HomeMy WebLinkAbout3589Ordinance No. 3589
["Beginning July 1, 1998"]
(Amending or Repealing Ordinances)
Amends Ord. 3222
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City
of Kent, Washington, amending the City of Kent
Comprehensive Plan as follows (1) to change the plan's
land use map designation from Mobile Home Park (MMP)
and Medium Density Multifamily Residential, seventeen
(17) to twenty-three (23) dwelling units per acre (MDMF),
to Mixed Use (MU) for property located at 1027 and 1035
West Smith Street (CPA -2001-2(A)), (2) to change the
plan's land use map designation from Single Family
Residential, 6 units per acre (SF -6) to Commercial (C) for
property located at 27220 154th Avenue Southeast (CPA -
2001 -2(B)), (3) to change the plan's land use map
designation from Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre
(SF -6) to Low Density Multifamily Residential, 16 units per
acre (LDMF) for property located at 2635 South 260th
Street (CPA- 2001-2(C)), (4) to change the plan's land use
map designation from Single Family Residential, 3 units per
acre (SF -3), to Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre
(SF -6), for property located at 25003 -114th Avenue
Southeast and 11223 Southeast 248th Street (CPA -2001-
2(E)), (5) to change the plan's land use map designation
from Low Density Multifamily Residential, 16 units per
acre (LDMF), to Commercial (C), for property located at
13303 and 13307 Kent-Kangley Road (CPA -2001-2(F)); (6)
amend the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive
Plan to include the Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent and
Federal Way School Districts (CPA -2001-2(G), and (7) to
amend the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive
Plan to reflect a 6 -year plan for capital facilities projects
(CPA -2001-2(H))
2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act ("GMA")
requires internal consistency among comprehensive plan elements and the plans from
other jurisdictions, and
WHEREAS, to assure that comprehensive plans remain relevant and up
to date, the GMA requires each jurisdiction to establish procedures whereby
amendments to the plan are considered by the City Council (RCW 36 70A 130(2)), and
limits these amendments to once each year unless an emergency exists, and
WHEREAS, the City of Kent has established a procedure for amending
the Comprehensive Plan in Chapter 12 02 of the Kent City Code, which sets a deadline
of September 1st of each year for submittal of requests for comprehensive plan
amendments, and
WHEREAS, by September 4, 2001, the City received applications to
amend the comprehensive plan's land use plan map designation, and six of those
applications involve parcels located at (1) 1027 and 1035 West Smith Street (CPA -
2001 -2(A)), (2) 27220 -154th Avenue Southeast (CPA -2001-2(B)), (3) 2635 South
260th Street (CPA -2001-2(C)), (4) the adjacent properties located at the southwest
corner of the intersecting rights-of-way for the Southeast 252nd Street and 114th
Avenue Southeast, and at 25218 -113th Avenue Southeast (CPA -2001-2-(D)), (5)
25003- 114th Avenue Southeast and 11223 SE 248th Street (CPA -2001-2(E)), and (6)
13303 and 13307 Kent-Kangley Road (CPA -2001-2(F)), and
WHEREAS, the parcel at 1027 and 1035 West Smith Street is currently
designated Mobile Home Park (MHP) and Medium Density Multifamily Residential,
17 to 23 units per acre (MDMF), and the applicants are requesting a plan designation
to Mixed Use (MU) (CPA -2001-2(A)), and
2 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
WHEREAS, the parcel at 27220 -154th Avenue Southeast is currently
designated Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre (SF -6), and the applicants are
requesting a plan designation of Commercial (C) (CPA -2001-2(B)), and
WHEREAS, the parcel at 2635 South 260th Street is currently
designated Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre (SF -6), and the applicants are
requesting a plan designation of Low Density Multifamily Residential, 16 units per acre
(LDMF) (CPA -2001-2(C)), and
WHEREAS, the adjacent properties located at the southwest corner of
the intersecting nghts-of-way for Southeast 252nd Street and 114th Avenue South and
at 25218 -113th Avenue Southeast are currently designated Single Family Residential,
6 units per acre (SF -6), and the applicants are requesting a plan designation of Single
Family Residential, 8 units per acre (SF -8) (CPA -2001-2(D)), and
WHEREAS, the adjacent properties located at 25003 114th Avenue
Southeast and 11223 Southeast 248th Street are currently designated Single Family
Residential, 3 unit per acre (SF -3), and the applicants are requesting a plan designation
of Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre (SF -6) (CPA -2001-2(E)), and
WHEREAS, the parcel at 13303 and 13307 Kent-Kangley Road is currently
designated Low Density Multifamily Residential, 16 units per acre (LDMF), and the
applicants are requesting a plan designation to Commercial (C) (CPA -2001-2(F)), and
WHEREAS, the Kent and Federal Way School Districts are requesting
amendments to the text of the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan
to reflect proposed changes to impact fees resulting from new student population
generated by new single-family and multifamily residential development (CPA -2001-
2(G)), and
2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
WHEREAS, the City of Kent Finance Department has submitted
proposed amendments to the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan to
identify a 6 -year plan for capital facilities projects, including costs and revenue sources
(CPA -2001-2(1)), and
WHEREAS, the City of Kent Land Use and Planning Board considered
the requested comprehensive plan amendments, conducted a public hearing of the same
on December 10, 2001, and made the following recommendations (1) the denial of
CPA -2001-2(A) and CPA -2001-2(D), (2) the approval of CPA —2001-2(B) with
conditions on access, (3) the approval of CPA -2001-2(C), (CPA -2001-2(E), and CPA -
2001 -2(F), and (4) no recommendation for CPA -2001-2(G) and CPA -2001-2(H),
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments of CPA -2001-2(A), CPA -2001-
2(B), CPA -2001-2(C), CPA -2001-2(E), and CPA -2001-2(F) are consistent with the
standards of review for comprehensive plan amendments outlined in Section 12 02 050
of the Kent City Code, and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the comprehensive plan amendment CPA -2001-2(A) to amend the
comprehensive plan designation for parcels of property located at 1027 and 1035 West
Smith Street, and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the recommendation of the comprehensive plan amendment CPA -2001-2(B)
to amend the comprehensive plan designation of a parcel of property at 27220 -154th
Avenue Southeast, and
4 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the recommendation of the comprehensive plan amendment CPA -2001-2(C)
to amend the comprehensive plan designation of parcels of property at 2635 South
260th Street, and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
denied the comprehensive plan amendment CPA -2001-2(D) to amend the
comprehensive plan designation of the adjacent properties located at the southwest
comer of the intersecting rights-of-way for the Southeast 252nd Street and 114th
Avenue Southeast and at 25218 -113th Avenue Southeast, and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the recommendation of the comprehensive plan amendment CPA -2001-2(E)
to amend the comprehensive plan designation of the adjacent properties located at
25003 -114th Avenue Southeast and 11223 Southeast 248th Street, and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the recommendation of the comprehensive plan amendment CPA -2001-2(F)
to amend the comprehensive plan designation of parcels of property at 13303 and
13307 Kent-Kangley Road, and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the Capital Facilities Element amendment CPA -2001-2(G) to include the
Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2002, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the Capital Facilities Element amendment CPA -2001-2(H) to reflect a 6 -year
plan for capital facilities projects, NOW, THEREFORE,
5 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS
SECTION]. The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan adopted by
Ordinance No 3222, as subsequently amended, is hereby amended to establish new
plan designations for the following parcels
A For the property located at 1027 and 1035 West Smith Street, from a plan
designation of Mobile Home Park (MHP) and Medium Density Multifamily
Residential, 17 to 23 units per acre (MDMF), to Mixed Use (MU), as depicted in
the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated hereby by this reference
(CPA -2001-2(A)),
B For the property located at 27220 -154th Avenue Southeast and legally described
on the attached Exhibit `Bl", from a plan designation of Single Family Residential,
6 units per acre (SF -6), to Commercial (C), as depicted in the map attached hereto
as Exhibit `B2" and incorporated herein by this reference (CPA -2001-2(B)), with
the condition that the subl ect parcel shall not be permitted to have direct vehicular
access to 154th Avenue Southeast to serve any non-residential land use
development,
C For the property located at 2635 South 260th Street, from a plan designation of
Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre (SF -6), to Low Density Multifamily
Residential, 16 units per acre (LDMF), as depicted in this map attached hereto as
Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by this reference (CPA -2001-2(C)),
D For the adjacent properties located at 25003 -114th Avenue Southeast and 11223
Southeast 248th Street, from a plan designation of Single Family Residential, 3
units per acre (SF -3), to Single Family Residential, 6 units per acre (SF -6), as
depicted in this map attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by this
reference (CPA -2001-2(E)),
6 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
E For the property located at 13303 and 13307 Kent-Kangley Road, from a plan
designation of Low Density Multifamily Residential, 16 units per acre (LDMF), to
Commercial (C), as depicted in this map attached hereto as Exhibit "E" and
incorporated herein by this reference (CPA -2001-2(F)),
SECTION 2. The Capital Facilities Plan element of the Kent
Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to include the Capital Facilities elements of
the Kent and Federal Way School Districts, as set forth in Exhibit "F" attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference (CPA -2001-2(G))
SECTION 3. The Capital Facilities Element of the City of Kent
Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to reflect a 6 -year plan for capital facilities
projects, as set forth in Exhibit "G" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference (CPA -2001-2(H))
SECTION 4. - Severababty 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 5. - E fective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be
in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of passage as provided by law
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
7 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
APPROVED AS TO FORM
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED—Z'7 day of 4 , 2002
APPROVED /? day of ' , 2002
PUBLISHED A15 day of , 2002
I hereby certify that tlus is a true copy of Ordinance No. 3� 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 JACOBE , CITY CLERK
P \OvAOr mmc6CompP)e Am nd 2001 doc
8 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
000%
All� _ ° a
` o c
W�,/. ° b a ern + e a
i 3 i c O C =� +�+ C
E O u mz F `a
7. Ch N i`o emQ m� cQ LLe� a
L c 1 m a ►+ 3 In 6 Z IL IL HI a IA
H
iiN
VECLJU a
13
p
o
C
d
t '
Cox
�
`°
o
c
U
c(LJj
O
Z
N 3AH NOSdWi
U a
EXHIBIT "A"
E"
;o ,-
o
0
04 �• a
N
coCor
�CP
c
a
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 6 OF EDIMALL A RASX ADDITION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED
IN VOLUME 53 CF PLATS CN PACE 11, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY.
EXCEPT THE NORTH 20 FEET THEREOF, AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY ON WARRANTY
DEED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8204290719., SUB k"CT TO RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION/
DEDICATION PER CITY OF KENT YACATION JSTV-20DD-2, KING COUNTY RECORDING
NUMBER
PARCEL NUMBER
716220-0030
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 5 OF EDWALL A P,ASK ADDITION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED
IN VOLUME 53 OF PLATS ON PAGE 11, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY.
EXCEPT -THE NORTH 20 FEET THEREOF, AS CONVERYED TO KING COUNTY CN WARRANTY
DEED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8204290719
PARCEL NUMBER
716220-0026
EXHIBIT _'B1"
EJI�to
9
c+i x
c
d
u
�\
N
Lo q
N
W
V
N
y
p O
o
N
7'I
c
o
IO
Y
a0+
R 2
FA
e a
V m
N
C@
Oi
O
i
m
Y•
L
O—=0
Q
— i
C A
>
to a0+0.
03
^qq
p�0+
G W Z
W
qO m
(,�
L
y
N
o m
m
c
OCO
o m ..
CUL
c
C
m,_
LLC a
c
V
�
,�
1
m 6
w3co
�LL
$LL
NJ W
,'
C
O
C
Q
iia
NAq
a
5
Vl
u
U
x
a
EJI�to
9
c+i x
c
d
u
0 h
4.0x
O �
1
to
D
�RIV
dO r
EXHIBIT B2
N
3
i
V)
Z
50
Z G o
(L
a
�W
z
z
Gi
H
N
N
W
c
x
_.
0 h
4.0x
O �
1
to
D
�RIV
dO r
EXHIBIT B2
N
3
i
V)
Z
50
Z G o
(L
a
�W
z
z
Gi
H
x
314144 1
0-%
V`
41
313141 31414131314131
r
47 44 41 94 91 44 31 91 4
X
91
•z:
x
N
1 31 31 37 31 31 31
m
Nal -14141313131`1 NN
«
Ls
C
°
�W�
Y;
Y 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 41 31 3
'i
a p
L.
4137
3"
3m
v m
137 313131
413134 313131313134 3144314131413131313
•�.,�,�.•
O
131343134
31
oo
°`A
eA
M
°�
H44NN44
�N
N
41e
3 A
m
�m
S3
Ya
fa
fu°.
o o
y
3131 •N 104,3,31-I`H`N 41
41•N 4141,
a
d
^x 1314147 ;144 44 413141 41
444`1 31H �1 $131 `N 91 413141
413131313141 _
914141 44 IN
_ N
'1444,41414313431413134313
��
41414131NN NN 41
Ra-
9413141 41473,444141
I Fl
'N'
;a
0
®
9i IN IN 1134`131 34
x
x
314144 1
NN31� - - 313,.
41
313141 31414131314131
r
47 44 41 94 91 44 31 91 4
X
� �
nx
x
I 37313131313131313131 313{313
1 31 31 37 31 31 31
x
ox
m
G
o
0
N in
z xz
1p O •
m
m
12 V E
c
coK
413LJ41413191`F
314144 1
NN31� - - 313,.
41
313141 31414131314131
r
47 44 41 94 91 44 31 91 4
\
:.x
nx
'313,31 41 44 94 34 37 31 4141`
I 37313131313131313131 313{313
1 31 31 37 31 31 31
=4
Nal -14141313131`1 NN
31 31 31 31 31 31 41
! 1IN I
14444414,44 44 41 31 41 9,31
3131313131°" 41 31 4147 31 31
Y 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 41 31 3
313131-4'
rx 31 4144 3434344441NN 47 5
414141414144414444N 44414
4137
- 14431314431
N-413731 N --M 44343141 N -N
V 144
137 313131
413134 313131313134 3144314131413131313
•�.,�,�.•
d IN414141414141`N 41314♦41
131343134
31
144;14,44 41 47 31 31 37 34 3141
443 1313431413434343141 �� �
3
H44NN44
mx 1414731 31313f474434
41e
,� •• •
3i 3131343
n `3141 `N� 319141414131
91413,
_
_
3131 •N 104,3,31-I`H`N 41
41•N 4141,
N mx
^x 1314147 ;144 44 413141 41
444`1 31H �1 $131 `N 91 413141
413131313141 _
914141 44 IN
_ N
'1444,41414313431413134313
_ 4INN`1 4447314144 IN
41414131NN NN 41
9413141 41473,444141
41314131
�13131313�;13431313131-1
N 4144N IN 9, 4141
414131 41•N •N
9i IN IN 1134`131 34
1313744 31`NN
41 131374141
mx
3141 `N 414131 414131
4141 4
^,Ix 141 IN 41414141
31 IN 141414141314141 4141 414
--_ ---
414141 4141414141
3141414141 ;1314441 413
r .rti
-;•t-���'�„Lr�?� x 313131 31314131413
31414141414131414131
31 `N 31413131 7 31313141 313
314131 MN 41 Ni
k 313131313141314141
41 3131413131 3131 N4
" 5
- Nx 1444441414444413131
413141 41313141313191 3
N
-
- '314141414141314131
41414131 414131 313131 3
X
EXHIBIT "C"
414141414141414141
4141413141 4131 413131 3
o
- 314141444131413141
373131313131 47 313131 4
nx ;13137313131414131
31414131314131 313131313131 3
414131
4131413131413141 414141414131 444
31 T
3131314131313131 313131373131 4
O 414141414131414131
3137314141314131 313141313141 3
41414114141314141
414141414141414141 413141414131 IN
mx
3131414141413141314131
343, 31414"1 41 IN N 41 31 31 31 31 3
5�
.�
�- N ` 141313141313131313131
4141313141 IN 413 IN 31313141313
413LJ41413191`F
314144 1
3141413131314131313131314141313
41
313141 31414131314131
313141313131314131 313131314
a1 a
313131414131413131 313141413
11313131313131 141
314131313131 �I
I 37313131313131313131 313{313
1 31 31 37 31 31 31
I 31 3741313137 X31
1 31313131313141313131 31313
31 31 31 31 31 31 41
! 1IN I
1 O 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 41 3131
3131313131°" 41 31 4147 31 31
Y 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 41 31 3
313131-4'
4141413131
414141414144414444N 44414
4137
- 14431314431
31413141313141313131414131313141313
V 144
137 313131
413134 313131313134 3144314131413131313
•�.,�,�.•
,31
131343134
31
1441313431
443 1313431413434343141 �� �
3
H44NN44
314131 313131 IN at ,� 31`H313131
x
,� •• •
3i 3131343
al 343,`11 :� 3131 34 41 41 31 34141 -A 4
_
mx
31313131:1 34 31 41 41 .4141 31 3134 3
N mx
`I 31413134 V 41 47 4134 34 31 4131 3
mx ^x
_ N
'1444,41414313431413134313
N
_
�13131313�;13431313131-1
ri)_
-___
9i IN IN 1134`131 34
Cl _ _ >_� v_
_ _ _. > _ mmx
3137313134313731 4
or
--_ ---
313131 31313441313
r .rti
-;•t-���'�„Lr�?� x 313131 31314131413
314131 MN 41 Ni
44343134 31444
�-�
313131313131 34414
N
^ 47 3131 31 31`1
��
EXHIBIT "C"
r
f1i
d
V
CO
0
O
iA
E
EXHIBIT "D"
Oe
E-3 n
a
rc
a
o0)
CO
C) O
zF�
azno
J W o
CLM�
ca MN
N V
O
z
0
Ajz-LLI
\
O
L
3m
ul
L
O
O
V
O m
L m
t
`
3
L
3 7
p W
�N
o
e°
ILO
m.I
aA
°cm
LLr. e
C=
Q
m d
rl 3
LL N 6,
F Y�.
N �I Val
1i
Vl
U
l iN
}'�U,
EXHIBIT "D"
Oe
E-3 n
a
rc
a
o0)
CO
C) O
zF�
azno
J W o
CLM�
ca MN
N V
O
z
0
___j
o �
a •r
alM7�
a���nrvi
v�Hdldldl3l•N
1�
LO
. 4191�w�
d191�11.31d1•N'
'ii`N� •u.
�IMMUS
' R- I la -low t7a
m
000%
4
f �F"
zLL,
,N144�
444141
�.
Y3
p
e
*c
�
3E
3E
o
16
a
m'
d
mIq
S3
O
ed
$w
C 6
zLL
O
i .2 y
0
D,
o
V
,1411
lNi
x
___j
o �
a •r
alM7�
a���nrvi
v�Hdldldl3l•N
1�
LO
. 4191�w�
d191�11.31d1•N'
'ii`N� •u.
�IMMUS
' R- I la -low t7a
m
r�
Ndldle ��-'-` '
v�tvt3 -
��•�Na�i 1
=T-
�vl�a =
•.0 `}I `N `}I •Hy
3AV Zey
A
EXHIBIT "E"
Q
�o
0
ME N
0o
zF,
2Oo
IL
co
n ui
ow
2
J
,N144�
444141
■
■
IN 41
dl di 4'
�Y
r�
Ndldle ��-'-` '
v�tvt3 -
��•�Na�i 1
=T-
�vl�a =
•.0 `}I `N `}I •Hy
3AV Zey
A
EXHIBIT "E"
Q
�o
0
ME N
0o
zF,
2Oo
IL
co
n ui
ow
2
J
'C"APITAL FACILITIES
PLAN
2001 -2002 - 2006-2007
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
Serving Unincorporated King County
Kent, Covington, Auburn, Black Diamond, Renton, SeaTac, Washington
APRIL 2001
KENT & FED. WAY SCHL DISTRICTS
„i #CPA-2001-2(G)/KIVA#2012913
(Charlene Anderson, Planner)
EXHIBIT "F"
Kent School District No. 415
Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan
2001-2002 - 2006-2007
April 2001
For information on the Plan, please call the
Finance & Planning Department at (253) 373-7295.
Capital Facilities Plan
Contributing Staff
Gwenn Escher-Derdowski, Planning Administrator
Joe Zimmer, Finance Department
Bonnie Cation, Transportation Department
Clint Marsh, Director of Facilities & Construction
Karla Wilkerson, Facilities Department
Kent school Drstrict W -Year capital Fackes Plan Apnl 2001
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
12033 SE 2561" Street
Kent, Washington 98031-6643
(253) 373-7000
SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2001-2002 - 2006-2007
April 2001
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Bill Boyce
Sandra Collins
Scott Floyd
Mike Jensen
Linda Petersen
ADMINISTRATION
Barbara Grohe, Ph D.
Superintendent
Daniel L Moberly
Assistant Superintendent of Business Services
Fred H. High
Executive Director of Finance
Margaret A. Whitney
Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources & Special Services
Carla Jackson
Executive Director for School Improvement of Kent-Mendian Strand
Gwen Dupree
Executive Director for School Improvement of Kentlake Strand
Mern Rieger
Executive Director for School Improvement of Kentridge Strand
Janis McBrayer
Executive Director for School Improvement of Kentwood Strand
Gary Plano
Executive Director of Curriculum & Instructional Services
Valerie Lynch, Ed.D.
Executive Director of Special Services
Donald Hall
E✓,sculrn_ Direclor of Information Technology
Kent School Dutnat S& -Year Capdal FaouLhes Plan %pdi 2001
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
TABLE of CONTENTS
Section
Page Number
I
Executive Summary
2
11
Six -Year Enrollment Projection
4
III
Current District "Standard of Service"
8
I V
Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools
12
V
Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan
15
V I
Relocatable Classrooms
18
VII
Projected Classroom Capacity
20
VIII
Finance Plan, Cost Basis and Impact Fee Schedules
25
Ix
Appendixes
31
Kent School District Sbr-Year Capdal Facilrhes Plan April 2001 Page 1
I Executive Summary
This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent
School District (the "District") as the District's facilities planning document, in
compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act,
King County Code K C.0 21A43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and
Black Diamond This annual plan update was prepared using data available in
the spring of 2001 for the 2000-2001 school year.
