kent central business district is
determined first by a geographic
area accessible to the downtown
within a ten to fifteen minute
travel time. This area is further
defined by the absence or
presence of other retail areas
within this geographic area. On
this basis, the market area for the
downtown has been generally de-
fined as the area bounded by 1-5
to the west, Petrovitsky Road to
the north, 180th S.E. to the east,
and 320th Avenue and State
Highway 18 to the south.
As stated, this market area is
affected by the presence of other
retail areas. Southcenter, a
super-regional shopping center at
1-5 and 1-405, limits the extension
of the market area north and
west; SeaTac Mall restricts the
area south and west. The busi-
ness districts of Auburn and
Renton, and several small con-
Economics--------------------
Loss or Gain
Hestaurants
1 & 1 avf'rns
I "' ---~---
I
~
Other·
\liscellaneou'i
14.6% I
Gl'!nf!:ral
Merchandise
110.2\
\
Apparel /
7. 2% /
-------, I
"'-'--~ ""-~/Furniture
& Appliances
6.7%
/
I
})ruqstore
8.1<% .-~\"Miscellaneous
· Shopping Goorlo;
10.11%
\
Restaurants
& Taverns
"'
Hardware
& Auto
114.2%
/on,.,
Miscellaneous
16. 9%
General
Merchandise
19. J\
----------·-----~~
~-1Apparel
----1.6\
., ... __
'""' ------,{Furniture
~ j'f. AppU.nces
"""'y 6,8\
>(Mf•cellanPOUS
/ Shopping Goo do;;
\/ 5.6\
Drugstor·ps
6.H
Kent Downtown Sales Kent Area Sales
170
1r,n
ISO
1qo
110
170
•••••••
110 I I
100 I 1!•---··••••••
~~' ;: I ....
"' 60
" o.. r;o
'10
10
20
,oat ,_
Q} .=
~ .
"-"-"'
u 0 c •
• 0 i '
"-"' Miscellaneous
Shopping Goodr.
•••••• I
I
I
I
E
~
"' 2
0
••••• II
···••Ill!! I
•••••
• I • I
I
I I I
I II .. :
-.. :
1 ~ ~ ~
c ~ ~ ~~
.
0 >
0
~~~~~:;;',9y s;::,~dud :: Sales Comparison to Industry Standard
venience centers within the area,
also affect the Kent downtown
market area.
Population growth in this market
area has, over the past decade,
averaged a 2.8% annual growth
rate totaling 93,570 in 1980.
During this same period the City
of Kent averaged 3.6% annual
growth and King County grew at
the annual rate of 0.9%. Popula-
tion growth through the year 1990
is forecast at a range of 2.24%
(policy) to 3.62% (trend) annually_
The actual population level will
likely fall within this range, with a
1990 population level between
117,000 and 133,000 in the
market area.
The Kent downtown business
center area presently captures
approximately 6% of the total
retail sales potential of the market
area. General merchandise is the
strongest sales area while a
greater proportion of consumer
dollars for apparel and furnish-
ings are being spent outside the
downtown. These low market
shares may indicate opportun-
ities for the area's merchants,
to capitalize on their locational
advantage and capture some of
the sales leaving the area.
.·.-·1--.~~. i ·:
;_"' :,
eli .. ;;
Summary l91l0 1985 19.90
7.5 ---~--
7 e--I
'The Kent downtown IS neither a
a~J)CW-regional center nor is it a
convenience center. Its role lies
J[)fT'ItWhere between, established
by Its relative convenience and its
concentration, although limited, of 16 • 5 • I I
companson goods. In addition, it
offers a potentially unique
pedestnan-ononted environment .,_,
This characteristic as a ~
pedestrian center diHerentiates ro
the downtown from the newer ::2
centers and sets it in a position ~
as the only place w1th1r1 the larger~
metropolttan area for people to 0 I !1 • 5 e--~-··
.;: ... ,. ii•
Business Mix
'r ;o ,, ' f L"'' !";0SSe~; fot mel in
u~ !he
,;;~ c'-=-!'-~~!r~d .--_!r1 th~
T: ·--;;: . ...:.f ·.!·:,.:. :..:.h:;:.~ ..
-, ~ t: '-. < ·: ~ rt t ;
Ljd~i:J uf JdiUJ rev'cnues generat
ed (tltt~y cJo nut reflect relative
uros::; leaseable areas for each
business type.) General
merchandise includes stores
which carry a wide variety of
goods, such as department
stores, but does not encompass
drugstores. Miscellaneous shop-
ping goods category includes gift,
camera and card stores.
Most of the commercial activity in
the downtown (general merchan-
dise, furniture and appliances
and miscellaneous shopping
goods) fall into the category of
comparison shopping goods. For
these items the typical consumer
is likely to "shop around" and
make comparisons before buying.
Consumers therefore, prefer
concentrations of these stores in
one area, and as a result these
stores benefit from competition
due to the large custorner base.
~I , ) 0 i ·i ·-. ------.. . --~---~clining Share Graph
The other retail businesses are
often referred to as convenience
stores, to which parking and
proximity to the shopper are
important. Convenience stores
are also complemented by the
comparison goods stores, since
combining several purchases in
one stop is also an aspect of
convenience.
Sales Performance
Sales performance, calculated as
sales volume divided by gross
leaseable area, is an indication of
the health and competitiveness of
a commercial area. Compared
with the average for the commun-
ity shopping areas in the far west,
the overall sales performance of
the Kent downtown is below the
industry average. Although some
businesses are doing well, and
particular stores may be above
the industry average, there is
generally room for overall
improvement.
171 -~
~
16"
-~~~-.. ->~--
15 ,.-..
VI c
.Q
E 13 --
VI
~ 12
0
Cl 11
9 lr-----------1.
·~---··------L--............._.
1980 1985
(YEAR)
1990
Sales Growth Chart ·--Industry Std.
Kent
Market Analysis
The growth in population and
income in the relevant market
area results in a comparative
growth in expenditures and thus
a growth in market area retail
sales. This points to an opportun-
ity for the downtown to increase
its sales. In fact, for the area to
maintain its present market
share of 6%, the sales volume
must increase proportional to
the growth in the market area's
retail sales. A continuation of the
present volume of sales would
result in an actual decline in
overall market share, to an
approximate 4% market share for
the downtown by 1990.
NOTE:
TREND PROJECTIONS
refer to an assumption that
the Kent area will continue
to grow at the rate it has
for the past 10 years.
POLICY PROJECTIONS
refer to a planned gmwth
rate based on King County's
growth policy guidelines.
Actual growth will most
likely fall between these
two projections.
7
8
Vl c
0 -
E _,
Vl 12
1...
!:!
vo\\C1.----·-·-..... _ .... -.............. .
0 11 .............. ~--i ·:·;.::occ __
0
10
9L __
1980 1985 1990
(YEARS)
Current Sales Graph ... ·.·.·-.-:-:·:·:-:--
With East
Hill
Without
----East Hill with Effect of East Hill Plaza
The downtown needs to increase
its retail sales. The present
relatively low market share and
the below standard sales per
square foot of many businesses
point to the potential for growth. It
may be reasonable to assume,
for example, that those categories
which show low sales volumes
relative to industry standards
could increase their sales, there-
by increasing their market share.
