HomeMy WebLinkAbout3940ORDINANCE NO .39 L}D
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of theCity of Kent, Washington, amending the Kent
Comprehensive Plan and its Capital Facilities
Element to include the Capital Facilities plans of theKent, Federal Way, and Auburn School Districts
(cPA-2009-2).
RECITALS
A. The state of washington Growth Management Act ("GMA")
requires internal consistency among comprehensive plan elements and the
plans from other jurisdictions.
B. To assure that comprehensive plans remain relevant and up
to date, the GMA allows amendments to the capital facilities element of
comprehensive plans concurrently with the adoption or amendment of a
city budget (RcW 36.704.130(2)(a)(iii)).
C. The City of Kent has established procedures for amending the
comprehensive Plan in chapter L2.02 of the Kent city code, allowing
amendment of the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive plan
concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the city budget and
allowing the City Council to hold the public hearing instead of the Land Use
and Planning Board.
L Comprehensive plan Amendment
2OO9 School Dist. Capital Facilities plans
D. The Kent, Federal way, and Auburn school Districts have
submitted proposed amendments to their Capital Facilities Plans to be
included in an amendment of the City's Capital Facilities Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
E. After providing appropriate public notice, the city council of
the city of Kent considered the requested comprehensive plan
amendment and conducted a public hearing on the same on November !7,
2009.
F. On October 7, 2009, the City provided the required sixty (60)
day notification under RCW 36.704.106 to the State of Washington of the
city's proposed amendment to the capital Facilities Element of the
comprehensive Plan and the sixty (60) day notice period has rapsed.
G. On December 8, 2009, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the Capital Facilities Element amendment CPA-2009-2 to include
the capital Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal way, and Auburn school
Districts, as set forth in Exhibit "4" attached and incorporated by this
reference.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
sEcrroU 7. - Amendment rhe Kent comprehensive pran, and its
Capital Facilities Element, are hereby amended to include the Capital
Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal Way, and Auburn School Districts, as
set forth in Exhibit "4" attached and incorporated by this reference (CPA-
2009-2).
2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2OO9 School Dist. Capital Facilities plans
SECTION 2. - SeverabÌlity. If any one or more sections,
subsections, or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional
or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and
effect.
SECTION 3, - Corrections by Cíty. Clerk or Code Revíser. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws,
codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and
section/su bsection numbering.
SECTION 4, - Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and
be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of passage as provided
by law.
, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER,CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2OOg School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans
TO BRUBAKER, CIry ATTORNEY
PASSED . I day of Decembe r, 2009,
APPROVED: 7 day of December, 2009.
PUBLISHE), IA day of December,2009.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.33 !Q
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
BRENDA JACOB CITY CLERK
P:\Civll\Ord¡nance\CompPlanAmend-SchoolDlstcäpltalFacllitlesPlans-2009.docx
4 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2OOg School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans
Auburn School District No. 408
GAPITAL FAGILITIES
PLAN
2009 through 201 5
Adopted by the Auburn school District Board of Directors
May 11, 2009
This page intentionally left blank.
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408
915 Fourth Street NE
Auburn, Washington 98002
(253) e31-4e00
Serving Students in:
Unincorporated King County
City of Auburn
City of Algona
City of Kent
City of Pacific
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Janice Nelson
Ray Vefik
Carol Helgerson
Lisa Conners
Craig Schumaker
Dennis Kip Herren, Superintendent
.{I.JBURN SCHÛOL NTSTRTCT
{úAvenuÊ t0 Excellentett
I
I
I
This page intentionally left blank.
Section I
Section ll
Section lll
Section lV
Section V
Section Vl
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Enrollment Projections... ... .
Standard of Service
lnventory of Facilities
Pupil Capacity
Capital Construction Plan.
Page I
Page 6
. Page 8
Page 15
Page 18
Page 21
Section Vll lmpact Fees
Section Vlll
. Page 24
Appendices.... . Page 28
Appendix 4.1 - Student Enrollment Projections Page 29
Appendix 4.2 - Capital Facilities Plan Projections Page 43
Appendix 4.3 - Student Generation Survey Page 48
This page intentionally left blank.
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section I
Executive Summary
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
lnrìo +l^-^,,^L ,)rì1<
/-ww tt Lruwwårt Lw t J
l. Executive Summary
This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Auburn
School District (the "District") as the District's principal planning document, in
compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act and the
adopted ordinances of the counties and cities served by the District. This plan was
prepared using data available in the spring of 2009.