This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the
Kent School District This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document
for all of the District's needs The District may prepare interim and periodic Long
Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies, taking into
account a longer or shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of
facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required
Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by
Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn and
included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of
each jurisdiction The first ordinance implementing impact fees for the
unincorporated areas was effective September 15,-1993. This Plan update has
also been submitted to Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Black Diamond,
SeaTac, and Renton.
A financing plan is included in Section V I I I which demonstrates the District's
ability to implement this Plan
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in
order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity While the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for
capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs in the
District. The Growth Management Act, King County and City codes and
ordinances authorize the District to make adjustments to the standard of service
based on specific needs of the District.
Beginning in 1998, the District standard provides for class size reduction for
grades K - 3 from 1.26 to 1.22 students, and grade 4 from 1.26 to 1:25. The
District's standard class size for grades 5 - 9 should not exceed 29 students, and
class size for grades 10 - 12 should not exceed 31 students. These standards
are currently under review by the Board and community pending implementation
of voter -approved Student Achievement Initiative 728 (See Section III for more specific
information)
(Continued)
X: -rt School District Sic -Year capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Pace 2
Executive Summary (=Unued)
The capacities of the schools in the District are calculated based on this
standard of service and the existing Inventory, which Includes some relocatable
classrooms The District's 2000-2001 program capacity of permanent facilities is
25,314 which reflects program changes and the reduction of class size In grades
K - 4 Relocatables provide additional transitional capacity until permanent
facilities are completed.
Kent School District is the fourth largest district In the state. The actual number
of Individual students per the October 2000, head count was 26,543 Full Time
Equivalent (FTE) enrollment for this same period was 25,237.88 (Kindergarten at .5
and excluding Early Childhood Education [ECE] and Running Start students)
The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of
transitional facilities were among subjects studied by the Citizens' Concurrency
Task Force The Final Report of the Concurrency Task Force was approved by
the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993 Findings and recommendations of
the Concurrency Task Force are discussed further in Section I I I of this Plan
Our plan is to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the
transitional use of relocatables as recommended by the Citizens' Concurrency
Task Force
The Concurrency Task Force reaffirmed that, as has been the practice and
philosophy of the Kent School District, portables are NOT acceptable as
permanent facilities Portables, or, using the more accurate but interchangeable
term, "relocatables" may be used as interim or transitional facilities.
To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school facilities.
2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased capacity
and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand.
To meet unique program requirements.
Use of relocatable and transitional capacity and specific recommendations by
the Concurrency Task Force are further discussed in Section V I of this Plan
Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, this Plan will be
updated annually, with changes in the fee schedules adjusted accordingly.
Kent Sctxd Drstrict Six -Year Capdal Fadi dies Plan Apnl 2001 Page 3
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection
For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on student yield from
documented residential construction projected over the next six years (see Table 2)
The student generation factor, as defined on the next page, is the basis for the
growth projections from new developments
King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were
used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see Table 1)
Based on the percentage for 2000, 8 25% of King County live births, together
with proportional growth from new construction, is equivalent to the number of
students projected to enter kindergarten in the district for the next six-year
period (See Table 2)
Early Childhood Education students (sometimes identified as "Preschool Special
Education [SE] or handicapped") are calculated and reported separately on a .5
FTE basis
The first grade population is traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten
population due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens.
Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset
by current local economic conditions With a few notable exceptions, the
expectation is that enrollment increases will occur District -wide in the long term.
District projections are based on historical growth patterns combined with
continuing development of projects in the pipeline dependent on market and
growth conditions.
The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact
to schools and monitor conditions to reflect adjustments in this assumption. The
six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new
development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district
Information on new residential developments and the completion of these
proposed developments in all jurisdictions may be considered in the District's
future analysis of growth projections
Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments
The Kent School District serves six permitting jurisdictions. unincorporated King
County, the cities of Kent, Covington, and Auburn The west Lake Sawyer area
has been annexed to the City of Black Diamond and Kent Learning Center is
located in the small portion of the City of SeaTac served by Kent School District.
(Continued)
Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 4
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection (Continued)
STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR
"Student Factor" is defined by code as "the number derived by a school district
to describe how many students of each grade span are expected to be
generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual student
generated rates for developments completed within the last five years.
Following these guidelines, the student generation factor for Kent School District
is as follows:
Single Family Elementary 504
Junior High 211
Senior High 183
Total 898
Multi -Family Elementary .273
Junior High .114
Senior High 076
Total .463
The student generation factor is based on a survey of 3,352 single family
dwelling. units and 2,262 multi -family dwelling units with no adjustment for
occupancy. Please refer to Appendix E on Page 34 for details of the Student
Generation Factor survey.
The actual number of students in those residential developments was
determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation
System. In 3,352 single family dwelling units there were 1,691 elementary
students, 707 junior high students, and 612 senior high students for a total of
3,010 students. In 2,262 multi -family dwelling units, there were 617 elementary
students, 257 junior high students, and 173 senior high students, for a total of
1,047 students.
Kent School District Sac -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 5
r�
F M
LLLl N
Ya
W
m
O
H
U
O
r
Go
o
O
o
OctO
1,
to
r
O
t0
0
<
O
M
O
r
m
N
N
m
O
M
<
N0
f`
M<
M
N
n
<<
r
co
m
0
r,
V
n
N
--tN
n
N
u)
N
m
d)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
r
a
o
N
r
m
1-
O
e,-
LO
v
m
co
0)
CO
W
m
r�
O
r
u)
N
N
M
v
O
to
N
r
V
m
O
to
r
O
m
O
r
O
N
O
h
O
m
O
m
to
Cl)
O
N
O
m
M
M
rN
N
m
<
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
r
N
m
Cl)M
Fj
N
m
O)
V
m
r
v
N
O)
0)
O
N
O
O
N
N
1-
v
O
N
to
T
N
N
to
O
N
m
co
O
N
m
r.-
O)
r
m
N
Of
<
n
to
03
r
M
m
m
r
co
co
r
r
N
f`
m
N
m
W
0
N
a
ce)v
m
V
(3)
r
to
m
O
N
to
C)
<
N
O
CO
O
N
m
(D
O
N
m
N
O
N
t`
co
O
N
m
m
C)
r
M
v
0)
<<
r
V
(7)
m
m
0)
r
M
N
m
<
m
VIt
to
r
CD
N
n
m
0
f`
m
1`
1`
Nm
ae.
N
,n
N
V
to
r
N
to
<
N
r
m
a
r
to
N
o
N
t0
tD
0
r
m
m
a!
r
V
N
G
r
N
O
0l
<
r
M
0
r
N
h
0�
r
CO
to
m
r
V
0)
m
r
N
0)
v_
r
1`
N
r
m
a
N
m
C
r
N
N
Nm
e
r
co
)f)
h
O)
Izr
N
[.-
m
r
O
N<
0)
N
m
M
O
N
V
N
m
r
t0
0
m
r
0
N
O)
r
Cl)
V
0)
r
N
O)
m
r
m
CO
n
r
n
<
tD
r
V
m
V
r
m
N
N
N
N
O
tD
m
m
M
N
N
aQ
M
y)
O)
O
O)
C)
r
m
m
0)
r
m
M
O)
<
to
tD
O)
<
M
V
0)
r
0)
O1
m
<
LO
0)
<
0)
V
0)
r
M
m
co
r
M
O
co
r
M
O)
m
r
to
Cl)
to
<
M
0)
M
r
r
N
r -
tL
O
m
No
N
N
0
O
0
007
0)
r
I
o
N
a
0
N
n
0)
r
M
rn
r
O
0)
r
N
0
r
m
0)
r
00
w
r
O
n
r
r0
n
r
N
to
r
co
V) rm)_
r
a0
N
O
m
C
m
N
v
NA
c
NV
M
N
O
<
O)
N
O
N
m
0)
C)
r
O
h
0)
r
O
W
r
r
0)
r
to
CO
m
r
N
r
m
r
r
N
r
r
O
0)
co
r
m
to
CO
r
O
a
<
m
O
N
r
O
O
N
N
m
r
0)
to
M
to
N
0
a
1`
0)
m
to
V
O)
V
v
O)
r�
CO,m
CO
to
V
to
m
M
M
n
r
N
1`
0)
N
t0
M
r
t0
N
oD
N
O
V
m
t0
N
N
N
N
m
to
N
r.-
)n
Oj
r
<
r
r
r
r
r
<
<
<
<
r
r
N
r
V
ICO-
I`
u
00i
p7
O
m
h
<
N
N
m
<
Cl)
t`
h
r
V
N
m
r
M
O)
1`
r
N
O
1�
r
0)
N
to
r
N
N
0
r
to
V
m
r
V
m
y
r
O)
m
a
r
r
0
M
r
CC)V
O
N
r
N
N
m
to
N
C'
r
co-
<
e
O
m
ejr
Of
m
f0
CD
to
n
r
r
m<
h
r
m
n
r
m
M
co
r
O/
Of
h
r
N
to
to
r
r
to
tD
r
O
m
V)
r
m
m
a
r
m
N
V
r
M
Cl)
r
M
N
N
r
m
O
<
N
V
r
O
r
M
V
m
cV
Cl)
e
m
co
M
co
`0V
11
r
co
t0
<
0
h
r
o
N
r
co
V
<
m
qt
r
m
M
<
00')
M
<
N
V_
r
O
v
r
r
N
<
m
co
<
V
O
c::t
to
<
O
C)
co
N
N)
r
co
m
�
a
Cl)
W
cm0
LO
r
OM)
to
r
N
N
r
0
V
r
,
v_
r
n
M
r
N
N
r
Cl)
Cl)
r
u7
M
r
to
t0+)
r
M<
r
co
r
M
N
<
4m
Cl
W
O
M
tD
O
M
m
r
N
M
V
tD
0
r
m
0
r
r
v
d
tU
d
d
m
d)
m
m
m
W
o
a
a
a
a
a
a
o
a
a
o
a
a
a
0
0
C9
0
0
E
0
E
0
t2
0
W
0
t`9
a
2
0
W
C9
F
O
m
[L
N
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
SIX-YEAR FTE ENROLLMENT PROJECTION
-AC:Y [iAt:>
.. P:,; '�R:>'. .#'S.<'
«<:F.;n«>„EJ;b:',C�,^;,•<.$;1;
<�i£<<:F.r.;;;,;EO;,<E,<<N
2000
1 2001 2002
2003
2004
2005 2006
-155
-244
"'.x'ce.+•<i' me,>nt Y>• ,a;
King County Live Births '
21,817
21,573
21,646
22,212
21,929
21,750
21,825 '
Increase/ Decrease
-155
-244
73
566
-283
-179
75
Kindergarten/ Birth % '
825%
825%
825%
825%
825%
825%
825%
' Early Chtl&wd Education a 5
62
67
77
78
79
80
81
' Kindergarten FTE @ .5
900
890
930
952
939
938
937
Grade 1
2,068
1,966
1,888
1,970
2,015
1,987
1,984
Grade 2
2,015
2,114
2,039
1,959
2,041
2,086
2,057
Grade 3
2,098
2,047
2,171
2,094
2,013
2,094
2,139
Grade 4
2,086
2,105
2,085
2,208
2,130
2,048
2,128
Grade 5
2,251
2,117
2,168
2,147
2,270
2,191
2,107
Grade 6
2,056
2,241
2,157
2,207
2,185
2,307
2,227
Grade 7
2,208
2,121
2,333
2,245
2,295
2,272
2,397
Grade 8
2,033
2,144
2,099
2,307
2,219
2,268
2,244
Grade 9
2,208
2,219
2,357
2,306
2,533
2,436
2,468
Grade 10
2,113
2,118
2,177
2,311
2,260
2,481
2,385
Grade 11
1,770
1,779
1,850
1,900
2,015
1,970
2,161
Grade 12
1,432
1,477
1,566
1,627
1,670
1,769
1,729
Total FTE Enrollment
25,300
25,405
25,897
26,311
26,664
26,927
27,064
N . ]
Yearly Increase
197
105
492
414
353
263
137
Yearly Increase %
0.80%
042%
194%
1.60%
1.34%
0.99%
0.51%
Cumulative Increase
197
302
794
1,208
1,561
1,824
1,961
' Kindergarten projection based on IGng County actual live birth percentage and proportional growth from new construction
2 Kindergarten FTE enrollment projection at 5 is calculated by using the District's percentage of King County live births
5 years earlier compared to actual landergarten enrollment in the previous year (ECE = Early Childhood Education)
lgndergarten projection rs at 5 FTE although many schools have Full Day Kindergarten at 10 FTE with alternative funding
4 Oct. 2000 P223 Headcount m 26,277 Full student headcount including 123 Preschool 8 311 Running Start = 26,543
IG R O W T H P R 0 J E C T 1 0 N S - Adiustments for current economic factors Fnl
For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment
growth from new development currently to some phase of planning or construction in the district.
Kent School Drstnot Sic -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 - April 2001
Page 7
III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service"
In order to determine the capacity of the District's facilities, the King County
Code refers to a "standard of service" that each school district must establish in
order to ascertain its overall capacity The standard of service identifies the
program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs
of special need, and other factors determined by the District which would, in the
District's judgment, best serve its student population
This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School
District. Relocatables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard
of service as the permanent facilities (See Appendix A, e & c)
The standard of service defined herein may continue to change in the future
Beginning in 1998, the District's standard class size for grades K - 3 was
reduced from 26 to 22 and grade 4 to 1.25. Kent School District is continuing a
long-term strategic planning process combined with review of changes to
capacity to meet the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative 728. This
process will affect various aspects of the District's "standard of service" and
future changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans. -
Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students
Class size for grades K - 3 should not exceed 22 students.
Class size for grade 4 should not exceed 25 students.
Class size for grades 5 - 6 should not exceed 29 students
Program capacity for regular education classrooms is calculated at an average
of 25 students per classroom because there are five grade levels at K - 4 and
fluctuations between primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e. third/fourth or
fourth/fifth grade split classes, etc )
Students may be provided music instruction and physical education in a
separate classroom or facility
Students may have scheduled time in a special computer lab.
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program.
(continued)
Kent Schod Dmtnct SD: -Year Capdal Facd(Ges Plan Apni 2007 P -,p 3
III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued)
Identified students will also be provided other educational opportunities in
classrooms for programs designated as follows
English As a Second Language (ESL)
Self-contained Special Education Programs
Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I)
Gifted Education
Other Remediation Programs
Learning Assisted Program (LAP)
School Adjustment Programs for severely behavior -disordered students
Hearing Impaired
Mild, Moderate and Severe Developmental Disabilities
Developmental Kindergarten
Early Childhood Education (3-4 yr. old preschool handicapped students)
Some of the above special programs require specialized classroom space, as
well as music and physical education classrooms, computer labs, etc.; thus, the
permanent capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced.
Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of
time to receive instruction in these special programs and space must be
allocated to serve these programs. Some newer buildings have been
constructed to accommodate most of these programs, some older buildings have
been modified, and in some circumstances, these modifications reduce the
classroom capacity of the buildings. When programs change, program capacity
fluctuates and is updated annually to reflect the change in program and capacity.
Current Standards of Service for Secondary Students
The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and
educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect
the capacity of the school buildings These are subject to change pending review
for Student Achievement Initiative 728.
Class size for grades 7 - 9 should not exceed 29 students.
Class size for grades 10 -12 should not exceed 31 students.
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program.
(continued)
Kent School Distnct So: -Year Capital Facilities Plan _ _ Apni 2001 Page 9
III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (conbn *d)
Identified students will also be provided other education opportunities in
classrooms for programs designated as follows
Computer Labs
English As a Second Language (ESL)
Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Preschool and Daycare
Honors (Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs
Basic Skills Programs
Traffic Safety Education
JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps
Variety of Technical & Applied Programs (Vocational Education)
i e Home & Family Life (Cooking, Sewing, Child Development, etc)
Business Education (Keyboarding, Accounting, Business Law,
Sales & Marketing, etc) Woods, Metals, Welding, Electronics,
Manufacturing Technology, Auto Shop, Commercial Foods,
Commercial Art, Drafting & Drawing, Electronics, Careers, etc
Many of these programs and others require specialized classroom space which
can reduce the permanent capacity of the school buildings In addition, an
alternative home school assistance, choice and transition program is provided
for students in grades 3-12 at Kent Learning Center.
Space or Classroom Utilization
As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized
rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space
during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of
regular teaching stations Based on the analysis of actual utilization of
classrooms, the District has concluded that the standard utilization rate is 95%
for elementary schools and 85% for secondary schools. In the future, the District
will continue close analysis of actual utilization
Kent School District Citizens' Concurrency Task Force
The Kent School District Board of Directors appointed a Citizens' Concurrency
Task Force, made up of a cross section of the community, to assist in defining
the District's Standard of Service To accomplish this task, the Task Force was
directed to study Kent School District enrollment history and projections,
demographics and planned new developments, land availability for new schools,
facility capacities and plans, frequency of boundary changes, and portable
(relocatable) vs. permanent facility issues. A meeting for public input was
conducted and the Final Report of the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force was
approved by the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993
(continued)
Kent School Distnct Su -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 10
III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued) --
The Final Report of the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force included Findings and
Recommendations and provision for the following long term goals:
A Seek to reduce classroom utilization rates to allow more
flexibility on the building level
B Seek to lower average class size from that established for
the 1992-93 school year
C Seek to minimize boundary changes
D Ensure that new permanent facilities are designed to accommodate
portables
1) to resolve current quality concerns
2) to provide for sites for portables to meet Increased demand
E Pursue modernization of current permanent facilities to resolve
current quality concerns and to provide for additional sites for
portables to meet increased demand
F. Pursue modernization or replacement of current portables to
resolve quality concerns
G Ensure that new portables meet current concerns of quality.
H Ensure that all sites for portables be modernized and utilities
be installed to meet quality concerns.
I. The quality of facilities, when using relocatable facilities, is a
major concern of citizens of the Kent School District Use of
relocatable and transitional capacity as well as more specific
concerns and recommendations by the Task Force are further
discussed in Section V I of this Plan
The Task Force also states that it has reviewed and accepted the explanation of
methodology and the conclusions reached in the enrollment Forecasting System
report and recommends that methodology not be changed without Board
approval.
Kent School District Sic -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 11
I V Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools
Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 25,314 students
based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section I I I Included
in this Plan is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current
capacity. (See Table 3 on Page 13)
The program capacity is periodically updated for changes in programs and the
addition of new schools It also reflects the reduction in class size from 26 to 22
in grades K - 3 and 1.25 for grade 4. which was implemented in 1998. The class
size reduction received voter approval in the Educational Programs and
Operations Levy to continue through 2002 The District is currently reviewing
recommendations to meet the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative
728.
Since 1997, Kent Learning Center has served grades 3 through 12 with
transition, choice and home school assistance programs It is located in the
former Grandview School In the western part of the District in the city of SeaTac.
This school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school.
Calculation of Elementary, Junior High and Senior High School capacities are
set forth in Appendices A, B and C on pages 30 and 31. A map of existing
schools is included on Page 14.
Kent School District Sot -Year capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 12
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
INVENTORY and CAPACITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS
E.. At) ,. it• • S a <i y, "' > > :' ,,, „< "'r<<r'i$co GRY; xI�#;r�{r yt�,xiY9#c4 rr
xtx'. ; :,
`' ` z£i<'r<
,
••(
:i :::<`
i:`;' • :;fy
2000-2001
Year
SCHOOL
Opened
ABR
ADDRESS
Program
<a`c$``„ 1 "..c�,• < :ai3r<: #'sapi'>.:',r,�
i��>z3
Capacity1
,
r r#.i"`
'"i>i �:d�'£<"€°iyg9 £
Carnage Crest Elementary
1990
CC
16235.140th Avenue BE, Renton 98058
485
Cedar Valey Elementary
1971
CV
26500Trmberlane Way BE, Comglon 98042
437
Ccmngtan Elementary
1961
CO
17070 SE Wax Road, Covington 98042
516
Crestwood Elementary
1980
CW
25225. 18011h Avenue BE, Comnglon 98042
451
Denial Elementary
1992
DE
11310 SE 248th Slreel, Kent 98031
456
East Hill Elementary
1953
EH
9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031
437
Emerald Park
1999
EP
11500 SE 216th Slreel, Karl 98031
475
Faln,00d Elementary
1969
FW
16600 -148th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
442
Glerindge Elementary
1996
OR
19405 -120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
461
Graas Lake Elementary
1971
GL
28700 -191 id Place BE, Kent 98042
470
Hor¢on Elementary
19W
HE
27641 -1441h Avenue BE, Kent 98042
432
Jenlon , Croak Elementary
1987
JC
26915. 186th Avenue 5E, Covington 98042
447
Kent Elementary
1999
KE
24700- 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032
456
Lake Youngs Elementary
1965
LY
19660 - 142nd Avenue BE, Kant 98042
570
Martin Sonun Elementary
1987
MS
12711 BE 248th Street, Kent 98031
475
Meadow Ridge Elementary
1994
MR
27710 - 108th Avenue BE, Kent 98031
451
Mandan Elementary
1939
ME
25621 -140th Avenue BE, Kent 96042
580
Mllennium Elementary
2000
ML
11919 BE 2701h Street, Kent 98031
461
Neely-O'8nen Elementary
1990
NO
6300 South 236th Street. Kent 98032
437
Panther Lake Elementary
1938
PL
20831 -108th Avenue BE. Kent 98031
380
Park Orchard Elementary
1963
PO
11010 SE 232nd Sireet, Kent 98031
494
Pine Tree Elementary
1967
PT
27825 -118th Avenue BE. Kent 98031 -
499
Ridgewood Elementary
1987
RW
18030.162nd Place SE, Renton 98058
523
Savryer Woods Elementary
1994
SW
31135.228th Avenue BE. Kent MA2
499
Scenic Hill Elementary
1960
SH
26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98031
437
Sons Creek Elementary
1971
SC
12651 BE 2161h Place, Kent 98031
480
Spnngbrook Elementary
1969
S8
20035 -100th Avenue SE, Kent 95031
423
Sunrise Elementary
1992
SR
22300. 132nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042
508
ElementaryTOTAL -
13,184
Cedar Heights Junior High
1993
CH
19640 BE 272 Street, Covington 98042
955
Kent Junior High
1952
KJ
620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032
823
Mattson Junior High
1981
MA
16400 BE 25161 Street, Covington 98042
815
Meeker Juni High
1970
MK
126005E 192nd Street, Renton 98058
909
Meridian Junior High
1956
MJ
23480 -120th Avenue BE, Kent 98031
754
Northwood Junior High
1996
NW
17007 BE 164th Street. Renton 98058
951
Sequoia Junior High
1966
SJ
11000 BE 264th Slreel, Kent 98031
836
Junior High TOTAL
6,043
Kern -Mandan Senior High
1951
KM
10020 BE 256th Street, Kent 98031
1,427
Kerdlake Senior High School
1997
KL
21401 BE 300th Street, Kent 98042
1,632
Kenbldge Senior High
1968
KR
12430 BE 208th Street, Kent 98031
1,311
KenhyoW Senior High
1981
KW
25800.164th Avenue BE, Covington 98042
1,301
Savior High TOTAL
5,671
Kurd Leaming Carter (Grandview) 2
1965
LC
22420 MildaryRoad, Des Molnes 98198
416
DISTRICT TOTAL
25314
t Changes to capacity reflect program changes and continued reduclwn in K-3 class size from 26 to 22
r Kent Learning Center serves grades 3 -12 The budding was formerly known as Grandview Elementary
Kent School DrMW Sc -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 April 2001 Page 13
n
MA
VI
�
:
-=S UZE
`
|�
\|
»
/
:
=k
/
c
EgaE
/
cc=@ca
\//CO
)\f
m
E
@
o o
#moo0
O
CO
CD
\6
, \\
m}EE
/0
@
|
2
•!