The businesses with healthy
sales volumes may maintain a
constant market share; together,
these would result in an
increased sales volume in the
downtown over the next ten
years.
Other competitive retail areas will,
however, also try to increase their
market share of the future retail
sales. Developments such as
the East Hill Plaza, for example,
pose problems for the down-
town. This project, proposed for
the fast growing area east of the
Kent C.B.D., potentially weakens
the advantage of the downtown
as a convenient concentration of
comparison shopping goods. If
the East Hill Plaza offers similar
categories of comparison shop-
ping, downtown will lose this
major advantage, and the new
development would likely absorb
a substantial portion of the
growth in the area. The down-
town would, however, retain its
competitive advantage as a
unique pedestrian-oriented
center.
Assuming a capture of a portion
of the downtown's market share
by the East Hill Plaza, the
residual growth in sales volume
becomes the sales potential for
the downtown. The actual sales
volume of the downtown would
most likely fall between the trend
(high) and policy (low) projections.
Improvement Potential
Downtown Kent is a unique place
to shop. Its pedestrian-oriented
and "small town" setting are the
principal attractions and the main
aspects that differentiate the area
from other retail centers in the
market area. This environment,
therefore, is a key component of
a strategy to increase sales. In
order to effectively compete for
the increased retail sales potential,
the downtown must accentuate
those features which differentiate
it from the newer competitive
centers, while also maintaining its
mix of comparison goods and
convenience stores.
There is a range of specific
measures which will enhance the
position of the downtown relative
to the convenience_ centers to the
East Hill Plaza, and to the super-
regional centers. More retailers
should, for example, be encour-
aged to establish themselves
downtown. The selection within
the downtown area, if enhanced,
would add to the locational
advantage of the downtown and
make it more competitive with the
larger, but less convenient
regional centers.
In order to draw new businesses
to the area, however, it will be
necessary for the downtown to
show increased sales as well as a
positive environment for increased
retail trade. A program of specific
downtown improvement is a direct
first step toward such a revitaliza-
tion effort. An improvement
program will help to stimulate
business overall, which in turn will
provide impetus for new busi-
nesses to locate within downtown
Kent.
Potential Budget
The downtown improvement
budget was established after
analysis of the area's 1985 sales
potential. The budget assumes
the area will retain a full share of
its remaining metroplitan area
market after the portion taken by
the construction of East Hill Plaza
is removed. The final budget is
a range represented by the
county's trend projection for
growth as the high budget
($1 ,548,000) and its policy pro-
jection for growth as the low
budget ($882,000).
The recommended improvement
budget of approximately
$1,200,000 is an average
between the high and low esti-
mates. This budget utilizes 5%
of the expected gross sales
increase as the source of fund-
ing. The recommended budget
also acknowledges that retail
business accounts for only 58%
of the project area's street
frontage. The total budget plans,
therefore, have been adjusted
upward to represent participation
by service business and govern-
ment owners at the same rate
budgeted for retail frontages.
Improvement Budget
1985 Improvement Budget*
(Average)
1980 C. B.D. Sales . . .. $9, 595, 000
Potential 1985 C. B.D. Sales
w/ lmprvmt. Program !'*$11,005,000
Potential Gross Retail
Sales Increase (yecrly). $1,410,000
5% Gross Retail Sales
Increase ........ ~*$70, 50(1
18
17
§ 16
' 15 -en a:
$11,391 ,OOO(high)
14 ~ < ..1
..1
0 c
••
12 '\ I ·····
$11,005,000(averagel\. .. , ,,,,.. ··•· ' · ·~~::: ......
(/)
Q)
'i en
(/)
(/)
0
11 ·····~~~--·;~~~~.=-~~;:~·:::::::,·· ...
10 ..
0 .~~::: ............................. ~················································ Current Sales
'C
Q) .....
tV
E
i w
9
1980
Budget Graph
Combined Retail/Service
Gov. Budget (yearly). .. $121,500
10-year lmprvmt. Budget .$1,215,000
Retail Portion (58%) .... $704, 70C
Service/Governmt. (42%) . $510,300
Budget Range
Low Range ...
Average Estimate .
High Estimate ..
*See adjacrnt chart
**Average
. . $8F2, 758
. $1,215,0(•0
. $1' 548,000
***Retail Frontage = 58% of total
1985
(YEAR)
1990
.. ;· Share of Market Remaining After Kent East Hill Plaza
•••• Estimated Sales Potential With Improvements
9
10
r----~-----~---Design
Defining a Strategy
The recommended Kent Down-
town improvement program is
focused on accomplishing two
goals: These are:
A. To use a planned physical
improvement program to
create a new and more unified
community image for Down-
town Kent.
B. To promote the core business
area as a more active, plea-
sant and unique place to shop
within the Kent metropolitan
area
~-;;..:
In developing a strategy to ac-
complish these goals while im-
proving the area's five major con-
cerns of identity, unified appear-
ance, adjacent residential, com-
petitive stance and un-united
business zones identified as the
major issues. The improvement
program has been divided into
two elements: physical improve-
ment and promotional programs.
The elements of this
improvement program are out-
lined as follows.
roposed Meeker Street
Financing
As the previous chapter pointed
out, the downtown can afford
between $800,000 and
$1 ,400,000 for a business im-
provement program. Two primary
programs are recommended for
financing the improvements.
These are:
Local Improvement District
A. Local Improvement District
A Local Improvement District
commonly abbreviated as
LI.D., is an improvement
process by which property
owners, in an area designated
by its property owners, may
join together to finance public
improvements. An LI.D. re-
quires the participation of
more than 50% of an im-
provement area's ownership
who will sign a local
,,~ ·.:~ .. ,.' .,~;t~i'lt '
I 1. ·~IJt! ~t;'Ji~;tt,r~~.'* t ·.t~~
: <. I J, ' S:fllt')
J •< t , I: -; y~~};
,~ ... ' ~·;,J· :j r\~ ft'~: t. ;" ,~ ~ .--------:'r.J'" , ~ ,_..,.,,;r.lr•r~~~~ i· '_t·_itt.:., j;t"~·"'J;~~~ ' -IT,: l ""'',.a;~ --~ .'~oml-~
' ~-~ ' ~\ I -~~~~-
'-"!"._:.._j_~
! '
Existing 1982
improvement district petition
requesting the city design an
improvement plan and sell
bonds to finance its
consruction. These bonds are
retired through an assessment
against real property in the
improvement area and are
paid as a fee added to
property taxes. L.I.D.
assessments normally run for
10 to 15 year improvement
periods. The improvements
constructed by an L.l. D. are
public in nature and normally
restricted to public rights-of-
way or publicly held land such
as parks. An L.I.D. is an
excellent vehicle for financ-
ing the public area improve-
ments recommended In the
downtown plan. L.I.D.'s may
also be subsidized with
other funds, or used to
finance additional improve-
ments to another city
project; for example, an im-
proved street paving pro-
gram added to a city
financed drainage project.
Parking and Business
Improvement Area
B. Parking and Business
Improvement Area
A Parking and Business Im-
provement Area (P.B.I.A.) is
similar to an L.l. D. in concept,
but is intended to allow for the
financing of additional im-
provements outside the public
..
