HomeMy WebLinkAbout817proposed, and
~----------,----
RESOLUTION NO. jrJ']
A RESOLUTION of the City Council
of the City of Kent, Washington regarding
adopting a new Comprehensive Plan of the
City of Kent
WHEREAS, a new Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent has been
WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 35A.63 of
the Revised Code of Washington hearings were held before the Planning Commission
of the City of Kent, and
WHEREAS, after said hearings of the Planning Commission on
September 26, 1976, forwarded the Plan to the City Council with the recommendation
that it be adopted, and
WHEREAS, the City Council held public hearings on the Plan on
December 6th and December 20th, 1976, and following said hearings concurred with
the recommendation of the Planning Commission, NOW THEREFORE,
The City Council of the City of Kent, Washington do hereby resolve:
1. That the new Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent, attached
hereto as Appendix "A", and incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth
herein, be and the same hereby is adopted as the Comprehensive Plan of the City of
Kent.
2. That the Comprehensive Plan be filed with the City Clerk and
in the offices of the Planning Department and be made available for public
inspection upon request.
DONE in regular City Council session this 3rd day of January,
1977.
ISABELK~,~
ATTEST:
~~ MARIEJENS~
AP~OVED AS TO FORM:
J:j~{}fu;J
DONALD E. MIRK, CITY ATTORNEY
~ I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Resolution No.
------~()~~{-~+----' passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington,
the 3rd day of January 1977.
~~ MARIE JENSEN~ (SEAL)
--- -- ------- ----
:. .~.~ • . , ' . : . I· ' ·: .. : .' • .. '\ , ,.''" : . , •
··'-~ . . ... ", ·.
i ·. ~1~ ?" .·
n
~
~ ~ ~ = CD a .. ~ l!.J ~ ~ Cll
~ ~ .....
= fll ca 1-4 0 1-3 = < ~
~
1:4
> ~>-·
~~·
·~
MAYOR
Isabel Hogan
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Joseph Street
KENT CITY COUNCIL
William Carey
Billie Johnson
Gary Just
Robert w. Kitto
Jeanne Masters
Len McCaughan
Larry Storment
CITY OF KENTJ WASHINGTON
KENT PLANNING COMMISSION
John Long, Chairman
Al Cole
Sam Edmondson
Irv Hamilton
Bill Holmer
Jon Johnson
Marilyn Jones
Rosetta Jones
Harry Williams
FORMER MEMBERS WHO WORKED ON THIS PLAN
Dennis Neifert
James Rasmussen
THIS PLAN WAS ADOPTED BY THE KENT CITY COUNCIL
ON JANUARY 3, 1977, BY P£SOLUTION NO. 817
I.
II.
I I I.
IV I
FoREWORD 1
INTRODUCTION
HISTORY OF I<ENT
GOALS AND POLICIES
Natural Environment Element
circulation Element
Housing Element
Human Resources Element,
Economic Element
Public Utilities Element
Human Environment Element
APPENDICES
I. IMPLEMENTATION
II. POPULATION
III. STATUS OF EXISTII.-JG PLANS
IV. DEFINITIONS
v. SI~ YEAR STREET PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE 1 ,.
I
PAGE 2
PAGE 6
I. PAGE 9
I • I PAGE 9
I I PAGE 13
I, I PAGE 16
PAGE 20
PAGE 25
PAGE 27
PAGE 29
/ c
-------
I I FOREWORD
A,s HAS BEEN FREQUENTLY SAIDJ CHANGE IS AN EVER PRESENT PART·
OF OUR ENVIRONMENT, KENT HAS EXPERIENCED MUCH CHANGE IN THE
PASTJ BOTH IN OUR NATURAL AND SOCIO/CULTURAL ENVIRONMENTS,
ALONEJ AND IN COMBINATIONJ THESE CHANGES HAVE GREATLY IN-
FLUENCEDJ AND IN SOME CASES SOMEWHAT DETERMINED OUR IDENTITY
AS A COMMUNITY, 1976 AND THE YEARS AHEAD SEEM DESTINED TO
BRING STILL MORE CHANGE AND HENCE MORE CHALLENGES TO OUR SELF-
DETERMINATION,
DECISIONS MADE BY THE CITY OF KENT OBVIOUSLY HAVE A GREAT
EFFECT ON HOW WE AS A COMMUNITY REACT TO CHANGE AND WHAT
FUTURE WE ARE TO HAVE; IT IS IMPERATIVEJ THEREFOREJ THAT
THE CITY HAVE AN ACCEPTED GUIDE TO FOLLOW WHEN MAKING DECI-
SIONS WHICH AFFECT THE CHARACTER AND FUTURE OF KENT,
THE FOLLOWING DRAFT OF THE NEW KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPRE-
SENTS AN EFFORT BY THE CITIZENS OF KENT TO PROVIDE THE CITY
WITH SUCH A GUIDE, IF THE CITY DOES NOT TAKE THE LEAD IN
PROVIDING STRONG DIRECTIONS FOR THE FUTUREJ KENT WILL FIND
ITSELF UNABLE TO RESPOND AS A COMMUNITY TO THE OUTSIDE IN-
FLUENCES WHICH SO GREATLY AFFECT US, As WE LOSE THE ABILITY
TO PROVIDE A LOCAL RESPONSE TO CHANGEJ WHETHER THE CHANGE
IS GENERATED INSIDE OR OUTSIDE OUR COMMUNITY~ KENT WILL ALSO
LOSE ITS IDENTITY AS A COMMUNITY AND UNDOUBTEDLY BE ABSORBED
INTO THE PREDICTED "PUGET SOUND MEGOLOPOLIS",
-1-
KENT HAS HAD A STRONG COMMUNITY IDENTITY IN THE PASTJ AND
LOCAL CITY GOVERNMENT HAS SERVED OUR RESIDENTS WELL. HOPE-
FULLY BY ADDRESSING THE FUTURE THOUGHTFULLY AND PURPOSE-
FULLY WE CAN OVERCOME THE PHYSICALJ CULTURAL AND GOVERNMENTAL
SPRAWL WHICH THREATENS TO ABSORB US, WE CANJ IF WE CHOOSEJ
DIRECT AND CONTROL OUR GROWTH, THIS PLAN AND ITS POLICIES
ARE PRESENTED TO THE CITY AS ONE MEANS OF SO ADDRESSING OUR
FUTURE,
~
II. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The Comprehensive Plan has been defined as "The official state-
ment of a municipal legislative body which sets forth its ma-
jor policies concerning future development". As such, the
Plan document should provide the City, specifically the legis-
lative body or City Council, with comprehensive, general and
long range policies: "comprehensive" means that the Plan
covers all geographical areas and functional aspects of the
City which affect future development; "general" means that
the Plan itself is not legislation or specific regulations
but rather an official guide and summary of desired pro-
posals; and "long range" means the Plan addresses itself
to a future state in time and the process of arriving at that
future state. For the City of Kent, which is an optional Muni-
cipal Code City, our Washington State Enabling Legislation
states: "Every code city, by ordinance, shall direct the
~lanning agency to prepare a Comprehensive Plan for antici-
pating and influencing the orderly and coordinated development
of land and building uses of the code city and its environs".
(Optional Municipal Code -RCW 35 A.63.060)
SCOPE
This Plan addresses itself to the geographical area known as
the Kent Sphere of Interest (so designated by the Kent City
Council in April, 1972), and most specifically to those lands
within the corporate limits of the City of Kent. This Plan
also addresses itself to a broad span of time with no fixed
or suggested termination date. Because it is a "Policy"
Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is more concerned with process
and general developmental policies than with specific land-
use patterns at a certain date in time. This Plan, as with
other plans, is not and should not be considered inflexible;
periodic updating will be required if it is to keep pace with
the changes in our community.
-2-
WHY A NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN?
The present Kent Comprehensive Plan (Revised) was originally
adopted by the Kent City Council in May, 1969 and officially ,
revised in October, 1971. Why then, with so recent a Plan,
are we again in the process of developing policies for our
future? The primary reason is that the 1969 Plan, even with
its 1971 revisions, gives the City little direction for
dealing with the future of Kent. Several important elements,
i.e., natural environment, economics, housing, and human
resources were not contained in that document.
I
The 1969/71 Plan is a traditional "701"* 20 year Plan focusini
only on land-use, circulation patterns and public facilities
geared to certain population levels at a certain point in tim
This type of Plan requires that many assumptions as to the
future be made-e.g., the local growth rate will/will not
change, the local economic climate will/will not change, new
technologies will/will not affect the community, etc. The
past few years have proven that these types of assumptions arl
virtually impossible to make with certainty. For example, wh
foresaw the energy crisis? The coming years will undoubtedl~
be even more unpredictable.
The 1969/71 Kent Comprehensive Plan addresses itself then to
1
only four basic elements: Population; Land Use; Public Facil
ties; and Circulation. The fifth section of the Plan deals
with a general implementation program. Not only do the four I
elements comprise only a portion of the City's concerns (e.g./
there is no mention of Economics, Natural Resources, Social/
Public Services, etc.) but none of the four elements is dis-
*Section 701 of the .Housing Act of 1954, as amended, provide~
funds to local communities for planning. j
y
y
h
s,
:in
!S
:im
~w
a
:.o
~i
:;
1r
.. g.;
L/
:;-
:le
BurienJ_ ~ \ -~·-·····
,__~
' \)
"' "to
0
~ .::.
0 ..
I
f
Leg end City
WASHINGTON
0 II I l ------City Boundaries ••u }
-3-
~\<J?VI l
Cl T Y
BOUNDARIES
KENT PL.ANNINv ,. .. ~---
I I I
I
I
i
!
-~ -----~-~ --~~--~--
cussed or studied in detail (e.g., under Circulation there
is little or no discussion of pedestrian movement, bicycles,
or rail service). Other problems with the Plan are also evi-
dent: the Plan is geared to a fixed date in time, 1988, with
all growth based on population projections which have since
proved erroneous (e.g., a City of Kent population of 27,000
for 1975, 36,000 for 1980); there was little base data col-
lected; and there was no consideration given to the various
natural systems which so greatly influence our City.
Another problem of concern to the City is that the 1969 ver-
sion of the Plan was prepared by the Planning Commission, City
staff and outside consultant, with little opportunity for
citizen participation prior to the official public hearings
on the Plan adoption. In 1970 the City conducted an extensive
Opinion Survey of Kent residents and subsequently organized
a citizens' Kent Civic Betterment Committee to study the
conclusions of that survey. From the work of this committee,
Goals for the City of Kent were established. (See Appendix
#1) These Goals were then incorporated into the 1969 Compre-
hensive Plan by official revision of the Plan (October, 1971).
\·'!t.il.e this 1971 revision to the Comprehensive Plan did provide
for some citizen input into the Comprehensive Plan, it did
not address the other problems noted.
Because of these difficulties, the City has decided that a
new Comprehensive Plan should be developed if the City is to
effectively use the Comprehensive Plan format to guide its
future growth, and that the content and character of this new
Plan should better reflect the needs of our community.
THE NEW PLAN
Having recognized the problems with the present Comprehensive
Plan and at the same time realizing the need for such a guide
to future growth, t~e City decided that an effort should be
made to develop a "Policy" type of Comprehensive Plan using
extensive citizen involvement in the Plan preparation process.
-4-
\
)
A ''Policy" Plan refers to a Plan which is based upon written
Goal, Objective, and Policy Statements which are a synthesis
the ideals and desires of the community, rather than on a "map
which identifies the geographical patterns and interrelation-
ships of the Plan elements -Land-use, Circulation, Community
Facilities, etc. By utilizing the policy statement approach,
the City· Council can adopt concise, clear statements which
can be used as a guide for a multitude of future decisions.
Also, during the Plan preparation process, the written stateme
provide the City and the community with points of discussion
community goals, desires, etc. Agreements and disagreements
be easily identified.
HOW THE PLAN SHOULD BE USED
This Plan, although a Plan of the City government, will be ut
lized by many people. The Plan will also be used in many way
in day-to-day policy decisions; in short range development de
sions; in long-range developme.nt decisions; as a statement of
public policy; for educational purposes; as an advisory docu-
ment; as an evaluative device; and as an aid to legislative
action.