This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the
District. However, this Plan is not intended to be the sole plan for all of the District's
needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic long-range Capital Facilities Plans
consistent with Board Policies and actions, taking into account a longer or a shorter time
period; other factors and trends in the use of facilities; and other needs of the District as
may be required. However, any such plan or plans will be consistent with this Six-Year
Capital Facilities Plan.
To enable the collection of impact fees in the unincorporated areas of King County and
within the City of Auburn and City of Kent; the King County Council, the City of
Auburn and the City of Kent will adopt this Plan by reference as part of each
jurisdiction's respective comprehensive plan. To enable the collection of impact fees in
the Cities of Algona and Pacific, these municipalities must also adopt this Plan and adopt
school impact fee ordinances.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act and the local ordinances,
the Plan will be updated on an annual basis, and any changes in the fee schedule(s)
adjusted accordingly.
The Plan establishes the District's o'standard of service" in order to ascertain the
District's current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public
Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not
account for the local program needs of the District. The Growth Management Act and
the school impact fee ordinance authorize the District to define its standard of service
based on the District's specific needs. In general, the District's current standard provides
that class size for grades K-2 should not exceed 25 students; class size for grades 3-4
should not exceed 27 students; class size for grade 5 should not exceed 30 students.
When averaged over the six elementary grades, this computes to 26.5 students per
classroom. Class size for grades 6-12 should not exceed 30 students, with some subject
areas restricted to lesser numbers. (See Section III for more specific information.)
2
The capacity of the schools in the District is calculated based on this standard of service
and the existing inventory of facilities including transitional classrooms. The District's
2008-09 capacity was 13,690 whereas Full Time Equivalent ("FTE") enrollment for this
same period was 14,018.83 (includes Full Day Kindergarten). The actual number of
individual students was 14,703 as of October 1, 2008. (See Section V for more specific
information.)
The capital construction plan shown in Section VI addresses the additions and proposed
modernization to the District's existing facilities. This provided for a new high school
approved by the voters in February 2003 and opened in September 2005; and the addition
of two new elementary schools approved by the voters in February 2005; with Lakeland
Hills Elementary opening in the Fall of 2006 and Arthur Jacobsen Elementary opening in
the Fall of 2007. The plan includes the construction of a new middle school and a new
elementary school, as well as the acquisition of future school sites to accommodate
growth. The new facilities are required to meet the projected student population increase
to be generated from the large development areas within the Auburn School District.
Three areas that have significant impact on the school district are the Lakeland South, the
Lea Hill, and the north Auburn valley areas of the district. There are other pockets of
development that impact the District as well. The City of Kent has an area of
approximately 158 acres that was sold to developers in 2004. The economic downturn
has slowed development in these areas. The district completed a comprehensive review
of all district facilities and in October 2008 a Steering Committee made
recommendations to the board for capital improvements to existing facilities and
replacement of seven schools over the next ten years. These recommendations led to a
capital improvements levy and a bond issue that was placed on the ballot in March 2009.
The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn and the
City of Kent provide for the assessment of impact fees to assist in meeting some of the
fiscal impact incurred by a District experiencing growth and development. Section VII
sets forth the proposed school impact fees for single family and multi-family dwelling
units. The student generation factors have been generated using the students who
actually attend school in the Auburn School District from single family and multi-family
developments constructed in the last five years. The method of collecting the data is
with the use of GIS mapping software, data from King County and Pierce County GIS;
and to integrate the mapping with student data from the district's student data system.
This method gives the District actual student generation numbers for each grade span for
identified developments. This data is contained in Appendix 4.3.
J
This page intentionally left blank.
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
GAP¡TAL FACILITIES PLAN CHANGES FROM 2OO8 TO 2OO9
Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes from the 2008 Capital
Facilities Plan that are a part of the 2009 Plan. The changes are noted by Section
for ease of reference.
Section I
Executive Summary
A. Updated to reflect new information within the Plan
B. Summary level list of changes from previous year
Section ll
Enrollment Projections
Updated projections. See Appendices 4.1 & 4.2
Section lll
Standard of Service
A. lncrease of 2 early childhood classrooms at elementary level
B. lncrease of 1 second grade TOSA program at elementary level
C. Reduction of 1 structured learning classroom at middle level
D. lncrease of 2 structured learning classrooms at the high school level
Section lV
lnventory of Facilities
Updated to include portables at Lakeland Hills Elementary for Fall of 2009
Updated to include Special Education Transition Facility for Fall of 2009.