' i
i •
'1 ,,
! lt -~
right-of-way, such as public
parking. A P.B.I.A. may also
finance non physical business
improvement programs such
as promotional activities,
advertising programs, or
special maintenance
programs. The improvements
financed by a P.B.I.A. must
uniformly benefit all
businesses in an improvement
area, and cannot be used to
improve private property. A
P.B.I.A. is financed by bond
sales as is an LI.D. and is
established via a petition
similar to an LI.D. petition. A
P.B.I.A. petition, however, is
signed by a business owner
as opposed to only the
property owner as in the LI.D.
Bonds are retired through a
special assessment against
the improvement area's
business and occupation tax.
The P.B.I.A. is the vehicle
recommended for financing
the development of the
improvement plan's joint
promotional and advertising
program.
Public Funding & Gifts
Until recently many community
improvement programs were all
or partially subsidized by match-
ing public funds, Block Grants,
state gas tax and urban arterial
programs, federal aid to urban
systems funds, or in some cases
Economic Development Admin-
istration grants. Funding cut
backs, inflation and policy shifts
have reduced these traditional
funding sources. Limited Block
Grant and other funds still remain
to assist with improvements and
all efforts should be made to seek
out those funds that remain.
Public funding subsidies are,
however, not anticipated as a
major financing element of this
improvement plan.
A funding source which should
not be overlooked, however, is
local industrial contributions. Cur-
rent economic conditions do not
favor contributions to public proj-
ects; but the initial plan is
expected to be implemented over
a three to four year period.
Economic recovery should be
more than well along by then.
The plan has designated several
special community oriented, art
work, park and park shelter
improvements to be financed by
private contributions. Many local
industries feel a strong sense of
pride in their community and also
find it good business to support
community improvements in
areas where their workers live
and shop. In many cases these
businesses will reserve funds to
promote the type of community
improvements recommended in
the park areas. A good factual
and reasonable request should
be prepared for presentation to
companies in the Kent busi-
ness/industrial area, asking for
financial support for the special
community features of the
improvement plan.
Existing 1st Avenue 1982
11 I
12
Improve Crosswalk • v
New Sidewalk w/
Special Paving Pattern
·~ '"''j Re-Landscape Park =drA~lti11ow
Redevelop 2nd Avenue
for Special Public Events
Public Gathering Area ----1-,.~o-
The"z"
2nd Avenue
PARK--
Gowe St.
Parking
__ ~Uo
Parking ~~ IV I
Downtown Shopping Loop U
' (~,
Intersections
(6' " i:, ~
'l~:r::w.li1!~'~r--+·· 'f·~u~ • ·
C \ ,C-C-"\JY-t~ -·
Handicap Ramps at all Corners · w
::J
New Sidewalk Paving on z
Titus Street "0 ~
c!:i<C
Downtown Shopping Connections
The "Z" , Second Avenue Park and First Avenue Trellis
c '
\'i:."ci;fl:<•
",;
First Avenue Trellis
Community Image
The Kent Downtown's original
"small city" atmosphere is still
largely intact and represents a
unique opportunity upon which to
build an improvement theme. The
development of such a theme
will provide a visible and
marketable commodity upon
which a business promotion
and advertising campaign can
be based. It will also provide the
major unifying element upon
which the downtown can build
the image and unified appear-
ance needed to attract new
customers.
A common tendency among
business areas is to attach them-
selves to a picturesque theme
such as a Swiss Village (Leaven-
worth) or the old western town
(Winthrop). Although picturesque
themes can be successful identity
builders, to be effective they also
require isolated or unique physi-
cal settings not generally found
within a major metropolitan area.
If the special setting does not
exist, there is just too little appeal
for the Swiss village in a city
setting. However, an element
commonly overlooked in estab-
lishing a business theme is the
area's own background. An
area's own historic setting is its
Wood Structure
Landscape Arbor Roof
.-~' .rt-f">, ~
~ ... 1111 ~~i :r~~{-
,,
most individual feature. If careful-
ly developed as a business im-
provement theme, an area's own
historic background will result in
the most accurate, interesting
and effective identity and
promotional concept available.
Although the Kent downtown has
changed since its original devel-
opment as a shopping district, it
still retains a small city atmo-
sphere. The idea of a small city
shopping district is an attractive
and popular commodity which will
market well as an alternative to
the standard shopping mall. This
image will be the key element of
any attempt to improve the
shopping environment. The type
of development undertaken at
Titusville Station on First Avenue
is an example of the private im-
provement concept needed in
added volume. The guiding
theme behind the individual im-
provement elements recom-
mended in this plan will be
directed at strengthening the
area's existing "small city"
atmosphere.
Downtown Shopping
Core's Connection
"The Z'
The core of the downtown pedes-
trian improvements is the down-
(!
"'t..
~·
Meeker Street
Sidewalk lmorovements
town "Z" which connects the
Meeker Street and First Avenue
shopping area. The recommenda-
tion is to add additional color and
texture to the sidewalk paving
and street surfacing in the core
area to attract pedestrian traffic
between the two shopping
zones. Included in this program
is also additional landscaping and
major improvements to 2nd
Avenue Park. The downtown is
presently without an active focal
point or developed public space
where special events and promo-
tional activities can be held. The
combination of a replanned and
•r ~ /~
I. )" / ' '
·_~y-' ~
":\-c'
--~.
improved 2nd Avenue and the
adjacent park can provide a
much needed amenity. The
park's development will be for
small events with 2nd Avenue
providing the expansion area for
larger special activities. When not
being used for special events the
street would remain open for
normal traffic and parking.
13
14
Continuous Awning & Weather
Protection at Storefronts in Downtown
~. ll
·;;. ~ ~ ,. '\' _o ··-~= "·~· • • x-=, 1 (fr .. -... ""'
Pylon Entry Example------
.; n
: ~ l J If ~t~
Parking Location Sign '
Gazebo & 2nd Ave.
Park
~ _. >; ··,_' : t;A7~~r~~ ,,_~ ( ., v •
Park Gazebo & Bandstand
Proposed Plan
...
N
-~--
}Iii' --. ,, __ ,,
,,.,
COMMERCIAl
'[D)
ttrl'
C=\~ rn
·<:;
'o
C:J
/0
-~ I
RET AIL
1-z .. a:
:0 ..
1-
<1> w a:
lr·--'!1
RETAtl RElAIL.
TAVERN;
TITUS STREET
DRUm
RET All RETAIL
Park Improvements
Gateway Entry with Pylon
New Sidewalks
~~!ilk-~, /_j_l:~ (, t_t~ J_j .. J. . ..x~r'Jt t r:f:ii&d¥1 I I -Gateway Entry Pylon
i~
' <!'
<,
.. -1
',~~ i1 ~ .... ~-f
!
CO)
c='""'"'T"+.,;,::..:.:=:::..:.=:.::_ New Parking Layout
-either parallel or angle
Alleyway Pedestrian Improvements
:lt;;·r:! II~ I lp""-;; Saturday Market
R.R. DEPOT
}
"'-------it--+--___,,......,~:=----1i-i-----2nd Avenue Public Space
·'""""" and Special Sidewalk Paving rDl
' c...···"\.. jj I ~»._WB1m;•_J H Railroad Screening Phase 2
Pedestrian Ramp at All Crosswalks
-Thermoplastic Markings
New Asphalt Street Topping
-i-11----i-' ---Special Crosswalk Paving
at Selected Locations
f II I I ; Ill Historic Street Lighting
on First Ave.
fill MFG. Ill 1 i 8 1: .:Oft~~:. New Colorful Awnings
~~~ C I B II! Paint Theme tor Highlighting
Buildings on First Ave.