The Kent City Council is the principal client of the Plan, as
it is our legislative body which makes the ultimate policies
and decisions regarding public improvements, regulation of
private development, involvement of the City government in
various programs, etc. Also, as an elected body, the City
Council and its decisions are answerable to the community.
Comprehensive Plan should, then, be a policy instrument of
Council. If the Council does not agree with or understand
Plan, the Plan will not be used.
The Kent Planning Commission will also use the Plan extensive~
as the Commission will convey its advice to the Council throu
recommendations regarding the Plan itself or implementation
strategies (e.g., zoning and subdivision decisions). The Com-
mission will also use the Comprehensive Plan as an educational
tool, especially when working with citizen groups.
ot
1apl
t-
:y I
t, l
I
I
I
1. me~
0~
, c~ ,;
'
ti·~
ys~ ed
f ;
s ~
Thd f,
he~
he~
i
r·
l el~
u·gll
m-
al:
The City Staff will administer many of the programs designed
to implement the Plan (e.g., the Zoning Code, the City Re-
creation Program, etc.). The City departments will also use
the Plan as a general guide for their programs, and their more
detailed plans (e.g., the Comprehensive Water Plan). The
Planning Department will, of course, use the Comprehensive
Plan as a guide for both its general work program and its
day-to-day administration of City regulations.
The Citizens of Kent, or the "public", will use the Plan in
many ways. For those persons involved in physical develop-
ments, (e.g., realtors, builders, etc.), the Comprehensive
Plan provides a formal statement of the dev~lopmental policies
adopted by the City Council. For citizens desiring to become
involved in the planning process, the Plan can be used as
an educational tool and as a basis for developing or lobby-
ing for programs or proposals requiring City action.
AMENDMENTS
~~P Comprehensive Plan is not, and should not become a static
document. As changes occur in what we as a community desire
for our future, and as unexpected events present new oppor-
tunities or problems, we must change the Plan to reflect the
new conditions or new information. To remain current, the
Plan should be reviewed at least every .two years by the City
Council and Planning Commission with input from the general
public.
Relationship to Surround Communities
K~~t lies in the center of the Green River Valley. Its
~orthern boundary is Renton's southern boundary. Tukwila
also lies to the north. Its southern boundary is Auburn's
northe~.: boundary. Des Moines lies adjacent to Kent's western
boundary. To the east lies the fast developing rural King
County area. Both Auburn and Renton have larger populations
than Kent while Des Moines and Tukwila are much smaller.
Although all of these cities are in close proximity, in the
past there was little commonality among their Comprehensive
Plans. For a few years the Valley Regional Planning Com-
-·5-
mission was a forum for all of the Valley Cities, but this
organization did not sway the Cities to develop a coor-
dinated, sub-regional development policy. However, today most
of the Valley Cities are working toward solutions to the mult~
tudinal development problems that are common to all of them.
HOW THE PLAN WAS DEVELOPED
In the fall of 1974 the Kent Planning Commission began work on
the new Comprehensive Plan by drafting an overall goal for the
Plan and goal and objective statements for nine proposed ele-
ments: Circulation; Public Utilities; Community Services(Bu-
man Resources); Open Space; Natural Resources; Waterways;
Housing; Economic Development; and Implementation. Kent resi-
dents merchants, and businessmen:were then recruited by the
Commission to serve on Citizen Advisory Committees which were
to develop a complete draft of the Goals, Objectives and Poli-
cies for each element. Five such committees were established
in October, 1974; Economic Development; Housing; Circulation;
Community Services; and a combined Open Space, Natural Re,.-··
sources, and Waterways Committee. After considerable work
(the committee reports are included in this document) the
Advisory Committees presented their conclusions and recomenda-
tions· to the Planning Commission on February 11, 1976.
Current Conditions
Today, Kent is an atypical City of 17,500 persons. Within its
borders are 165 manufacturing and warehousing establishments,
and many more are arriving each year. These firms are a ·
diverse group making and storing everything from aerospace
products to boilers. In addition to the abundance of indus-
trial firms, the City contains large numbers of commercial
enterprises, fifty of which are restaurants.
All of this commercial and industrial development is of recent
vintage. Even large cities find it difficult to keep track
of so much urban development concentrated in the industrial
categories. To date, Kent has managed to keep one step ahead
of this fast paced development. However, without this new
Plan or a similar one, the City ultimately will find it dif-
ficult to maintain a balance~between the desires of the devel-
02e~s and the needs of its citizens.
I
I
I
!
! !
'
I
I I
I I
i
I
I
I ' ! .
III. HISTORY OF KENT
The geographical area known as "Kent" has undergone considerable
change since the time the Green River Valley and its East and
West Hills were formed. Before there was a "Kent", there was
a valley enclosed with hillsides covered with dense underbrush
and forested with conifers, maple, ash, alder, and cottonwoods.
Wild game and waterfowl were abundant, as were fish in the Green
River and many streams. The river flooded annually, covering
large sections of the valley floor. The first inhabitants
of the area, the Indian peoples, were nomadic and their culture
was tied closely to the natural environment; Indian bands were
unified around the geographical concept of the regional drainage
system. The Green River people were known as the Skope-ahmish.
These bands depended on the game, fowl, shellfish, plants,
berries and fish found in this region for their sustenance.
The first white settler, Samuel Russell, did not come to the
Valley until 1853. At that time the Green River was known
as the White River; the White flowed into the Green near Auburn
c..:.:1:! ·das thus part of the Duwamish system. As the settlers carne,
conflicts with the Indians over ownership of the land arose
and after a short "Indian War", the Indian peoples were re-
located to the Muckleshoot Reservation and the Indian way of
life disappeared. The white settlers began their farming
activities in earnest. Early settlers cleared the land with
the help of Indian labor and established small subsistence
farms. These early farmers were generally poor, producing but-
ter, eggs and vegetables such as onions, potat0es, and cabbage.
Surplus produce was sold in Seattle.
Travel was by means of canoe on the river or by foot on Indian
trails. In the early 1860's flat-bottom scows were run up
the river from Seattle, but the trip still took almost four days.
I~ 1871, Captain Simon Randolph ran the first steam boat up
the Green River. As the popularity of the steamboats increased,
there were as many as 5 or 6 sternwheelers operating on the
river.
Small Farming settlements in the valley began to grow even
-6-
1·.
though continued flooding of the river caused annual losses
to the residents. The settlements of Thomas, Christopher,
0 'Brien, Orillia, Kent, and Slaughter (Auburn) were formed a~
were generally known as "White River". ·
In 1878, J.J. Crow planted and harvested·trie first hop fiel
in the Kent Valley. The high yields and profits from the h
attracted other farmers and soon hop growing spread through
most of the valley. ·
The hop boom only lasted ten years. With the decline of hop
and the national depression of the early 1890's, many valley
farmers suffered great losses and lost their lands.· As the
land values declined, the area converted to other types of
farming. Dairying then became profitable as the growing Citl
of Seattle consumed great quantities of fresh milk, cheese
and cream. In 1899, the Carnation Milk Company was formed
located in Kent. It was in Kent that the first condensed c
of Carnation milk was processed on Septem~oer 6, 1899.
The ~own of Kent was incorporated in 1890. ~he location of
Northern Pacific Railroad depot in Kent had established Kent
as the business location for much of the valley and the City
began a modest growth as a commercial center for the sur-
rounding agricultural lands.
By 1917 there was a definite shift in the farming sector tow
the intensive growing of vegetables. This shift was due in
part to the immigration of European and Japanese farmers int
the area. The first great truck farm crop was lettuce. As
lettuce declined, other vegetables such as peas, beans, broc
coli, and cabbage became commercially prominent. Canneries
located in Kent and became major employers. Agriculture was
also becoming important on East Hill. Large cherry orcharcis,
chicken ranching, dairying and berry raising were the princir
farming activities there.
At the end of World War II, the Kent Valley was still basica:
;es
-·I
!d a
.eld
~ ho
tgl1
hop
ley
he
f
Cit
e
d a
ca
)£
2nt,.
ity.
:ow
en
.nt
~s
:oc'
!S
'as
·as,
.cip
cal
rural a:1d aqr"icul t ural. C.:.sh cropping in the eastern rart of
the lowland, and dairying were the principal agricultural
activities. The population was still concentrated in Kent and
the City itself still encompassed little more than one square
mile. The City of Kent 1950 population was 3,278. The East
Hill area was beginning to attract more residential develop-
ment, however. The West Hill remained only sparsely developed
until the boom of the 1950's.
Flood Control was still a concern in the Valley as the Green
River continued to flood annually and surface pending of
water was common during the wet season. A serious flood in
1946 again caused major property damage and this led to a flood
control study conducted by the u.s. Army Corps of Engineers.
As a result of this study, Congress authorized the construction
of the Howard Hanson Dam in 1955.
The decision to construct the dam was D~sed, at least partially,
on the potential benefits to industry, as well as benefits to
agriculture. Some industry had always been desired by Kent
area residents; by the late 1950's a distinct effort was being
mri0e to attract industrial development. From 1950-54 both the
nulitDer of commercial farms and the amount of lan·J. in farms
decreased for King County as a whole, and this tr~nd had an
impact on the Kent area. At this same time, planniDg for signi-
ficant improvements to the regional transportation S..{stem,
specifically Interstates 5 and 405, and SR-167 (the V~lley Free-
\vay) was. underway. These flood control and free\i::lY pla.nning
projects contributed significantly to the major changes which
were soon to occur in the Valley.
,In anticipation of future urban or industrial develop~ent of
the Valley floor, large speculative land purchases beg~n. In
1957, several small parcels totalling 425 acres were pu~~hased
for what was to become the Southcenter Shopping Center an-:1
Andover Industrial Park ten years later. Corporations an~
railroad companies began to aggregate large tracts of land,
driving up the market value. Most of the farmland still lay
within the unincorporated areas of the County, however, and
·the County's agricultural zoning policies and its inability t0
provide urban servides posed a problem to those who wished
·to develop their la!!ds. Landowners then turned to the Valley
-7-
cities, seeking both new zoning and utility services through
annexation. The cities, anxious to increase their limited
tax base, agreed to annexations and grew rapidly. The City of
Kent grew from one square mile in 1953 to 12.7 square miles
in 1960.
The Howard Hanson Dam was completed in December, 1961, and the
past overbank flooding of the Green River was substantially
restricted. The Valley lands were attractive to industrial
developers due to the flat terrain, the availability of major
rail lines and transportation routes, and the proximity of
Seattle, Tacoma, and Sea-Tac International Airport. Urban
development occurred first in the northern end of the Valley,
around Tukwila. In 1965/66 this urban development jumped south
when the Boeing Company decided to construct two major facilitre
in the Valley lands of Kent and Auburn. The Kent Aerospace
Center was situated in the middle of Kent's agricultural land,
isolated from the existing pattern of urban development. As
individual industrial sites and larger industrial parks became
available, other industrial uses began to locate in the Valley.
Tradewell Stores, Inc., came in 1965, Cam Industries and North-
west Steel Rolling Mills in 1966, Western Electric in 1967, and
Tally Corporation in 1968. To provide the utility service
needed by these firms, the City designed large water and sewer
projects wh1ch were financed through Local Improvement Districts ..
These L.I.D. 's resulted in high assessments to farm land and
a higher charge for water; the higher cost of water directly
affected the agriculturally-oriented industries such as the
c~nneries. By the late 1960's these agricultural industries
were leaving Kent.
Interstate 5 was completed in 1966, Interstate 405 was completed
in 1967, and the Valley Freeway (SR-167) to Kent was opened
in 1969. This regional transportation network provided more
incentive to industrial development of t11e lowland.
By 1970, the major land-use changes and growth of the Kent
area were obvious. As new industries located in the Valley,
the small truck farms vanished. This transition was not
instantaneous, however, and in 1971 over one-third of the Valley
lands were unused or 11 in waste 11
• This is the situation we see
today -land being held for future industrial or commercial
development, but no longer farmed.
I !
I
II I
i
' ' I
I
I
I I
!
; I
Residential development and City annexations on East and West
Hills have continued and were slowed or:.ly during the recession
of the early 1970's. This increased residential population
has led to demand for additional commercial services as wit-
nessed by the explosive growth of the community shopping centers
on East Hill.
Recent residential growth has been oriented exclusively to the
hills, and residential development of the Valley floor has been
limited. Old residential farming communities such as Orillia
and O'Brien have virtually disappeared and the only remaining
old residential areas are those adjacent to the Kent CBD. This
shifting away from intensive agriculture and residential use of
the lowland is causing a major change in the character of the
Kent community.