Updated to include portables at Mt. Baker Middle School for Fall of 2009.
Section V
PupilGapacity
Updated to include portables at Lakeland Hills Elementary for Fall of 2009
Updated to include Special Education Transition Facility for Fall of 2009.
Updated to include portables at Mt. Baker Middle School for Fall of 2009.
4
Section Vll
lmpact Fees
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHAA,GES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2OO8 to 2OO9
Appendix 4.1 - Updated enrollment projections from October 1 , 2008
Appendix 4.2 - Updated enrollment projections with anticipated buildout schedule.
Appendix 4.3 - Student Generation Survey March 2009
Section Vlll
Appendices
5
DATA ELEMENTS
CPF
2008
CPF
2009 EXPLANATION
Student Generation Factors
Single Family
Elementary
Mid School
Sr. High
Multi-Family
Elementary
Mid School
Sr. High
School Gonstruction Gosts
Elementary
Middle Sehool
Site Aquistion Gosts
Cost per acre
Area Cost Allowance Boec
Mateh % - State
Match % - District
District Average AV
Single Family
Multi-Family
Debt Serv Tax Rate
GO Bond Int Rate
$21,750,000
$42,500,000
0.3370
0.1 450
0.1 780
0.0650
0.0290
0.0390
$272,387
$168.43
59.32%
40.68%
$1.79
5.11%
$290,617
$78,574
$21,750,000
$42,500,000
0.3200
0.1 520
0.1 580
0.0790
0.0340
0.0420
$286,006
$168.79
59.17%
40.83%
$1.67
4.99%
$316,271
$85,729
Consistentwith King County Ordinance 11621,
Student Generation Factors are calculated
by the school district based on district
records of average actual student generation
rates for new developments constructed
over the last five years.
Updated estimates on land costs
Updated to projected SPI schedule
Updated to current SPI schedule.
Computed
Updated from March 2009 King County
Dept of Assessments data.
Updated from March 2OO9 King County
Dept of Assessments data using weighted
average.
Current FiscalYear
Current Rate (Bond Buyers 20 lndex 3-09)
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section ll
En rol I ment Projections
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS
The Auburn School District uses a modified cohort survival model to project future enrollment for all
of the District's operations. Table ll.1 is an extract from the comprehensive projection modelfound in
Appendix 4.2 titled "CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections". This Table shows the
anticipated enrollment for the next six years based on the previous 6 year history of the District under the
assumptions set forth in the comprehensive projections, Appendix A.1, and the projection for additional
students generated from new developments in the district as shown in Appendix 4.2.
Note: The district is currently operating Full Day Kindergarten in nine schools and includes two state
funded Full Day Kindergarten at two additional elementary schools.
7
TABLE
il_I
ASD ENROLLMENT
PROJ ECTIONS (March 2009)
GRADE
2008-09
Actual
2009-1 0
Proiected
2010-11
Proiected
2011-12
Proiected
2012-13
Proiected
2013-14
Proiected
2014-15
Proiected
KDG
1
2
3
4
5
998
101s
1024
I 048
1044
1 069
1024
1057
1044
1 058
1092
1 088
1 051
1084
1087
1078
1102
1 136
1082
1116
1118
1126
1128
1152
1114
1149
1151
1 159
1176
1178
1142
1177
1179
1187
1205
1223
1170
1205
1207
1216
1233
1252
K-5 61 98 6364 6538 6722 6926 7114 7283
6
7
I
1 096
1 034
1076
1 095
1120
'1065
1114
1119
1152
1 168
1144
1157
1 185
1 199
1182
1208
1211
1233
1252
1234
1246
6-8 3206 3280 3385 3469 3566 3652 3732
I
10
11
12
1256
1341
1 350
1352
1 368
1218
1275
1326
1 361
1 330
1151
1250
1458
1329
1267
1 130
1469
1426
1265
1245
1495
1431
1 355
1237
1549
1455
1 358
1325
9-12 5299 5187 5092 51 84 5406 5517 5687
TOTALS '14703 14831 r5016 15374 15898 16284 16701
GRADES K-12 Actual Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected
K-5 w/K @112
6-B
9-12
5699
3206
5299
5851
3280
5187
601 3
3385
5092
61 81
3469
5184
6369
3566
5406
6543
3652
5517
6698
3732
5687
K-12 wlK @.112 14204 14319 14490 14833 15341 15713 16117
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section lll
Standard of Service
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
STANDARD OF SERVICE
The Schoot tmpact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn
and the City of Kent indicate that each school district musf esfaö/rsh a "Standard of Service" in
orcler to ascertain the overall capacity to house its projected student population. The Superintendent
of Public lnstruction esfab/rshes square footage "capacity" guidelines for computing state funding
support. The fundamental purpose of the SPI guidelines r.s fo provide a vehicle to equitably
distribute state matching funds for school construction projects. By default these guidelines
have been used to benchmark the district's capacity to house its student population. The SPI
guidetines do not make adequate provision for localdistrict program needs, facility configurations,
emerging educationat reform, or the dynamics of each sfudenfb educational program. The Auburn
Schoo/ District Standard of Service addresses those local considerations that require space in
excess of the SPI guidelines. The effect on the space requirements for both permanent and
relocatable facitities rs shown below for each grade articulation pattern. Conditions that may
resutt in potentiatspace needs are provided for information purposes without accompanying
computations.