Improvements to the park include
the addition of new landscaping,
a special event seating area, and
a bandstand or Gazebo where
such events as noontime music
concerts can be held. The pur-
pose of this Improvement
would be to provide a location
for both formal and Informal
promotional events within the
prime downtown shopping
core.
"Trellis Connection"
Combined with the completion of
the "Z" as a pedestrian circula-
tion feature is the construction of
a weather protecting trellis cover
along the east side of First
Avenue between Gowe and
Meeker Streets. This improve-
ment will link the entire retail
area with an interconnected
pedestrian circulation system.
The system as planned will run
along Meeker Street to 2nd
Avenue along 2nd Avenue to
Gowe Street to First Avenue.
After circulating on First Avenue
the system connects back to
Meeker Street using the existing
park block and the shaded trellis
as pedestrian attracting features.
This system completes a pedes~
trian circulation pattern along
almost all downtown storefronts
and promotes the interconnection
of the Meeker Street and First
Avenue areas as jointly
supportive shopping areas .
When combined with
recommended storefront awnings
along Meeker Street and on First
Avenue the Trellis would also
complete a needed weather
shelter running throughout the
retail area. The Trellis is also a
character producing and image
defining feature which will help
visually establish the recommend
ed "small city" theme.
15
16
rnrn
:000
lan at 2nd & Gowe Park
_ _r:: i.rr
I, r
• '1 I l ) ' ' f : i ~ ' ' I r ·. ··' k~~ · ..
·, ' :• ' .. '' '·,,]\I, l 'I
~"'· '"'$.';~:· "'./')\ ·,.d~o-~ ~":_ ---'· -, f-( • \ ;V.I~:l .. -:::
'!'.'"":'-·-·-·-c-... --ltt· -tl-"~'"''1
·;~-.·-~~::'.~--~--JI~~t~-~··"
posed Parksite
Street Paving
To unify improvements and add
consistency to the total shopping
area it is recommended that all
Phase 1 street areas be topped
with new surfacing. Asphalt top-
ping is recommended for all
areas except 2nd Avenue and the
intersection between Gowe and
Meeker Street. In this area a
special patterned and colored
concrete paving is recommended
to highlight a future special event
area and to again promote the
Meeker to First Avenue pedes-
trian link. The 2nd Avenue paving
design will also reinforce the
planned small town design
theme.
i~~~. ·.: .. ~ l :4;.;J
. ._ ,..--< r r-_....... ~ ... ~ = h ~ "~"" _,-, • ' ,. .v ' ,. ., ,. "' ' ,., .~. .. •' '.frl' i_ ' ' J' •·, I 'of' \)~
~-·----:-
:r: N!"'""'--~.!._ ~\11 ~ -·~· ....,-~ ' 'b,.,.._ .. ~ ... ~ -k~"h..f!.?--""'. _~. -
Existing Parksite
Sidewalks
The Downtown sidewalk surfaces
have cracked and deteriorated
over the years and are now at the
point where many need im-
mediate replacement. New
sidewalks will provide more
convenient and safer pedes-
trian access, enhance the total
downtown appearances and
provide one of the unifying ele-
ments needed to define the
area's pedestrian shopping
core. The sidewalk repair should
be done as part of the general
improvement program. The rec-
ommended replacement process
would include new concrete
sidewalks with special paving
throughout the First, Meeker and
2nd Avenue and Gowe street
improvement areas. A special
finish pattern and sidewalk color
is recommended for portions of
Meeker Street, 2nd Avenue and
Titus Street emphasizing a
pedestrian connection between
the Meeker Street and First
Avenue commercial areas. Since
street right of ways are limited,
sidewalk widths will remain at
near their existing width to
maintain parking.
•''··'
Street Furniture
Along with covered walkways,
new paving and lighting and park
improvements, the improvement
budget should also include funds
to install:
• 4 to 6 pedestrian benches
along the downtown sidewalk
area.
• Trash receptacles.
• Newspaper racks (2).
• A drinking fountain near the
improved Second Avenue
plaza
• Metal tree gratings at all street
tree locations.
• Community bulletin board or
kiosk with business directory,
located in the area parking
lots.
Artwork
An important feature often over-
looked in an improvement plan is
a provision for the incorporation
of artwork. Although public art is
often controversial, it should still
be considered as an important
part of the improvement plan.
Experience has shown that the
best public art work is
developed when an artist is
part of the total project design
team. For this reason the plan
has recommended an artwork
budget, but no specific artwork or
site. If artwork is to be included,
an artist should be selected to
work with the project designers
as soon as they begin the layout
of Phase I construction plans.
Park and Gazebo
A business area park is recom-
mended for development on the
existing park site at the northwest
corner of Second Avenue and
Gowe Street. The park would
promote the Downtown's small
town image by becoming the
local version of a village green. It
would also provide the downtown
with a pedestrian focal point and
place where promotional events
can be held and special activities
advertised.
The park should be a working
amenity and not a recreational or
play park in the traditional defini-
tion. Uses which the park should
encourage might include:
• The focal point for downtown
promotinal events such as
Cornucopia Days or Saturday
Market.
• The location of the business
area's special holiday displays.
These could include displays
for Christmas, Thanksgiving or
the 4th of July.
• A community resource for local
fund raising events such as a
flea market, rummage sale or
bake sale.
• An outdoor meeting place for
midday music, cultural and arts
events.
The major architectural feature of
the park is a gazebo structure
which will also serve as speakers'
platform, bandstand and stage. It
is expected that the gazebo
would be the improvement proj-
ect's major theme structure. It
would set the architectural style
and theme for all other improve-
ment structures as well as for the
Downtown Improvement theme.
The structure would be wood,
and of sufficient bulk to be highly
visible and would contain enough
Gazebo & Bandstand at 2nd Avenue Park
floor area to hold a good sized
band. The design of the structure
would pay particular attention to
architectural detail, high quality
workmanship and durable
materials.
The gazebo's architectural style
should be interesting and
unique so that it will attract
attention and be the object of
special community pride. The
hope is that the unique qualities
of the structure might also make
it interesting enough that a local
industry or major business would
contribute to its construction.
Functionally, the structure should
contain the following items:
-Special night lighting to high-
light the structure as a piece of
urban art.
-Electrical outlets to power
speaker systems, amplifiers
and additional lights.
-Prewired connections for a
speaker system.
The structure should be sited so
that it is clearly visible from ·
adjacent streets especially
Second Avenue. This will allow
for coordination with special
event park activities in the
Second Avenue street area,
Seating i~ r->
. . . . . r_:;-J
--
r--J
......
.?
Event Seating ~; 1 v~ J . AAw ... ~ "l
Background Landscaping .. Wll!l. : LLLU....IIII ; ~
J 1 Bandstand------------------------~~---e j
13
Plaza·-------------.._
enhance its usage as a Down-
town focal point and reduce the
potential for vandalism.