-8-
.~~l
_J,:;
CITY
OF
WASHINGTON
CIRCULATION
EXISTING
FREEWAY -
EXPRESS--WAY
ARTERIAL:
PRIMARY. ~
ARTERIAL: ..........,
SECONDARY
COLLECTOR-
SCENIC DRIVE -----
RAILROAD
RAPID TRANSIT
INTERCHANGE
PROPOSED
••••
IIIIIWI
z:a rz=z:zrc
. :
. ~-.;~_} ·. -./\"~ () ~: ·. ·k·'-1 .. '~/::~!_:~-~~ -~~
CITY MAP
KENT
XING COUNlY
1!114
WA!HII'CUJCN nATe RIOHW'AT COioOomoH
DEI'.U.tMEKroP HIGHWAYS .......... """"'" U.S. DErAJLTWVrT DFDAH1roaTAT110N
PEDE1AL IU!Jinf'AT o\DIGHifn.ATlQit
'!!:
IV. GOALS AND POLICIES
BEGINNING WITH THE NATURAL ENVIRON~1ENT ELEMENTJ THE PLAN CONTAINS A SERIES OF GOALS
9BJECTIVES AND POLICIES. ELEM~NT_BY ELEMENT THE POLICIES OFTEN AR~ REPEATED. THIS
IS NOT REDUNDANCY AS MUCH AS IT IS Ai~ ATTEf~PT TO POINT OUT THAT SUCH POLICIES ARE
rr~1PORTANT IN MORE THAN ONE ELEf·1ENT.
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ELEMENT
(CONSISTS OF THE SEPARATE ELEMENTS -WATERWAYS)
OPEN SPACE AND NATURAL RESOURCES)
PROPOSED GOALSJ OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
OVERVIE''V
~he complexity of our natural environment has become evident
1n recent years, throughout the nation, as we witness constant
changes and modifications of it. What we once took for granted
we now realize we must forcefully· protect, preserve and enhance.
~·ve are constantly bombarded with news about dying lakes, pol-
luted rivers, oil spills in our oceans and bays and consequent
destruction of natural habitats and wildlife. We hear about
the loss of once productive farm lands to urban development,
the destruction of forested areas on the outskirts of our cities
and towns and the resultant flooding when the rains cannot be
absorbed into the ground in a normal manner
111 of these things are happening here in the Green River Val-
.2Y a~d the surrounding lands. More specifically, the City of
Kent 1s caught up in the same process of urban development
-9-
that we hear about from other areas and regions of our nation.
Thus, the citizens of Kent find themselves in the p6sition of
having t·o look at their natural environment in a greater
amount of deta'il then they have heretofore. v~hat is happening
all across the nation to the natural environment is happening
here at home also.
{
! I
I
i i'
I
\
I I
I I
' i I ,
I 1,\ ·.
l
I
!11.' I:
I! ! I
I
!
I' I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
:.:'.,,--
WATERWAYS
OVERALL GOAL: PROVIDE OPTIMUM USAGE AND PRESERVATION OF THE
CITY 1 S WATERV~AYS.
GOAL 1: To permit optimal usage of the City's waterways for
fish, wildlife habitat, general recreation and aesthetic
enjoyment.
Objective 1:
Policy:
Po~:
Objective 2:
Policy:
Policy:
Objective 3:
Policy_:
Objective 4:
Policy: --
Policy:
Preserve and enhance water quality.
Provide adequate sewerage systems adjacent
to waterways.
Prevent pollution of both surface and sub-
surface water resources.
Preserve and enhance and restore biotic
habitats in waterways, channels and ad-
jacent lands.
Retain naturally vegetated buffer strips
along at least 80% of waterways.
Encourage natural vegetative cover to be
left along waterways by property owners.
Preserve the natural functions of the
waterways.
Promote "non-destruction" of waterways in
areas of new construction by causing the
stream courses to remain stable and in their
natural state.
Incorporate water resources into an open
space network.
Designate the waterways and adjacent lands,
including wetlands, as open space which can-
not be built upon.
Define the intended usage for waterways
as open space.
Objective 5: Promote both private and public recreational
usage along waterways.
Policy: Promote easements for hikers and non-motorize
vehicles.
Policy: Provide rest areas along waterways.
GOAL 2: Preserve local water resources.
Surface water management systems shall utili;
natural features. Objecti~:
.Policy:
Policy:
Policy:
Policy:
-10-
Where flow control in waterways is required,
promote means other than channelization and
levees.
Significant wetlands should be used as deten
ponds for flood control.
Discourage the practice of cnemically sprayi
for control of vegetation along waterways.
New construction shall be designed so that f
discharge is no more than what it was under
natural conditions.
l
.·_·.~
:
OPEN SPACE
,...------GOAL: INSURE THE PRESERVATION OF LAND FOR A VARIETY OF
----~ USES WITHIN THE CITY OF KENT.
~~---1: Encourage open space throughout the City.
Objective 1: Reserve, conserve and preserve farm land,
forested areas, flood plains, wetlands and
watersheds.
Policy: Create a forestry and watershed code which·
aids in preventing/regulating the cutting
of vegetative cover and which aids in re-
tention of slopes and ravines.
Policy: Encourage a network of corridors, paths and
routes throughout the City.
Objective 2~ Encourage private development of open space.
Policy: Develop an ordinance defining guidelines
for incorporation of natural elements/open
space in private developments.
Policy: Promote the incorporation of open space/
natural elements on eixsting developments.
-11-
NATURAL RESOURCES
OVERALL GOAL: PROTECT AND ENHfu~CE EXISTING NATURAL RESOURCES.
GOAL 1: Ensure the preservation of ecosystems and protect thei_
aesthetic values.
Objective 1: Preserve and protect suitable habitat for
local species.
Policy: Cause new private and public developments
in wildlife areas to landscape at least 3%
of their land for wildlife. -
Objective 2: Protect and enhance existing nesting, breed-
ing, spawning and feeding areas.
GOAL 2:
Policy: Where developed lands contain wildlife
landscaping for food and shelter, encourage
noninterference with wildlife use of such
landscaping.
Policy: Utilize the latest technology to ensure that
streams used by fish do not become negative
breeding and spawning areas.
Protect the ecosystems and the aesthetic value of
the hillsides.
Objective 1: Limit new mining or removal of gravel and
sand.
Policy: Any extraction or utilization of mineral
and/or soil resources shall be conducted
in harmony with the existing ecosystems
and sensory aesthetics.
GOAL 3: Encourage the conservation of soil resources.
I
I
I
.I i
I'
I 1
: I
'1 i
, I
I , I
I
I
I •
I •
. I
; I
I i
'I
i 1
i j
I
I
I
!
!
I I
I I I
i i
I I
.~r -
GOAL 4:
Insure the preservation and improvement of existing
atmospheric conditions.
Objective 1:
Policy:
Objective 2:
Policy_:
control local sources of pollution (both
point and non-point) .
coordinate with other local jurisdictions
in creating regulatory devices.
Balance land use to retain sufficient vege-
tation and natural soils to aid in the
natural air purification process.
Require at least 5% of any development to be
landscaped. ---
-12-
C1RCUL8IIO~ ELEMENI
interrelationship of circulation and patterns of land use
strong, and circulation is recognized as being one of the
elements for enforcement of land use policies. Today,
, circulation patterns are giving way in importance to
ferent modes of transportation. Costs and social factors
· being introduced which go beyonq right-of-way acquisition,
struction and maintenance. All levels of government, as
1 as business, and the individual are being made aware of
.. se changes through a variety of means.
cost of fuel to power private automobiles, trucks, buses,
lanes, and other means of transportation is one factor which
1 recently was not of major concern. Major fuel types
in abundant supply and were well within the economic
ch of those who had a means to use them. Because of availa-
lity, cost and environmental concerns the types of fuels
ling used are changing. Automobiles and trucks today operate
a variety of fuel types ranging from propane to unleaded
·,.st important for the future, however, will be the a:vailabili ty
fuel. The realities of our limited fuel resources has
akened us to the need of strong and effective planning in
0this realm. Many conservation measures have been introduced
,~in the recent past to conserve our depleting fuel resources.
· .. Americans have adopted various means and ·modes of travel pre-
~iously not considered significant enough to warrant major
planning. Bicycles, motorcycles, and pedestrian traffic have
increased greatly. Automobiles have become smaller and more
gasoline efficient, and public transportation modes more popu-
lar. Carpooling has had some effect on the number of automo~
biles on the roads and fuel consumption.
For the majority of mobile Americans today time/distance ratios
~ave been replaced by cost/distance ratios as the single most
ln:portant factor in travel. It is of vital import-ance-th-at
11
government recognize and anticipate the changes taking place
in transportatio~ and be able to provide the necessary re-
sources to accommodate and encourage these changes.
OVERALL GOAL: ESTABLISH A BALANCED, SAFE AND EFFICIENT
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FOR ALL MODES OF TRAVEL.
GOAL 1: Assure the provision of safe and efficient routes
and terminal facilities for vehicular traffic moving within
.and through Kent.
Objective 1: Provide adequate trafficways for both local
and through traffic, separating the systems
when possible.
Policy 1: Provide better and easier east-west traffic
flow.
Policy 2: Encourage through-routes outside residential
areas and discourage through-traffic routes
in residential areas.
Objective 2:
Policy l:
Policy 2:
Objective 3:
Insure adequate facilities for both truck
and vehicular traffic.
Provide truck loading and unloading zones
in commercial areas.
Provide multi-use parking facilities.
Maintain close coordination of planning with
all state, regional, county, city and
private transportation agencies and activi-
ties.
-13-
Objective 4: Scale and design vehicular routes and facili-
ties both to the function they are to perform
and the neighborhood or area in which they
are located.
......
':i
I
; I
I : I
, ! I I ; .
I
I
I
I
!
I I
I
I
I\ j 1
]1 I ,
111 ·· ·, I ,I
GOAL 2: Assure safe, convenient pedestrian movement within
and through Kent.
Objective 1: Coordinate with King County and surround-
ing cities to establish and implement a
regional pedestrian trail network.
Policy 1: Inform state, regional, county, and private
concerns of these policies and establish
continuing communication.
Objective 2: Provide a network for safe, convenient
pedestrian movement throughout the City.
Policy 1: Vehicular and pedestrian circulation should
be separated in all portions of the City
where feasible.
I
Policy 2: Sidewalks and adequate lighting should be
installed along all public roads.
Policy 3: Provide pedestrian trafficways within re-
tail trade areas.
Policy 4: Provide separation of pedestrian traffic
from hazards or nuisances as necessary.
Policy 5: Provide pedestrian trafficways to and from
public transportation routes and encourage
public transportation to intersect with
established pedestrian routes.
Policy 6: Periodically review the functioning of the
pedestrian system to determine its safety
and effectiveness.
Policy 7: Provide pedestrian access to and from
designated pedestrian trails.
GOAL 3: Assure safe, convenient bicycle movement within an
through Kent.
-14-
Objective 1: Coordinate with King County and surroun
cities to establish and implement a reg
bicycle trail network.
Policy 1: Bicycle routes should be related to pop
lation centers and should connect recre
facilities as well as con®ercial areas.
Policy 2: Bicycle routes should serve a recreatio
a transporhation function. ·
Policy 3: Bicycle routes should be planned as a s
and should be integrated with the pedes
trails system where feasible.
Policy 4: Bicycle routes should be planned in coo
tion with other local governments, the
government, state and federal governmen
agencies, and local residents.
Objective 2: Provide a network for safe, convenient
bicycle movement throughout the City.
Policy 1: Separate bicycle lanes should be provi
where necessary.
Policy 2: Bicycle use should be considered in all
roadway planning and design.
Policy 3: Periodically review the functioning of
bicycle system.
Objective 3: Investigate the feasibility of licensi
bicycles and operators.
,, _,
... ~~ .....
it.tj; ·~·-.i
1)~. !~
--CITY
OF
WASHINGTON
Community P·lan
. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-
PROPOSED LAND USE
~-
Commerce
Office
Mulll-lamlly Dwelling
Single -lamlly Dwelling
Residence-Agrlc ullure
Agrlcullure
lnduslrlal Park
Industry
Public.