O
/
_
3
/
VI
ZZ
a a
05% —ea
_ School District Six -Year aA_Plan
}
,!
�
o
Cu
)0
eGG�
2� s E
Z( E
0 —J
CO))2
CO 2
m®-
,
\
!a
:
-=S UZE
`
|�
\|
d!
:
®/ |./:
\mE./
E
/\ ®3s
B \4i7OL
m}EE
@
|
:
•!
_
3
/
�
!
!
ZZ
a a
05% —ea
_ School District Six -Year aA_Plan
}
,!
�
o
Cu
)0
eGG�
2� s E
Z( E
0 —J
CO))2
CO 2
m®-
,
\
!a
:
-=S UZE
`
|�
\|
d!
:
®/ |./:
E
/\ ®3s
B \4i7OL
|
:
•!
ZZ
a a
05% —ea
_ School District Six -Year aA_Plan
}
,!
�
o
Cu
)0
eGG�
2� s E
Z( E
0 —J
CO))2
CO 2
m®-
,
\
V The District's Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan
At the time of preparation of this Plan In spring of 2001, the following projects are
recently completed or in the planning phase In the District
Millennium Elementary #30 opened in the fall of 2000 It is in the city of Kent at 11919
SE 270th Street
• Construction funding for Elementary #31 and Junior High #8 did not receive voter
approval A Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee will review recommendations for
capital construction needs, potentially to be presented for future voter approval
Junior High #8 was previously planned to fill future needs for grades 7 through 9 The
Board authorized purchase of a site for this school east of 124 Avenue SE at SE 286"'
Street. That site was determined not to be feasible and the property is for sale
• A new site has been purchased at 15435 SE 256th Street in Covington, but timing, size,
and grade level configuration will be reviewed by the citizens' committee Other potential
future sites and facilities are listed In Table 4 and shown on the site map on page 17.
• Some funding is secured for purchase of additional portables as needed The sites have
not been determined
Each of the elementary schools has capacity planned for approximately 540 students
each, depending on placement of special programs Junior high schools are planned
for a program capacity of approximately 1,065 students and Kentlake Senior High (#4)
has a current program capacity of 1,632
County and city planners, decision -makers and school districts are encouraged to
consider safe walking conditions for all students when reviewing applications and
design plans for new roads and developments This should Include sidewalks for
pedestrian safety, pull-outs and tum-arounds for school buses
Included in this Plan is an Inventory of potential projects and sites identified by the
Dlstnct which are potentially acceptable site alternatives In the future. (see rave a)
The voter approved 1990 Bond Issue for $105.4 million included funding for the
purchase of eleven sites for some of these and future schools, and the sites acquired
to date are included in this Plan Funding Is secured for purchase of additional sites
Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction requirements and
some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs.
Based on voter approval of $130 million in construction funding in February 1994,
Millennium Elementary #30 is the last school to be constructed that has received voter
approval At the time of preparation of this Plan in the spring of 2001, input is being
collected from the community as to the best use of Student Achievement Initiative 728
funds. Since most of I-728 funds focus on reduced class size and extended learning
opportunities, Board decisions could dramatically alter class size and school capacity.
Because of the timing of this report, those decisions will be reflected in the next update
of the Capital Facilities Plan.
Kent School Dtstnct Sbc-Year Capdai Famidns Phan Apni 2001 Page 15
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
Projects Planned, Under Construction, or Providing Additional Capacity
Site Acquisitions included
SCHOOL / FACILITY / SITE I LOCATION
I
Status I Completion I Program I new
ELEMENTARY(Numbem aswgned to future schools may not correlate mffi number of existing schools)
Elementary# 31 (Unfunded)' To be determined 2 New Planning TBD 2 540 75%
JUNIOR HIGH
Junior Hgh # B (Unfunded)' To be determined 2 New Planning TBD 2 1,065 75%
SENIOR HIGH
K.Wlake Senior High opened In 1997 and continues to provide capacity
TEMPORARY FACILITIES
Relocatables For placement as needed New
SUPPORT FACILITIES
Satellite Bus Facility (Unfunded)' To be determined 2 New
OTHER SITES ACQUIRED
Additional
Capacity
Planning 2001 i 22.31 each 100%
Planning TBD 2 NIA
Land Use
Type Jurisdiction
Covington area (Near Mattson JH)
SE 251 8 164 SE, Covington 98042
Elementary
City of Covington
Covington area (Scarsella)
SE 290 8 156 SE, Kent 98042
Elementary
King County
Covington area West (Halleson)
15435 SE 256 Street, Covington 98042
TBD'
City of Covington
Ham lake area (Pollard)
16820 SE 240, Kent 98042
Elementary
tong County
HorseshoefKeevles Lake area (West)
SE 332 8 204 SE, Kent 98042
Junior High
tong County
Shady lake area (Sowers, etc)
17426 SE 192 Street, Renton 98058
Elementary
ting County
So King Co Activity Center (Nike site)
SE 167 8 170 SE, Renton 98058
TBD 2
King County
Change, Previous Junior High #8 site SE 286th Street 8124th Ave SE, Kent
Site was determined to be'unbuildable' for a lunar high and property is now for sale
Notes:
' Unfunded facility needs are pending review
2 TBD - To be determined - Some Was are acquired but placement, timing andfor configuration have riot been detemaned.
Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 April 2001 Page 16
Yy w ^ b
:. _ :�. • ,� i 411
X or
- i
r ; -vie y
09,
�'w ter']:' �f Y •�' • M=~ �M •I R 4 1f
.I _(
11 V
•' v1 >Y: �"' +fs=: '3.: s ftirior K I' IE r+ d KS's rtr 7 +l
`'i y .�..•i+.6 `• � I \ �•'\ . a � � Trrt,F•fir Fc.
�lSw We 'iS'i ter .�1'n I T
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
Sites Acquired or Under Construction
S = Senior High she ' �1
J = Junlor High site
E = Elementaryshe , .. •
X = Support Facility she -� 21
Map >•mize rxD Cou^i' PknNrq d Community Development Dw}skti �.
t�j X_vA 2rx1 Csa;r�,+
" e'�—�a
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Page 17
1 _
I
V I Relocatable Classrooms
Currently, the District utilizes 158 total relocatables. Of this total, 87 are utilized
to house students in excess of permanent capacity, 63 are used for program
purposes at school locations, and eight for other purposes (See Appendices A S C D)
Based on enrollment projections and funded permanent facilities, the District
anticipates the need to purchase some relocatables during the next six-year
period
In the Final Report approved by the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993, the
Kent School District Citizens' Concurrency Task Force reaffirmed that, as has
been the practice and philosophy of the Kent School District, portables (or
"relocatables") are NOT acceptable as permanent facilities.
In addition to the Findings and Recommendations regarding portables listed in
Section I I I, "Standard of Service," the Task Force also listed some specific
concerns In regard to use of portables as interim or transitional capacity
The quality of facilities, when using relocatable facilities, is a major
concern of citizens of the Kent School District [And,] that the Kent
School District should consider the following factors and priorities when
using, purchasing and modernizing portables
A. HIGHEST CONCERNS
1. Adequate heat
2 Portable covered walkways, where practical
3. Adequate ventilation
4. Fire Safety
B. MODERATE CONCERNS
1. Adequate air conditioning
2 Security
3 Intercoms / Communication
4. Restroom facilities
5. Storage facilities
6 Crowding / class size
7. Noise
8. Availability of equipment (i a projectors, etc.)
9. Lack of water (use bottled water/portable tanks for drain)
(Continued)
XCnt S ftc! Ms;r'..,i Sm -Year Capel Faidltes ?Ian Apnl 2001 P€V3 10
V I Relocatable Classrooms (Continued)
For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively
accurate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan as well as in
the Concurrency Task Force Report The reports also reference use of
portables or relocatables as Interim or transitional capacitytfacilltles
During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that
all of the District's relocatables will be replaced by permanent facilities During
the useful life of some of the relocatables, the school-age population may
decline in some communities and increase in others, and these relocatables
provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community.
Although the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force has reaffirmed that portables are
not acceptable as permanent facilities, they did recommend that portables, or
relocatables, may be used as interim or transitional facilities:
1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school
facilities.
2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased -
capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet
that demand
3. To meet unique program requirements
Portables, or relocatables, currently in use will be evaluated resulting in some
being improved and some replaced. Quality concerns will be among those
addressed by the next Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee in review of
capital facilities needs for the next bond issue
The Plan projects that the District will use relocatables to accommodate interim
housing needs for the next six years and beyond The use of relocatables, their
impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the
interrelationship between relocatables, emerging technologies and educational
restructuring will continue to be be examined
Kent School District Sm -Year Capel Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 19
VII Projected Six -Year Classroom Capacities
As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study is periodically updated for
changes in special programs and reflects class size reduction in Grades K - 4.
As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 13, the
program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison
charts. (See Tables 5 8 5 A -B -C on pages 21-24)
Enrollment is reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis and funding
apportionment is based on Annual Average FTE (AAFTE) The first school day
of October is set by OSPI as the enrollment count date for the year. Full Time
Equivalent (FTE) student enrollment for October 2, 2000 was 25,237.88 with
kindergarten students counted at 5 and excluding Early Childhood Education
students (ECE - preschool special education) and College -only Running Start
FTEs. (See Tables 5 8 5 A -B -C on pages 21-24)
A headcount of all students enrolled on October 2, 2000 totals 26,543 which
continues to rank Kent School District as the fourth largest district in the state of
Washington.
Based on the enrollment forecasts, current inventory and capacity, current
standard of service, relocatable capacity, and future planned classroom space,
the District anticipates having sufficient capacity to house students over the next
six years. (See Table 5 and Tables 5 A -S -C on Pages 21- 24)
This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There
may be significant need for additional portables and/or new schools to
accommodate growth within the District and class size reduction mandated
under Student Achievement Initiative 728 Some schools, by design, may be
opened with relocatables on site. Boundary changes, limited movement of
relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational restructuring
will all play a mayor role in addressing overcrowding and underutilization of
facilities in different parts of the District
Kent School D*W Sb[ -Year capital FaciMies Plan April 2001 Page 20
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
TOTAL DISTRICT
Permanent Program Capacity' 24,853
New Permanent Construction '
Millennium Elementary # 30 461
Junior High # 8 (Unfunded)"
Elementary # 31 (Unfunded)4
25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 26,379
1,065
540
Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 26,379 26,919
Interim Relocatable Ca acct
Elemenlary Relocatabie Capacity Required
375
375
350
450
500
550
0
SCHOOL YEAR
406
464
754
841
1015
0
29
Senior High Reiomlable Capecdy Required
0
0
0
186
279
558
620
Total Reioa bleCapacrtyRequired 3
781
839
Permanent Program Capacity' 24,853
New Permanent Construction '
Millennium Elementary # 30 461
Junior High # 8 (Unfunded)"
Elementary # 31 (Unfunded)4
25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 26,379
1,065
540
Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 26,379 26,919
Interim Relocatable Ca acct
Elemenlary Relocatabie Capacity Required
375
375
350
450
500
550
0
Junw Hgh Rel c table Capecdy Required
406
464
754
841
1015
0
29
Senior High Reiomlable Capecdy Required
0
0
0
186
279
558
620
Total Reioa bleCapacrtyRequired 3
781
839
1,104
1,477
1,794
1,108
649
TOTAL CAPACITY ' 26,095 1 26,153 1 26,418 1 26,791 1 27,108 27,487 1 27,568
2
TOTAL FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION 25,300 25,405 25,897 26,311 26,664 26,927 27,064
DISTRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 795 748 521 480 444 560 504
' Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated periodically to reflect program changes
2 FTE = Full Time Equivalent Enrollment (ie ECE Preschool Handicapped 8 M day Kindergarten student =.5)
3 2000-2001 total classroom relocatable capacity is 1,767.
4 Unfunded facility needs are pending review
Keret School DISNct So( -Year capital Facilbes Plan Table 5 Apnl 2001 Page 21
KENT -SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
ELEMENTARY
Elementary Permanent Program Capacity 12,307 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184
Kent Learning Center - Special Program416
New Permanent Elementary Construction
Millennium Elementary # 30 461
Elementary # 31 (Unfunded)4
540
Subtotal 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,724
Relocatable Capacity Required 2 375 375 350 450 500 550 0
TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,559 13,559 13,534 13,634 13,684 13,734 13,724
FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION a 13,536 13,547 13,515 13,615 13,672 13,731 13,660
SURPLUS(DEFICIT) CAPACITY 23 12 19 19 12 3 64
Number of Relocatables Required 16 16 14 18 20 22 0
t Kent Leaming Center is a special program at Grandview School serving students in Grades 3 through 12.
The school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school.
2 Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and is updated periodically to reflect program changes
3 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projection (ECE & Kindergarten = .5)
Unfunded facility needs are pending review.
Kent School District Soo Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A Apnl 2Cot rad, 22
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
JUNIOR HIGH
Junior High Pemianent Program Capacity 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 7,108
New Permanent Junior H hConstruction
Junior High # 8 (Unfunded)' 1,065
Subtotal
6,043
b,U43
b,U43
6,043
8,043
/,luts
r,lut3
406
464
754
841
1015
0
29
• -
Junior High Pemianent Program Capacity 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 7,108
New Permanent Junior H hConstruction
Junior High # 8 (Unfunded)' 1,065
Subtotal
6,043
b,U43
b,U43
6,043
8,043
/,luts
r,lut3
406
464
754
841
1015
0
29
Relocatable Capacity Required'
TOTAL CAPACITY 6,449 6,507 6,797 6,884 7,058 7,108 7,137
FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION 2 6,449 6,484 6,789 6,858 7,047 6,976 7,129
SURPLUS(DEFICIT) CAPACITY 0 23 8 26 11 132 8
Number of Relocatables Required 14 16 26 29 36 0 1
Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated periodically to reflect program changes
2 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment / Projection
Approximately 10 Junior High students are served part of the day at high schools for advanced placement.
3 Unfunded facility needs are pending review
April tool Page 23
Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B
Ke
VIII Finance Plan
The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District
plans to finance improvements for the years 2001 - 2002 through 2006 - 2007
The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact
fees. The plan is based on voter approval of future bond issues, collection of
impact fees under the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation
fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act
Kent Elementary #27a, replacement for the original Kent Elementary School,
was the last school for which the District received state matching funds under
the current state funding formula
Millennium Elementary #30 is the last school that has received funding approval
from voters Some funding is secured for additional portables
Planning for future schools is in progress by the District Citizens' Facilities
Planning Committee For the Six -Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are
based on estimates from Kent School District Facilities Department. Please see
page 27 for a summary of the cost basis.
Kent School Dict Sb( -Year Capdal Faailibes Plan April 2001 Page 2-3
i�
R
R
E
LL_
Vl
W
t9
H
N
w
mm
pNp��
N
(spy
N
1
N
�
0
N
w
r
N
=_
n
_
O
N
N
N
x
S
O
8
O
=
co
O
p
_
_
'
O
O
-
N
N
o=
CD
w
_=
z
_
m
f -M
04
_
<Y_
m
N
-
hak
Sg
Sg
a
N
_
N
E
s
•s
=y_
el
w
N
w
L
$
m
p
$
`
pP-
N
N
`
L
w
E
._
S
z
w
x
ccr=
z
o
8
m
Yi
m
i
w
c
G
p
g
N
y
c
w
IL
a
W
c
n
a
d
n
9
LL
m
i�
R
R
VIII Finance Plan - Cost Basis Summary
For impact fee calculations, construction costs are based on the average costs
of the last six elementary schools, and the average costs of the last two junior
high schools and the next junior high school
Elementary Schools
Cost
Average
Meadow Ride #26
$6,996,325
Sawyer Woods #27
$6,463,054
Glenrid a #28
$8,032,895
Kent Elementary #27a
$10,122,095
Emerald Park #29
$10,957,114
Millennium Elementary #30
$12,027,809
Average Cost of
6 elements schools
$9,099,882
<:. ;a:Rth' s s<�;� .. ,
•r.: , •2
Esc;.•' "ssaa:<i i+g.ba43'
Junior High Schools
Cost
Average
Cedar Heights
$14,488,028
Northwood
$17,100,049
Junior High #8
$38,780,438
Average Cost of
3 junior high schools
$23,456,172
The site acquisition cost is based on an average cost of sites purchased or built
on within the last ten years Please see Table 7 on page 27a for a list of site
acquisition costs and averages
The impact fee calculations on pages 28 and 29 include a "District Adjustment"
which is equal to the amount of increase that the impact fee formulas drive out
for this year. The reasons for this adjustment include 1) the district's long-term
commitment to keep impact fee increases as minimal as possible, and 2) our
community's overwhelming support of Initiative 695
Kent Schad Distrid Sbc-Year Capita Paddies Plan A;d 2COi Pzp 27
Z N
W
Y
M m n al el O O O O n N o'1 st a1 1- N n Ln v Cl)
O n O M O O O O r 0 0 w N N O N V M of
c0 V) c0 m n O N O n 0 w n W r W O v O LO LO V)
a r m ao c o vi as 6 m m ao r LK ro m r r cl
o W n n C) Ln r ClW O n r m cn Ln in n 0 C9 co N
r W n a cc1 O r M M N et c0 i0 c7 0 w w in cn co
r
69 Ga. 69 r N r r IA E9 4% Nf f9 cq 69 r �p 69 69 n
N f9 cfi f9 69 rcA Vi 69 Vi E9
O O O O Lo m O < O O 0 OO O N o O O N O O O,
O O O c0 c0 �n cD u7 n O n et '� O a w O F-
t
O O O n'
'ar N cn M6 6 a r O 6 N 6 6 CD
N N m 0 m r v v Ln
`o 0 b
�CJQ�, cA N N Y N h H
E N v = N =
a Oi Or p to i N
m _
L
N Ym w Lc I i U v a�+ Y K U ]2 Y
N N N Y Y Y cW� YpQ C 0 N N N N
C'l Q Q Q pe� N N � N � y� 9 � !!fcc�NWnQQ/� iyy$G � O4mW
4J N rp cW/1 Uw) VWi Vw) cn n co N
N W N
.2
a
a �
m
r
U
o
O
N
0
E
i
cu
O
Z
O
C
E
m
W
2
:3
0)
ami
W
a
o
vz
4)
d
W
H
c
O
3
d
fA
Q
Cc
a
a
m
n
N
E-0
w
Y
m
E
W
-6
cc
E
d
W
w
w
E
°-'
v
O
C
o
U
d
fA
g
w
Y
m
J
m
x
m
N
0
J%
.>
t
CO
fp
S
o
>
0
o
0
t
00
U
m
fA
=
c=€
N
d
=
ami
U
`o
C
7
3
o
2
N
x
W
R
O
a
C
�o
U
r
m
V)
m
W
o
o
-+
c
y
d
co
E
a
m
�
N
y
m
0
o
0
0
(A
Lrn
=
m
w
Y
a
m
A
C
m
m
a
=
m
N
=
f
m
W
A
A
0
L
U
m
0
_C5
N
c7t
tNcpp
m
d
co
'cm
�
d
F
CO
n
CO
N
N
LO
0)
v
Ln
c0
c0
�
y
W
c0
CO
c9
N
t,4
2
a0
S
q
CO
0
N
W
O
M
N
N
r
c0
0
O
Ln
r
N
N
M
.t
M
0
n
N
v
0
O
n
N
M
O
v
O
n
r
r
c7
et
CO
O
N
CO
M
O
a)
ai
L6
N
O
cp
CO
Ln
r
ri
c`9
n
r
N
v
co
a,
N
N
co
NN
N
O
f9
m3
rfA
NCA
69
H
ci!
f9
V,
41%
f9
K
r(A
H
fA
49
M m n al el O O O O n N o'1 st a1 1- N n Ln v Cl)
O n O M O O O O r 0 0 w N N O N V M of
c0 V) c0 m n O N O n 0 w n W r W O v O LO LO V)
a r m ao c o vi as 6 m m ao r LK ro m r r cl
o W n n C) Ln r ClW O n r m cn Ln in n 0 C9 co N
r W n a cc1 O r M M N et c0 i0 c7 0 w w in cn co
r
69 Ga. 69 r N r r IA E9 4% Nf f9 cq 69 r �p 69 69 n
N f9 cfi f9 69 rcA Vi 69 Vi E9
O O O O Lo m O < O O 0 OO O N o O O N O O O,
O O O c0 c0 �n cD u7 n O n et '� O a w O F-
t
O O O n'
'ar N cn M6 6 a r O 6 N 6 6 CD
N N m 0 m r v v Ln
`o 0 b
�CJQ�, cA N N Y N h H
E N v = N =
a Oi Or p to i N
m _
L
N Ym w Lc I i U v a�+ Y K U ]2 Y
N N N Y Y Y cW� YpQ C 0 N N N N
C'l Q Q Q pe� N N � N � y� 9 � !!fcc�NWnQQ/� iyy$G � O4mW
4J N rp cW/1 Uw) VWi Vw) cn n co N
N W N
.2
a
a �
F..
m
r
U
o
O
N
0
E
i
cu
O
Z
O
C
E
m
W
2
:3
0)
ami
W
a
o
vz
4)
d
W
H
c
O
3
d
fA
m
m
E
N
W
C
m;
U'
Cc
a
a
m
n
N
E-0
w
Y
m
E
W
-6
cc
E
d
W
w
w
E
°-'
v
O
C
o
U
d
fA
g
w
Y
m
J
m
x
m
N
0
J%
.>
t
CO
fp
S
o
>
0
o
0
t
00
U
m
fA
=
c=€
N
d
=
ami
U
`o
C
7
3
o
2
N
x
W
R
O
a
C
�o
U
r
m
V)
m
W
o
o
-+
c
y
d
co
E
a
m
�
N
y
m
0
o
0
0
(A
Lrn
=
m
w
Y
a
A
C
a
=
m
N
=
f
m
W
0
L
0
_C5
N
F..