OVERVIEW
The Auburn School District operates fourteen elementary schools housing 6,198 students in grades
K through 5. 665 of the 998 Kindergarten students attend 1/2 days throughout the year. Grades I
through 5, plus 333 kindergartners, attend on a full day basis. When converted to a full time equivalence
the K-5 enrollment is 5,784. Four middle schools house 3,206 students in grades 6 through 8. The District
operates three comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school housing 5,299
students in grades I through 12. The District opened the fourth high school in the fall of 2005.
crAss srzE
The number of pupils per classroom determines the number of classrooms required to house the
student population. Class sizes are subject to collective bargaining. Changes to class size
agrecmcnts can havo oignifioant impact on available space.
The current pupil/teacher limit across all elementary programs is an average of 26.5 students per
teacher. Consistent with this staffing limit, room capacities are set at 26.5 students per room at grades
K - 5. At grades 6 - 12 the limit is set at 30 pupils per room. The SPI space allocation for each grade
articulation level, /ess the computed reduction for the Auburn School District Standard of Service,
determines the District's capacity to house projected pupil populations. These reductions are shown
below by grade articulation level.
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
STRUCTURED LEARNING FOR DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District operates a structured learning program for students with moderate to severe
disabilities at the elementary school levelwhich currently uses ten classrooms to provide for 105 students
The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of
capacity is expected unless population with disabilities grows at a disproportionate rate compared to
total elementary population.
ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR
The Auburn School District operates an adaptive behavior program for students with behavior
disabilities at the elementary school level. The program uses two classrooms to provide for 20 students.
The housing requirements for this program exceed the SPI space allocations by two classrooms.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
I
(53)
0
(53)
Auburn School Diskict No. 408
CAPITAL FAC¡LITIES PLAN
2009 through 20't5
STANDARD OF SERVICE
SPECIAL EDUCATIOA' RESOURCE ROOMS
The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the elementary level for
special education students requiring instruction to address their specific disabilities. Seventeen standard
ciassrooms are required to house this program. The housing requirements for this program exceed
the SPI space guidelines by ten standard classrooms. The loss of capacity is expected as growth
in program is larger than the total elementary population.
(265)
0
(265)
NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCE ROOM
The Auburn School District operates one resource room to support the education of Native American
students at the elementary level. One standard classroom is fully dedicated to serve these students.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 room @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 1 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity O rooms @26.5 each =' Total Capacity Loss
(27)
0
Total Capacity Loss (27)
HEAD START
The Auburn School District operates a Head Start program for approximately 120 youngsters in six
sections of 112 day in length. The program is housed at three elementary schools and utilizes
three standard elementary classrooms and auxiliary office spaces. The housing requirements
for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
(80)
0
EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District operates a pre-school program for young children with disabilities below
age five. This program is housed at eight different elementary schools and currently uses eleven
standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI
space guidelines.