Open Space -Trails
·,~~
·\· ir:~
-~ '"-:'
CITY MAP
KENT··
KINO COllNTf
1974
··--~-
~]ill)"
~:'
~---~--• &It
~ ~
':J
WA.SibtiOTCJt( STATE HlmiWAT~
~....rNEHT~HIOHWA'I'I ~"""~11'111"*'...,--___,lr.!".._,r;-----------I ..................
r Al!lto•~ ~ --~=.:-== ---------.. ~-·.
Provide for public transportation needs.
,Objective 1: Establish and maintain close coordination
and continuing communication among all state,
regional, county, city and private public
transportation planning and construction
activities.
--J----·-2: Encourage the establishment of an efficient
regional and local feeder mass transporta-
Policy 1:
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Policy 4:
Policy 5:
tion system, both public and private.
Encourage bus routes to relate to population
centers and to connect and interconnect
industrial, residential, commercial, recrea-
tional and educational areas.
Encourage local shuttle buses to connect
outlying areas, which have low population
density, with the main routes.
Encourage facilities such as bus lanes, bus
storage terminals, park and ride lots.
Encourage transit routes to converge on
Kent's core area.
Encourage the private sector, industrial
firms, commercial establishments, to
become involved in providing transportation
to and from work.
Objective 3: Encourage use of mass transit systems.
Policy 1: Provide bus shelters, route signs, bus
stop signs, posted maps of times and routes.
Policy 2: Encourage improvement of routing and
ridership by surveying rider and potential
rider desires.
Policy 3: Encourage improvement of local bus service.
Policy 4: F~courage active public transportation in-
formation programs.
Objective 4: Encourage and support the safe and efficient
use of rail transportation for movement of
both goods and people.
Policy 1: Coordinate with public and private rail trans-
portation organizations to insure efficient
movement of people and goods.
Policy 2: Minimize conflicts between rail transportation
and other modes of transportation and land use.
Policy 3: Encourage the provision of necessary rail
routes and terminal facilities.
Policy 4:
GOAL 5: Develop
ease of
spirit.
Objective 1:
Objective 2:
Encourage the public or private utilization
of the existing rail lines for mass transit
purposes.
and maintain an address system which allows
location and promotes a sense of community
Use the Central Business District as the center
for naming of streets and the numbering of
addresses.
Choose street names to promote a sense of
community for Kent, such as persons of
historical significance, local flora and
fauna, or other names related to the cultural
heritage of Kent.
Objective 3: Minimize the duplication of street names,
especially where streets are not continuous.
Objective 4: Name a committee to develop changes in the
names of city streets where necessary.
Policy 1: Include on this committee representatives
of the public, including the Chamber of
Commerce, the Post Office, the Fire Depart-
ment, the Public Works Department, and other
interested parties.
-15-
I
'I
'II I' ,,I
! il
i II ~ ' i ! I I :
I I I il
: ~ !I
I I' il ! '
1 11
I'!
I
I !
I
II
II il
if,
: 1: I
I i 1f j
I i J.:
1
I 1'
1
i , rl:
I :I
, .
1
11,
,, ,I,
!I :[' I I ' I
' fl! J I',
:11
I
' : 'i:
1: /,'I
i
!
HOUSING ELEMOO
OVERVIEW
The housing problem is often referred to but many people are
unclear as to the nature of the problem. As a nationwide
concern, the housing problem is generally defined as a shortage
of decent housing at prices people can afford. In 1968, the
President's Committee on Urban Housing found that 26 million
units of housing would have to be produced in the next ten
years to meet housing needs and that six million of these
housing units would have to be for low and moderate income
families.
Housing cannot be defined as merely a physical structure but
is part of a neighborhood and larger community -it is a total
living environment. Likewise, the housing problem is more
than the actual number of units that must be produced. It
also includes the location and distribution of these units
and the variety and choice of housing types and residential
e::·.7 i.conment s.
Housing itself is a complex field affected by such variables
as supply of money, level of taxation, property tax assessments,
public services such as transportation, water, sewers and
schools, land costs, racial and economic discrimination,
planning arid zoning controls, building and housing codes,
the construction industry, government programs, and geographic
and attitudinal considerations.
Housing has been traditionally controlled by the private
market. However, this market has been altered by a range of
governmental programs concerning housing. In the 1930's
Congress established the Public Housing Program and the Federal
Housing Administration (FHA) which insured iwme mortgages.
After the war, the Veteran's Administration guaranteed home
mortgages.
The post-war housing boom was significantly influenced by
these latter two programs as they encouraged single-family
-16-
suburban development. The 1949 Housing Act established a
national goal of "providing a decent home and sui table li
environment for every American". In the 1950's and 1960 1
the federal government established a number of subsidy ho
programs designed to provide housing for those marginally
above public housing income levels. The Housing Act of ~
added a new dimension to government involvement with hous
by requiring that planning efforts of local governments w
were federally assisted include a "housing element" of tb
Comprehensive Plan.
The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (P.L. 9
radically altered national housing policy by effectively
tailing the traditional public housing program, as well c:
various subsidized mortgage insurance programs. In theiJ
Congress thrust forward a heretofore relatively minor pa1
the national housing scene: public housing in private ac<
modations, or leased housing. Under the 1974 Act, local
ments are required to prepare and adopt a "Housing Assisi
Plan" prior to receiving any H & CD block grant funds.
local·Housing Assistance Plan must contain: an accurate:
of the condition of the hous·ing stock; an estimate of th1
assistance needs of lower income persons; a realistic an1
goal for the nunber of dwelling units to be assisted; an•
general location (by census tract) of proposed new housi,
projects and substantial rehabilitation projects for l01.v
come persons. After acceptance of the Plan by HUD, all
ly assisted housing units must conform to tne adopted Pl
and local governments review all proposed projects to en
this conformity.
~'Vhy is housing required to be an element of the,Comprehe
Plan and why is it a concern of urban planners? Comprehe
planning attempts to guide the total development pattern
community. It recognizes the interaction of various dec
and seeks to achieve community goals by establishing pol
to achieve these goals and to guide decision making. Pl
have long dealt with and influenced housing, nowever, nc
recognizing the impact of plans on housing supply, locat
"
1ed a
le liv
1960 IS
:ly hou
r1ally
of 19
nmental suitability. The housing element of the Compre-
ve Plan forces the housing issue to be dealt with ov~rily.
planning cannot influence many of the forces that affect
ing market (such as taxation_, availability of
ing), it can influence the location of housing, types of
ng, provide a range of residential environments and
se the livability of residential environments.
.,---GOAL: INCREASE THE RESIDENTIAL POPULATION IN KENT,
A DECENT HOME AND SUITABLE LIVING ENVIRONMENT FOR
DESIRING TO LIVE IN KENT.
Preserve and expand existing residential neighbor-
hoods situated close to necessary public facili-
ties and services.
Objective 1: Actively encourage the retention and reha-
bilitation of existing residential neigh-
borhoods on and adjacent to the Valley
floor, especially those within and around
the CBD core.
Policy 1: Undertake a detailed neighborhood analysis
of all existing residential neighborhoods
to determine their potential for rehabilj.ta-
and to identify strategies for such reha~
bilitation.
Policy 2: Utilize regulatory measures (e.g. zoning)
to provide both interim protection to
existing residential neighborhoods which
will not be retained, and to protect and
expand the neighborhoods to be preserved.
Policy 3: Through development of neighborhood plans,
assure the provision of adequate utility
services to these neighborhoods (e.g.
water, sanitary sewers, storm drainage,
streets, lighting, power etc.)
-17-
Policy 4: Ensure that the neeoea community services
(e.g. library facilities, medical services
governmental services, neighborhood shop-
ping opportunities, etc.) are easily
accessible by neighborhood residents.
Policy 5: Ensure that rehabilitation is more eco-
nomically feasible by amending the Kent
Zoning Code and other applicable regu-
latory measures to permit a high density
of residential development, especially
around the CBD core.
Objective 2: Maintain and improve ti1e existing resi-
dential neighborhoods on the East and
West Hills.
Policy 1: Prepare detailed neighborhood plans for
the east and west hill neighborhoods.
Policy 2: Utilize regulatory measures (e.g. zoning)
to protect these neighborhoods against
usesincompatible with residential de-
velopment (e.g. major arterial. loca-
tions, commercial and industrial devel-
opment, etc.)
Policy 3: Through development of neighborhood plans,
assure the provision of adequate utility
services to these neighborhoods (e.g.
water, sanitary sewers, storm drainage,
streets, lighting, power, etc.)
Policy 4: Ensure that the needed community services
(e.g. library facilities, medical
services, governmental services, neigh-
borhood shopping opportunities, etc.)
are easily accessible by neighborhood
res,idents.
......_---~-~ ;I~
I
I
I' 'I ,! I
''
i:
I
I' I [
' I
I I
: i I I :
'!!:
I '
1 I
' I
I
I :
1
: il
, • II
I :I :
: i I l I~
__ . ____ 3....1 ---~·--:c-~~--------
GOAL 2: Guide new residential development into areas where
the needed services and facilities are a·vailable.
Objective 1: Encourage new residential development on
suitable areas of the Valley floor.
Policy 1: Designate suitable areas for future resi-.
dential development.
Policy 2: Develop a capital improvement program for
public streets, utilities and facilities
on the Valley floor.
Policy 3: Review current zoning, construction, and
building regulations to ensure that flexi-
ble development standards are maintained.
Policy 4: Permit and encourage medium and high
density residential development, but only
as the necessary services are available.
Policy 5: Provide for mobile hom.e parks and sub-
divisions.
Policy 6: Encourage upper story residential uses
in commercial and office buildings.
Objective 2: Permit new residential development on the
East and West Hills as the necessary
services and facilities are available.
Policy 1: Develop a capital improvement program for
public utilities and facilities on East
and West Hills.
Policy 2:.
Policy 3:
Utilize regulatory measures (e.g. zoning)
to restrict and discourage development
which contributes to urban sprawL
Through neighborhood planning, permit med-
ium and high density residential development
i.n areas that are compatible with existing
~ow density development.
-~OAL 3: Assure an adequate and balanced supply of housing
units offering a diversity of size, densities, ·age,
style and cost.
Objective 1;
Policy 1:
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Policy 4:
Encourage the maintenance and rehabili-
tation of existing housing units.
Sponsor a housing rehabilitation program.
Provide information on home maintainence
and rehabilitation to homeowners.
Maintain a strong code-enforcement progra
Support legislation and progra:ms which
provide incentives for maintaining homes
in good condition.
Objective 2: Encourage the production of a variety of
new dwelling units.
Policy 1: Emphasize P.U.D. developments where densi
ties and. dwelling types are mixed.
Policy 2: Provide for mobile home parks.
Policy 3: Review current regulations (e.g. zoning,
building, fire codes) to insure that the
associated increased development costs are ndnimi
Policy 4: Determine what incentives could be provi-
ded to encourage new construction of unit
Policy 5: Provide for assisted housing (e.g., for
the elderly, low income, etc.).
GOAL 4: Assure environmental quality in residential areas.
-18-
Objective 1: Through neighborhood planning, assure an
adequate level of community/public
services for all residential areas.
·.;
,I .
Policy 1: Provide ~dequate utility services to all
residential areas.
Policy 2: Provide the environmental health services
necessary to maintain the residential
environment.
Policy 3: Promote needed conununity services and
facilities such as churches, daycare
centers, libraries, recreation and leisure
activities, etc.
Policy 4: vJhere necessary, establish buffers (e.g. ,
open space, fencing, extensive landscaping,
etc.) between existing residential areas
and adjacent non-residential areas and/or
uses.
Policy 5: Promote and encourage consolidation and
rerouting of the railroad lines that run
through the downtown core.
Objective 2: Preserve and maintain as much of the nat-
ural environment as possible.
Policy 1: Prohibit residential development in areas
unsuitable for development (e.g., steep
slopes, swamps, etc.).
Policy 2: Require site design to utilize the natural
features (e.g., streams, steep slopes,
wetlands).
Policy 3: In site development plans, require preserva-
tion of significant natural features.
'
-19-
i
i I ,,
I ' I I ,; I
i '' ' ,,
I i
' '
,!' I :I' u
i
i
!