Projected Student Capacity per Facility
Elementary
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
Junior High
1,065
FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED
IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Total 4%
Student Generation Factors - Single Family
Student Generation Factors - Multi -Family
Elementary
0.504
Elementary
0 273
Junior High
0.211
Junior High
0 114
Senior High
0 183
Senior High
0.076
Total
0.898
Total
0 463
Projected Student Capacity per Facility
Elementary
540
Junior High
1,065
Senior High
1,650
Required Site Acreage per Facility
Elementary (required)
Junior High (required)
Senior High (required)
21
27
New Facility Construction Cost / Average
Elementary $9,099,882
Junior High $23,456,172
Senior High $0
See average calculatrons on Pg 27
Temporary Facility Square Footage
Elementary
86,212
Junior High
25,256
Senior High
21,736
Total 4%
133,204
Permanent Facility Square Footage
Elementary
1,460,033
Junior High
743,063
Senior High
849,464
Total
96% 3,052,560
Total Facilities Square Footage
Elementary
1,546,245
Junior High
768,319
Senior High
871,200
Total
3,185,764
Developer Provided Sites / Facilities
Value 0
'Welling Units 0
SPI Square Footage per Student
Elementary 80
Junior High 11333
Senior High 120
Average Site Cost/ Acre
Elementary $0
Junior High $0
Senior High $0
Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost
Elementary @ 25 $78,504
Junior High @ 29 $78,504
Senior High 31 $78,504
State Match Credit
Current State Match Percentage 0.00%
Previous State Match 55 64%
Boeckh Index Factor
Current Boeckh Index $103.34
District Average Assessed Value
Single Family Residence $192,198
District Average Assessed Value
Multi -Family Residence $61,255
District Debt Service Tax Rate
Current / $1000 Rate $2.32
General Obligation Bond Interest Rate
Current Bond Buyer Index 5.07%
Kent School District Sox -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 28
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
Site Acquisition Cost per Single Farmly Residence
Formula ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Fadlity Capacity) x Student Generation Factor
Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence
Formula ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Pernanent(lotal Square Footage Ratio)
Required Sde Acreage
I Average Site Cmt/Acre I
Fadity Capacity I
Student Fedor
"
A 1 (Elementary)
11
$65,213
540
0 504
$669 52
A 2 (Junior High)
21
$45,694
1,065
0 211
$19011
A 3 (Senior High)
27
$0
1,650
0 183
$0 00
1,650
0 183
096
$000
0 898
0
DlsW Adjustment (See Page 27 for explanation)
($1,291.38)
0 898
B —>
A —>
$859 63
Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence
Formula ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Pernanent(lotal Square Footage Ratio)
State Match Credit per Single Family Residence
Formula Boeckh Index x SPI Square Footage x District Match % x Student Factor
$65963
I Canatruct" Coat
I Facility Capacity
I Student Factor I
Footage Rata
SNdent Fedor
B1
(Elementary)
$9,099,882
540
0504
096
$8,15349
B2
(Junior High)
$23,456,172
1,065
0211
096
$4,46130
S 3
(Senior High)
$0
1,650
0 183
096
$000
0
DlsW Adjustment (See Page 27 for explanation)
($1,291.38)
0 898
B —>
$12,61479
Temporary
Facility Cost per Single Family Residence
Kent School District Six Year Capital Facilities Plan
April 2001 Page 29
Formula ((Facility Cost!
Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (temporary /Total Square Footage Ratio)
Facility Cost
Facility Capacity
Student Factor
Fodage Ratio
C 1
(Elementary)
$78,504
25
0504
004
$6331
C 2
(Junior High)
$78,504
29
0 211
004
$2285
C 3
(Senior High)
$78,504
31
0 183
004
$18 54
0 898
C —>
$10469
State Match Credit per Single Family Residence
Formula Boeckh Index x SPI Square Footage x District Match % x Student Factor
$65963
Boeckh Index
SPI Footage -
Dislnd Match % I
SNdent Fedor
$10469
D 1 (Elementary) $1033.4
80
0
0 504
$000
D 2 (Junior High) $10334
11333
0
0 211
$000
D 3 (Senor High) $10334
120
0
0183
$000
$10,14767
Developer Fee Obligation
D —>
$000
Tax Credit per Single Family Residence
Average Residential Assessed Value $192,198
Current Debt Service Tax Rate $232
Bond Buyer Index Interest Rate 507%
Discount Period (10 Years) 10 TC—> . $3,43144
Developer Provided Facility Credit FacBity / Site Value I Dwelling Units
0 0 FC—> 0
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisition per SF Residence
$65963
B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence
$12,61479
C = Temporary Facility Coat per Residence
$10469
Subtotal
$13,57912
D = State Match Credit per Residence
$000
TC = Tax Credit per Residence
$3,43144
Subtotal
$3,43144
Total Unfunded Need
$10,14767
Developer Fee Obligation
$5,07384
FC = Facility Credit (if applicable)
0
DlsW Adjustment (See Page 27 for explanation)
($1,291.38)
Net Fee Obligation per Single Family Residence
53,76246
Kent School District Six Year Capital Facilities Plan
April 2001 Page 29
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENCE
Site Acquisition Cost per Mukl-Family Residence Unit
Formula ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor
Required Site Acreage I A"mge Site Cost/Acre f Fanldy Capacity I Student Fedor
A 1 (Elementary) 11 $65,213 540 0 273 $36266
A2 (Junior High) 21 $45,694 1,065 0114 $10271
A 3 (Senior High) 27 s0 1,650 0 076 $000
0 463
A —> $46537
Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit
Formula ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent / Total Square Footage Ratio)
Tax Credit per Multifamily Residence Unit
Average Residential Assessed Value $61,255
Current Debt Service Tax Rate $232
Bond Buyer Index Annual Interest Rate $ 07%
Discount Penod (10 Years) 10 TC —>
Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value I Dwelling Units
0 0 FC—>
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisition per Mufti -Family Unit
B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit
C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit
Subtotal
D = State Match Credit per MF Unit
TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit
Subtotal
$46537
$6,82685
$5433
$7,34655
$000
$1,09370
$1,09370
Total Unfunded Need $6,25265
Developer Fee Obligation $3,126 43
FC = Facility Credit or applicable) 0
Distinct Adjustment (See Page 27 for explanation) (3796 94)
Net Fee Obligation per Mufti -Family Residence Unit $2,32949
Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2001
$1,09370
U
Page 30
Construction Cost I
Facility Capacity
I Student Fador I
Footage Ralio I
B1 (Elementary)
$9,099,882
S40
0273
096
$4,41648
B 2 (Junior High)
$23,456,172
1,065
0 114
096
$2.41037
B3 (Senior High)
$0
1,660
0076
096
$000
0 463
6 —>
$6.82685
Temporary Facility Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit
Formula ((Facility Cost/ Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary/ Total Square Footage Ratio)
Facility Cost
Facility Capacity
Student Factor
Footage Ratio
C1 (Elementary)
$78,504
25
0273
004
$3429
C 2 (Junior High)
$78,504
29
0 114
004
$1234
C 3 (Senior High)
$78,504
31
0 076
004
$770
0 463
C —>
$5433
State Match Credit per
Multi -Family Residence Unn
Formula Boeckh Index
x SPI Square Footage x Dts;nct Match % x Student Factor
Boeckh Index
SPI Footage
Dislncl Malch %
Student Factor
D1 (Elementary)
$10334
80
0
0273
$000
D2 (Junior High)
$10334
11333
0
0114
$000
D 3 (Senior High)
$10334
120
0
0 076
$000
D —a
$000
Tax Credit per Multifamily Residence Unit
Average Residential Assessed Value $61,255
Current Debt Service Tax Rate $232
Bond Buyer Index Annual Interest Rate $ 07%
Discount Penod (10 Years) 10 TC —>
Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value I Dwelling Units
0 0 FC—>
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisition per Mufti -Family Unit
B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit
C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit
Subtotal
D = State Match Credit per MF Unit
TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit
Subtotal
$46537
$6,82685
$5433
$7,34655
$000
$1,09370
$1,09370
Total Unfunded Need $6,25265
Developer Fee Obligation $3,126 43
FC = Facility Credit or applicable) 0
Distinct Adjustment (See Page 27 for explanation) (3796 94)
Net Fee Obligation per Mufti -Family Residence Unit $2,32949
Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2001
$1,09370
U
Page 30
IX
Appendixes
Appendix A: Calculations of Capacities for Elementary Schools
Appendix B: Calculations of Capacities for Junior High Schools
Appendix C: Calculations of Capacities for Senior High Schools
Appendix D: Use of Relocatables
Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey
Appendix F: Summary of Changes to 2000 Capital Facilities Plan
Kent Scholl DistrM Sic -Year Capel Facilities Plan Apr,i 26'D9
W
J
C3
Y Q
U
ZO
LU
U C
N O
O
>
N =
z
Z
Y U
a
Q
U
rl
m a
E �
Nv pp pp Qi p pp pp pp pp pp NN N YY pp a p 2
p m 8 mj p �
oN
� N
ee o p
0 0 0 0 pp 0 Sj O N 0 0 Sj O O O N N N M1 N N O O H O O ry O p
a i
O O O N O ! N O N O O N N O O O
E 9
m t
U
ry
N
W
a � Q
���y��yppppp�� �(pm 1111/ppm� app�pp ppppb� 8 � � z
S
Z
� Q W
p po p e p a m @Q yffi a
O O fOtl O f7 O Y 0- N 1'! fOV N O O O O O O O N O 0 0 19 N 10 f �8{rC1 Q
N p LL
a � m
m
88 pppyyppp yppy�� 8 ON 1p� 8 8 S fpm 8 1(p� pN 11p� m w
x �
O O 01 N w 0 0 01 } O 0! O T!
N N N N N N ry N N N N r
(7
fl U G W W Q U' S j y > R
2
a i 22 w E m� .0
{gipEm gc ,9®q m Ea -E m 'c �° ymEj 16, SSEEw
U U ci u a w W LL o o x -mi Y 2 2 z G 4 a K N 0 N N r. w
N
A�g
Sy
gN
Y
F
tM•�
n
a
n
b
I%
CIL
Nt
wk
x
W
0
W
u Y
c iS
w E
Y
2
W
E
N
m
ry
�
�
W
p
w
o
0
m
L
ujC
„
R N
n
N
O
O
Q
¢
N
�
U
¢
E is
W
E
,
CL
, @
��
ap8fl
b
i;
ZaLU
•� O
O
N
N
�
O
N
O
r�
aQ
�
p
��
$�
N
tN,l
U
•
N
a
�j
•.
r
r
ui
m
r
V
§
m
m
M
E
m
U
S$
❑
0
O
y
in
Z
Ill
H
a`
U
x
_
E
N
C
❑
❑
_
U
IL
�
a
_>
all
z }
ZLLI
n
w
L
i
•r
<p
y
qq8
N
m
U
i N
n n
S
tp
Q
In
Q
YI
N
p
c
W
n
17
S
O
N
4
=
is
i
LO
C
6
0
0
•, m
_P
x
tO
N
l0
J
N
V
x
c�-
x
u
s
r
O
a
o=
�`
a
c
N
a
o
O
BN
q
N
�'
be
m
Y
a
❑
W
Y
Y
Y
G
O=
O
Q
Q
O
x
L
~
p
�
x
N
Y
H
U
Y
f
1`
2cn
L;
E
n
a
n
b
I%
CIL
Nt
wk
x
W
u Y
c iS
w E
Y
�
�
W
o
m
L
U
¢
E is
CL
�
p
��
$�
N
tN,l
U
•
N
a
�j
•.
r
r
ui
r
x
E
❑
0
O
y
Z
Ill
H
a`
U
W
a
U
�
all
n
L
i
•r
<p
y
qq8
N
m
N
m
U
•` �'+
Q
n
17
S
N
LO
C
6
0
_P
x
x
c�-
x
u
s
r
O
o=
�`
a
c
a
o
O
�'
m
Y
N
❑
Y
Y
Y
Y
L;
a
z w
b k
2
i
LU
0:
km
/ §
§
q
�
&
£
�
§
4
!
!
k
]
§
!
2
\
!
k
2
,
§0
)
§
�
�
/
} /
\
\
\
\
/
f
k
b
|
§
|
a
c
)
' &
E
k
—
k
G
k
7
—
)
/ED
co§
q
�
&
£
�
§
4
rn
a �r�' FF o `r' ncAi m }a' oo m$cmi o N
iq
o 0000000 00000
�'
cmi
O O O O O O O O O O D O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O
G
0
O O O O O O O O O O O O o
O
O'
o 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 D o D o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o
p
�
O O O m O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
r
O
N Q N n O n b m Q V S P b b N h Cf
�.
� r m0 Ol
W
o o Q Q n A n
O O O O o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
h
Op
�
W
� N 1N�! [mY fV ib'1 CNj
0 0 0 0 0
0
(ny
2
N
N
qqq
N O c p m m n O n Q m 00 b N N m n
b m n n r OI A b N N b A m Cl m N 17 m O NOI
n m m b m o n Dr m r n m Q o (o n fn m o
W
Za
A (D Q N ID m
N Q 1n
r m
D D D o o � a o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o o � o � o
0
O
p
C�
I-
n Q N m b n N
o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 D o 0 0 0 0
d
0
N
m eN- n N m N 100 N n b 0 N rn fby m P N Q N O! Yl m A �j m
N
y
Q S m m lA`I m YI Y] Ov
A
m
p m
m
C
A
C
0
m
Q N i m D b m mf P A b n m m N
N
m N N n P b m N m I[l m CI
7
W
D
N
y
N 10 P r m N O m n S m Q1 f0 n H b
O
1p Q n Q 10 m OI b
N N N
Ma
V
P OA1 m n N m n n O S N S m {nil m E r m O
r n
r
N m N N
F D
P fV n m
N
z
r
W J g U 2 8 8 Z N U W N 7 J K 3= 7� q' J W W= U> R
g W w W GG m U m f J U U' q 0 `s S rt W h 2
E G
S 2 2 2 N K Z K K 1�1 W J
N 20 2 W i i O 0 2
(ry
N
m X
C
d
c bi
m
r
E
q
e d
n N g
E
d
@ 3g
E
N
C
E v
_
Vap c Y
i
a m E E
g.
6N Tq N
W
W
Appendix F - Summary of Changes to April 2000 Capital Facilities Plan
The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") is updated annually based on previous Plans In
effect since 1993 The primary changes from the April 2000 Pian are summarized We.
Millennium Elementary #30 opened in August, 2000 Property for Junior High #8 was
determined not feasible and is for sale. An additional site was purchased and is In the
Plan, but grade configuration for that site has not yet been determined.
Changes to capacity continue to reflect reduction in class size for grades K - 4 as well
as annual program changes Further reduction in class size for Student Achievement
Initiative 728 will be reflected in the update for next year Changes in portables or
transitional capacity reflect purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement of portables
between facilities
Permanent facility costs have been adjusted to reflect averages of costs for schools
built most recently. The district expects to receive no state matching funds for schools
in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually Unfunded facility needs are
pending review Impact fee calculations include a "District Adjustment' which is equal to
the amount of Increase that the Impact fee formulas drive out for this year. See page
27a for further explanation
Student enrollment forecast Is updated annually.
The student generation factor survey was updated to reflect developments added or
deleted and changes in student yield Changes reflect no adjustment for occupancy.
Survey data is included as Appendix E
Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors Include -
ITEM
Grade/type
FROM
TO
Comments
Student Generation Factor
Elem
Osis
0504
Updated in 2001 Plan
Single Family (SF)
Jr
0197
0211
Sr
0160
0193
Total
0 892
0 898
Student Generation Factor
Elem
0279
0273
Updated in 2001 Plan
Multi-Family(MF)
Jr
cow
0114
Sr
0 063
0 076
Total
0 428
0 463
State Match
o%
0%
No change since 1999 Plan
Boeckh Index (Cost per square foot)
$10127
$10334
Per SPI
Average Assessed Valuation
SF
$176,547
$192,198
Per Puget Sound ESD
AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts.
MF
$56,029
$61,255
Per Puget Sound ESD
Debt Service Tax Rate
$232
$232
Per King County Assessor
General Obligation Bond Interest Rate
594%
507%
Market Rate
Impact Fee -Single Family
SF
$3,762
$3,792
No change to fee
ImpactFee- Multi -Family
MF
$2,329
$2,329
No change to fee
Kent School District Sic -Year Capital FactIrties Plan APPENDIX F April 2001 Page 35
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
for
Kent School District No 415
2001 Capital Facilities Plan
Issued with a 14 -day comment and appeals period
Description of Proposal
This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single
action
1 The adoption of the Kent School District 2001 Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan by
the Kent School District for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District
2 The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Kent
School District 2001 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of
the King County Comprehensive Plan
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent to include the
Kent School District's 2001 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Kent
4 The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Covington to include
the Kent School District's 2001 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan
Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Covington
5 The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Auburn to include the
Kent School District's 2001 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Auburn
This proposal may also involve amendment of Comprehensive Plans of the Cities of
Black Diamond, SeaTac and/or Renton to incorporate the Kent School District 2001 Capital
Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities Element of that jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan
Proponent. Kent School District
Location of the Proposal
�j1V�D
The Kent School District includes an area of approximately 73 square mite's. *e'l;l
of Covington and portions of the cities of Kent, Auburn, SeaTac and Black Diamond fall. dhj
the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated Kinq County I 1 L
KENT & FED. WAY SCHL DISTRICTS CITY •),= KENT
#CPA-2001-2(G)/KIVA#2012913 PERP J CENTER
(Charlene Anderson, Planner)
Lead Agency.
Kent School District is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not pose a
probable significant adverse impact to the environment An environmental impact statement
(EIS) is not required under RCW 43 21C 030(2)(c) This decision was made after a review of
the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency This
information is available to the public upon request
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2) The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue Comments must
be submitted by 4.00 p m , June 1, 2001 The responsible official will reconsider the DNS
based on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely,
withdraw the DNS If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment
deadline,
Responsible Official 7
F If High, Exkctive Director of Finance
Ken chool Distri No. 415
Telephone (253) 373-7295
Address 12033 SE 256th Street #A-600
Kent, Washington 98031-6643
Appeals of this determination are governed by Board Policy No. 9280 which can be
obtained from Fred High, Executive Director of Finance, Kent School District No 415,
12033 SE 256th Street #A-600 , Kent, Washington 98031 and pursuant to WAC 197-11-680
and RCW 43 21C 075.
Date of Issue May 18, 2001
Date Published May 20, 2001
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
WAC 197-11-960 Environmental Checklist
Purpose of Checklist;
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43 21C RCW, requires all
governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making
decisions An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with
probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment The purpose of this
checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your
proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the
agency decide whether an EIS is required
Instructions for Applicants
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your
proposal Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental
impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions
briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your
knowledge In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own
observations or project plans without the need to hire experts If you really do not know the
answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not knout' or "does not
apply " Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and
landmark designations Answer these questions if you can If you have problems, the
governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them
over a period of time or on different parcels of land Attach any additional information that will
help describe your proposal or its environmental effects The agency to which you submit this
checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably
related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals.
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be
answered "does not apply" In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject
actions (part D)
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project,"
"applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "prepares," and "affected
geographic area," respectively
A BACKGROUND
Name of proposed project, if applicable
The adoption of a six-year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District
The Comprehensive Plans of King County, City of Kent, City of Covington, City of
Auburn and possibly Cities of Renton, SeaTac and Black Diamond have been and/or
will be amended to include the Kent School District 2001 Capital Facilities Plan in the
Capital Facilities Plan Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan A copy of
the District's Plan is available for review in the District Finance & Planning Department
Name of applicant
Kent School District No 415
Address and phone number of applicant and contact person
Kent School District No 415
12033 SE 256th Street # A-600
Kent, WA 98031-6643
Contact Person. Fred H High, Executive Director of Finance
Telephone (253) 373-7295
Date checklist prepared May 3, 2001
Agency requesting checklist
Kent School District No 415
6 Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable)
The 2001 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted in
June, 2001 and forwarded to King County, City of Kent, City of Covington, City of
Auburn, City of Black Diamond, City of Renton, and City of SeaTac for possible
inclusion in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan The Capital Facilities Plan will be
updated annually Site-specific projects have been or will be subject to project -specific
environmental review
7 Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related
to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
The Capital Facilities Plan proposes the construction of two elementary schools and
one junior high school.