Gazebo & Bandstand
Plan View
17
18
Colored Glass_~~ ~~--~~ ,1 ~~~~
Open Lattice Pylon With Interior Lighting---...__ "-.~ ~:----._jt A~ ~
Landscaping ___ ~ ~
-~-Parking Location Sign
Section at Gateway Entry
,>
'\ >
' >11;.{ ,~~w
j~ ' -~
-/
>
Gateway Isometric
Entryway Pylon
Gateway Entries
The first impression shoppers will
have of the improved downtown
will be at its entry points. At
present there is no real sense of
entering a special downtown area
or anything unique about the
shopping area. The purpose of
the gateway entries is three-
fold. The first is to announce the
beginning of the Downtown Busi-
ness Area. The second to estab-
lish the theme and design image
of the improved downtown, and
the third is to extended a feeling
of welcome for shoppers.
The most important of the gate-
way purposes is its function as a
theme setting piece for other
downtown improvements. The
recommended gateway element
is an open lattice pylon most
likely made of painted metal with
interior lighting. The pylon would
be a colorful visual feature during
the day and a glowing lantern at
night. Since the pylons need to
be large, the lattice frame con-
struction is recommended to
reduce the visual appearance of
the feature while still getting the
pylon's message across. The lat-
tice's open appearance is also
intended to blend the pylon
visually with the architecture of
the trellis block, and park gazebo.
The second purpose of the pylon
is to act as an invitation to
customers. It is the pylon's siting
and landscaping treatment which
will provide this. Schematic
designs show the pylon on a
raised landscaped base. The
landscaping in this case should
be more than functional. It should
also be colorful with special
attention paid to seasonal flower-
ing plants at each end of Meeker
Street. The pylon landscaping
plan should also allow for flower
beds for special annual and
summertime displays.
The three pylon locations shown
in the plan are at First and
Meeker, First and Titus and at
Fourth and Meeker. SufficiAnt
land for the pylons exists at both
First Avenue locations, but the
Fourth and Meeker site may
present a problem. If so, another
location west on Meeker might be
as good or even better. Before
any west site is chosen, the
project's final design team should
survey the area to make sure this
feature is as well sited as
possible.
Transit
Economic surveys show a
significant number of Kent shop-
pers are over 55 years old. It is
common knowledge that as
people get older they frequently
turn to public transit as an
economic and convenient way of
getting about. Another growing
trend has been for all people to
use public transit more as costs
of car ownership and operation
rise. Others feel it is good
conservation practice to save
natural resources whenever pos-
sible and transit usage promotes
this philosophy. The surprising
fact is that faced with three good
reasons for increased use of
transit, there are few transit
routes serving the Kent
Downtown. This is an extraordi-
nary situation. It is hard to
understand how either the local
businesses and property owners
or the city government would let
this situation develop. There
should be minimum bus service
to and through the downtown.
Immediate efforts need to be
mounted to get transit service
established to the retail area.
Landscaping
The Downtown already has a
significant street tree program.
Although these trees have been a
controversial improvement, they
are the reason 21% of the
downtown's frequent shoppers
like the atmosphere of the area.
The trees were also often men-
tioned during the project's
customer and telephone survey
phase as an attractive and a
much liked amenity. The trees
also contribute significantly to the
development of the recommend-
ed "small city" shopping image,
and as such are a viable addition
to the downtown's future image.
Landscaping recommendations
call for the completion of this
street tree program on First
Avenue, and for the replacement
of missing and damaged trees.
Most landscaping recommenda-
tions, however, are directed at a
special improvement at Second
Avenue Park and at the Gateway
Entry Points: The "small city"
theme proposed for the down-
town area would be strengthened
by good landscaping and special
seasonal color at these locations.
The Gateway entries should ex-
hibit a special contribution of
colorful planting and, if possible,
flowers since the Gateway setting
is a shopper's first image of the
Downtown. Landscaping of the
T Recommended Lettering
Styles
OPTIMA +1
f:IL\1\1\I~'f'fl~ +2
HELVETICA +3
BETON +4
Second Avenue park should
strive to be functional and to
develop a natural screening back-
drop around the gazebo and
public gathering area. Other
areas of the park should be open
to prevent vandalism and to
promote flexibility for the park's
use as a working downtown
amenity.
Signing
Two often mentioned concerns
are that potential shoppers don't
known about the Downtwon or
are not informed of the area's
convenient free parking. These
concerns may or may not be true,
but there is a need for more
informational signing about the
Downtown. These needs in-
clude: the designation of access
routes and freeway exit points;
the installation of signing to direct
shoppers to the Downtown's free
parking, and the provision of
informational or directory signing
(possibly at parking locations)
telling shoppers what types of
businesses are in the area and
their location. A series of new
signing types are recommended
to provide this information. The
signs are schematically designed
to be pylon shapes similar in form
to the gateway pylon. The intent
is to provide the Downtown with a
family of signing shapes which
will be readily identified with the
Business Area as access or infor-
Downtown Information Parking Trash Light or
Bollard Approach Location
Sign Types
~II
Location Sign
PUBLI'1 Painted A . ' , .d Letters
R
K
I
Nl\ I I~ ,I
Public Parking
(metal)
Signing Details
mational signs. Sign materials
would be both painted metal and
wood.
.. Business Directory
(wood)
WI okillil Light
Lighted Bollard
(metal)
19
20
TYPICAL KENT SMALL RETAIL BUSINESS
ESTIMATED PRO FORMA INCOME STATEMENT
(Average Costs In 1982 Dollars)
LID COSTS
No
L.I.D.
With
L.I.D. $1,000,000 L.I.D.
Gross Sales (estimate) 12% interest at time of sale
(2,000 s.f. @ $93.3/s.f.) 186,600 1 0 year bonds
(2,000 s.f. 0 $105.7/s.f.) 211,400 Interest paid annually
58% -retail areas
42% -banks and govet·nment Cost of Merchandise Sold
(@ 35% markup) 121,290 137,400
Share to
Othet· Variable Costs ( 1 0%) 18, 600 21,140 Year Principal Interest Total Commercial
Gross Profit before over-
head, taxes, interest 46,650 52,850
CostofL.I.D. 1,286
(d .65/s.f.
Gt·oss Profit after L.I.D. 46,650 51' 564
Gross Pt·ofit due to L.I.D. 4,914
Pet·cent of Gross Sales
Increase Applied to
Finance L.I.D. 5.18%
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1q94
100,000 120,000 240,000 139,200
(.965 s.f.}
100,000 108,000 208,000
100,000 96,000 196,000
100,000 84,000 184,000
100,000 72,000 172,000
100,000 60,000 160,000 92,800'
(.643 s.f.)
100,000 48,000 148,000
100,000 36,000 136,000
100,000 24,000 124,000
100,000 12,000 112, 000 64.960
(.450 s.f.)