(80)
(2e2)
0
(1 06)
0
(2e2)
READING LABS
The Auburn School District operates a program for students needing remediation and additional
language arts instruction. These programs utilize non-standard classroom spaces if available in
each elementary school. Four elementary schools do not have non-standard rooms available, thus
they are housed in a standard classroom. The housing requirements for this program are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
10
(106)
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
STANDARD OF SERVICE
MUSIC ROOMS
The district elementary music programs require one acoustically modified classroom at each
elementary school for music instruction. The housing requirements are not provided for
in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(371)
0
(371)
ENGLISH ASA SECOND LANGUAGE PROGRAM
The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the elementary school level for students
learning English as a second language. This program requires fourteen standard classrooms that are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(371)
0
(371)
SECOND GRADE TOSA PROGRAM
The Auburn School District provides a TOSA reading specialist program for eight highly impacted
elementary schools. This pullout model provides direct instruction to students who are not at grade
level and do not receive other services. This program requires eight standard elassrooms that are
not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
(212)
0
(212)
ELEM ENTARY LEARNING SPECIALIST PROGRAM
The Auburn School District provides a learning specialist program to increase literacy skills for
first and second graders. This program model has been created from the l-728 funds and currently
has the specialist going into existing teacher classrooms, as well as pulling out students into
designated classrooms. The district is utilizing classrooms at all fourteen elementary schools.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(371)
0
(371)
FULL DAY KNDERGARTEN
The Auburn School District provides Full-Day Kindergarten programs to increase academic skills for
kindergarten students. This program model has been created from tuition, l-728 funds and currently
has two schools receiving state funding for 2008-09 school year. The district is utilizing fourteen
classrooms at nine of the fourteen elementary schools. Housing requirements exceed the OSPI space
guidelines for this program by seven classrooms.
Loss of Permanent Capacity I rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(186)
0
11
(1 86)
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACIL¡TIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
STANDARD OF SERVICE
MIDDLE SGHOOLS
SPECIAL EDUCATIOAI RESOURCE ROOMS
The Auburn School District operates a resource room program for each grade at the middle school level.
This is to accommodate special education students needing remedial instruction to address their specific
disabilities. Nine classrooms are required at the middle school level to provide for approximately 300 students.
The housing requirements for this program are not entirely provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District offers a self-contained program for students with moderate to severe behavior
diabilities. The program is housed at one of the middle schools and uses one classroom. The housing
requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space allocations.
STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District operates four structured learning classrooms at the middle school level for
students with moderate to severe disabilities and one developmentally disabled classroom for students with
profound disabilities. Two of the four classrooms for this program are provided for in the SPI space allocations.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(53)
0
(53)
MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPUTER IABS
The Auburn School District operates a minimum of one computer lab at each middle school. This program
utilizes a standard classroom per middle school. The housing requirements for this program
are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each - 0
Total Capacity Loss (120)
ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the middle school level for students
learning English as a second language. This program requires four standard classrooms that are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each - 0
Total Capacity Loss a12})
ROOM UTILIZATION
The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive middle school program that includes
elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are
not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available
teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 11114108 identifies 148 teaching stations available in the
mid-level facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately B teaching stations.
Loss of Permanent Gapacity 8 rooms @ 30 each = (240)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = Q
Total Capacity Loss (240)
12
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 20'15
STANDARD OF SERVICE
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
SEA/TOR HIGH COMPUTER IABS
The Auburn School District operates two computer labs at each of the senior high schools. This
program utilizes two standard classrooms at comprehensive high schools and one at West Auburn
The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
(210)
0
(210)
ENGLISH ASA SECOND LANGUAGE
The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at three comprehensive high schools for students
learning English as a second language. This program requires three standard classrooms that are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(e0)
0
(e0)
STRUCTUR ED LEARNING CENTER PROG RAM
The Auburn School District operates six structured learning center classrooms for 53 students with
moderate to severe disabilities. This program requires two standard classrooms that are not provided
for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
TRANSITIOTV PROGRAM FOR 18.21 YEAR OLD
The Auburn School District operates a transition program lor 18-21 year old students with moderate to severe
disabilities. Two classrooms are utilized for this program that connects students to the community and work.
The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss gf Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(60)
0
(60)
(60)
0
SPECIAL EDUCATIOA' RESOURCE ROOMS
The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the senior high level for special
education students requiring instruction to address their specific learning disabilities. The current senior
high school program requires eleven classrooms to provide for approximately 370 students.
The SPI space guidelines provide for one of the eleven teaching stations.