S List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal
The above -referenced projects will undergo environmental review at the time of formal
proposal
9 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 The proposed projects are pending review by the Board of Directors and have not
yet received voter approval
10 List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal,
if known
King County and Cities of Kent. Covington and Auburn will review and approve the
Capital Facilities Plan for the purposes of impact fee ordinances and will adopt the Plan
as an amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan element of the King County and Cities
of Kent, Covington and Auburn Comprehensive Plans, Cities of Black Diamond,
SeaTac and Renton may also review and approve the Capital Facilities Plan for the
purposes of any school impact fee ordinances and may adopt the Plan as an
amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan element of their Comprehensive Plans
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses
and the size of the project and site There are several questions later in this checklist
that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal You do not need to repeat
those answers on this page (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional
specific information on project description )
This is a non -project action This proposal involves the adoption of the Kent School
District 2001 Capital Facilities Pian for the purpose of planning the facilities needs of
the District and for inclusion in the Capital Facilities Plan element and possible
amendment of the Comprehensive Plans for King County, City of Covington, City of
Kent, City of Auburn, City of SeaTac, City of Renton and City of Black Diamond. A copy
of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the District's Finance Department office.
12 Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand
the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and
section, township, and range, if known If a proposal would occur over a range of area,
provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available While you should submit
any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed
plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist
The 2001 Capital Facilities Pian will affect the Kent School District The District
includes an area of approximately 73 square miles The City of Covington, and
portions of the Cities of Kent, Auburn, SeaTac and Black Diamond and parts of
unincorporated King County fall within the District's boundaries
B ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1 Earth
a General description of the site (circle one) Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
The Kent School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and
gradients, including all of those listed Specific topographic characteristics will be
identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project.
b What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Specific slope characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit
process for each capital project
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
Specific soil types will be identified during the planning and permit process for each
capital project
d Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Kent School District Specific soil limitations on
individual project sites will be identified at the time of environmental review
e Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed Indicate source of fill
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project -
specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal Proposed
grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of fill materials
will be identified as appropriate to each project
f Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so,
generally descnbe
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of construction projects currently
proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan Individual projects and their erosion impacts
will be evaluated on a site-specific basis Individual projects will be subject to
environmental review and local approval on the time of proposal
g About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
Percentage of impervious cover will vary with each capital facilities project and will
be addressed during project -specific environmental review.
Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
any
Erosion potential on individual project sites will be addressed during project -specific
environmental review Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be
met
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
Various emissions, many construction -related, may result from individual projects
Air-quality impacts will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally descnbe
Off-site sources and necessary mitigation will be addressed during project -specific
environmental review
c Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if
any
Plans for individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will
be subject to environmental review and relevant local approval processes, including
obtaining of any necessary air quality permits, at the time individual projects are
formally proposed Please seethe Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
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, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)'?
If yes, describe type and provide names If appropriate, state what stream or
river it flows into
There is a network of surface water bodies within the Kent School District The
surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and
incorporated in the design of each individual project
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 projects may require work near these described waters, Individual
projects in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental review and
local approval requirements at the time the project is formally proposed
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in
or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected Indicate the source of fill material
Information with respect to placement or removal of fill or dredge material will be
addressed at the time of project -specific environmental review Applicable local
regulations have been or will be satisfied
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions have been or will be addressed
during project -specific environmental review
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location
on the site plan
Each capital facilities project, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to
meet applicable local regulations for flood areas
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 information regarding discharges of waste materials, if any, will be
addressed during project -specific environmental review Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
Ground
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground
water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact ground
water resources Each project will be evaluated during project -specific
environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been or will be
satisfied. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
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
Impacts of discharged waste material, if any, have been or will be addressed
during site-specific, project -level environmental review
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
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying storm
water runoff consequences Each project will be subject to environmental
review and applicable local regulations
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally
describe
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will have varying
environmental impacts and will be subject to appropriate review and local
regulations pnor to construction Information regarding waste materials will be
presented at the time of such review Please see the Supplemental Sheet for
Nonprolect Actions
d, Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts have been or will be
developed on a protect -specific basis in cooperation with the appropriate jurisdiction
4 Plants
a Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site.
deciduous tree alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree- fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants water lily, eelgrass, m0foil, other
other types of vegetation
There are various vegetative zones within the Kent School District. An inventory of
species has been or will be produced as part of project -specific environmental
review
b What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Impacts on vegetation will be determined at the time of project -specific
environmental review at the time the project is formally proposed. Please sea the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site
Specific impacts to these species from individual protects has been or will be
determined at the time of project proposal and will be addressed during site-specific,
project -level environmental review
d Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to
environmental review and local approval at the time of project proposal
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
birds hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
mammals deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
fish bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species observed on or near sites has been or will be developed
during project -specific environmental review
List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site
Specific impacts to these species from individual projects will be determined at the
time of protect proposal and will be reviewed in cooperation with the affected
jurisdictions.
Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain
Impacts on migration routes, if any, will be addressed during site-specific, project -
level environmental review.
Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any*
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be
determined at the time of site-specific, project -level environmental review
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
The State Board of Education requires a life -cycle cost analysis of all heating,
lighting, and insulating systems prior to allowing specific projects to proceed
Energy needs will be decided at the time of specific engineering and site design
planning Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
b Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If so, generally describe
Individual projects of this Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated as to their impact
on the solar potential of adjacent projects during environmental review
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
Energy conservation measures will be considered at the project -specific design
phase and environmental review.
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
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if
any.
Proposed projects will comply with all current codes, standards, and rules and
regulations Individual projects have been or will be subject to environmental
review and local approval at the time of formal submittal
b Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for
example traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises exist within the Kent School District. Specific noise sources
have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review
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 would come from the
site
Normal construction noises would exist on a short-term basis during school
construction There could be an increase in traffic or operations -related noise
which would be addressed during project specific environmental review Please
see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Project noise impacts have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during the
project -specific environmental review Each project is or will be subject to
applicable local regulations
8 Land and Shoreline Use
a What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Kent School District, including residential,
commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, agricultural, forestry, open space,
recreational, etc
Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe
This question will be addressed during site-specific, project -level environmental
review
Describe any structures on the site
Structures located on proposed sites have been or will be identified and described
during project -specific environmental review when appropriate.
Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Structures to be demolished, if any, will be identified as part of the project -specific
environmental review process.
What is the current zoning classification of the site?
There are a variety of zoning classifications within the Kent School District Site
specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project -specific
environmental review
What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
An inventory of comprehensive plan designations has been or will be completed
during project -specific environmental review
io
g If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
Shoreline master program designations have been or will be identified during
project -specific environmental review
h Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area?
If so, specify
Environmentally sensitive areas, if any, will be identified during protect -specific
environmental review
Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
This information has been or will be provided at the time of protect -specific
environmental review
Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
It is not anticipated that proposed projects will displace any people. Displacement of
people, if any, will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any,
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project -
specific environmental review and local approval at the time the project is formally
proposed
I Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any
Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have
been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during
project -specific environmental review
9 Housing
a Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low-income housing
No housing units would be provided
b Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low-income housing
Any impact of project proposals on existing housing have been or would be
evaluated during project -specific environmental review procedures
11
Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts have been or will be addressed
during site-specific, project -level environmental review
90 Aesthetics
a What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas,
what is the principal exterior budding material(s) proposed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific,
project -level environmental review
b What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific,
project -level environmental review.
Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any*
Appropriate measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts have been or will
determined at the time of project -specific environmental review
11 Light and Glare-
a What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project -specific
environmental review
b Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project -specific
environmental review
What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Off-site sources of light or glare have been or will be evaluated at the time of project
specific environmental review.
Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any
Mitigation of light and glare impacts has been or will be addressed during project -
specific environmental review.
12
12 Recreation
a, What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate
vicinity'?
There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Kent
School District
b Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses If so,
describe
Recreational impacts have been or will be addressed during project specific
environmental review Projects in the Capital Facilities Plan may enhance
recreational opportunities and uses
c Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any
Any adverse effects on recreation stemming from individual project proposals have
been or will be subject to mitigation during the environmental review procedure A
school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of
additional play fields and gymnasiums
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 existence of histonc and cultural resources will be determined at the time of
project -specific environmental review
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site
An inventory of historical sites has been or will be conducted as part of project
specific environmental review
c Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project -specific basis
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.
Impact on public streets and highways has been or will be assessed during project -
specific environmental review
23
b Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
The relationship between specific projects and public transit has been or will be
assessed during project -specific environmental review
c How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate?
An inventory of parking spaces and the impacts of specific projects on parking
spaces has been or will be conducted during project -specific environmental review
d Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether
public or private)
The development of new schools may require new access roads or streets This
issue will be fully addressed during project -specific environmental review
e Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe
Use of water, rail or air transportation has been or will be addressed during site-
specific, project -level environmental review
f How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts
g Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any
Mitigation of impacts on transportation has been or will be addressed during project -
specific environmental review
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
The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities
Plan will substantially increase the need for other public services. Impacts have
been or will be evaluated on a project -specific basis
b Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if
any
Schools are built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat
sensors and sprinkler systems
14
16 Utilities
a Circle utilities currently available at the site electricity, natural gas, water, refuse
service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Utilities available at project sites have been or will be identified during project
specific environmental review
b Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the
service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity
which might be needed
Utility revisions and construction needs will be identified during project -specific
environmental review
C SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge I understand
that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision
Signature. 7
Fred gh. Executive Di or of Finance
Date Submitted. May 18, 2001
is
D SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project 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
When 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, emissions to
air, production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, or production of noise?
To the extent this Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be constructed,
and/or renovated or remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more
likely Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks,
access roads and playgrounds will increase storm water runoff, which could enter
surface or ground water. Emissions to air could result from heating systems,
emergency generators and other equipment, and from additional car and bus trips to
and from the school for students and faculty Any emissions resulting from this Plan
should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous
substances, with the possible exception of storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for
emergency generating equipment Noise may result from additional traffic and from
concentrating several hundred children at a new facility, especially before and after
school and during recesses
To the extent this proposal allows additional residential development to occur, these
impacts would also increase somewhat, but it is not possible to quantify those
impacts at this time The impacts would depend on the type, location and
distribution of housing, for example, whether single or multiple family and the
location of the school
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are
Facilities implementing the Plan have been or will be evaluated at the project
specific level and impacts will be mitigated accordingly. Storm water detention and
runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and, depending on the
date of actual construction, may be subject to a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements Discharges to air will be
minimal, and will meet any applicable requirements of the Puget Sound Air Pollution
Control Authority. Fuel oil will be stored according to local and state requirements.
16
2 How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment
Depending on the particular site, construction of facilities may require clearing sites
of plants and loss of animal habitat To the extent residential development is
allowed, additional area may be cleared and eliminated as habitat for animals
There are not likely to be any impacts on fish or marine life, although some water
quality degradation in streams and rivers could occur due to increased residential
development These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during
project -specific environmental review when appropriate
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are
Individual projects will be evaluated and mitigated appropriately on a project -specific
basis, but specific mitigation proposals cannot be identified at this time
How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Any actual projects resulting from this Plan would consume heating fuel and
electrical energy Increased traffic resulting from the construction of additional
facilities would consume petroleum based fuels Reduced traffic resulting from
construction of another neighborhhood school may also reduce amounts of fuel
consumed, but it is not possible to quantify such reduction in consumption at this
time These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project -
specific environmental review when appropriate
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are
Facilities would be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency
standards
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally 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 Plan and facilities constructed pursuant to the Plan should have no impact on
these resources It is not possible to predict whether other development made
possible by this Plan would affect sensitive areas
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are,
No specific measures are being proposed at this time Appropriate measures have
been or will be proposed during protect -specific review Annual updates of this Plan
will be coordinated with King County, Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, SeaTac,
Renton and Black Diamond as part of the Growth Management Act process, one of
the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent
the School District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth
management planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected.
17
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 Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with
existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are;
None are proposed at this time Actual facilities constructed to implement the Plan
will be sited and constructed to avoid or reduce land use impacts
6 How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or
public services and utilities?
This proposal should not create substantial new demands for transportation The
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create an increase in traffic near
new District facilities but also reduce traffic by creating the opportunity for more
students to walk to a closer school The construction of the facilities included in the
Capital Facilities Plan may result in minor increases in the demand for public
services and utilities, such as fire and police protection, and water, sewer, and
electric utilities None of these impacts are likely to be significant The impacts on
transportation and public services and utilities of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level review when appropriate
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time
7 Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or
federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment
The Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment
18
Federal Way School District No. 210
i
2001/02
1 Capital Facilities Plan
Buildin or the- 21St -Centu
KENT & FED. WAY SCHL DISTRICTS
#C PA-2001-2(G)/KI VA#2012913
j (Charlene Anderson, Planner) -
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
2001/02
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BOARD OF EDUCATION
Audrey Germanis
Linda Hendrickson
Charles Hoff
Ann Murphy
Jim Storvick
SUPERINTENDENT
Thomas R Murphy
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
=
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
iii -v
SECTION 1 THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Introduction
1
Inventory of Educational Facilities
2
Inventory of Non -Instructional Facilities
3
Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities
4
Needs Forecast - New Facilities
5
Six Year Finance Plan
6
SECTION 2 MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Introduction
7
Map - Elementary Boundaries
8
Map - Junior Ht'h Boundaries
9
Map - Senior High Boundaries
10
SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Introduction
I 1
Buildm.- Capacities
12-13
Portable Locations
14-15
Student Forecast
16-18
Capacity Summanes
19-23
King County Impact Fee Calculations
24-26
SECTION 4 . -SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 1999/00 PLAN 27-29
ii
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act
(SHB 2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee Ordinances
of King County Code 21A, City of Federal Way Ordinance No 95-249 effective
December 21, 1995 as amended, and the City of Kent Ordinance No 3260 effective
March 1996, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its 1999100 Capital Facilities Plan
as of May 2001
This Plan has been adopted by King County, the City of Kent and the City of Federal Way
and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction by reference This
plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensne Plans of each
jurisdiction To date, the City of Des Moines has not adopted a school impact fee
ordinance
The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas within
which urban growth can be encouraged The Growth Management Planning Council
adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area Line
Maps with designations for urban centers A designation was made within the Federal
Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries King
County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to meet the
region's need for housing, jobs, services, culture and recreation This Plan's estimated
population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption
This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which
requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act This plan is not
intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may prepare
interim plans consistent with Board policies Additional plans will be consistent with the
six year Capital Facilities Plan =
I
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INTRODUCTION (continued)
On October 12, 1998 the Board of Education approved a recommendation to move to a
Pre K-5 elementary, 6-8 middle school, and 9-12 high school grade configuration
beginning in the fall of 2003 or as additional high school space allows This grade
configuration is believed to be more responsive to student needs It will allow for smaller
elementary enrollments with room for lower primary class sizes The middle school
allows two-year preparation for the WA State 7th grade test, matches the Federal Way
Public Schools 8a` grade gateway test, and matches most western Washington districts
Middle schools are also thought to be a better way to address the needs of adolescents in a
period of transition from elementary to school to high school The four-year high school
plan combines the 9-12 graduation credit system, allows two-year preparation for the 10th
grade test, and physically places the high school students together
Federal Way Public Schools must meet the needs of a gro%mg student and community
population The District must be flexible with building, programs and staffing to meet the
needs of the 21St Century, while being financially responsible and sensitive to the current
tax rates. A flexible, cost effecti\ e and educationally beneficial approach that integrates
academics and high tech/high skill preparation is needed By extending the existing debt
and creatively using new and existing facilities, the District can meet these complex needs
with no increase, on average, in local tax rates
Federal Way citizens approved a bond proposal of $83 million in September 1999. This
bond will provide for a comprehensive high school ($44 million), a middle school ($17
million), expansion and improvement of existing schools ($9 million), replacement of
Truman High School ($6 mullion) and other general improvements ($7 million)
Additional planned improvements included in the bond proposal are parking and
pedestrian safety, playgrounds and sports fields, new classroom start-up and music
equipment, information systems and networks and emergency communications.
Planned opening for the new high school is September 2003. Truman High School will
open in the same year There is a study in progress to determine if the new high school
will open with all grade levels or if semors will have an option to stay at the current high
school for the 2003/04 school year This proposal will affect capacity at the existing three
high schools If recommended, this capacity change will be reflected in the Capital
Facilities Plan for the 2003/04 school year
Federal Way Public Schools opened the Internet Academy in the 1996/97 school year
This program currently serves approximately 577 students, 441 are full-time students.
Intemet Academy has grown from about 60 students to the current 577 in four years The
forecast for this school has been reduced from previous projections, as historical growth
has not been a reliable tool to forecast this enrollment A conservative projection using
current numbers is included in this Plan
Intemet Academy is currently operating out of leased space consisting of administrative
areas and a computer lab area This capacity is not included in the analysis of instructional
spaces The facility needs are unique to a program of "distance learners".
IV
i
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Federal Way Public Academy opened to the 1999/00 school year in six portables on the
Illahee Junior High site Two additional portables were added for opening the 2000/01 "
school year to expand the program to include ninth grade students. The school served 180
seventh, eight and ninth grade students this year and will serve 180 — 210 students in
grades seven, eight and nine in the 2001/2002 school year.
M
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1999100 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 1 - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be gathered
to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing
community
This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and
expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. This is followed by
a Financial Plan which shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and
modernization listed
1
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Adelaide
1635 SW 304th Street
Federal Way
98023
Bnsadoon
3601 SW 336th Street
Federal Way
98023
Camelot
4041 S 298th Street
Auburn
98001
Enterprise
35101 5th Avenue SW
Federal Way
98023
Green Gables
32607 47th Avenue SW
Federal Way
98023
Lake Dolloff
4200 S 308th Street
Auburn
98001
Lake Grove
303 SW 308th Street
Federal Way
98023
Lakeland
35675 32nd Avenue S
Auburn
98001
Mark Twain
2450 S Star Lake Road
Federal Way
98003
Meredith Hill
5830 S 300th Street
Auburn
98001
Mirror Lake
625 S 314th Street
Federal Way
98003
Nautilus
1000 S 289th Street
Federal Way
98003
Olympic View
2626 SW 327th Street
Federal Way
98023
Panther Lake
34424 1st Avenue S
Federal Way
98003
i Rainier View
3015 S 368th Street
Federal Way
98003
Sherwood Forest
34600 12th Avenue SW
Federal Way
98023
Silver Lake
1310 SW 325th Place
Federal Way
98023
Star Lake
4014 S 270th Street
Kent
98032
Sunnycrest
24629 42ncLAvenue S
Kent
98032
Twin Lakes
4400 SW 320th Street
Federal Way
98023
Valhalla
27847 42nd Avenue S
Auburn
98001
Wildwood
2405 S 300th Street
Federal Way
98003
Woodmont
26454 16th Avenue S
Des Moines
98198
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Federal Way Public Academy
36001 1s` Ave S
Federal Way
98003
Illahee
36001 1st Avenue S
Federal Way
98003
Kilo
4400 S 308th Street
Auburn
98001
Lakota
1415 SW 314th Street
Federal Way
98023
Sacalawea
1101 S Dash Point Road
Federal Way
98003
Saghalie
33914 19th Avenue SW
Federal Way
98023
Totem
26630 40th Avenue S
Kent
98032
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Decatur
2800 SW 320th Street
Federal Way
98023
Federal Way
30611 16th Avenue S
Federal Way
98003
Thomas Jefferson
4248 S 288th Street
Auburn
98001
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS
Ment School
31455 28th Ave S
Federal Way
98003
Harry S Truman High School
31455 28th Ave S
Federal Way
98003
LEASED SPACE
Internet Academy
32020 1s` Ave S
Federal Way
98003
2
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITOL FACILITIES PLAN
CURRENT INVENTORY NON -INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES
Developed Property
Administrative Building
MOT Site
Central Kitchen
Federal Way Memorial Field
Leased Space
Community Resource Center
ECEAP Offices
Undeveloped Property
31405 18th Avenue S
Federal Way
98003
1066 S 320th Street
Federal Way
98003
1344 S 308th Street
Federal Way
98003
1300 S 308th Street
Federal Way
98003
1928 S Sea Tac Mall Federal Way 98003
3081914 ch Ave S Federal Way 98003
Site # I Location
23 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW
3` S 351st Street & 52nd Avenue S
4 E of 10th Avenue SW Between SW 334th & SW 335th Streets
63 E of 47th Avenue SW & SW 314th Place
71 S 344th Street & 46th Avenue S
72 36600 block of Pacific Highway S
84 3737 S 360th Street
85 16`h Ave S and S 364`" Way
96 S 308th Street & 14th Avenue S
Notes:
Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction requirements.
Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed to house students in the
District
3
1 FEDERAL 1VAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
1
NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES
I
EXISTING FACILITY
FUTURE NEEDS
ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF
FUNDS
Truman High School
Replacement with expansion
(1)
Purchase and Relocate
Interim Capacity
(2)
Portables
Decatur High School, Federal
Expansion
(1)
Way High School and
Thomas Jefferson FIigh
School
Various School Sites
Parking Safety, Network
(3)
Upgrades, Automated
Libraries,
Elementary Playgrounds, High
School Sports Fields,
Emerqency Communications
Notes:
(1) Anticipated source of funds is currently authonzed bond issues.