* Avet·age benefits for 2, 000 s. f. store Total Commercial Square Feet~ 144,250
'Average rate of 10-ycar pct·iorl
Income and Payment Schedule
Private Property
Improvements
Not all of the items recommended
for the improvement program are
listed in the Improvement Cost
Estimate. Two Items, building
painting and canopies or awn-
Ings, are strongly recommend-
ed Improvements which would
greatly strengthen the upgrading
program. Both items are private
property improvements and can-
not be financed by an LI.D. or
P.B.I.A. These improvement
items are no less important to the
success of a long range improve-
ment plan. If effectively coordinat-
ed by property owners, their addi-
tion, most likely during Phase II
of the long range plan, would add
an important unifying feature to
the Downtown. These two items
are described in more detail as
follows:
Painting
One Downtown problem is its uni-
formly bland appearance. One of
the reasons for the success of
Leavenworth's Swiss Village
theme was the addition of in-
teresting and attractive features
to existing buildings. An easy
way to improve the attractive-
ness of the Kent Downtown
would be the addition of a
coordinated and interesting
paint scheme for the entire area.
The First Avenue historic area
could benefit measurably from a
more interesting use of building
color. In some cases it would not
even be necessary to completely
repaint buildings. The highlighting
of special architectural features
and trim would give much
needed visual interest. If a paint-
ing program were coordinated,
even for maintenance improve-
ments, throughout the entire
Downtown, the future benefits to
the area's identity and marketing
potential would be significant.
Awnings and Canopies
A needed pedestrian amenity is
a weather protection system
throughout the retail area. Exist-
ing canopies and awnings cover
less than one half of the existing
pedestrian areas. If the Down-
town is to compete effectively as
a year-round shopping district,
customers must be offered a
reasonable and comfortable way
to use the area during bad
weather. A consistent system of
awnings and canopies would help
the problem signficiantly. In addi-
tion to providing weather protec-
tion, awnings and canopies would
also provide a colorful and attrac-
tive addition to the Downtown
improvement theme. A general
recommendation is that the
canopy system now found on
several Meeker Street buildings
remain as that street's canopy
concept, and that First Avenue
use colorful fabric awnings to add
additional color and interest to
the street.
Improvement Budget
The Downtown improvement pro-
gram as outlined represents a
larger project than can be
financed by LI.D. and P.B.I.A.
assessments. It is expected that
the final improvement program
will be selected from the list of
first priority improvement items
and be modified to fit the funding
budget available. The budget for
construction will eventually repre-
sent L.I.D., P.B.I.A. public funds,
and any available corporate or
private contributions. Until all
funding options are fully explored
it is wise to have a range of
improvement options available.
The final L.I.D.-P.B.I.A. con-
struction budget should be
limited to a range between
879,000 dollars and 1,400,000
dollars with 1 ,200,000 dollars
being the recommended
budget. Additional construction
items can be added if other funds
become available.
Improvement Summary
Cost Summary Including Fees & Contingency
1) Grand Total Phase I Elements Only
for City & LID Funding Combined
2) 2nd Avenue Pari<
3) Artwork
4) PBIA Signing Outside CBD
5) Phase II Landscaping
6) CBD PBIA Promotion Budget
(core area only)
Note:
$1,482,262
102,428
33,000
41,250
67,956
200,000
1) Ll D items do not include subsidies that may be payed
by the City or Pat·ks Depanment.
2) PB lA promotion budget includes central business district
only. Areas outside CBD may be negotiated with businesses
c
Downtown Improvements
Estimated Construction Cost ( 1982 base year)
Item Priority Price $
Paving
Pavement Removal $11,972
61,034
Funding
Potential
LID
LID New Asphalt Street Paving
Drainage Cost Not Estimated as Part of Plan
Utility Frame Adjustment
Striping & Buttons
Sidewalks
Removal of Existing Sidewalks
New Conct·ete Sidewalks
Curbing and Handicapped Ramps
2nd Avenue Paving & Intersections
Sidewalk Dt·ainage Connections
Bollard & Street Furniture
Sidewalk Tt·ees & Landscaping
Gateway Entries ( 3)
Lighting
Wil·e Undergrounding
Fixtures (Historic) Painting
Arbor/Trellis at Fit·st Avenue
Signing Improvements CBD
& Information
Signing Improvements Outside CBD
Artwork
2nd Avenue Pat·k
Park Landscaping
Gazebo
Railroad Screening
Gateway Park Landscaping
1st & Titus Park
Total All Physical Improvements
10'1, Mobilization
20'/, Contingency
25'1, Design & Adrninistt·ation
2
2
2
r.,~-~nd Tnt"'")l
8,050 LID
3,459 LID/City
84,515
52,443 LID
99,510 LID
40,494 LID
175,840 LID
35, 172 LID
3,400 LID
50,300 LID
475,159
150,000 LID
66,618 LID
50,270 LID
116,888
30,000 LID
60,000 LID
25,000 PBIA
20,000 At·ts Commission
Private
22,078 Donation
40,000 City
62,078
19,050 City
18,200 City
3,436 City
$1,046,826
104,682
$1,151,488
230,297
$1,381,785
3lt5,lt66
<;1 ,,, ,,,
21
22
~----------Implementation------------,
Building a Stronger Image
The key element of any improve-
ment plan is the organization of
its implementation program. In
the case of Kent, this element is
doubly important because a key
community component, "aggres-
sive local organization" is lack-
ing. This must be overcome
before progress toward construc-
tion can begin. The purpose of
this segment of the plan is to
describe a new organization and
implementation process which will
move the plan's improvements to
construction.
New DirecUon
The Downtown is presently rep-
resented by two promotional
groups, the Kent Chamber of
Commerce (KCC) and the Kent
Development Association (KDA).
The Kent Chamber of Commerce
is an active supporter of the
Downtown but also represents
the larger Kent Metropolitan Busi-
ness area. In this capacity, its
promotional allegiances are to a
greater area than just the Central
Business District. The Chamber
and its staff, therefore, cannot
concentrate their energies only
on Downtown projects without
leaving its other duties unattend-
ed.
The Kent Development Associa-
tion was established as the
organizational vehicle for
implementing a business im-
provement plan. Its membership
Activities
NEW DIRECTION
K.D.A., Committies " Membership, Officers ,
Duties
CITY PARTICIPATION:
Staff Support, Petitions, Funding
ACTIVE LEADERSHIP
Coordination with City, Retail Boards
and Community Groups
DESIRE FOR IMPROVEMENT
is composed primarily of business
people from within the Central
Business District and a few
property owners.
Initial Activities
The first major step in construct-
ing the improvement plan is
focusing the Kent Development
Association's efforts on plan pro-
motion and construction. In this
process the KDA needs to under-
take three basic reorganizational
efforts. These recommendations are:
A. Organize a slate of new
officers
The purpose here is to have a
KDA leadership which is spe-
cifically charged with promot-
ing and implementing the
Downtown improvement plan.
The officers' major tasks will
be coordinating and imple-
menting subcommittee activi-
ties, promoting the plan, and
serving as liaison with the city
staff members who will be
assisting in the plan's imple-
mentation. It will be important
that the newly elected KDA of-
ficers have both the time and
interest needed to continue
promoting the plan for the
next 12 months.
B. Implementation Steering
Committee
The first task of the new KDA
officers will be to establish the
project's implementation com-
mittees and to form a Steering
Committee made up of Com-
mittee Chair persons. The rec-
ommended committees are:
1. Membership/Promotion/
Funding
The KDA membership is
currently too small to ade-
quately staff the committee
activities needed to imple-
ment the plan. This commit-
tee's first major duty is to
increase active membership
through a membership
drive. Its second duty would
be to begin promoting the
plan as a community infor-
mation service which sends
out project news releases
and answers citizens' ques-
tions about project improve-
ment costs and budget. The
third and final duty of this
committee would be local
fund raising. Several project
elements such as the
artwork and gazebo are
budgeted as community
improvement
contributions from major
industries. It would be this
committee's charge to
prepare informational and
funding requests to these
businesses and to solicit
supporting grants to fund
these projects.