I
I
II
,, ,,
II
I
1:
II
I I
l
I
l
HUMAN RESOURCES ELEMENT
Today all too many individuals and families find they are un-
able to cope sufficiently with all the complexities, stresses
and ever accelerating changes of modern society. In the past,
large extended families provided substantial emotional and
financial support to the individual family merr~er. Close
neighborhood ties also fostered aid in times of difficulty
or crisis. Government as a whole did not involve itself in
providing services for the individual or family except in times
of crisis.
The many changes in our life style over the past years (e.g.,
greater mobility, frequent job changes, shift from the "ex-
tended" family to the ••nuclear" family, etc.) are rapidly
diminishing the resources once provided by the family and
neighborhood; a breakdown of the family unit and troubled
individuals are the result.
Coupled with this problem is the maze of impersonal bureau-
:;l.-•. cy through which an individual or family must now thread
his way to receive the help he is seeking. Lack of readily
available and adequate information regarding services and pro-
grams, as well as constantly changing programs, funding and
eligibility requirements further add to the average citizen's
confusion.
Kent, as a community, has many resources which can be used to
deal with these problems. To date these resources have been
under-utilized, due largely to a lack of coordination and
adequate information. No one agency or entity has been in
the position to offer comprehensive coordination and leader-
ship; this is an urgent need to which the City government
should uddress itself.
OVERALL GOAL: PROMOTE THOSE RESOURCES AND FACILITIES NEE
BY:KENT RESIDENTS TO ENABLE THEM TO MEET THEIR PERSONAL N
AND TO ENSURE THE WELL-BEING OF INDIVIDUALS AND FM~ILIES.
GOAL 1: Encourage and support full educational opportuniti
for Kent residents of all ages, at a level commensurate wi
their abilities, desires, and needs.
-20-
Objective 1: Support continuing education, comaunity
education,vocational education and pre-
school programs.
Policy 1: Participate in programs for multiple f
ing to help support vocational, communi
continuing education and pre-school pr
grams~
Policy 2: Actively seek outside funding sources.
Policy 3: Actively support development of a corn-
munity school type of program.
Objective 2: Encourage coordination between city go
ment, educational bodies and the public
minimize duplication of facilities and
programs.
Policy 1: Encourage formation of an ongoing co-
ordinating committee which establishes
formal communication, cooperation and
coordination between all facets of~the
educational system, City government and
the public.
Policy 2: Encourage and support dissemination of
information regarding available continc
ing, community vocational and pre-schoc
education programs.
:::
d
Encourage and support informal short-term
educational programs in the community.
Policy 1: Recruit and sponsor such events in conjunc-
tion with other City programs, and in
partnership with the educational system.
Policy 2: Actively seek outside funding to support
these programs.
Policy 3: Provide City facilities when available,
or information regarding other community
facilities for these programs.
Assure the availability of health and social services
all segments of the community to enable them to be
ive and self-spfficient.
--J~--~·-1: Coordinate with local and regional health
agencies to insure provision of adequate
public health services for physical and
mental health.
Policy 1: Participate in local and regional health
planning activities such as the King
County Health Planning Council.
Policy 2: Encourage and support studies to determine
health needs in the Kent area.
Policy 3: Work with the Seattle-King County Health
Department and other local and regional
health agencies to insure the availability
of needed health servic~s within Kent.
Policy 4: Support educational programsconcerning health.
-J----·-2: Ensure and support high quality emergency
health care services.
Policy 1: Maintain a strong emergency medical service
program through the City.
-21-
Policy 2: Support other needed public and private
emergency and crisis intervention serv-
ices.
Policy 3: Support policies and legislation which
provide appropriate standards for li-
censing of emergency health care serv-
ices.
Objective 3: Coordinate with local a~d regional health
agencies to insure provision of adequate
environmental health services.
Policy 1: Participate in local and regional envi-
ronmental health planning activities.
Policy 2: Encourage and support studies to deter-
mine environmental health needs in the
Kent area.
Policy 3: Maintain a close working relationship
with the Seattle-King County Health De-
partment and other health agencies to
insure the availability of needed envi-
ronmental health services.
Policy 4: Support educationa~ programs concerning
environmental health.
Objective 4: Support the social services needed within
the conununi ty.
Policy i: Encourage and support studies to deter-
mine social service needs in the Kent
area.
Policy 2: Encourage the development of social serv-
ices to meet identified needs.
Policy 3: Emphasize the need for coordination of
agency programs an~ services to avoid
duplication.
Policy 4: Encourage the involvement of private in-
dustry, foundations, organiza·tions, and
groups in providing for social services.
Policy 5: Support and encourage self-help programs
(e.g.,the s. King County Activity. Center).
I
I .,
1
.. I,
I I ' ~
'II:
' l 11,
1'1
\1
' I
!
:
i!
i
;j l.i I
I I i
~ II :
I, .
. 'I' i : : ,, '
I , '
I I
I
I I 'i I
:I
. I .. !
'I
':: I .. I ,.
:I i
' ' ' '
.I ,'
I
I
'i
IIi I ~ I : .
,'1 I
il
I
Policy 6: Encourage and support programs to adequately
train volunteers serving local agencies and
programs.
Objective 5: Develop legislation and administrative
policy that facilitate the best use of re-
sources available to Kent.
Policy 1: Advocate legislation and policies at the
county, state, and federal level which en-
courage and allow for the local determina-
tion of needs and application of funds to
meet those needs.
Policy 2: Actively seek county, state, and federal
assistance, grants, donations, etc., to aid
in financing needed local programs.
Objective 6: Develop an on-going mechanism to compre-
hensively review and evaluate requests for
the City's support of health and social
service programs.
Policy 1: Establish a "Human Resources Board" to ad-
vise the City Council on such requests.
Policy 2: Encourage citizen participation in plan~
ning for health and social service programs.
Objective 7: Provide Kent residents with a comprehensive
information and referral service so that
they may be aware of what services are
available to them.
Policy 1: Identify and inventory services available
in the Kent area.
Policy 2: Provide direct support for such a service.
Objective 8: Support the availability of day care pro-
grams.
Policy 1: Encourage and support day care centers •
Policy 2: Promote public and/or private transporta-
tion to and from day cctre centers.
-22-
Policy 3: Encourage owners of potential day ~aJ
facilities, such as churches, to makE
~heir facilities available for day Ci
programs.
Policy 4: Encourage the development of day cart
centers with extended hours.
Policy 5: Encourage industries and businesses
provide day care opportunities for t,
employees.
Policy 6: Encourage and support programs for y
children with no supervision after
school hours.
Policy 7: Encourage and support education prog
to provide staff for day care.
Policy 8: Actively seek outside funding source
to support day care programs.
Objective 9: Support and encourage the multi~use
coordination of existing facilities.
Policy 1: Support the consolidation of human r
source programs into a single facilj
Folic~ 2: Use the Human Resources Board to en-
courage and promote the coordinated
of all public and private facilitie~
Objective 10: Recognize that land use and develop-
ment has social implications and cor
quences.
I
Policy 1: Analyze current physical developmen1
programs and priorities to determinE
their social effects.
Policy 2: Require a similar analysis of new pl
cal development proposals.
GOAL 3: Ensure that a balanced program of leisure ac
ties, including the arts and other cultural
opportunities, is accessible to all segments
t l A ~ ,,
r.f J !~
I;/
l~i'
!·
' (','
~:
' ~
i
the community, regardless of age, sex or physi-
-) cal abilities.
Objective 1:
Policy 1:
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Policy 4:
Policy 5:
Policy 6:
Policy 7:
Objective 2:
Policy 1:
P0licy 2:
Encourage the availability of a broad
range and number of artistic and cul-
tural programs and services in the Kent
area.
Support programs of the Kent Arts Corn-
mission.
Work with regional and local groups to
sponsor cultural activities on both a short-
term and an on-going basis within Kent.
Aid in .the promotion of artistic and cul-
tural activities.
Maintain a fund from which artistic and
cultural programs may be sponsored.
Actively seek federal, state, private
donations,foundation gifts and grants to
support local cultural activities.
Maintain a current inventory and program
of art and cultural programs available
in the Kent area.
Encourage citizen support of the Arts
Commission's cultural activities.
Encourage development of the creative
talents of Kent's residents.
Support and encourage local exhibitions
of artists and artisans, and musicians.
Provide City recognition to successful
local artists and artisans, and musicians.
~ p 1' . ! o 1cy 3: Support and encourage on-go1ng programs
Policy 1:
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Objective 4:
Support and encourage local exhibitions
of recognized athletes.
Provide City recognition to successful
local athletes.
Support and encourage on-going develop-
mental athletic programs for Kent resi-
dents.
Provide active and passive recreation
activities for all individuals and for
family and other mixed age groups.
Policy 1: Maintain and encourage citizen involve-
ment in planning recreation activities,
to ensure that the development of such
programs is in accordance with the needs
and desires of all segments of the
community.
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Policy 4:
Objective 5:
Policy 1:
Policy 2:
Develop and maintain a balanced recrea-
tional program.
Encourage the private sector to partici-
pate in the public recreation process
through dedication of land, improvement
of facilities, donations to programs
and sponsorship of activities.
Provide opportunities and facilities for
both structured and unstructured recrea-
tion activities.
Preserve Kent's cultural and historical
heritage.
Develop and maintain a list of all im-
portant historical sites and buildings
'tlithin Kent.
Maintain the office of City Historian.
; which provide Kent residents of all ages Policy 3: Encourage the expression of the diverse
~· an opportunity to express and improve cultural backgrounds vJithin the Kent
! their talents. area. ·
~ Objective 3: Encourage development of the athletic Policy 4: Support and encourage local historical j.. . talents of Kent's residents. societies.
-23-
.'
'. ;-,-Itt
(
! I :'!
, I
I I
I
I
,I
II
• ..
I,
':
II:
l(:i
::ii
1
111
;!
--:1: I :I !li
II, I
1.11 I
:,1:
::1
''.~1, '.~';I' ·, I
!,1 I
:,11 i ,, i
I :~:.
iii
!II
'
'I
! I
i I 1'
I i 'i '!I
I 1 t I i
); I I
• ,i
I:
I
I
, I
I :
. : [
'Iii i. [
I! 'I I '
I I i :I
I ~~J
'II
,I
II
''I' i: !
I II'
:I I:
'.II:
I', :i:l'
•i
ill'
1:1 I
IIi I
'I' !I
J:l!
:1 .
I
II:
II! I ,,
;~ --~~---______:__ -__ -·__:_:::_·...,..~_,..;..,._==
Policy 5: Sites and buildings of cultural and
historical significance shall have high
priority for preservation.
Policy 6: Through public and private cooperation,
encourage the restoration and designation
of historical/cultural sites and buildings.
Policy 7: Through. public and private cooperation,
encourage access to historical and
cultural sites be made available to the
general public.
Policy 8: Preserve existing areas of unique scenic,
cultural, historical, or natural interest.
Policy 9: Prevent the destruction of features of
historical and cultural significance by
restricting development for up to two
months on sites designated to be of histori-
cal significance so that the potential
damage may be evaluated.
Objective 6: Provide and support the facilities needed
to properly accommodate the arts, cultural
activities, sports, and leisure recrea-
tional activities.
Policy 1: Identify and evaluate all existing public
and quasi-public facilities in regard to
the facility needs of existing and po-
tential programs.
Policy 2: Develop mechanisms to coordinate the joint
use of all community facilities thereby
eliminating duplication .
Policy 3: Provide multi-purpose facilities, adequate
to house art, cultural and recreational
activities.
Policy 4: Provide recreation facilities accessible
to all neighborhoods.
Policy 5: Emphasize flexibility and multi-use in the
development and construction of any new
farilities where appropriate.
\'
-24-
E.CQNOMIC ELEMENT
istorically, land use planning has pre-supposed multiple
oncerns in identifying present and future land use trends.
et, plans developed as a result of this action have re-
ulted in a very narrow range of implementation tools, i.e.,
oning, subdivision and capital improvement program strategies.
lthough these are still viable strategies in preparing an
rban plan, their relationship is mostly recognized through
aps in the Comprehensive Plan. Because of this inadequacy, our
resent efforts are directed at developing a series of state-
ents (goals, objectives, policies) that can guide legisla-
.yive decision making on planning related actions.
,,,.