(2) Anticipated source of funds is Impact Fees
(3) Anticipated source of funds is future bond issues
P
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NEEDS FORECAST - NEW FACILITIES
NEW FACILITY
LOCATION
ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF
FUNDS
Additional Secondary Capacity
Unknown
(1)
Notes:
(1)Anticipated source of funds is state matching funds, Impact Fees, future bond issues and/or
non -voted debt issues
5
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Six Year Finance Plan
ecured Funding
Sources
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Total Resenue
Impact Fees (1)
S1,500000
5531000
5109,490
S2000,000
$3 000 000
511 735 221
$640,490
Land Sale Funds (2)
S100000
S100000
$100000
5100,000
S100000
565 438
$565 438
Bond Funds (3)
S I4 453 801
S10336,424
524 790 225
TOTAL
514,553,801
$10,967,424
$209,490
$100,000
$100,000
565,438
$25,996,153
Unsecured Funding Sources
2001
Slate Match Funds (5)
S10,000000
Bond or Levy Funds (3)
547,355 00
Land Fund Sales (6)
Total ost
Impact Fees (4)
S1,500000
TOTAL
$58,885,000
NEW SCHOOLS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Total ost
New Secondary Capacity (9)
S26,250
5238,529
S2000,000
$3 000 000
511 735 221
517,000,000
New Semor High School (12)
55,952997
$22,180043
5/4370275
5544,354
543047,669
New Senior High School Site (10)
5o
New Secondary Capacity Site (11)
51600000
51,600000
MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSION
ruman Senior High (Alternative)
51600343
53,867,122
$241,908
55709,373
Ex ansion Three High Schools
S3,464500
52,904,500
S411000
S6,780000
Expansion Elementary Schools
5100,000
51 500,000
S1,600,000
TEMPORARY FACILITIES
portables (7)
$884,000
S136,010
5272020
5272,020
51,564,05
OTHER
Safety Improvements (Sa)
51,600000
S1,600,000
School Improvements (8b)
51,300 000
5300,000
$600,000
$2,200,
Famhbes Department
5250,000
5250,000
$250,000
5250,000
5250000
5250,000
$1,500,
OTAL1
$14,167,8401
$30,411,9151
$16,211,7121
$4,430,364
$5,1,-il,0201
532,257,11
$82,601,092
NOTES
1 These fees are currently being held in a King County, City of Federal Way and City of Kent impact fee account. and will be
available for use by the Distinct for system Improvements
2 These funds come from various sales of land and are set aside for estimated expenditures
3 These funds will be used for future projects
4 These are projected fees based upon known residential des elopments In the District over the next six years
5 These funds are projected state matching funds
6 These funds are projected land sale income
7 Riese fees represent the cost of moving and siting existing portables and purchasing new portables The District may choose to purchase new
portables in the years shown Thus estimate may also include the cost of purchasing these portables
Sit These projects have been approved by the Board of Directors and cover most schools These projects do not Increase capactty
These projects intrude parking and pedestrian safety Improvements at 15 elementary schools
86 These projects have been approved by the Board of Directors and cover most schools These projects do not Increase capacity
These projects include school networks rnfomiation and library systems, new classroom start up elementary playgrounds and high school sports fields,
music equipment emergency commumcation
9 New secondary c.,pac¢y, is the middle school component of the bond This is shown as middle school in the impact fee cateulauon
The Drsmcr rs rescarchmg small school salunons char will Increase capacity for smdmts m the secondary grades
10 Site purchase for the high school of 33 2 M was eomprttc In the 2000 calendar year
Il Site pruchase for the middle schoollnew secondary capacity site or sites in be determined
12 Total a pendirures through the M lr000 for the Senor High School is 5 752.331
- 6
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 2 - MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Federal Way Public Schools (the District) has twenty-three elementary schools (grades K-6),
seven junior high schools (grades 7-9), three senior high schools (grades 10-12) and two
alternative schools (grades 7-12) for the 1999/00 school year The Intemet Academy serves
grades K-12 On April 20, 1996, the Federal Way Public Schools Board of Education adopted
the boundaries for these schools In May 1999, minor adjustments to elementary boundaries
were adopted The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school for each
grade level (Harry S Truman High School, Ment School, Intemet Academy and Federal Way
Public Academy serve students from throughout the District) The identified boundaries are
reviewed annually Any change in grade configuration or adoption of programs which affect
school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas
The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility
infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments In the case of most public
facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to that
development School Districts are different If the District does not have permanent facilities
available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries can
be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding facilities
Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken lightly It is
recognized that there is a potential impact on students who are required to change schools
Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not lust one school
It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the construction of a
complete school facility School districts are required to project growth throughout the district
and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the district, not just around a single
development
7
i FEDERAL NAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPTIAL FACILITIES PLAN'
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BOUNDARIES
7
F.
RAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 210
W ® E
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
;e
S
Coda -- 0
Code -- ■
a
'S
10
Adelaide CL
64 Illahee
E 9
16
Bngadoon Bd
66 Kilo
G4
�.
28
Camelot G-5
62 Lskota
D-6
WAY
22
Enterpriae O 9
61 Sacalawea
E 5
w.o��,as cwnnn (253) 945-2000
14
Green Gables A7
70 Saghahe
C41
"1
30
Lake DolloH G4i
65 Totem
G-3
11
Lake Grove DE
8 Ment
F-6
33
Lakeland F-9
2
Mark Twain FA
—
29
Meredith HILI H 5
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
3
6
Muror Lake E-6
5
Nautilus E-5
Code--®
75
Olympic View C-7
21
Panther Lake E-8
80 Decatur
Ob
37
Rainier View F-10
81 Federal Way
E 5
41
Sherwood Forest D9
83 Thomas Jefferson
Gd
24
Silver Lake 07
8 Harry S Truman
FF
•-
26
Star Lake G3
8 Ment
F-6
I
25
Sunnycrest G-2
13
Twin Lakes BE
27
Valhalla GJ
Future School Sites —
7
Wildwood F-5
Surplus Sites —
1
Woodmont F-3
100
Educational Service Center
F-6
99
Future Support Services
E-8 cod. --
97
_
Maintenance-Operehons Tanspo,tahon E-6
D pa.,..
Parks —
n
—
A B
— C
3FF0^R4L
WAY WASHINGTON
and VICINIT
7
W ® E
;e
S
r
a
'S
•S a a i
It
Vz
FEDERALI
WAY
10
w.o��,as cwnnn (253) 945-2000
ti
i3
4
;'8
9
-S.49A—}
I
6
7�
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPTIAL FACILITIES PLAN
Junior High School Boundaries
7
N a
F
RAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 210
B
W e
I
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Ys
Coda-- 0
Code - N
i
S
10
Adelaide C-6
64 Illahee
E9
r
i6
Srigadaon B4
66 Kilo
G-6
2
28Camelot
G-5
62 Lakata
D-6
i
22
Enterprise D9
61 Sacalawea
E-5
WAY
i4
Green Gables A7
70 Saghalie
C-8
w "eaf..meu (253) 945-2000
30
Lake Dolloff GS
65 Totem
G-3
17
Lake Grove DL
8 Ment
F-6
33
Lakeland F-9
2
Mark Twain Fd
29
Meredith Hill H5
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
3
6
Minor Lake EE
5
Nautilus E-5
Code
15Olympic
Yew C7
21
Panther Lake E-8
80 Decatur
C-6
37
Ramer View F 10
81 Federal Way
E 5
41
Sherwood Forest 0-8
83 Thomas Jefferson
GA
24
Silver Lake 07
6 Harry Truman
F-6
+
26
Star Lake G 3
8 Ment
FE
25
Sunnycrest G 2
13
Twin Lakes B-6
4
27
Valhalla G<
Future School Sites —+
7
Wlldwood F 5
Surplus Sites —
1
Woodmant F3
100
Educational Service Center
F-6
99
Future Support Services -
E� _ Cade-- ■
/
97
Maintenance -Operations Transportabon
E-6
Parks–
D p...
x! x.
A B
C
s FEDERAL WAY WASHINGTON and VICIN/T
_
!!
My
7
N a
r
B
W e
Ys
S
r
i
FEDERALI
WAY
w "eaf..meu (253) 945-2000
;.: .A-
5
yro.
h3
3
18
I
6
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPTIAL FACILITIES PLAN
Senior High School Boundaries
-
�
F, AL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 210 ,
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Code Code
10 Adelaide CE 64 Illahee E-9 _
16 Bngadoon 13-8 66 Nilo G4
28 Camelot G 5 62 Lakota D-(5
22 Enterprise D-9 61 Sacalawea E 5 "•`-.l _ -
14 Green Gables A7 70 Saghahe C-8
30 Lake Dolloff G-6 65 Totem G-3
11 Lake Grave D-6 8 Ment FE _
33 Lakeland F-9
2 Mark Twain F4 ~ 5r - •i �;
29 Meredith Hit H-5 SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS J- J 3
6 Mirror Lake E8
5 Nautilus E-5 Code
15 Olympic View C 7
21 Panther Lake EA 80 Decatur C-6
37 Rainier Yew F 10 B1 Federal Way E-5 I • '$ I 6
41 Sherwood Forest DA 83 Thomas Jefferson G4 - —
24 Silver Lake D-7 8 HarryS Truman F-6 •'•
26 Star Lake G-3 8 Ment F-6
25 Sunnycre,t G 2
13 Twin Lake, 1" 4 _
27 Valhalola GA Future School Sites
7 Wddwod F-5 Surplus Sites — -
1 Woodmcnt F 3
100 Educational Sem.Center a, Center FE : t , >`
99 Future Support Servo:ea E8_ Code--� —
97 Maintenance-Operaoona-Transportation E-6 - pao-
D
Parks -
A B
J FEDERAL WAY WASHINGTON end VICINIT
6
F
ce•-
„�...r ,ai
6''..
- -`Ci X`.,
-
'`�J•'
��/\\l/\fes
-
;',i';� t I8
•
'l.e '• e n•
exr
S
r
r0
1rs rY..
'. �, •e
i —
.l
46�
i 9 5651 S
ei•
� y9
I
PRO
FEDERALI
-
an
W®
0
x
= !6
n y
I
vue��esF ,„ (253)
945-2000
IN'
..+ - " -
�H
_,••��
fl
u_,�inE.116111471
F G
,
10
man
6
F
ce•-
„�...r ,ai
6''..
- -`Ci X`.,
-
'`�J•'
��/\\l/\fes
-
;',i';� t I8
•
'l.e '• e n•
exr
S
r
r0
1rs rY..
'. �, •e
i —
.l
i 9 5651 S
ei•
� y9
I
FEDERALI
-
W®
0
x
= !6
n y
I
vue��esF ,„ (253)
945-2000
..+ - " -
�H
_,••��
fl
EI,.ma
F G
10
6
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENWATION
Building Capacities - The Education Program
Portable Locations
Student Forecast - 2001 through 2006
Capacity Summaries
King County Impact Fees - SingIe and Multi Family Units
11
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Building Capacities
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to
ascertain the District's current and future capacity The Superintendent of Public Instruction
establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not take into
consideration the education program needs The District has identified a Building Program
Capacity for each of the schools in the District This Full Time Equivalent (FTE) capacity is
based on
• The number of classrooms available in each school
• Any special requirements at each school
• The contracted class load by grade level
In general, the District's current standard provides that the average class size for a standard
classroom for grade K is 24 students , for grades 1-6 is 26 students and grades 7-12 is 25
students, Gate (Gifted and Talented Education) classrooms are 25 students, individual
education programs classrooms are 15 students, and special education classrooms are 12
students This size is determined based upon current ratios and trends as well as the physical
size of the classroom Educational Program Capacities change every year This analysis is
for the 2000/01 school year The capacity of an individual school could and does change at
any time depending on program changes which may require additional space
Capacity is affected by changes in class size. The Federal Way School District has expressed
a goal of reducing class size Discussion on the exact target classes size is ongoing The
Board of Education has adopted a recommendation to reduce class size for grades K through
grade 2 to a 20 1 ratio This grade level reduction will be addressed in the Capital Facilities
Plan for 2002/03
12
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES -
ELE'NIENTARY BUILDING JUNIOR HIGH BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY PROGRAM CAPACITY
Adelaide
488
Brizadoon
528
Camelot
374
Enterprise
512
Green Gables
494
Lake Dolloff
482
Lake Grove
476
Lakeland
488
Mark Twain
503
Meredith Hill
498
Minor Lake
398
Nautilus
542
Olympic View
450
Panther Lake
514
Rainier View
468
S her A cod Forest
550
Silver Lake
528
Star Lake
502
Sunn}crest
462
Twin Lakes
502
Valhalla
494
Wilde. ood
428
Woodman
450
1998 TOTAL
11,131
Elementar) Average 1 484
Notes
Illahee
821
Kilo
854
Lakota
741
Saca awea
828
Saohalie
768
Totem
709
1998 TOTAL
4,721
Junior High Average 787
SENIOR HIGH BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY
Decatur 1,230
Federal Way1,416
Truman High School
Thomas Jefferson
1,409
1998 TOTAL
1998 TOTAL
4,115
Senior High Average 1,372
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY
Merit School1
Truman High School
194
1998 TOTAL
210
Elementary program capacities are based on the number of teaching stations
in the building, contracted class size, and special use classrooms in place
dunng the 99/00 school year All available instructional space is calculated
Secondary program capacities are based on peak loading
The calculation is based on 25 students per available
teaching stations
Capacities were calculated by the Study and Survey Committee and amended for changes in instructional programs
13
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Portable Locations
The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic
education It is not efficient use of District resources to build a school ".ith a capacity for
500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates throughout the
year and from year to year
Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students until
permanent facilities can be built or boundary adjustments can be made When permanent
facilities become available, the portable(s) is either moved to another school for an interim
classroom, or used for other purposes such as storage or child care programs Some portables
may not be fit to move due to age or physical condition In these cases, the District may
choose to buy new portables and surplus these unfit portables It is the practice and
philosophy of Federal Way Public Schools that portables are not acceptable as permanent
facilities
The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities used for temporary
educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools
14
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
PORTABLE LOCATIONS
PORTABLES LOCATED PORTABLES LOCATED
AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AT SENIOR HIGHS
PORTABLESLOCATED
AT JUNIOR HIGHS
usm�rnon.LL
NON
urrcucrtos.u.
Adelaide
3
1
Brioadoon
1
Truman
Camelot
1
1
Enterprise
3
Green Gables
1
Lake Dolloff
2
Lake Grove
2
Lakeland
2
Mark Twain
3
2
Meredith Hill
3
Mirror Lake
4
Nautilus
1
Olympic View
2 '
Panther Lake
3
Rainier View
3
Sherwo9d Forest
4
Silver Lake
4
Star Lake
4
Sunn crest
1
1
Twin Lakes
2
1
Valhalla
2
Wildwood
4
Woodmont
3
TOTAL
58
2
PORTABLESLOCATED
AT JUNIOR HIGHS
15
a sraurno.n�
No"
INMVMonu
Federal Way Public Academy
8
1
Blahee
3
Truman
Kilo
3
1
Lakota
3
Saca awes
1
Saghalie
4
Totem
5
TOTAL
27
2
15
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT SUPPORT FACILITIES
MOT
no\
wsrnurnonnL IhMUC ONAL
Decatur
4
Federal Way
1
Thomas Jefferson
Truman
4 1
Ment
4
TOTAL
13 1
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT SUPPORT FACILITIES
MOT
1
Clothing Bank
1
TOTAL
2
HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES
Mirror Lake 1
Sherwood Forest 1
Total 2
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Student Forecast
Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development Enrollment
projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget preparation The
majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the forecasted number of students
Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are also made on the basis of projected
enrollment Other expenditures and certain revenue projections are directly related to
enrollment projections
Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department
Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school -building totals, grade level
and program level to include vocational and special education students
The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis Cohort survival is the analysis of
a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time In a
stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades This analysis uses historical
information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This method does not
trace individual students. it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each grade level The
district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted factors to study
several projections Because transfers in and out of the school system are common, student
migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases survival rates Entrygrades
(kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis The district collects information on
birth rates within the district's census tracts, and treats these statistics as a cohort for
kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years
The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting student
enrollments The resultant forecasted -enrollments are evaluated below
The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts These are
forecast of enrollment for one year The projections vary depending on the number of years
of historical information and how they are weighted
A second method is a projection using an enrollment projection software package that allows
the user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these projections
for the district level The Enrollment Master M software provides statistical methods
including trend line, standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of these methods
This software produces a five-year projection of school enrollment.
Short-term budget projections may be more conservative than the standard grade progression
model For the 2001/02 school year, the district chose the Enrollment Master projection
using standard grade progression model. Standard grade progression is a reasonably accurate
method for the near term future when the near future looks much like the near past.
16
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Long range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the cohort
survival method The cohort method of analysts becomes less reliable the farther out the
projections are made The Federal Way School District long-range projections are studied
annually The study includes information from the jurisdictional demographers as they
project future housing and population in the region The long-range projections used by
Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student populations as the
projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the State of Washington
Growth Management requires junsdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years The
Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the vanousjunsdictions
comprising the school district geography These projections create a vision of the school
district in the future
17
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Full Time Equivalent
Enrollment History
and Projections
Simplified FTE (K Headcount =
5 FTE, Junior High FTE-- 989 Headcount,
Semor High FTE =
932 Headcount)
Total K -12
Percent
School Year
Elementary
Junior FLgh
Senior Mgh
FTE
Change
1994-95
10,505
4,626
3,758
18,889
1995-96
10,689
4,838
3,796
19,323
227c
1996-97
10,863
4,930
3,913
19,706
199°
1997-98
11,123
5,073
4,082
20,278
28%
1998-99
11,480
5,080
4,120
20,680
199°
1999-00
11,622
5,110
4,348
21,079
19%
2000-01
11,640
5,300
4,390
21,330
12%
P2001-02
11,593
5,404
4,425
21,422
0490
P2002.03
11,579
5,593
4,423
21,595
08%
* P2003-04
91660
5,558
6,491
21,709
0590
P2004-05
9,643
S541
6,735
21,919
1090
P2005.06
9,637
5,575
6,839
22,051
0690
P2006-07
9,585
5,582
6,956
22,123
03%
* New Configuranog
Elementary K-5
Middle School 6-8
High School 9-12
Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast
23,000 30%
22,000
25%
21,000
�
20%
'0 20,000
9
�
= 19,000
15%
�
C
a
°
u 18,000
0
10%
17,000
05%
16,000
15,000
00%
JO !O l0 J� l� PO q q b A A 4
S � O O O0 O �O �O �O a0 a0 a0
D ,S O A O
6, Cob, b' ZP, s9 bo b,
School Year
D FTE t Percent of Change
KU-
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Capacity Summaries
All Grades, Elementary, Junior High, and Senior High Schools
The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student Forecast
information The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled facilities and
why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or mtenm measures
The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summanzmg the entire
District, and then evaluating capacity vs number of students at elementary, Junior high, and
senior high levels individually.
The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in
place each year
19
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY -ALL GRADES
19,994 1 19,968 120,242 1 1 21,686 121,660 1 21,634 122,434
ENROLLMENT
Basic FTE Enrollment
Actual
21,422
21,595
Projected
- -
1 22,051
22,123
CAPACITY
2000
2001
2002
z
2003
2004
2005
2006
BUILDING PROGRAM
21,008
21,100
21,273
21,387
1 21,597
1 21,729
CAPACITY
19,994
19,994
19,968
12,725
-10,242
21,686
21,660
21,634
12,975
Add or subtract changes to capacity
c
Special Education Changes
(26)
(26)
c
(26)
(26)
(26)
Truman High modernization and expansion
106
Increase Capacity at Three High Schools
300
-4
New Middle School
800
New High School
c
1,364
a
19,994 1 19,968 120,242 1 1 21,686 121,660 1 21,634 122,434
ENROLLMENT
Basic FTE Enrollment
121,330
21,422
21,595
21,709
21,919
1 22,051
22,123
Internet Academy Enrollment
322
322
1
322
322
322
322
322
Basic FTE Enrollment without Lntemet Academy
21,008
21,100
21,273
21,387
1 21,597
1 21,729
21,801
RPLUS OR
SUPROGRAM CHAP ACI YD) I (1,014) (1,132) (1,031) 1 299 I 63 (95) I 633
RELOCATABI.R CAPACITY
Current Portable Capacity
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,725
2,725
2,7752,875
Add/Subtract Portable Capacity
1
1
1
1
Add New Portable Capacity
1,386
1,268
325
3,024
50
100
100
Adjusted Portable Capacity
2,400
2,400
12,725
2,725
2,775
2,875
12,975
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
1
1
1
1
CAPACITY
1,386
1,268
1,694
3,024
2,838
2,780
3,608
20
I
14
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY
BUILDING PROGRAM
CAPACITY
1 Special Education Changes
ENROLLMENT
CAPACITY SUMMARY - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
r ctuw
-- rtujct,tcu - -
2000
2001
2002
7
2003
2004
2005
2006
69
69
69
1,450
69
69
69
11,131
11,131
11,105
z
11,079
11,053
11,027
11,001
9,568
9,516
c
C]
(26)
(26)
(26)
(26)
(26)
a
11,131
11,105
11.079
1 11,053
11,017
1 11,001
11,001
Basic FTE Enrollment
11,640
11,593
11,579
9,660
9,643
9,637
9,585
2 Internet Academy
69
69
69
1,450
69
69
69
69
Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy
11,571
11,524
11,510
9,591
9,574
9,568
9,516
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
1
1
1
1,450
1
1,450
1,450
PROGRAM CAPACITY
(440)
(419)
(431)
1,450
1,462
1,453
1,433
1,485
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 3
Current Portable Capacity
Add/Subtract portable capacity
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
Adjusted Portable Capacity
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
1,450
SURPLUS OR RWHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
1
1
CAPACITY
1,010
1,031
1,019
2,912
2,903
2,883
2935
NUIES•
1 Add Programs 3 ECEAP, 1 SBD (Severely Behavioral Disordered) and 1 Pre -School Prod am
This reduces Basic Education capacity in the school years indicated
2 Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities
3 Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and
other adtrnnistrative techniques which can be used to temporarily
house students until permanent facilities are available This is a
calculated number only The actual number of portables that will be used
will be based upon actual population needs
21
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY
BUILDING
CAPACITY
1 Add New Secondary Capacity
ENROLLMENT
CAPACITY SUMMARY - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Basic FTE Enrollment
Actual
5,404
5,593
Projected
- -
5,575
5,582
2 Internet Academy
2000
2001
2002
z
r.