(60)
(300)
0
13
(300)
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
STANDARD OF SERVICE
P E RF O RM I NG ARTS CE'VTERS
Auburn High School includes 25,000 square feet used exclusively for a Performing Arts Center. The
SPI lnventory includes this space when computing unhoused student capacity. This space was
not intended for nor is it usable for classroom instruction. lt was constructed to provide a
community center for the performing arts. Using SPI capacity guidelines, 25,000 square feet
computes to 208 unhoused students or 8.33 classrooms.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 8.33 rooms @ 30 each =(250)
ROOM UTILIZATION
The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive high school program that includes numerous
elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are
not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages g5% utilization of all available
teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 11114108 identifies 148 teaching stations available in the
senior high facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 10 teaching stations.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
STANDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS
ELEMENTARY
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (2,332)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (2,334
MIDDLE SCHOOL
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (533)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (53Ð
SENIOR HIGH
Loss of Permanent Capacity - (1,270)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (
TOTAL
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (4,135)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (4J3Ð
(300)
0
(300)
14
This page intentionally left blank.
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section lV
lnventory of Facilities
Auburn School District No. 408
CAP¡TAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
INVENTORY OF FACILITIES
Table tV.1 shows the current inventory of permanent district facilities and their OSPI rated capacities.
Table IV.2 shows the number and location of each portable unit by school. The district uses relocatable
facilities to:
1. provide interim housing in school attendance areas uniquely impacted by increasing school
populations that would otherwise require continual redistricting.
2. make space available for changing program requirements and offerings determined by unique student
needs, and
3. provide housing to cover district needs until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed.
Relocatable facilities are deemed to be interim, stop gap measures that often place undesirable stress on existing
physical plants. Core facilities (i.e. gymnasiums, restrooms, kitchens, labs, lockers, libraries, etc.) are not of
sufficient size or quantity to handle the increased school population served by adding relocatable classrooms.
Table
IV.1
Permanent Facilities
@ OSPI Rated Capacity
(November 2008)
District Sch ool Facilities
Buildine Capacity Acres Address
Elementary Schools
Vy'ashineton Elementary 492 5,40 20 E Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002
Terminal Park Elementary 401 6.70 1101 D Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002
Dick Scobee Elementary 550 10.50 1031 14th StreetNortheast, Auburn W4,98002
Pioneer Elementary 415 8.30 2301 M Street Southeast. Auburn WA, 98002
Chinook Elementary 485 8.75 3502 Auburn Way South, Aubum V/4, 98092
Lea Hill Elementary 459 10.00 30908 l24th Avenue Southeast,Auburn WA. 98092
1005 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002Gildo Rey Elementary 531 10.00
Eversreen Heiehts Elem.456 8.09 5602 South 316th. Aubum WA,98001
Alpac Elementary 494 10.60 310 Milwaukee Boulevard North, Pacific WA, 98047
Lake View Elementary 595 16.40 16401 Southeast 318th Street, Auburn V/4,98092
Hazelwood Elementary 578 12.67 11815 Southeast 304th Street, Auburn V/4, 98092
Ilalko Elementary 585 12.00 301 Oravetz Place Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092
Lakeland Hills Elementary 594 12.00 1020 Evergreen Vy'ay SE, Auburn V/4,98092
Arthur Jacobsen Elementary 614 10.00 29205 132"d Sfeet SE, Auburn, WA 98092
ELEM CAPACITY 7249
Middle Schools
Cascade Middle School 836 17.30 l0l5 24fh Street Northeast. Auburn WA, 98002
Olympic Middle School 898 17.40 1825 K Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002
Rainier Middle School 849 26.33 30620 l16th Avenue Southeast, Auburn V/4, 98092
Mt. Baker Middle School 84s 30.88 620 37th Street Southeast. Auburn WA, 98002
MS CAPACITY 3,428
Senior High Schools
West Auburn Hieh School 231 s.l0 401 West Main Street, Auburn \MA, 98001
Auburn Senior Hieh 2.261 18.60 800 Fourth Street Northeast, Auburn V/4, 98002
Aubum Riverside HS 1,388 33.00 501 Oravetz Road, Auburn WA. 98092
Auburn Mountainview HS t,431 40.00 28900 l24rh Ave SE, Auburn, WA 98092
SH CAPACITY 5.31 I
16
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACIL¡TIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
INVENTORY OF FACILITIES
TABLE
tv.2
TEMPORARY/RELOCATABLE
FACILITIES INVENTORY
(March 2009)
Elementary Location 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Washington
Terminal Park
Diðk Scobee
Pioneer
Chinook
Lea Hill
Gildo Rey
Evergreen Heights
Alpac
Lake View
Hazelwood
llalko
Lakeland Hills Elementary
Arthur Jacobsen Elementary
0
2
3
3
5
5
b
0
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
2
3
3
5
5
6
0
2
2
0
2
2
0
0
2
3
3
5
5
6
2
2
2
0
2
2
0
0
2
3
3
5
2
6
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
3
3
5
2
6
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
3
3
5
2
6
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
3
3
5
2
b
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL CAPACITY
30
795
32
848
34
901
33
875
33
875
33
875
33
875
Middle School Location 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Cascade
Olympic
Rainier
Mt. Baker
0
0
5
6
0
0
5
8
0
0
5
8
2
0
8
I
2
2
I
8
2
2
8
I
2
2
8
I
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL CAPACITY
11
330
13
390
13
390
18
540
20
600
20
600
20
600
Sr. High School Location 2008-09 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
West Auburn
Auburn
Auburn Riverside
Auburn Mountainview
0
12
13
0
0
12
13
0
0
12
13
0
1
12
13
0
1
12
13
0
1
12
13
0
1
12
13
0
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL CAPACITY
25
750
25
750
25
750
26
780
26
780
26
780
26
780
COMBINED TOTAL UNITS
COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY
66
1,875
70
I,988
72
2,04',1
77
2,',l95
7g
2,255
79
2,255
79
2,255
17
This page intentionally left blank.