~he multiple solution approach to resolving land use conflicts
~ls still the preferred strat~gy in planning. For instance,
~the preservation of farmlands in the Kent Valley will never
:,~·become a reality if a singular approach to this problem such
~;as agricultural zoning is instituted. An agricultural pre-
'iservation district is only a viable alternative when coupled
~ l~th programs that reduce property taxesi promote a valley
vmarketing center for farm products; acquire development rights;
'"and eliminate sprawl oriented public improvements. Economic :;i deveHopment is the title given to this element simply because
!Planning,being a dynamic process, cannot be effective unless
:;~the economic ramifications of public action, land use, and en vi-
:, r<;>nmental degradation are recognized. "Environmental Degrada-
; tlon., is a term intended to describe the elements that blight
; ~he character of a community, i.e. , delapidated housing,
: lnadequate public services, crime, air, vlater and noise pol-
" lution, and certainly destruction of its natural landscape.
Hopefully, this dynamic approach will make people more aware
'that physical growth, and its accompanying economic benefits
also has its disbenefits like higher cost of providing added
. services, destruction of our natural landscape and eventually
1. a cutback in basic services. It's about time the public
~ and their leaders realized that economic progress is not
1 ~ltogether positive. This society functions as a system with-
1 tn ~ system and as a result cannot gain something without
\ os1ng sornethir;g.
,.Li)ti. .. .
OVERALL GOAL:· PROMOTE CONTROLLED ECONOMIC GROWTH WITH
ORDERLY PHYSICAL DEVELOPJ'·iENT, RESOURCE COi\SERVA'riON Al\ID
PRESERVATION.
GO;\L l: Promote diverse industrial development in indus-
trially developed areas.
Objective 1:
Policy 1:
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Policy 4:
Policy 5:
Policy 6:
Develop a plan for zone changes of in-
dustrial areas that considers land values,
tax base and just compensation as necessar~
Locate industrial land uses contiguous
to the West and East Valley Highways to
minimize sprawl.
Promote industrial sliOdivisions.
Promote the location of light industry_
along major arterials, especially West
Valley Highway and S. 180th Street.
Promote ·the location of heavy industry
between the two major rail lines on the
Valley floor.
Review the zoning of all unused indus-
trially classified land to determine the
desirability of the industrial zoning
classifications.
Review plans for utility extension to
insure that utility services are extended
only when necessary.
GOAL 2: Assure retail and commercial developments are in
suitable locations.
-25-
Objective 1: ~1inimize adverse physical impacts of strip
commercial development.
(
....
I
I
i
I
\
I
, I
,___J I I
:!1 I,
I
r :, :
I( I
! i ,,
I
:1 :
'I ,,
I
I
I ,,
I
I
I I:
I 'I
, )I
' 'i
·I :1: ' I I · ; I 'I li I : lll: ' I,
I ~---JII
I
!
~-~~~-~~~~--~~-~.
Policy L: Encourage planned retail-commercial busi-
ness development.
Policy 2: Discourage subdivision of shopping centers.
Policy 3: Restrict strip commercial development
to areas already so developed.
Policy 4: Adopt and enforce regulations which will
minimize the adverse impacts and unsafe
conditions caused by strip dev~lopment.
Objective 2: Promote the location of neighborhood shop-
ping centers in close proximity to the
residential areas they are to serve.
Policy 1: Assure the development of compact, attrac-
tive, and safe shopping centers.
Policy 2: Assure that neighborhood shopping facili~
ties do not disrupt the existing resi-
dential character of the neighborhood.
Objective 3: Encourage the retention of the Kent CBD
as the primary retail center for the
Kent area.
Policy 1: Pro~ote implementation of the CBD Plan.
Policy 2: Support activities which strengthen the
CBD.
Policy 3: When appropriate, locate governmental and
public functions and facilities within the
CBD.
Objective 4: Provide for the commercial services need-
ed to serve the industrial area.
GOAL 3: Encourage the retention of agriculture in Kent.
Objective 1~ Create an agricultural preservation dis-
trict.
Policy 1.: Conduct a detailed feasibility study which
outlines what agricultural activities
.:::auld be economically viable and \·Jhich
lands should be designated for agri-
cultural use.
Objective 2: Encourage the redevelopment of an
agricultural marketing system.
Policy 1: Support the sale of local products
in Kent.
Policy 2: Aid in the development of a program
for regional marketing of locally
grown products.
GOAL 4: Assure a stable diverse economic base for the City
Objective 1: Attract industries which manufacture,
process, serve or sell diverse products
Policy 1: Encourage the adoption of tax programs
which encourage good land use planning.
Objective 2: Provide diverse employment opportunitie
for all eligible age groups.
Policy 1:
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Policy 4:
Encourage labor intensive industrial
firms to locate in Kent.
Support job referral and training servi
Maintain reliable and valid data on
industri-al employment trends.
Assure that industrial and co~uercial
firms are aware of local manpower
planning efforts.
Objective 3: Provide a central source of information
regarding economic development in Kent.
Policy 1: Prepare and distribute an annual Econon
Development report.
GOAL 5: Assure adequate and suitable areas for residential
development.
-26-
Objective 1: Assure a suitable living environment in
Kent.
--~-
PUB L I C UT I L I I I E S
r'-'~~·~~ GOAL: PROVIDE A PLANNED, COORDINATED UTILITY SYSTEM.
f~~ 1: Assure every household, industry and business an
ample supply of high quality water at an adequate
pressure.
Objective 1: Develop efficient facilities for the
transmission, distribution and storage
of water.
Objective 2: Coordinate closely with the City of Seat-
tle and local water districts to insure
adequate and efficient service to all
water users of the Kent area.
Objective 3: Complete and implement a comprehensive
water plan encompassing both facilities
and service.
Objective 4: Insure an adequate water supply and pres-
sure for fire protection purposes.
Objective 5: Develop an equitable rate structure which
encourages an adequate water system.
Objective 6: Finance and develop water systems based
on planned development patterns and land
use decisions.
R-2: Provide for a planned, coordinated and efficient
sanitary sewer system.
Objective 1: Complete and implement a comprehensive
sanitary sewer plan encompassing both
facilities and services.
Objective 2: Coordinate closely with METRO and local
sewer districts to insure adequate and
efficient sewer service is available to
all the Kent area.
Objective 3: Finance and develop the sanitary sewer
system based on planned development
patterns and land decisions.
Objective 4: Develop an equitible ·rate structure which
encourages an adequate sewer system.
GOAL 3: Provide for a planned, coordinated and efficient
storm drainage and retention system which respects
and utilizes the natural drainage system.
Objective 1: Complete and implement a comprehensive
storm drainage plan encompassing both
facilities and services.
Objective 2: Coordinate closely with ~lliTRO, King County,
and local drainage districts to develop
regional drainage policies and programs.
Objective 3: Develop programs to minimize increased
storm water runoff.
GOAL 4: Provide an efficient means of refuse collection and
disposal for residents of the Kent area.
Objective 1: Encourage and support research into new
refuse disposal techniques.
Objective 2: En~ure an efficient refuse collection
system with compatible rates.
Objective 3: Coordinate with state, county and surround-
ing cities to develop and implement a
regional solid-wa~te disposal system.
Objective 4: The refuse collection and disposal system
should not cause pollution to the natural
environment.
· GOAL 5: Assure a balanced, continuous adequate power supply
for the Kent area.
-27-
I
I: ,.
II
~~~:;
' t'!
.
1
11:
I ~.I
·'
I
:'
1 ii
, 11
II
It I
'
I
I I ! ~
I
11.
'II' I : i
'I
'.~ .. l
:Ill
! I I,
,I
·l
[:
\i.l I•
:;it
1\
I
1:.
!:
!:
I , 11,
' I I'!
I,
. II
·:1 :I:
I 1'1 ,
'' ' ! ~ , ' I i
I l I
I ' I'
I 'I I,
I . t; ':) '
I .
I :1
li
'I
I
•I
'I
I I
I
I I
:i
'I
! !
:! .
1:
t
,1'
' ' : I
:11
.\
I' I I
ill
111
"·II
li I
ill'!
I
i I
I I
I! I
I
'.I
iii
'I
Objective 1:
Objective 2:
Objective 3:
Encourage and support studi•.=:s of
comprehensive power needs and resources.
Encourage and support conservation of
power resources.
Encourage and support efficient use and
conservation of existing power sources
and systems.
-28-
r-
HU.MAN ENVIRONMENT
OVERALL GOAL: ASSURE KENT RESIDENTS AN AESTHETIC AND
HEALTHFUL ENVIRONMENT.
GOAL 1: Maximize the aesthetic qualities of Kent's nat-
ural and man-made environments.
Objective 1: Maintain and enhance natural environ-
mental amenities.
Policy 1: Identify significant natural amenities
and prohibit their destruction.
Policy 2: Support and enforce regulations and
programs designed to eliminate littering
and indiscriminate dumping of waste
material.
Policy 3: Require reestablishment of some of the
natural amenities destroyed during
development.
Objective 2: Encourage a high degree of aesthetic
quality in the man-made environment.
Policy 1: Require that new construction and
improvements be designed and built so
as to enhance the quality of the neigh-
borhood in which it is located.
Policy 2: Support and enforce regulations and
programs which minimize visual blight.
GOAL 2: Assure Kent residents a healthful environment.
Objective 1: Support and enforce programs which
minimize or eliminate pollution of the
environment.
Policy 1: Adopt and enforce a noise ordinance and
bulk storage ordinance.
-29-
Policy 3: Require that a detailed analysis of the
adverse environmental impacts of any
.project be undertaken prior to issuing
permits for any such project.
Objective 2: Maintain a strong public safety program.
Policy 1: Assure an emergency medical aid program.
I
I.
!i
il
\I
d
•I
\I
II
li
I
APPENDICES
I. IMPLEMENTATION
II. POPULATION
III. STATUS OF EXISTING PLANS
IV. DEFINITIONS
V. SIX YEAR STREET PLAN
I'
Ill. ,,
[Ill
:,1
Iii
..
1
1\
,,li
,,1.
1111\
,,\1' 1i: il
I 1,
',,·,\:.1 I,
! ' ' : ~
\'\i
1 1i' '" II'
[1'
1
',,
I I'' I' ;,i
11
II:
iii
1
,1
I'
'l''t
'I ~·It
l1i:
1:,1111 ,·II
11[\,l
I I
I
I
I
,,
I'
rf ,I,
!II
I ~ I
~
11
1.
'.'1 I I ,I ··I
: :,
~· I (
i i:
. I
I i ' I)
I ' ' ~ ' I ' 'i' I
l1 r,!
1-.~ li :1 f ! I ., I I ,.
I I I , : I :
I : , I
I I ,,
I
,,
. !I i I :
il
/I ,,
i
I
!
~ --~
,:1'
! I
. ,1 I
,,, .1
':I 'I' 'I'.,~ :!i i
,, I
i i
i:
II
II
I I
I I I ~1P LEME NTAT I ON
The Comprehensive Plan cannot be a forceful guide for urban
development without an implementation strategy.
One of the reasons Comprehensive Plans have had so little
effect on urban development has been the almost total lack
of corrmitrrent to implementation of these plans.
The implementation element of Kent's Comprehensive Plan will
aid those who are responsible for guiding Kent's development
to confront the many difficult and variable aspects associ-
ated with urban growth and expansion.
Following is a list of those actions which are the minimum
effort that should be made to cause the plan to become an
effective guide for controlling Kent's urban development •
1. Annual Review
Each year the Planning Commission should review the Plan
and determine what problems are evident with it. Upon
completion of their review a report should be sent to
the City Council explaining the Commission's findings
and outlining any changes that the Planning Commission
feels are needed.
2. Codes and Ordinances
A number of codes and ordinances are a necessary tool
in implementing the Plan. The City already has an
updated Zoning Code, Subdivision Code and Travel
Trailer Code. Other codes necessary are a planned
Streets Code,.Mobile Home Park Code, Bulk Storage
Code and Noise Ordinance.
3. Area Plans
The Comprehensive Plan is broad in scope and in a
general way deals with the many urban development
problems confronting the City. However, it is neces-
sary, in many instances, to have a more detailed pre-
cise plan for a specific area of the City. There are
three such plans in existence today: The East Hill Plan,
which covers the area between S. 240th Street and S. 264tJ
and 94th AvenueS. easterly to l30th Avenue S.E.;The Cent:
Business District Plan which covers the area between Pion,
Street and Willis Street and the Milwaukee Railroad and
State Street; the Shoreline Master Plan which covers all
the area along the Green River.