2. L.I.D. Committee
A Local Improvement Dis-
trict (LI.D.) is recommend-
ed as the plan's major
source of financing with a
one million to 1.2 million
dollar construction budget.
The implementation of this
program will need to be fol-
lowed closely by an LI.D.
committee. This committee
would be responsible for
project review in three
areas. These are:
a. LI.D. Petition Circulation
LI.D. Committee mem-
bers will need to assist
City of Kent staff in co-
ordinating and circulating
the L.I.D. signature peti-
tion to initiate the
project's construction
phase. This assistance
will be critical to the
LI.D. project's successful
beginning.
b. Design
The L.I.D. committee will
also need to follow the
development of the proj-
ect's final design closely
to see that planned im-
provements meet the
project improvement
goals, that the project
Schematic Timetable Kent Downtown Improvements
July 82 1983 July Oct 1984
l.I.D.I LID Petition. Jl ~ 1 )l R~~:~~ •. )j Bid~ ~~ Contract
c
"' :J
P.B.I.A. Prepare New Business---• in Ad Program J "'~
Attraction Proqram ~·;;
~~~~SS(!SSme~tS --~
City . I ... uc• . b"" o t Funded Rev1e": Fundih Select Funded ~ B1d~ Construction )lc
Potentials anQ.' Product lmprov. Availablity I 1984
I
I LID Committee ~ ~~UOLj>; _
Continuous see Ll D Above)
Review
KDA 1 vrgan1zea ~ • ~"lljiA L.ommmee ~ (Contif1U(JUS
k'f'l<1-<::~nra •• ~. ~ see LID Above)
1982
Jan
Organize Pfivate
& Corporat
Solicitation Committee
1983
Sept Solicit Funds for ·
Special Projects
1984
Implementation Timetable
meets its budget, and
that the implementation
elements are consistent
with the quality of !he de-
velopment and design
theme the community
has selected. In perform-
ing this duty, the LI.D.
Committee will need to
hold regular review meet-
ings with the engineer-
ing, urban design and
planning consultants pre-
paring the final design
drawings.
3. P.B.I.A. Committee
Promotion and coordinated
advertising have been iden-
tified as needed features of
any improvement plan. This
plan recommends that
$200,000 be raised through
the formation of a Parking
and Business Improvement
Area to promote the down-
town and coordinate its ad-
vertising program. It has
also been suggested that
the P.B.I.A. could also be
Construction Oct
\J
/1
1985
c
0 u
23
24
First Avenue Elevation with Storefront Weather Protection or Awnings
1'-~ ,/--<'<-... """ !~\ -~.)
lll ' ; 1':!~ I
i:i':::::c'J-~,._;~ . <
0;
~ ,,
~~
·-w~ (.'
! l
C n. ~
)
' ~
EXISTING STREET LIGHT
NEW PEDESTRIAN SHELTERS
WITH SIGNS & LIGHTS
EXISTING COVER
EXISTING TREES
NEW TREES
HISTORICAL STREET LIGHTS
EACH SIDE
y y )(:
[ <;,~\
)'t~·~~:
SPECIAL PAVING AT CURB EDGE
r_,-)-~,__':....
';_ff> I
1/.J ~ , ...... .. \... .. J,J-)
,.(.//~ }
Typical Section at First Avenue Improvements
First A venue Improvements
expanded to an area larger
than the Downtown's im-
provement zone. The idea
would be to increase the
benefit area, and to insure
the promotional budget
would cover the entire Kent
Downtown area. The
P.B.I.A. Committee's activi-
ties would include the fol-
lowing items:
a. Establish the size and
boundaries of the
P.B.I.A. Assessment area
(limited to the project
area or larger?)
b. Assist the City of Kent
staff in preparing and cir-
culating the P.B.I.A. as-
sessment petition.
c. Participation in and di-
recting the selection and
hiring of a specialized
promotional consultant
to:
-Design a promotional
theme or concept and
C.B.D. logo
-Design a coordinated
advertising program
around this theme and
set up its implementa-
tion budget for a
minimum three to five
year period.
-Prepare an access sign-
ing plan and location
strategy.
d. Implement the promo-
tional program timed to
begin as the L.I.D. con-
struction phase draws to
a close.
Promotional Program
In addition to physical improve-
ment recommendations, this plan
also recommends the develop-
ment of a coordinated Downtown
promotional and advertising pro-
gram. The physical improvement
program is in its own way a pro-
motional effort intended to attract
shoppers, but if it is to be com-
pletely effective, it will need addi-
tional support in the form of a
studied and professionally de-
veloped promotional and advertis-
ing campaign. The purpose of the
program is to get the word out
that the Kent C.B.D. is a good
place to shop and that new
changes are making it better.
Several things will be critical in
this program. Among the most
important are:
A. Timing: The promotional pro-
gram will need to be timed to
begin a major effort just as
Phase I improvements are
nearing completion.
B. Funding: The plan recom-
mends that $200,000 be de-
voted to the promotional pro-
gram. It is intended that this
money be used to have a high
quality advertising and promo-
tion designed. (Budget approx-
. imately $40,000 -$50,000.)
The budget would also pay for
the initial year to year-and-
one-half of the program's
operation (Budget, $80,000 -
$120,000), pay the costs of
selecting and installing C.B.D.
designation signs outside the
improvement area (Budget
$30,000 -$40,000), and for
the development of a distinc-
tive logo which would become
a readily identified image that
shoppers will always associate
with the Kent Downtown. The
budget is not intended to pay
advertising costs over time.
When the P.B.I.A. funding pro-
cess is set up, it will be nec-
essary that it have a provision
to extend its operation to the
collection of funds to operate
the joint advertising program
after 1987.
C. Promotion: The purpose of
this program should not be
seen as only the development
of an advertising concept. The
program should also incor-
porate plans to assist
merchants in sponsoring
special promotional events in
the Downtown which will at-
tract new shoppers. The pro-
gram contains funds to help
organize and plan these
special events.
City Participation
The Downtown Improvement Plan
is a joint undertaking between the
City and the area's private
property and business interests.
Approximately 35% of the proj-
ect's tinal cost will come through
some form of public or city con-
tribution. To be of maximum
benefit, this share of the work will
need additional city staff support
in three areas. These are:
A. Support for organizing and cir-
culating LI.D. and P.B.I.A.
petitions: The technical pro-
cess of contacting property
owners to obtain signatures
will require staff to ensure
proper petition circulation.
B. Technical assistance: The
preparation of final construc-
tion plans and specifications
will require the assistance of
both the city's planning and
public works departments.
C. Public funding: The most
knowledgeable source for ob-
taining any significant public
funding support for the project
will come through the efforts
of the city staff. Though the
potential for obtaining funding
support is limited, any match-
ing funds will help promote
the enthusiasm of local mer-
chants and property owners
for the project.