2003
2004
2005
2006
Basic FTE Enrollment v ithout Internet Academy
5,160
5,264
5 453
5,418
5,401
5,435
5,442
4,721
4,721
4,721
800
4,721
4,721
4,721
4,721
800
-
800
r
4,721
4,721
4.--12 1
F -4772-1-T-4.721
4,721
5,521
Basic FTE Enrollment
5,300
5,404
5,593
5,558
5,541
5,575
5,582
2 Internet Academy
140
140
140
1
140
140
1
140
140
Basic FTE Enrollment v ithout Internet Academy
5,160
5,264
5 453
5,418
5,401
5,435
5,442
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
675
675
675
800
1
1
800
PROGRAM CAPACITY
- (439)
1 (543)
1 (732)
(697)
(680)
(714)
79
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 3
Current Portable Capacity
675
675
675
800
800
800
800
Add/Subtract portable capacity
1
1
Add new portable capacity
236
132
125
103
120
86
879
Adjusted Portable Capacity
675
675
800
800
800
1 80o
800
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
1
1
CAPACITY
236
132
68
103
120
86
879
NOTES:
1 Add new muddle school
2 Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities
3 Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and
other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily
house students until permanent facilities are available This is a
calculated number only The actual number of portables that will be used
will be based upon actual population needs
22
FEDERAL VN AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
CAPACITY
BUILDING PROGRAM
CAPACITY
Add or subtract changes incapacity
1 Truman Remodel
2 Add Capacity to Three High Schools
3 Add New High School
ENROLLMENT
t ULUi
- - rtv]cowu - -
2000
2001
2002
z
S
2003
2004
2005
2006
113
113
113
1
113
113
1
113
4,325
4,325
4,325
n
4,625
6,095
6,095
6,095
6,726
6,843
Adjusted Portable Capacity
325
325
1 525
525
575r
675
775
f]
106
300
ca`
1,364
Basic FTE Enrollment
4,390
41425
41423
61491
61735
6,839
61956
4 Internet Academy
113
113
113
1
113
113
1
113
113
Basic Ed vnthout Internet Academy
4,277
4,312
4,310
6,378
6,622
6,726
6,843
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
325
325
325
525
1
1
1
PROGRAM CAPACITY
1 48
13
315
(283)
(527)
(631)
(748)
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 5
Current Portable Capacity
325
325
325
525
525
575
675
Add\Subtract portable capacity
1
1
1
7
Add new portable capacity
373
338
200
242
50
100
100
Adjusted Portable Capacity
325
325
1 525
525
575r
675
775
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
1
1
1
7
CAPACITY
373
338
840
242
48
44
27
NOTES.
1 Truman High School modernization and expansion
2 Add capacity to three existing high schools
3 Add new hish school
4 Internet Academy students are mcluded in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities
5 Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and
other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily
house students until permanent facilities are available This is a
calculated number only The actual number of portables that will be used
will be based upon acmal population needs
23
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Kine Countv. the Citv of Federal Way, and the City of Kent Impact Fee Calculations
Single and Multi -Family Residences
Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees to
help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities
To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was
established This formula can be found in King County Code 21A and was substantially
adopted by the City of Federal Way and Kent The formula requires the District to establish a
"Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be added to a school
district by each new single or multi -family unit and to gather some standard construction
costs, which are unique to that district
- STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS
Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for single
faintly units and multi -family units The factors used in the 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan
were derived usins actual generation factors from single family units and multi -family units,
' which were constructed in the last five (5) years
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee
Calculation for single family and multi -family units based on King County Code 21A and the
Growth Management Act.
i
➢ Temporary Facility Cost is the average cost of a portable purchased within the last 12
months
➢ Site Acquisition Costs is the per acre cost of the last school site purchased (site 85), this
is a negotiated purchase price
Plan Year2001/02 Plan Year1999/00
Collection Year 2001/02 Collection Year 2000/01
Single Family Units $2,616 $2,710
Multi -Family Units $ 896. $ 830
24
mr>ommmonnm
(gym
c+>
om
m
m N o
`r
�
m
n
rn
f�
o
m
a
c7
c
o
v
m
m
m
o
m
n
ev
~NLLm�N�am0w�
m
00000
0000
[0J
2
mrn
moaawo�o�
omv
'O
M
m
y
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
L
d
N
O
O
M
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
m
N
R
b
N
N
m d 0
c0
V
(!�J
01
0
0
0
0
0
(m0
m
N
W
b
L V
d d
m
n
o
0
o
m
rn
a
N LL
0-
m
v
O
N
N--
D
a
0
O
0000000000
O
N
m
N
N
Cl
O
O
o!
(7
O
�'�'
C9
O
d N
N
•f
N
N
('/
�"]
u]
N
7
N
W
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
L
O O) N
E c «
Z (N to
O
`O OC N
UL
Ecn?
� m
Z 9
O � m
E E
m m
Z ru
T m
o E
c
L l/ =
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
E 3
z � ❑
o E H
(i -
m
m
v
d
N
N
N
N N
N
0
�Im
d
Ym]
�
Z c ❑
w
c
F,
o
m
R
o
mi
m
O
N
=
a
3
m
o
m~
c
w
(n
c
o¢
d
W
_
an
d
m
m
R
of
❑
m
c
y
m
m
m
L
>O�SmiA
UJ
C7
mFL-
0
o
m
m
m
n
n
m
m
0
o
m
O m
m
m
rn
m
m
m
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
School Site Acquisition Cost,
Facility
Acreage
Elementary
Middle School
Sr Hioh
LVIPACT FEE
Student
Cost/ Facility Factor
Acre CaDacity SFR
Student
Factor Cost/ Cost/
MFR SFR MFR
000
20 00
40 00
_ 50
580,000
580 000
484
800
1 364
03227
0 1525
0 1454
_0.0840
0 0266
0 06761
$0 $0
S305 $53
5341 $159
TOTAL
5646 $212
School Construction Cost:
SO
$17,000,000
-------------
543,800,000
......._ 484
800
--------------------••----•--
1,364
Student
9c Perm Fac /
Facility
Facility
Factor
Total So Ft
Cost
Canacity
SFR
Elementary
Middle School
Sr Hi -
Student
Factor Cost/ Cost/
MFR SFR MFR
965690
96562
-------------
96 5690
SO
$17,000,000
-------------
543,800,000
......._ 484
800
--------------------••----•--
1,364
03227
01525
0 1454
00840
00266
--•----....---
0 0676
50 $0
53,129 $546
$4,508 52,096
TOTAL
$7,638 $2,642
Temporary Facility Cost: Student Student
%Temp Fac Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/
Total So R Cost Size SFR MFR SFR MFR
Elementary
Middle School
Sr High
34490
3 4490
3 4490
SO
_ $65:00
_
$68,005
25
25
-------------
2�
0 3227
015251
-----------------
014541
0 0840
0 0266
------------ -
0 0676
$0 50
S14 S2
- S14 S6
TOTAL
S28 59
State Matching Credit Calculation
Boeck Cost/ Sq Ft State
So Ft Student Match
Elementary
Middle School
New Sr High
Student Student
Factor Factor Cosd Cost/
SFR MFR SFR MFR
$103 55
....--•---••-
5103 So
.............
-------------.............._..-•--••---
d
0 00%
0 00%
.......
6174%
0 3227
0 1525
....—•--•--------------...••--
01454
0 0840
-------•••-- -
0 0266
00676
$0 SO
$0 SO
$1,115 $519
Total
$1,115 $519
Tax Payment Credit Calculation
Average Assessed Value (April 2001)
Capital Bond Interest Rate (May 200 1)
Net Present Value of Average Dwelling
Years Amortized
Property Tax Levy Rate
Present Value of Revenue Stream
SFR MFR
$176,267
549.627
2590
3_E
5 2590
51,344,713
$378.596
10
10
SI 46
5146
$1,963
$553
26
Single Family
Multi -Family
Residences
Residences
Mitigation Fee Summary
Site Acquisition Cost
$
646
S
212
Permanent Facility Cost
S
7,638
S
2,642
Temporary Facility Cost
S
28
S
9
State Match Credit
S
(1,115)
S
(519)
Tax Payment Credit
$
(1.963)
S
(553)
Sub -Total
S
5,233
S
1,791
50% Local Share
$
2,616
S
896
Impact Fee
$
2,616
S
896
26
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 4
SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2000/01 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 1999/00 Capital
Facilities Plan The changes between the 1999/00 Plan and the 2001/02 Plan are listed
below
OVERALL PLAN NAME CHANGE
This Capital Facilities Plan is designated as the 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan to align with
the naming conventions of other King County School Districts Federal Way practice had
been to name the plan for the school year in which it was adopted The name is now changed
to reflect the year in which the fees will eo into effect
SECTION I - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
Leased facilities now include ECEAP offices The Security Department has been re -located
to the Administration Building
INVENTORY OF UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY
Site 85 is added to inventory — purchased site for the new senior high school.
Site 9 is removed from the inventory, this site has been sold
SIX YEAR FINANCE PLAN
The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 2001/2006
27
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001102 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
CAPACITY
The average capacity of senior high schools is increased from 1311 to 1372 This change is a
result of analysis of current building use and programs in place for the 2000/01 school year
Building Program Capacities are found on page 13.
PORTABLES
The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables
purchased Portable Locations can be found on page 15
I STUDENT FORECAST
The Student Forecast now covers 2001 through 2006 The new forecast reflects a decreased
rate of growth Enrollment history and Projections are found on page 18
CAPACITY SUNIlVL9RY
The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities and
student forecast New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown as
increases to capacity Capacity Summaries are found on pages 20-23.
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION - KING COUNTY CODE 21A
The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The adjustment
made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee between the 1999/00
Capital Facilities Plan and the 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan can be found on page 29
Off
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2001/02 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 1999/00 TO 2001/02
STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS
Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a
period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation The changes in
student Generation factors between the 1999/00 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2001/02
Capital Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age
of the developments Student allocation is also changed to reflect the middle school
configuration The Student General worksheet is found on page 25
IMPACT FEE
Item From/To Comment
Percent of Permanent Facilities 96 70 to Report #3 OSPI
96.56%
Percent Temporary Facilities
3.30% to Updated portable inventory
3.44%
Temporary Facility Cost
$60,374. to
Updated cost of most recently
$68,005.
purchased portables
Boeck Cost/Sq Ft
$10139 to
Change per OSPI
$103.55
State Match
60 62% to
Change per OSPI
61.74%
Average Assessed Value
SFR -
Per Puget Sound Educational Service
$163,436 to
District (ESD 121)
$176,267
MFR - $45,536
To $49,627
Capital Bond Interest Rate 5 94% to Market Rate
5.25%
Property Tax Levy Rate $142 to King County Treasury Division
$1.46
29
Mission
Federal Way Public Schools is obligated to
educate all students in academic knowledge,
- - skills, abilities and responsible behavior to
be successful, contributing members of a
free society.
Vision: Every Student a Reader
* All 3rd graders reading at grade level by 2004
* All 10`' graders reading at grade level by 2006.
* *90% of ALL students reading at grade level by 2009
Federal Way Public Schools
31405 19' Avenue S
Federal Way, Washington 98003-5433
(253)945-2000
This document is published by the
Business Services Department of the
Federal Way Public Schools
June 2001
I
FEDERAL I--
WAY
i UBLIC SCHUC
FEDERAL
WAY .
August 21, 2001
Charlene Anderson
City of Kent Planning
220 South Fourth Avenue
Kent WA 98032
Dear Charlene,
RECEIVED
AU"u % : 2001
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING SEWICES
Enclosed are 14 copies of the Federal Way School District 2001102 Capital Facilities
Plan This plan is scheduled to go to the Federal Way School District Board for adoption
at the August 27, 2001 regular Board Meeting
I ha\ e also enclosed a copy of the DNS that was published in May A copy of the DNS
was -sent at that time to the City of Kent to the attention of Jim Hams
The schedule of expenditures for 2000 is also included in this package
Please let me know if you have any questions about the changes in the CFP for Federal
Way Schools My direct line is (253) 945-2071 or email at owalker@Alsd wednet edu
Sincerely,
Gen Walker r„
Business Services GIS Specialist Ctl j � J
KENT &FED. WAY SCHL DISTRICTS SSP 1 2I
#CPA-2001-2(G)/KIVA#2012913 CITY 0'z uc 1T
(Charlene Anderson, Planner) P�.4P,71T C�
Phone (253) 945.2000 • 31405 18th Avenue South • Federal Way, WA 98003-5433 9 www.fwsd.wednet edu
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
IMPACT FEES - CITY OF KENT
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - 2000
RECEIVED
AUG 2 U 2001
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING SErWICES
Invoice Date
Date
Warrant # Project Vendor Expenditure Amount
Type
Sep -00
40972 Portables - Sunn crest KCDA Carpet $ 3,96856
Sep -00
40494 Portables - Sunn crest KCDA 1 Single Portable $ 38,755 23
Totals $ 42,723.79
ii3��. A IC—J
��7 o � 2Z j
CITYrFKENT
754627/2
State of Washington,
Counties of King and Snohonush,
Jesus F Martinez being duly sworn, says that he/she is the Authorized Agent of Seattle Times
Company, publisher of The Seattle Times and representing the Seattle Post-Intelligencer,
separate newspapers published daily in King and Snohorrush Counties, State of Washington
that they are newspapers of general circulation in said Counties and State, that they have been
approved as legal newspapers by orders of the Supenor Court of King and Snohormsh
Counties, that the annexed, being a classified advertisement, was published in
c
a I i u a
The Seattle Times 05/18/01
And not in a supplement thereof, and is a true copy of the notice as it was pnnted and/or
distributed in the regular and entire issue of said paper or papers dunng all of said period, and
that said newspaper or newspapers were regularly distributed to its subscnbers dunng all of
said period
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 22nd day of May, 2001
uric ,�S
Notar} Public 1 nd for the State of Washingon residing at Scattic
Dehrminatldn vl = A. ` ` ON,I I ✓�(`� 1,
Federm Way Public la n Ors ao ( CC.•�t'•�? V'
,"Shied a O (DNS) ur ar rqn Q Facilities ploo
i
sign 1-110(e (W t under WAC s i
191 -I1 -3a1(3) W the Dnlnct's
Afterreviewl& a camPl.lW,r,l. �u y
ranmenMl checklist e F artier
nOV Pu Mn oS Nle, the Federal rri Q¢ A:
Way Public Schools has tleter-
mineEthePraaasolswlllrWyerse / rrrl i�•04• _
a Probable sI9nlfil-olM-0 adverse ! `h 1„ttttvcv.•• -
mvironmental ImPoet an the,
environment -till q OF 1F1 PS
CPheckllsl are waliablle hom I1N i `
Federal Way Public Schools, li\\\\.\N `
3145 IBM Ave S.. Federal Way,
ON
musWA �y
anlHed m salerlthan 5
'Pm Jane l to Ms. Jer`Carlmn at
the above address
Date al Publication-
N�v is, =I
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE RE CE I VE D
Issued with a 14 Day comment and appeals period
AUG 2 3' -2001
Description of ProposalCITY OF KENT
P PLANNING SErMCES
This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single action
1 The adoption of the Federal Way Public Schools' 2001/02 Six Year Capital
Facilities Plan by the Federal Way Public Schools for the purposes of planning for the facilities
needs of the District
2 The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan by King Count} to
include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital
Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan
3 The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Federal Way and the
City of Kent to include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan as part
of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City of Federal Way and the City of Kent's
Comprehensive Plan
This proposal may also involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the Cities
of Auburn, and Des Moines to incorporate the Federal Way Public Schools' 2001/02 Capital
Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan
Proponent- Federal Way Public Schools
Location of the Proposal
The Federal Way Public Schools District includes an area of approximately 35 square
miles The cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines andAubum fall within the District's
boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County
Lead Agency:
Federal Way Public Schools is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse environmental impact on the environment An environmental
impact statement (EIS) is not required underRCW 43 21C 030(2)(c) This decision was made
after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency This information is available to the public upon request
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2) The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue Comments must be
submitted by 5 00 p m , June 1, 2001 The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on
timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw
the DNS If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline
Responsible Official Ms Jen Carlson
Manager of Budget and Planning
Federal Way Public Schools
Telephone- (253) 945-2045
Address 31405 18th Avenue South
Federal Way WA 98003
You may appeal this determination in writing by 5 00 p m , June 1, 2001, to Jen Carlson,
Federal Way Public Schools, 31405 18th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003.
Date of Issue May 16, 2001
Date Published May 18, 2001
2
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
WAC 197-11-960 Environmental Checklist
Purpose of Checklist
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43 21C RCW, requires all governmental
agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions An environmental
impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on
the quality of the environment The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the
agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be
done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required
Instructions for Applicants,
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal
Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are sigmficant, requiring preparation of an EIS Answer the questions briefly, with the most
precise information known, or give the best description you can
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge In most
yes, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the
need to hire experts If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your
proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply " Complete answers to the questions now may avoid
unnecessary delays later
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark
designations Answer these questions if you can If you have problems, the governmental agencies can
assist you
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a
period of time or on different parcels of land Attach any additional information that will help describe
your proposal or its environmental effects The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be
significant adverse impact
11
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answefed "does
not apply" In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject actions (part D)
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and
"property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively
P]
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
BACKGROUND
1 Name of proposed project, if applicable
The adoption of a Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan by the Federal Way School District No 210 for
the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. The King County, City of Federal Way,
and the City of Kent's Comprehensive Plan will be amended to include the District's 2001/02
Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element This project may also involve the
amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the cities of Des Moines and Auburn to incorporate
the District's 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan A copy of the District's Plan is available for review
in the District's offices
2 Name of applicant
Federal Way School District No 210
3 Address and phone number of applicant and contact person
Federal Way School District No 210
31405 18th Avenue South
Federal Way WA 98003
(253)945-2000
Contact Person Ms Jen Carlson
Manger of Budget and Financial Planning
Telephone (253) 945-2045
4 Date checklist prepared
May 16, 2001
5 Agency requesting checklist
Federal Way School District No 210
6 Proposed tiring or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The Federal Way School District's 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by
the District in July 2001 The Capital Facilities Plan will be forwarded to King County, the City of
Federal Way and the City of Kent for inclusion in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan It will
also be forwarded to the cities of Des Moines and Auburn for possible inclusion in these
jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plans The District will continue to update the Capital Facilities Plan
annually. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to
project -specific environmental review
3
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
T Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal') If yes, explain
The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the District plans to
implement over the next six years These include modernization and expansion of an alternative
high, purchase and siting of temporary facilities and construction of a senior high school and
increasing secondary capacity
8 List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will undergo additional environmental review,
when appropriate, as they are deN eloped
9 Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal9 If yes, explain
No applications are currently pending
10 List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known
The District anticipates that King County, the City of Federal Way and the City of Kent will adopt
this Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plan The cities of Des Moines and Auburn
may also adopt this Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities Elements of their
Comprehensive Plans (when issued)
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
describe certain aspects of your proposal You do not need to repeat those answers on this page
(Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project
description )
This is a non -project action This proposal involves the adoption of the Federal Way School
District's 2001/02 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District's facilities needs
The District's Capital Facilities Plan will be incorporated into King County's, the City Federal
Way, and the City of Kent's Comprehensive Plans It may also be incorporated into the
Comprehensive Plans of the cities of Des Moines and Auburn The projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project -specific environmental review. A
copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the District's offices.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
12 Location of the proposal Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township,
and range, if known If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or
boundaries of the site(s) Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map,
if reasonably available. While you should subrrut any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans subnutted with any permit applications related to this
checklist
The Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Federal Way School Distnct The District includes an
area of approximately 35 square rules The City of Federal Way, parts of the cities of Kent, Des
Moines and Auburn, parts of unincorporated King County, fall within the District's boundaries A
detailed map of the District's boundaries can be viewed at the District's offices
5
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
B ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
I Earth
a General description of the site (circle one) Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
The Federal Way School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and
gradients Specific topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified during project -level
environmental review when appropriate
b What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)9
Specific slope characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan
have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review
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
Specific soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate
d Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe
Unstable soils may exist within the Federal Way School District Specific soil limitations on
individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project -level environmental
review when appropriate
e Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed
Indicate source of fill
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when
appropriate, to project -specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal
Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of any fill
materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time
f Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of the construction projects currently proposed
in the Capital Facilities Plan The erosion impacts of the individual projects have been or will
be evaluated on a site-specific basis at the time of project -specific environmental review when
appropriate Individual projects have been or will be subject to local approval processes
0
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
g About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
The proposed new school facilities included in the Capital Facilities Plan as well as the
proposed renovation projects will require the construction of impervious surfaces The extent of
any imperr ious cover constructed will vary with each capital facilities project included in the
Capital Facilities Plan This issue has been or will be addressed during project -specific
environmental review when appropriate
h Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any
The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and appropriate
control measures have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review
when appropriate Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met
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 completed9 If any,
generally describe and give approximate quantities if known
Various emissions, many construction -related, may result from the individual projects included
in the Capital Facilities Plan The air-quality impacts of each project have been or will be
evaluated during project -specific environmental review when appropriate Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
b Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe
Any off-site sources of errussions or odor that may affect the individual projects included in_the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate
c Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any
The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to
project -specific environmental review when appropriate and relevant local approval processes
The District will be required to comply with all applicable air regulations and air permit
requirements Proposed measures specific to the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review
when appropriate Please seethe Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
fN
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
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, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)9 If yes, describe type
and provide names If appropriate, state what stream or nver it flows into
There is a network of surface water bodies within the Federal Way School District The
surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate When necessary, the surface water regimes and flow patterns
have been or will be researched and incorporated into the designs of the individual
projects
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
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require work near the surface
waters located within the Federal Way School District Applicable local approval
requirements have been or will be satisfied
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected
Indicate the source of fill material
Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material as a
component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be
provided during project -specific environmental review when appropriate Applicable local
regulations have been or will be satisfied
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions9 Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -
specific environmental review when appropriate
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site
plan
Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area, will be
required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas
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
0
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a
result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided
during project -specific environmental review when appropriate Please -see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions,
b Ground
1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater
resources The impact of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on
groundwater resources has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
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
The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the projects
included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental
review
c Water Runoff (including storm water)
1) Descnbe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known) Where will this water flow9 Will this water
flow into other waters) If so, describe.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have stormwater runoff
consequences. Specific information regarding the stormwater impacts of each project has
been or will be provided during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
Each project is or will be subject to applicable local stormwater regulations
0
3
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the dischargd of waste
materials into ground or surface waters The specific impacts of each project on ground
and surface waters have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate Each project is or will be subject to all applicable regulations
regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
d Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate
Plants
a Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site
deciduous tree alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants water lily, eelgrass, milfoll, other
other types of vegetation
A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Federal Way School District, Inventories of
the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be developed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
b What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered9
Some of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or
alteration of vegetation The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate
c List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be determined dunng project -specific environmental review
when appropriate
101
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any
Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review
when appropriate Each project is or will be subject to applicable local landscaping
requirements
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
birds hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
mammals deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
fish bass, salmon, trout, hemng, shellfish, other
An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects proposed in
the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate
b List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site
Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project -specific
environmental review when appropriate
c Is the site part of a migration route9 If so, explain
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on nugration routes have
been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
d Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined during
project -specific environmental review when appropriate
11
ENVIRONDIENTAL CHECKLIST
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
The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life -cycle cost analysts of all heating,
lighting, and insulation systems before it will perrrut specific school projects to proceed The
energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
determined at the time of specific engineering and site design planning when appropriate
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
b Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent propenies9 If so,
generally describe
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar potential of
adjacent projects have been or will be addressed dunng project -specific environmental review
when appropriate
c What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal9 List
other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any
Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project -specific environmental review
when appropriate
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 proposal9 If so,
describe
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will comply with all current codes,
standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to
project -specific environmental review and local approval at the time they are developed
when appropriate
12
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises from traffic, construction, residential, commercial and industrial areas
exists within the Federal Way School District, The specific noise sources that may affect
the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during
project -specific environmental review when appropriate.