In addition to these existing area plans, the City should
develop the following additional area plans: Vall~y Floo
.Plan, all of the Valley area except the Central Business
District; West Hill Plan, all the area on the west side
the City except that area covered by the Valley Plan; Nor
Part of East Hill, that area not covered by the East Hill
Plan.
The time schedule for these plans should be:
l. Valley Floor Plan 1977
2. West Hill Plan 1977-78
3. Upper East Hill Plan 1977-78
4. Comprehensive Plan Committee
Since the Plan was developed by citizens working with the
Planning Con~ission and Planning staff, it would be incurr
bent upon the City to involve citizens in a program of
monitoring the Plan. This committee would report to the
Planning Commission who would review their report and sen
it on to the City Council.
5. Capital Improvement Program
A special type of implementation device, and possibly onE
the most important, is the Capital Improvement Program.
This program attempts to look at the City's short and lor
range capital needs and allocates the necessary resource~
to reach the intended goals. Such a program is necessar}
and
all
ly one
unravel all of the existing individual and potential
conflicting Capital Programs. No comrnuni ty has enough
money for all the things it 1vould like to do. Thus
it is imperative that an orderly process be formu-
lated that will enable the City Council to expend its
resources in those areas where the need is greatest.
How does the Capital Improvement Program affect the
Comprehensive Plan? All too often capital projects
are undertaken without coordination with other over-
lapping projects or without the needs of the area
which is getting the capital improvement, properly
being assessed. Often there are neglected needs in an
area but no method for determining this. The Capital
Improvement Program can aid in overcoming this problem
and help in implementing the policies of the Compre-
hensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan as a Guide
,The policies of the Comprehensive Plan should be used
as a guide by all the City Boards, Commissions and
the City Council when they are considering official
actions that relate to the Plan. Staff reports con-
cerning rezones, variances, conditional use permits,
and subdivisions should list all the policies that
pertain to the case at hand and should explain conform-
ity or nonconformity to these policies.
When the City is embarking on a program, such as a
~ housing rehabilitation ~rogram, pertinent policies from
!.'.the Comprehensive Plan sho~:1d be the main guideline
' for determining the overall n~habilitation program.
.'More specific details can be w,>rked out as the need
arises, but the main thrust of ~he rehabilitation
program should be based on the v.licies of the Plan.
·How City Departments Relate to the P ~~E.
.;:·To be effective, the Plan must have tb? support of the
\£ity Departments which will be affected by it. Al-
(though the Planning Department will be mar~ directly
by the Plan than any other City Depc~rtment,
several other departments will also have a role in
implementation of the Plan.
8. Revise the Plan
Nothing is more useless than a document which meets
all state and local requirements as to format and
content, but which is not followed because it is out
of date or does not contain all that it should. In
such cases the Plan should be revised. It is quite
likely that the Plan will undergo its first revision
at the end of its first year in operation. If it is
not revised, it will quickly become obsolete. Kent
is a rapidly growing and changing conununi ty. rro keep
up with this situation the Plan must also grow and
change.
I I I p 0 p u LAI I 0 N
The Kent planning area in 1970 contained a population of
61,876; the 1980 and 1990 projections for tnis same area
indicate 80,571 and 202,341 persons respectively&l These
figures represent population totals derived by regional
population analysis conducted by the Puget Sound Council
of Governments.
In 1976, the City of Kent had a population of 17,500 per-
sons within an incorporated sixteen square mile area. Its
population can be disaggregated to show the three areas
within the City that represent the major portions of tnis
figure. These areas known as the West Hill and East Hill
Plateau arid the Valley Floor reflect the follo~ing con-
centrations:
West Hill
East Hill
Valley Floor
TOTAL
6,000
6,500
5,000
17,500
1 ~nterim Regional Development Plan (IRDP): 1980 -1990 IRDP
P:.J?ulation Forecast; Projections updated in 1973 for the
AAh (Activity Allocation·Model) PSCOG.
,,
I .:
I
' /i'
'I I,
i II· I.
li'"'
1
1 II 'I .,,
I'· 1 1
! i' IIIII . I
Il l tl
'I Iiiii 11· I' ~~·.· Jill' If I" I 1
'1 i I
. !\
i
I'll' i ,.';1 l
I !
I
,:J ll·i'l:
1 illl
I ~· • 1 ,
1
1 I 1 1 I
. :I . 1:
'\<'li -~J:"
1;:
'I '· .t.
I 'i
I 'I'
Recent increased residential construction activity on the
West and East Hill Plateaus is expected to continue within
the next few years. As early as 1974, the Kent Building
Department issued only 20 single family residence permits
while no Building Permits for apartments were ever issued.
The 1975 figures, however, seem to reflect a renewed interest
among developers and financial institutions in the resi-
dential construction field. Within the next five years
significant contributions to the Kent population are ex-
pected to come from annexations and continued residential
growth in the West and East Hill Plateaus.
Table I shows population figures for the planning area as
forecast in the 1973 update of the Interim Regional Develop-
ment Plan (IRDP) prepared by the Puget Sound Council of
Governments (PSCOG). [Note : u.s. Census Tracts typically
coincide with the Activity Allocation Forecast Model (AAM)
as developed by PSCOG]. Generally, these population pro-
jections demonstrate modest growth through 1980 with a
forecast of 80,571 people; this 30% popuJation increase up
to 1980 and the population growth rate of JSO% projected
for the Planning Area between 1980 and 1990 are plausible,
particularly for the East Hill plateau. Muc~ of this wooded,
gently rolling area is at the present sparesl~ developed
for mixed residential uses. With the pending co0strtiction
of adequate roads to this plateau, the 1990 ~opulation
forecast would become more credible.
Since 1968, the City of Kent has experienced an o'erage
population growth rate of 3% annually. Prior to 1)68 the
City experienced the largest population growth ~hrc tgh an-
nexation of residentially developed lands. Populatl0n pro-
jections for the City may be developed by simply detc-mining
the amount of land available for single family units o.td
apartment units and multiplying the average number of p~l.-
sons per type of unit~ single family residence or apart1·~~nt
unit. The following figures are used to project maximum
population growth for Kent:
SINGLE FAMILY/APARTMEJ\T
Average Number of persons per unit 3 0 2 2 0 0 ·-
TABLE I POPULATION FORECAST FOR THE
KENT PLANNING AREA -1973*
PLANNING AREA
AMM(District) Census Tracts 1970 19 80 .
3050 298 8,008 9,907
3150 296 3,271 4,585
3400 297 4,321 5, 010
3410 295 3,944 5,705
3420 317 5,829 7,995
3430 318 2,606 6, 19 8
3440 294 7 '0 17 11,129
3450 292 6,950 7' 015
3460 29 3 8,097 11' 4 70
3500 290 6,836 8' 135
3510 291 4,098 5,005
3540 283 3,450 3,003
. -
TOTAL. 65,147 85,156
1990
13,6~'
7 '6 7'
6,7
8,5
15,8
11,0
15,5
10' 2
19 '7
10,7
6, 3
3,5
210,0
*Puget Sound Council of Government -1973 Population Foree
update of (IRDP) Interim Re~ional Development Plan.
0
61
67
71
50
80
03
59_.
24
70
70
=·.2
r-, 4
Ol
!ca:
Thus, the present availability of land for either of
these uses is as follows:
Acreage
Units/ Units X
Per Acre Persons
Pop.
Total
Single Family 669 acres 6 4014 X 3.2 = 12,845
Multiple {Apts.) 425 acres 24 10,200 X 2.0 = ~,400
TOTALS 1,094 acres 33,245
19 76 Population 17,500
Maximum Population 50,745
Under the present land availability figures, Kent has a
maximum population capacity of approximately 51,000
persons.
I I I. STATUS OF EXISTING PLANS
The following existing plans are hereby adopted as
elements of this Comprehensive Plan:
PLAN
East Bill Plan
Water Plan
Parks and Recreation Plan
Shoreline Master Program
Central Business District Plan
DATE ADOPTED
6/71
10/72
4/74
4/74
5/74
IV, DEFINITIONS
ACTIVE RECREATION -The individual participates in an
organized function, generally physical (e.g., basketball)
or cultural (e.g., folk dancing).
ACTIVELY
ADEQUATE
Communicating or causing action or changes.
In action; working; in force.
-Given to action; energetic.
-Requiring or implying action or exertion.
Implying rapid action; progressive.
-Equal ·to or sufficient for some (specific) .
requirement; proportionate or correspondent.
-Such as is lawfully and reasonably sufficient.
ADJACENT LANDS -Lands lying next to, touching, connected
in some manner (physically, visually).
ASSURE -To secure, as against change or risk; insure.
-To confirm; give confidence to.
COMMUNITY SCHOOL PROGRAM - A program developed to maximize
joint use of public school facilities by the schools and
the community (e.g., using school facilities for adult
education classes in the evening) .
CONSERVE -To keep in a safe or sound state; to preserve.
CONTINUING EDUCATION -Ongoing educational opportunities
offered ·through the State Community College System,
including credit and non-credit classes at all levels in
varied areas (academic and vocational prosrams as well as
special interest programs) .
lj
i<'
I
Ill! I •••
I
1,'1
I
I' ' '
,I' 1~1
II,,!
r 11~., !'~j iII
:11,
:I
!;I ,~.,1
,~,~ '
i '
)i
I II j'
l:
ji
,i i
.t
ury hlond
...
"~ ' \)
0
~
.:,
0 ..,
\ I
,." ~· ,':::''..,.. ~ ).,O of Kent t.
197
o CENSUS TRACTS
Legend w A s H I N 0 T 0 N & BLOCK GROUPS '"'2'96-Census Tract .=::.:.. ' '• .-~." ==-2
Block Group -----KENT PLANNING
THIS MAP REPRESEN
THE PLANNING AREA
WITHIN WHICH THE
PUGET SOUND COUNCI
OF GOVERNMENT'S 1
POPULATION FORECA
WAS DEVELOPED,
:sENTS
\REA
rHE
)UNCI L
's 19
<ECAST
ECOSYSTEMS -Eco is short for ecology, a
describ1ng the interaction of plants and
other organisms and with their environs.
to the methods by which this interaction
Greek word
animals with
Systems refers
takes place.
ENCOURAGE -To give help or patronage to, as an industry;
to foster.
ENHANCE -To advance, augment or elevate; to make or
become greater, as in value or desirability.
ENSURE -To give assurance to; to insure.
-To make sure or certain; guarantee; as to
ensure the rule of the majority.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES -The Seattle-King County
Health Department Environmental Health Services include:
food inspection; regulation of sewage disposal and water
supply; plumbing inspections; meat inspections; platting
and land development regulations; vector control; rodent
control; jail inspection; mob~le home park inspection;
school inspections; swin~ing pool and beach inspection;
solid waste regulation,. as well as other public health
nuisances.
FLOW CONTROL-Control of water flow, i.e., speed, area of
flow, eddies, whirlpools.
INSURE -To assure' against loss by a contingent event;
to give, take or procure an insurance on or
for; to enter into, or carry.
-To ensure; make certain.
LIMIT - A boundary or boundary line.
-That which terminates, circumscribes or confines;
the utmost extent, as the limits of knowledge.
- A fixed value or form which a varying value or form
may approach indefinitely, but cannot reach.
,~)
MAXIMIZE -To increase to the highest degree.
NATURAL
-To interpret a doctrine, duty, etc., in the
broadest sense.
Pertaining to, in accordance with, or determined
by nature.
Being or found in its native state; specifically;
(a)not regenerate, enlightened, etc.; as passion
of the natural man; (b) not artificial, synthetic,
processed, acquired by external means, etc.; as
natural rubber.
NATURAL ENVIRONMENTAL AMENITIES -Those natural occurring
pfienomena wh1ch are considered to be an asset to human
enjoyment of the environment (e.g., lakes, forests, streams,
wild life) .
NEIGHBORHOOD -An area bounded by definite boundaries,
with a sameness of social and economic background of the
residents, often identified with a significant landmark
such as a school, shopping district, etc.
OPEN SPACE -
GENERAL -Vacant lands or other areas including open
water areas, roads, streets and highways wnich
do not have structures built on them or over
them.