The key element of the city's
participation will be the assign-
ment of an improvement plan
Project Manager. The amount of
paperwork and organization
needed to get the LI.D. and
P.B.I.A. under way is overly com-
plex and time consuming for a
volunteer group. Also the K.D.A.
will need the assistance of an as-
signed staff person to answer
their questions, interpret city
policy and to help keep local in-
terest from declining during the
long implementation process.
-'~1--r
ir !\
li :!
---~--,1(
~ '
-EXISTING STREET LIGHTS
EXISTING TREES
NEW PEDESTRIAN SHEL TEAS
WITH SIGNS & LIGHTS ·
·-HISTORICAL LIGHT FIXTURES
EACH SIDE
·h '
'J.4'
'Jl:"J•f'F-'<C
-CURB EXTENSIONS AT
SELECTED LOCATIONS
SPECIAL PAYING AT CURB EDGE
t
! ~~'}_..
I' .,•
Meeker Street Section
Showing Optional Paralel Parking
. ,.~---
PARK
EXISTING STREET LIGHTS
EXISTING STREET TREES
NEW ARBOR/TRELLIS
OVER SIDEWALK AT
SELECTED LOCATIONS
PLANTING TO GROW
UP ARBOR
"'
i-t
;o;A-t---h-
PLANTING STRIP
't.,J :1.
I f ( ~-
K ' ~ I
. '""'"-~hI_ ,;rt
~I :11
I l
First A venue Section
Showing Trelis at Park
?S
26
Meeker Street
Special Sidewalk
Full Width Pedestrian Ramp
at Crosswalk
----------New Concrete
New Sidewalk with __ .J
Special Pattern : Color
New Metal Tree Grating
(Typical)
/ ~New Asphalt Top Coat
~ onStreet
Sidewalk Details
Desire for Improvements
The most critical feature facing
downtown Kent is the property
owners' and merchants' desire to
improve their area. For the past
several years there has been
enough interest to talk about an
improvement plan but not enough
understanding of the potential
benefits to implement a program.
The Downtown now sits at a
major crossroads. If nothing is
done, the area's share of the
retail market will drop well below
6%, marginal business will begin
moving into the area, key busi-
ness tenants will begin leaving,
and relative property values will
decline. Other development will
absorb the area's growth poten-
tial and then its existing sales.
The issue is, therefore, not if
the Downtown should do some-
thing but what it should do and
when it will act. The purpose of
the plan is to outline a feasible
program to get the process start-
ed. It is still the responsibility of
the local community to get things
rolling.
Conditions such as those which
now exist in the Downtown do not
just happen. They are the result
of a lack of organization and
unified support within the busi-
ness and property owner com-
munity. There will always be
more reasons than can be
counted for not taking a risk and
moving ahead. Many of these
questions are based on real con-
cerns and many others are
simple reluctance to act and not
reasons at all. The simple fact
remains, however, that the Down-
town must improve its irnage or
pay the consequences of
inaction. There will be some risk.
But in the long run the real risk is
that the community will not see
the benefits of improvement or,
even worse, will execute a half
completed plan, spending money
but not really doing enough to be
effective. This plan is intended to
help eliminate that problem and
to answer some of the questions
concerning what to do and the
potential benefits of improvement.
Now the community's desire to
improve and survive must serve
to get a project completed.
Phase II
The business improvement pro-
gram outlined in this report
should not be looked at as end-
ing when the 1985 improvement
phase is completed. There are
many more items to be improved
than those outlined in that pro-
gram. Portions of Fourth Avenue,
Gowe Street between Second
and Fourth, Harrison Street and
railroad track frontages are still
left unimproved. The promotional
program budget is also intended
to design, not run, the program,
and the awning and building
painting program will be just the
beginning. All of these elements
will need to be carried on as
Phase II of the program. The
problems of business mix and
quality will also not be solved by
1985, and the Development Asso-
ciation and Chamber of Com-
merce will need to shift to an
aggressive program of attracting
new Downtown business. Several
existing buildings in the Down-
town area are also in need of re-
development. As the business
climate improves with Phase I
completion, these projects will
become increasingly viable. If
Phase I improvements are ener-
getically installed and take
advantage of the potential busi-
ness growth projections outlined
in the economic surveys, there
·will be sufficient resources by
1987 or 1990 to complete Phase
II improvements.
4" Cone. Sidewalk t,J'
Concrete r 1
Curb & Gutter
\,§
,.
J
D .. I ~ '· ...
., . .. I
..
..
Pattern (Special) Pattern (Standard)
Metal Tree Grating (Typical)
NOTES 3'-0" Sq. Pattern Concrete
Acid Etch or Light Sandblast Finish
Cone. Curb & Gutter ,, ,,
I
4" Cone. Sidewalk
~~ ~ .
---
Wheelchair Ramp
Painted Crosswalk
Standard Sidewalk
Sidewalk Details
27
28
""' fjJ
----,-1; l'
"'\ .·"' .,
.., ·"'~ . .,
-~.
... ~j
::1
~·-~ )\
:fl
t()
rr
n:O::I=-,_ .a()c:()-_ r')~") ·.
11-a ..,..fl ~\ I -lOIC&l 1 , .F~t rH!Cll ft
TITUS STREET
1
r()::::t_~~~ ():(),(~1~, 1
-~ I• '7:&1 !1. v·-c-~~ :1 . I
I , 1\ .SJ : .j
,.., ,., (.., () (' ,..., "" r')
-.1\ ~-~
' PUI!liCPAI\f\ING !
-r7
A I_;_
I
'"'
"'
')\
Phase 2 Streetscape,
Parking, Building Storefront
Improvements
Future Commercial Expansion
and Redevelopment Areas
Improved Railroad Screening
Phase 2
1:1 I"""'"' Phase 1 Improvement Area
4,;:1 Future Commercial
Redevelopment (private)
t'il • 1 Phase 2 Streetscape, Parking
& Building I Storefront
Improvements
•nr 1 7 Extended Gateway
Entry Concept
A.
Phase II N
1987-1990
City of Kent
Mayor
I sa bel Hogan
City Administrator
Richard Cushing
City Council
Billie Johnson, President
Tom Bailey
Bernie B iteman
Jon Johnson
Dan Kelleher
Tim Leahy
Dave Mooney
Kent Planning Department
James P. Harris, Director
Keri Adams
Jim Hansen
Parks Department
Barney Wilson, Director
Public Works
Don Wickstrom, Director
Jim Poston
Merrill Vesper
Acknowledgements
Kent Development Association
Hal Barrentine
Pat Crockett
Pat Curran
James Curran
Bob Fey
Rick Hart
Jan Jacobson
Sherrene Jones
Dan Kelleher
Alana Mclalwain
June Mercer
Dennis Neifert
Helen Selig
Bill Stewart
James Storey
Steering Commitee
Pat Curran
Amy Patsch
Norm Heutmaker
Helen Selig
Don R. Walker
Lemar Strain
Sandy Golando
Karen Dealy
Norm Harris
Stephanie B rueii-Malecki
Dick Allen
Rick Hart
Suzette Cooke
Deanne Glamser
Design Team
MAKERS
Gerald Hansmire
David Thomas
Dennis Neifert & Associates
Dennis Neifert
Mike Hovland
Williams/K uebelbeck
& Associates
Greg Easton
Fredrick Dong
Don Shimono & Associates
Don Shimono
29