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)9
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site
The District does not anticipate that the projects will create long-term increases in traffic -
related or operations -related noise levels
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any
The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project -specific environmental review when
appropriate Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations
8 Land and Shoreline Use
a What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties9
There are a variety of land uses within the Federal Way School District, including residential,
commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc.
b Has the site been used for agnculture9 If so, describe
The project sites covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have not been used recently for
agriculture
c Describe any structures on the site
The structures located on the proposed sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified and described during project -specific environmental review
when appropriate
13
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d Will any structures be demolished9 If so, what9
The remodeling and renovation projects will require the demolishment of school structures The
structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when
appropriate
e What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning
classifications under the applicable zoning codes Site-specific zoning information has been or
will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
f What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site9
Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be completed during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate
g If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review
when appropriate.
h Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify
Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the Plan
have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review
I Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
The Federal Way School District currently serves approximately 22,400 students The student
population is expected to increase to 23,680 by the year 2006. The District employs
approximately 2,800 people
Approximately how many people would the completed project displace9
Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has
been or will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of the projects contained
therein, will displace any people
IV
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
k Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project -specific
environmental review and local approval when appropriate Proposed mitigating measures will
be proposed at that time, if necessary
1 Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any
The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing
uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and
during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
9 Housing
a Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, rniddle,
or low-income housing
No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects included
in the Capital Facilities Plan
b- Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing
It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will eliminate any
housing units The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on existing
housing have been or will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review when
appropriate
c Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any.
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate
10 Aesthetics
a What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the
principal exterior building matenal(s) proposed9
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate.
15
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
determined during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
c Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any.
Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project -specific basis when
appropriate
11 Light and Glare
a What type of light or glare will the proposal produce9 What time of day would it mainly
occur9
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed during project -specific environmental review.
b Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views9
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
c What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal9
Off-site sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review when
appropriate
d Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any
Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during
project -specific environmental review when appropriate
12. Recreation
a What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Federal Way School
District
16
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe
The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will
be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate The projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed renovated school and support
facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses
c Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any
Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be subject to mitigation during project -specific environmental review when appropriate A
school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields
and gymnasiums
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 site9 If so, generally describe
There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for such registers on the sites of the
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan The existence of historic and cultural resources _
on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in more detail dunng project -specific
environmental review when appropriate.
b Generally descnbe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project -specific environmental review
when appropriate
c Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project -specific basis when
appropriate
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 impact on public streets and highways of the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when
appropriate
17
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b Is site currently served by public transit9 If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop9
The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public
transit has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when
appropriate
c How many parking spaces would the completed project havev How many would the
project elirmnatev
An inventory of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability has been or will be
conducted during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
d Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or
streets, not including dnveways9 If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private)
The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has been or
will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate.
e Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation9
If so, generally describe -
Use of water, rail, or air transportation has been or will be addressed during project -specific
environmental review when appropriate.
f How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known,
indicate when peak volumes would occur
The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate
g Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any
The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when
appropriate
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)9 If so, generally describe
The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will
substantially increase the need for other public services
b Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
M
ENVIRON-AIENTAL CHECKLIST
Remodeled/renovated school or facilities will be built with automatic security systems, fire
alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems
16 Utilities
a Circle utilities currently available at the site electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities are
available at the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan The types of utilities
available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed in more detail during project -
specific environmental review when appropriate
b Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and
the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be
needed
Utility revisions and construction needs have been or will be identified during project -specific
environmental review when appropriate
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge I understand that the lead
agency is relying off them to /make its decision
Signature l r'.r?w (.0 P�Ow
Date Submitted- May 16, 2001
19
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project 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
When 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, errussions to air,
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, or production of noise?
To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be
constructed and/or renovated and remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more
likely Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access roads,
and playgrounds could increase stormwater runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters
Heating systems, emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed pursuant to
the Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions The projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous
substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel orgasoline for emergency
generating equipment The District does not anticipate a significant increase in the production
of noise from its facilities, although the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will
increase the District's student capacities
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are
Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above have been or will be
addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate Stormwater
detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and may be subject
to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements
Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements Fuel oil will be stored
in accordance with local and state requirements
2 How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine lifev
The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment
These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project -specific
environmental review when appropriate The projects included in the Plan are not likely to
generate severe impacts on fish or marine life
ON
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are
Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be identified at this
time Specific mitigation proposals have been or will be identified, however, during project -
specific environmental review when appropriate
3 How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the
consumption of energy
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance with
applicable energy efficiency standards
4 How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally 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 farmlands9
The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no impact on
these resources.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project -specific environmental
review when appropriate Updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County and the
cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines, and Auburn as part of the Growth Management Act
process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas To the
extent the District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management
planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected
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 Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is
incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management
plans The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained
therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are.
No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities Plan or
the projects contained therein are proposed at this time
21
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
6 How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services
and utilities?
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary increases in the
Distnct's need for public services and utilities Upon the completion of the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan, however, the District does not anticipate that its need for public
services and utilities will increase substantially beyond existing levels
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time
7 Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment
The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of
the environment
22
#CPA -2001-2(H)
CITY OF KENT FINANCE DEPT
ANNUAL CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT
2002 - 2007 Capital Improvement Program
Sources of Funds
Amounts in 000's
Councilmanic Bond
Proceeds -
27%
Voted Public Safety
Bonds
19%
Street Fund
9%
Utiltiy Revenue
Bonds
10%
Alternative running
Sources -Parks - ( _Grants
1% Other Funding 4%
Sources
1%
Sources of Funds
Capital Improvement Fund
Grants
Other Funding Sources
Alternative Funding Sources - Parks
Voted Public Safety Bonds
Councdmantc Bond Proceeds
Street Fund
Utilby Revenue Bonds
Utility Funds
Total Sources of Funds
cx CIP 6yr plan 02x13 100`3012001
Utility Funds
17%
(Improvement
Fund
12%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total
4,329
2,735
2,775
2,813
2,805
2,950
18,407
-
2,532
945
340
1,600
1,450
6,867
368
173
83
109
109
234
1,076
-
284
455
315
75
675
1,804
30,000
30,000
11,210"
20,500
10,900
42,616
3,210
3,563
190
3,049
2,691
1,144
13,847
10,000
5,125
15.125
4 313
4,822
6,102
5,571
3,152
2,178
26,138
23,436 44,109 41,050 12,197 26,457 8,631 155,880
EXHIBIT "G"
I-46
2002 - 2007 Capital Improvement Program
Projects Forecast
Amounts In 000's
Transportation
18%
Utility Fund
Projects
25%
Projects
Public Safety
23%
Parks,
Recreation &
Community
Services
16%
neral
Government
20%
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total
Transportation
7,526
3,852
8,790
3,074
4,491
1,044
28,777
Public Sarety
535
30,350
350
350
3,350
350
35,285
Parks, Recreation
5,263
4,190
2,913
2,307
3,069
4,164
21,906
& Community Services
-
General Government
6,099
1,195
13,195
1,195
7,570
1,195
30,449
Utility Fund Protects
4,013
_ 4,522
16,002
6,271
4,877
3,778
39,463
Total Projects 23,436 44,109 41,250 13,197 23,357 10,531 155,880
I-47
cw CIP 6yr plan 02 As 1013012001
I-48
ce CIP 6yr plan 02 As 10130!2001
2002- 2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SOURCES AND USES
SUMMARY
_
AMOUNTS IN
000'S
-
Total
202
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Sources of Funds
Capital Improvement Fund
7,684
1,584
1,220
1,220
1,220
1,220
1,220
CIP Fund - REET 2nd Qtr
10,723
2,745
1,515
1,555
1,593
1,585
1,730
Youthfreen
769
269
155
35
100
100
100
Street Fund
13,847
3,210
3,553
190
3,049
2,691
1,144
0. 1-<rlmenic Bond Proceeds
34,241
11,216
15500
7,525
Counalmanic Bonds Shops Facility
8 375
5,000
3,375
Voted Public Safety Bonds
30,000
30,000
Donations and Contributions
140
40
100
Other Funding Sources
167
99
^6
8
9
9
34
Alternative Funding Sources - Parks
1,804
284
455
315
75
675
Grants - Parks Projects
5,778
2,143
745
215
1,225
1,450
Grants -Street Projects
1,089
339
200
125
375
Water Fund
10,225
1,347
1,520
2,822
3,099
628
809
Sevier Utility Fund
3,086
585
452
677
440
454
468
Drainage Utility Fund
12,827
2,381
2 840
2,603
2,032
2,070
901
Utility Revenue Bonds
15,125
10,000
5,125
Total Sources of Funds
155,880
23,436
44,109
41,050
12,197
26,457
8,631
Transportation
Corridor Improvements
6,495
890
1,180
1,720
1,180
1,525
Arterials
3,817
1,017
850
500
500
1,150
Intersection & Signal Improvements
3,799
1,524
925
450
250
650
Other Improvements
14.665
4095
- 1097
6120
1,144
1,166
1,044
Total Transportation
28,777
7,526
3,852
8,790
3,074
4,491
1,044
Public Safety
Fire & Life Safety Requests
1,835
460
275
275
275
275
275
Police
450
75
75
75
75
75
75
Public Safety Facilities
33 000
30,000
3 000
Total Public Safety
35,285
535
30,350
350
350
3,350
350
Parks, Recreation
& Community Services
21,906
5,263
4,190
2,913
2,307
3,069
4,164
General Government
General Government Facilities
17,145
2,045
345
7,345
345
6,720
345
Other General Government
13,304
4 054
850
5 850
850
850
850
Total General Government
30,449
6,099
1,195
13,195
1,195
7,670
1,195
Utility Fund Projects
Sanitary Sewer
2,486
485
3662
577
340
354
368
Stormwater Drainage
16,227
2,281
2,740
2,703
2,932
2,870
2,701
Water Projects
9,625
1,247
1,420
2,722
2,999
528
709
Easthill Maint Facility
10,000
10,000
Shops Renovation
1,125
1,125
Total Utility Fund Projects
39,463
4,013
4,522
16,002
6,271
4,877
3,778
Total All Projects
155,880
23,436
44,109
41,250
13,197
23,357
10,531
I-48
ce CIP 6yr plan 02 As 10130!2001
Kent Station Street/Traffic
TRANSPURIAIIUN
2,900
2002 - 2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
AMOUNTS IN 000's
228tn Corridor - West Corridor
5,785
180
1,180
Total 2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Sources of Funds
Arterials
Grants
1,089
389
200
125
375
Councilmanic Band Proceeds
14,441 4,416
767
8,500
1,525
Street Fund
13,247 3,110
3,463
90
2,949
2,591
iTotal Sources of Funds
28,777 7,526
3,852
8,790
3,074
4,491
Kent Station Street/Traffic
2,900
2,900
Corridors
228tn Corridor - West Corridor
5,785
180
1,180
1,720
1,180
1,525
196th Corridor
710
710
Arterials
256th Street Widening
767
767
212th Street Rehab
650
650
132nd Ave Improvements (240th - 244th)
250
250
72nd Avenue (196th - 200th)
500
500
84tn Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation
500
500
Military Road Improvements
150
150
116th Ave Imp (256th - KK(SR516))
500
500
Central Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation
500
500
Intersection & Road Improvements
James & Central Intersection Improve
316
318
4th & Willis Roundabout -
600
200
400
WVH & 277th Intersection Improvement
250
250
94th Ave @ Canyon Dr Traffic Signal
200
200
1-5 & 277th Intersection Improvement
475
275
200
Military Rd & 277th Intersection Improve
650
650
116th & 248th Signal
250
250
124th & 248th Signal
250
250
132nd & 248th Street Improvement
806
806
Other Improvements
Miscellaneous Asphalt Overlays
3,299
497
517
538
560
582
Slurry Seal Program
400
50
75
75
75
75
Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Installation
1,800
300
300
300
300
300
Traffic Signal Controller Cabinet Replacement
40
40
Neighborhood Traffic Control
75
75
City Wide Guardrail & Safety Improvement
30
30
Street Striping Program
522
83
85
87
89
89
Signal Battery Backup
600
120
120
120
120
120
Easthill Maint Facility
5,000
5,000
Total Protects Funded
28,777
7,526
3,852
8,790
3,074
4,491
.I-49
cx CIP 6yr plan 02 As 10/30/2001
2007
605
50
300
M
PUBLIC SAFETY
2002-2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
AMOUNTS IN 000's
Total 2002 2003 2003 2005 2005 2007
Sources of Funds
Councilmanic Bonds
3,000
3,000
Voted Public Safety Bonds
30,000
30 000
CIP Revenues Required
2,285
535
350
350
350
350
350
Total Sources of Funds
35,285
535
30,350
350
350
3,350
350
Fire & Life Safety Projects
Fire Equipment Replacement Fund
1,400
400
200
200
200
200
200
Breathing Apparatus/Pass Alarm Replacement Program
40
40
Hurst Tool Replacement
20
20
Other Fire & Life Safety Projects
375
75
75
75
75
75
Total Approved Fire & Life Safety Projects
1,835
460
275
275
275
275
275
Police Projects
Radios
75
75
Misc Police Projects
375
75
75
75
75
75
Total Approved Police Projects
450
75
75
75
75
75
75
Public Safety Facilities Projects
Municipal Court Building
3,000
3,000
Other Public Safety Facility Improvements
30,000
30 000
Subtotal Public Safety Facilites
33,000
-
30,000
-
3,000
-
Total Public Safety Projects
35,285
535
30,350
350
350
3,350
350
1-50
cw CIP Syr plan 02 ids 1 W=2001
PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICL
2002- 2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
AMOUNTS IN 000's
TOTAL 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005 2007
Sources of Funds
REET 2nd Qtr
10,723
2 745
1,515
1,555
1 593
1 585
1,730
CIP Revenues
425
50
75
75
75
75
75
Dona; ons/Contnbubons
140
40
100
AI'ematrve Funding
1 804
284
455
315
75
675
Fee -m -lieu
25
20
Youlh[Teen
753
269
165
35
100
100
100
S'a[a Fuei Tax
51
8
8
8
9
9
9
Ccuncdmanic Bonds
2,1C0
2 100
General Fund
91
91
Grants
5778
2143
745
215
1225
1450
Total Sources of Funds
21,906
5,263
4,190
2,913
2,307
3,069
4,154
Projects
Sports Fields
Soccer Field Renovation
Bra
800
Service Club Ballfields
2450
80
120
1,250
1,000
Service Club Park Acquisition
750
750
East H II Youth Sports Complex
3C0
300
Commons Playfield Renovations
1,040
1 C<o
Park Development
Land Acquisition
450
150
75
75
75
75
Uplands PlaySeld Improvements
43
40
228th Corridor Park Trailhead (Russell Woods)
25
25
Interurban Trail
33
30
Green River Corridor
20
25
Grant Matching Funds
453
50
100
75
75
75
75
East Hill Youth Sports Facility Development
3 530
3 380
150
Skate Park Development
300
300
International Parks Acquisition/Development
13
10
Town Square Park
I'lco
1,100
Lake Fenwick Park Development
75
75
Riverwalk I Riverview Park Development
562
12
550
YoulhrTeen Capital Protects
604
269
35
100
100
100
Clark Lake Development
7W
700
West Hill Amphitheater
83
80
Mill Creek Gould Property Development
SCO
500
BMX Property Donation
200
200
Green River Corridor Acquisition
SCO
500
East Hill Park Land Acquisition
500
SCO
Neighborhood Parks Development
-
Canterbury Park Development
339
339
-
West Hill Park Development (Seattle Water)
777
600
177
132nd Street Park Development
794
44
750
S 272nd St Neighborhood Park Development
620
-
20
600
Turnkey Park Acquisition & Parking Lot Devel
200
200
Panther Lake Neighborhood Park Acquisition
310
310
Major Capital & Lifecycle Renovations
Downtown Sidewalk Replacement7Gateways
355
175
90
90
Spnngwood Park Improvements
65
65
Seven Oaks Park Improvements
35
35
West Fenwck Renovations
175
175
Krvranis Tot Lot 91 Improvements
40
40
Tudor Square Renovations
30
30
Pine Tree Park Improvements
3C0
300
Turnkey Park Renovations
213
63
150
Life Cycle
1,500
250
250
250
250
250
250
Demolition of Rental Houses
50
25
25
Van Dorens Park Improvements
45
45
Lake Mendian Park Improvements
200
200
Green Rvr Disabled Fishing Access/Boeing Tract C
300
300
Botanical Garden
25
25
Big Blue Mobile Computer Lab
65
65
OK -Leash Park
30
15
15
Trail Improvements
51
8
8
8
9
9
9
City Arts Program
91
91
Planning -Architecture & Engineering
Architect I Engineering
130
15
20
20
25
25
25
Master Plans
70
20
10
10
10
10
10
Recreabon Facility Feasibility Study
35
35
Swimming Pool Feasibility Study
40
15
25
Total Projects _
21,906
5,263
4,190
2,913
2,307
3,069
4,164
Sources of Funds
Councilmanic Bond Proceeds
CIP Revenues Required
Total Sources of Funds
Projects
Other Facility Repairs & Improvements
Campus Expansion and Renovation
Golf Complex Improvements
Subtotal General Gov't Facilities
EH Maintenance Facility
General Government-CIP 25%
Shops Renovation
Subtotal Maintenance Facility
Total Projects
cw CIP 6yr plan 02.xls 1013012001
GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES
_
2002 - 2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
-
AMOUNTS IN 000'5
Total 2002 2003 2004
2005
2006
2007
15,075 1,700
7,000
6,375
2,070 345 345
345
345
345
345
17,145 2,045 345
7,345
345
6,720
345
1,800 300 300
300
300
300
300
6,700 1,700
2,000
3,000
270 45 45
45
45
45
45
8,770 2,045 345
2,345
345
3,345
345
5,000
5,000
17,145 2,045 345 7,345 345 6,720 345
I-52
OTHER GOVERNMENT PROJECTS
2002 -2007 DEPARTMENT REQUESTS
AMOUNTS IN 000's -
Development Rights Acquisition
Total
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Proposed Revenue
755
255
100
100
100
100
100
Capital Improvement Fund
2,904
654
450
450
450
450
450
From Utility & Street Funds
2,400
400
400
400
400
400
400
Counalmamc Bonds
6 000
3 000
700
5 000
700
700
700
Total Proposed Revenue
13,304
4,054
850
5,850
850
850
850
Development Rights Acquisition
50
50
Miscellaneous Projects
755
255
100
100
100
100
100
Various Department Equipment
299
49
50
50
50
50
50
Kent Station Infrastructure, Arch & Engineering
1,000
1,000
Automation Projects
11 200
2 700
700
5 700
700
700
700
Total Protects Funded
13,304
4,054
850
5,850
850
850
850
I-53
cw CIP 6yr plan OZ.As 10130/2001
WATER, SEWER AND STOR&MATER DRAINAGE
2002-
2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
AMOUNTS
IN 000 s
Total
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Sources of Funds
Water Fund
9,625
1,247
1,420
2 722
2 999
526
709
Drainage Utility Fund
12,227
2,281
2,740
2,503
1,932
1,970
801
Revenue Bonds
15,125
10000
5125
Sewer Utility Fund
2486
485
362
577
340
354
368
Total Sources of Funds
39,463
4,013
4,522
15,802
5,271
7,977
1,878
Protects Funded
Sanitary Sewer
Remote Telemetry Upgrades -Phase 11
93
46
47
Kent Station Improvements
136
136
Easthill Shap
250
250
Miscellaneous Sewer Lines
2007
303
315
327
340
354
358
Total Sanitary Sewer
2,486
485
362
577
340
354
368
Stormwater Drainage Management
Horseshoe Acres Pump Station
130
100
10
10
10
Garrison Creek Storm Improvements
274
130
144
Outfall Treatment
976
100
876
Soos Creek Basin Improvements
6,207
528
419
1,460
1,000
900
1,900
Miscellaneous Drainage Improvements
4,365
658
684
712
740
770
801
Drainage Improvements w/ Road Improvements
3 369
519
400
250
1,000
1 200
Endangered Species Act
463
100
110
121
132
Remote Telemetry Upgrades -Phase II
93
46
47
NPDES Permit
250
100
50
50
50
Easthdl Maint Facility
5,000
5,000
Shops Renovation
563
563
Easthdl Shop
100
100
Total Stormwater Drainage
21,790
2,281
2,740
7,703
2,932
3,433
2,701
Water Projects
East Hill Reservoir
2,850
500
1,050
1,300
Impoundment Project (124th.118W288th-304th)
2,700
300
1,200
1,200
Miscellan=eous Water Improvements
2,047
309
321
334
347
361
375
Remote Telemetry Upgrades - Phase 1
277
137
140
-
-
Water Conservation
1,053
287
125
138
152
167
184
Pump Station #3 (Replacement)
75
75
3 -Year Lrg Mtr& Vault Replacement Program
67
33
34
-
WaterSourceDevelopment
350
350
Kent Station Improvements
56
56
Update Kent's Water Comprehensive Plan
150
150
Shops Renovation
562
562
Easthdl Malnt Facility
5 000
5 000
Total Water
15,187
1,247
1,420
7,722
2,999
1,090
709
Total Projects Funded
39,463
4,013
4,522
16,002
6,271
4,877
3,778
I-54
Cw CIP 6yr plan 02 As 1013012001