-.~ -~---~ --------------
!I' I I
!II:
i
i!
11
1
I
I
f':
SPECIFIC -Areas of natural occurring phenomena -wet-
lands, streams, rivers and other unobstructed
waterways, lakes, etc.; woodlands, brushlands;
open farm lands used for crop and animal
husbandry, hillsides and bluffs.
SPECIFIC -Areas of manmade features -streets -highways,
canals, open yards, parking lots, trails,
alleys, _landscaped areas, parks and recrea-
tional areas without structures, vacant lots.
To have real meaning, open space should be related to
its purpose and the benefits derived therefrom. For
example:
Type of Open Space ) Wetlands Open Space
Characteristics ~ Open, not built on, open
water areas plus vegetation
cover on edges or reeds
and other water oriented
plants.
Purpose -) To protect the natural
drainage systems -to act
(Conservation) as storage areas for storm
water -for passive recrea-
tional uses -for visual
effect -to protect and
enhance wildlife, flora
and fauna.
Benefits ~ Preservation of land as
open space with the intent
that the benefits to the
general public of holding
a wetland as open space
(or other type open space
land) can be measured or
are measurable in relation
to harm that might occur
to the public's health,
safety and general welfare
if the wetland is destroyed
. or allowed to be built upon.
PASSIVE RECREATION -The individual observes activity or
is participating in social activities (e.g., picnicking)
or natural activities (e.g., a nature walk).
PERMIT -1.
2.
3.
4.
To tolerate; to consent to.
To grant (one) license or liberty; to authorize.
To give over; commit.
To allow; to make possible.
POINT M~D NON POINT SOURCES OF POLLUTION -Point refers to
a specific place producing pollutants - a factory. Non
point refers to sources not tied to a specific site -
moving autos, trucks and airplanes.
POLLUTION -Defilement; impurity.
PRESERVE -1. To keep from injury or destruction, protect;
PREVENT
save.
2. To keep intact;
3. To maintain; retain;
1. a. To anticipate, as an occasion by being
ready, or a wish by s~tisfying it.
b. To precede; outrun.
2. To forestall; circumvent.
3. To keep from happening, existing, etc.; to
render impossible, especially by advance
provisions; as rain prevented his coming.
PRIME FARMLfu~D -Prime farmland is land best suited for pro-
duclng food, feed, forage, fiber; and oilseed crops, and
also available for these uses (the land could be cropland,
pastureland,_rangeland, forest land, or othe~_land but not
urban built-up· land or water) • It has the soil quality,
growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce
sustained high yields of crops economically when treated
and managed, including wate~_ manag~rrte~_!._, __ aqcording _to
modern farming methods.
PROHIBIT -1. To forbid by authority; to interdict.
2. To stop or prevent (a person); to hinder .
~ize.
:o
~+-•
'--'-'
0
pro-
1
td,
lOt
II
"'li
ll
;,
~· t ~
If
il
i
.; .
PROMOTE -1.
2.
To conttibute to the growth of; to further.
To advance from a given grade or class as
qualified for one higher.
PROTECT -To cover or shield f~om injury or destruction;
to defend; guard.
PROVIDE -To look out for in advance.
0UASI-PUBLIC FACILITIES -Land areas and physical improve-
ments which are accessible by the general public at certain
times, although such area or facility is not owned directly
by the public. ·
RESERVE -1.
2 .
3.
4.
RESTOHE -1.
2.
RETAIN -1.
2.
To keep in store for future or special use.
To retain or hold over.to a future time;
not to deliver or disclose at once.
To s,et apart; to keep_.
To secure by stipulation.
To give back; to return.
To re-establish; to put back into existence
or use.
To keep in a fixed place or condition; as,
To hold or continue to hold in possession
or use.
SIGNIFICANT NATURAL FEATURES -Refers to natural occurring
features such as trees, hills, streams, wetlands which
can be identified as having some worth to the community
when preserved.
STABLE -1.
2.
3.
Firmly established;. fixed; steadfast.
Steady in purpose; constant.
Durable; enduring.
STRUCTURED RECREATION -Recreation which is planned for,
has set schedules, designated areas, and rules.
SUPPORT -1. To uphold (one) by aid or countenance; to
take side of;
as to support the defendent in an action;
2.
also to uphold or defend as valid, right,
just, etc.
To verify or substantiate.
SURFACE -The exterior of an object or body; the face or
faces of a three-dimensioned thing.
SURFACE ill~D SUBSURFACE WATER RESOURCES -Surface: water
flowing on the surface in streams, water standing in ponds
and wet land areas; subsurface: water contained underground
in aquifers or other forms.
TRAFFICWAYS -Established or proposed rights-of-way for
movement of people and goods by different modes of transporta-
tion.
ID'JSTRUCTURED RECREATION -Spontaneous activity.
WETLAND TYPES
The Soil Conservation Service has defined and located the
wetlands of the Green River Valley. The Soil Conservation
Service definition is:
TYPE I WETLANDS
Seasonably wet but dry during most of the growing season -
have value for waterfowl in the winter.
TYPE II WETLANDS
Wetlands having water at or near the surface and seldom any
standing on the surface -little if any value to waterfowl.
TYPE III WETLANDS
Generally wet through most of the growing season with water
depths of six inches or more. Used for feeding and nesting.
TYPE IV WETLANDS
Retain their water throughout the year. They have a high
waterfowl value.
TYPE V WETLANDS
None in Kent.
I
I
II', ! i
I ,I
II' til
TYPE VI·WETLANDS
None in Kent.
TYPE VII WETLANDS
These wetlands have standing water for much of the year and
are covered with a growth of trees -not good for waterfowl,
but can sustain small fur animals.
... ·~.
----------~~=.....,-=-=------iiiiiiiiiOO~~~
-.~ .;' ._,--
. . ·. ~-, . ' . ._ ·-··, . .
. . . . . . ~-(/~--~;1:~~:~~~--:~ .... ·. ~ . ' . . \ .. :~l3~i~ittg:e~·i__ SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION .PROGRAM
THE sxx YEARj:?{~~~~Isf.:~vcrioN PROGRAM FOR sTRE.ETs IS HEREBY ADOPTED As PART oF THIS cor~PREHENSIVE PLAN
. ·.~;,-->~-~-~-I·~-)~;-~\-:;~-~:--;.:,' --HEAR:I~dJ-8~-~~~:6-:-7-76 ADOPTION DATE ft·-ZJ-7~ RES-OLUTION NO. 90'-~ -Kent -··--~
" 1977 -1982 -.· _.. ,--·
''
I LENGTH
...... ·
< '-R0.\0 F c u R
ESTIMATE OF C85T
IT EM LOCAL r-;AME OR u L R U 1----: 1978-1 i
OF STREET N A B R TYPE ()I= ,.,ORK IN
;
I rw. ROAD OR 5TRE ET c 5 MIL E5
I TO";"t-L
NO, A A 197 7 l97'J i 1seo -sa.
./ T 5 N L !
I I
I !
1 Russell Road
Kent Des Moines -James c u Gr., Pave, Curb, Swk, Landscaping 0.4 I I 1010 1010
I
Undergrowtding, Dr. I 2 Fourth Ave & Willis St New Traffic Signal 0.1 c u so i 50
I .
3 Jason Avenue c u Gr., Dr., Pave, Curb, Swk, Ill.,
Smith -James Rockery, Landscaping, Underground 0.2 420 420
-t . lOlst Ave/SE 260th St c u Gr., Dr., Pave, S\~k, Curb, Ill. 0.4 I 737 737
I
!
SE 2S6th -104th Ave
I
I
s N Second Avenue L u Gr., Dr., Pave, Swk, Curb, Ill. 0.1 137 I 137
Heeker -Smith I
I
; 687
6 112th Avenue SE c u Gr., Dr., Pave, Curb, S\~k o.s ' 687
SE 232nd ~ SE 240th
I
'
:
7 42nd :wenue L u Complete Half Street 0.2 so 80
' S 250th -S 253rd I ~
8 ~lili tary Road c u Widen for left turn lanes 0.2 so I 50
~ t Kent Des ~loines Rd :
I
' Fourth Ave & Smith St
I
9 c u New traffic signal 0.1 80 80
Fourth Ave & ~1eeker St Traffic signal rebuild 0.1 I .
10 Smith Street. c u Gr·., Dr., Pave, Curb, S\~k, Ill.
Fourth -T..incoln Undergrounding 0.3 519 519
I
l -'---'--~----· ...
l
SlX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (cONTINUED)
~ ' . .
HEARING DATE . 6-7-76 ADOPT IOtl DATE C.-21-l(S' RE.SOLUTION NO. BOC:, Kent
1977 -1982
1
I !... E ~~:., TH
I" ,,
MIL cS
I
E S T II.! A T E 0 F : ::l S T
ROAD F c u R
ITEM I ~OCAL ,..; !..llE I ~-. u l_ R u ""
tW. OF c:; ~::;c..-.-...... N :.. B .., I 1YFE OF ,.,O?.K
.,. I''._ C I r,
R::JAD OR ~Tr\E.ET NO. c s A A
T s N L
UAB PROJECTS, DESIGN A.''-JD AfPRAISAL jCOST* FU?~~ED ! 686
11 ll04th Avenue SR 515 c u
SE 252nd -SE 260th
12 !Central Avenue
at Smith, ~leeker, Go we SR 516 ~I u
& Willis
PROJECTS DEPENDENT ON OUTS~DE FUND~NG
13 104th Avenue SR 515 I S u I
SE 236th -SE 240th
14 Kent Kangley Road SR 516 I M u
SE 256th -!16th Ave
15 Reith Road c u
S 253rd -~lili tary Road
16 East Valle)' Higluvay M u
S 212th -S 192nd
17 I ~leeker Street SR 516 s u
Green River -\\'ash. Ave
18 S 196th Street c u
East \"a 11 ey Hh")' -
l'ies t Valley Ihvy
19 S .::;oth Street s u
East Valley Ilwy -
\icst Valley H1vy
--.-L -.J.._ .
0.42 Widen, Gr., Dr., Pave, Swk, Curb,
Ill.' Landscaping, Undergrounding
0.38
Signal rebuilds with signal poles
nast arms, new controllers, illu-
mination, one new signal, increas
curb radii
l'iiden, Gr., Dr., Pave, Swk, Curb,
Ill.' Landscaping, Undergrounqing
0.23
Same as above 0.87
Same as above o. 70
Same as above 1.3
Sar.1e as above 1.1
l~iden, Gr., Dr., Pave, Curb, 111,1 1.0
Landscaping, UnJcrgrounding, \elv
Alignment
\'Iiden, Gr., 11r., Pave, S1\k, Curb
Ill, Landscaping, UnJergrounding,
Structure
1. 25
686
189
270 196
15 1234
128 297
970
1 I -·-·-·-__ · .
·~
1500
2350
1858
i 1999
1-1 so
I
189
466
1249
2350
1925
1858
1999
24 20
--------___ _.L_. _____ _J
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
CHARLES ANDERSON
JIM BAUMAN
LETA BOWERS
WALLACE DEMBICZAK
KRISTINE DEMBICZAK
DAVE DUNNING
DAVID EDDY
JACK ELDER
RICHARD FARAGE
MAX FULLNER
DALE GARRISON
PETER A. GOMES, SR.
EVELYN HERINGSON
DR. JEROME JOHNSON
KARL KAMAN
BILL LACY
LORI LARCON
HAZEL LESLIE
DENNIS McCLELLAN
RAY McCONNELL
DONNA McGUIRE
JOHN MERCER
JUNE MERCER
JOHN MORRIS
HILDER E. MULLEN
HRS. AFTON NEILSON
MRS. THOMAS O'CONNELL
CLINTON POZZI
ROBERT RAUSCHER
BOB SMITH
CHARLES SMITH
JACK STITT
.t-'IARGE STITT
JONI STRONG
BILL THAYER
CYNTHIA TONDA
GARY VOLCHOK
JUDY VOLLBRACHT
GLEN WALDEN
MAX WELLS
VIRGINIA WESTERBERG
HARRY WILLIAMS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF
JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
LYN JOHNS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
RAUL RAMOS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
WILL WOLFERT, ASSISTANT PLANNER
LIN MIRK, OFFICE COORDINATOR
CAROL GREENE, SECRETARY
CAROL COWAN, FILE CLERK