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section V
Pupil Capacity
3l
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
PUPIL CAPACITY
While the Auburn School District uses the SPI inventory of permanent facilities as the data from
which to determine space needs, the District's educational program requires more space than that
provided for under the formula. This additional square footage is converted to numbers of pupils in
Section lll, Standard of Service. The District's capacity is adjusted to reflect the need for additional
space to house its programs. Changes in the capacity of the district recognize new unfunded
facilities. The combined effect of these adjustments is shown on Line B in Tables V.1 and V.2 below.
Table V.1 shows the Distict's capacity with relocatable units included and Table V.2 without these units.
1/ New facilities shown in 2012-13 and2014-15 are not funded underthe current Capital Facilities Plan.
! The Standard of Service represents 25.38% of SPI capacity. \Men new facilities are added the Standard
of Service computations are decreased to 23.35% of SPI capacity.
3/ Students beyond the capacity are accomodated in other spaces (commons, library, theater, shared teaching space).
1t
2014-152011-12 2012-13 2013-142008-09 2009-1 0 2010-11
Gapacity
WITH relocatables
Table V.l
16,750
|
585
|
(1,880)
15,455
16,117
2,255
(4,135)
(662)
15,950
(1,e40)
14,010
14,833
2,195
(4,135)
(823)
15,950
800
(1,880)
14,870
15,341
2,255
(4,135
(471)
16,750
(1,880)
14,870
15,713
(843)
2,255
(4,135
\z¿ou)
13,690
14,703
(1 ,013)
1,875
(4,135)
15,950
(2,147)
r 3,803
14,319
1,988
(4,135
(516)
15,950
(2,0e4)
13,856
14,490
(634)
2,041
(4,135
(1,880)(2,094)(1,940)(1,880)(1,880)Total Adjustments (2,260)(2,147)
SPI Capacity-New Elem
SPI Capacity- New MS
CAPACIry ADJUSTMENTS
15,950
B
c
D
Exclude SOS 14
ASD Enrollment
E D Surplus/Deficit
lnclude Relocatable
SPI CapacityA.
4.1
4.2
Capacity Adjustments
Net Capacity
2014-152010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-142008-09 2009-1 0
Capacity
WITHOUT relocatables
Table V.2
15,950
(4,135)
11,815
14,833
(3,018)
Ø.135
15,950
800
(4,135)
12,615
15,341
(2,726)
(4,135)
16,750
4,135
12,615
15,713
(3,098)
(4,135
16,750
585
(4,135)
13,200
16,117
(2,e17)
(4,135
15,950
(4,135)
11,815
14,319
(2,504)
(4,135
15,950
(4,135)
1 1,815
14,490
(2,675)
(4,135)
(4,135)(4,135)(4,135)4 1 35()(4,135)(4,135)
SPI Capacity-New Elem
CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS
15,950
(2,888)
B.
c.
D.14,703
E.ASD Surplus/Deficit
Exclude SOS 14 4 135
SPI Capacity-New MS
4 135
ASD Enrollment
Total Adjustments (4,135)
SPI Capacity
1 1 ,815
A.
4.1
4.2
Capacity Adjustments
Net Capacity
19
PERMANENT FACILITIES
@ SPI Rated Gapacity
(March 2009)
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FAGILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
PUPIL CAPACITY
A.E Schools
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15Buildins2008-09 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12
492
401
550
415
485
459
531
456
494
595
578
585
585
585
492
401
550
415
485
459
531
456
494
595
578
585
585
585
492
401
550
415
485
459
531
456
494
595
578
585
585
585
492
401
550
415
485
459
531
456
494
595
578
585
585
585
492
401
550
415
485
459
531
456
494
595
578
585
585
585
492
401
550
415
485
459
531
456
494
595
578
585
585
585
492
401
550
415
485
459
531
456
494
595
578
585
585
585
585
Washington
Terminal Park
Dick Scobee
Pioneer
Chinook
Lea Hill
Gildo Rey
Ever Heights
Alpac
Lake View
Hazelwood
llalko
Lakeland Hills
Arthur Jacobsen
Elementary #15
7.211 7.211 7.211 7.211 7.211 7.211 7.796ELEM CAPACITY
B. Middle Schools
C. Senior H Schools
Buildins 2008-09 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Cascade
Olympic
Rainier
Mt. Baker
Middle School#5
836
898
849
845
0
836
898
849
845
0
836
898
849
845
0
836
898
849
845
0
836
898
849
845
800
836
898
849
845
800
836
898
849
845
800
MS CAPACITY 3,428 3,428 3,428 3,428 4,228 4,228 4,228
Buildinq 2008-09 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
West Auburn
Auburn
Auburn Riverside
Auburn Mountainview
231
2,261
1,388
1.431
231
2,261
1,388
1.431
231
2,261
1,388
1.431
231
2,261
1,388
1.431
231
2,261
1,388
1,431
231
2,261
1,388
1,431
231
2,261
1,388
1,431
SH CAPACITY 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311
1 950 1 750 1 750 17 35COMBINED CAPACITY 1 950 1 IEm
20
This page intentionally left blank.
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section Vl
Capital Construct¡on Plan
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 201 5
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
The formal process used by the Board to address cuffent and future facility needs began inl974
with the formation of a community wide citizens committee. The result of this committee's work
was published in the document titled'Guidelines þr Development.' In 1985 the Board formed a
second Ad Hoc citizens committee to pick up from the work of the first and address the needs of
the District for subsequent years. The work of this committee was published in the document
titled'Directions for the Nineties.' In 1995 the Board commissioned a third Ad Hoc citizens
committee to make recommendations for improvements to the District's programs and physical
facilities. The committee recommendations are published in the document titled'Education Into
The Twenty-First Century - - A Community Involved.'
The 1995 Ad Hoc committee recommended the District develop plans for the implementation,
funding, and deployment of technology throughout the District's programs. The 1996 Bond
proposition provided funding to enhance the capacity of each facility to accommodate
technological applications. The 1998 Capital Lery provided funding to further deploy
technology at a level suffrcient to support program requirements in every classroom and
clepartment. In 2005 a replacement technology levy was approverl to continue to support
technology across all facets of the District's teaching, learning and operations.
In addition to the technology needs of the District the Ad Hoc committee recognized the District
must prepare for continued student enrollment growth. As stated in their report, "the District
must pursue an appropriate high school site as soon as possible." The Ad Hoc recommendation
included commentary that the financing should be timed to maintain consistent rates of
assessment.
A proposition was approved by the voters on April 28,1998 that provided $8,000,000 over six
years to address some of the technology needs of the District; and $5,000,000 to provide funds to
acquire school sites.
During the 1997-98 school year a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by
the Auburn and Dieringer School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the
school population from an areathat includes a large development known as Lakeland South.
Lakeland South atthattime was immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the Auburn
School District. On June 16, 1998 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a
joint meeting of the Auburn and Dieringer Boards of Directors. On June22,1998 the Auburn
School Board adopted Resolution No. 933 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of
the boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On
June23,1998 the Dieringer School Board adopted a companion ResolutionNo. 24-97-98
authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad
Hoc Committee's recoÍìmendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from
Dieringer to Auburn containing most of the Lakeland South development and certain other
undeveloped properties. Development in this area is progressing at an aggressive rate.
In April of 2002, the Board formed a fifth citizen's Ad Hoc committee to address the following
two items and make recoÍrmendations to the board in the Fall of 2002:
a. A review of the conclusion and recommendations of 1985 and 1995 Ad Hoc Committees
related to accommodating high school enrollment growth. This included the review of
possible financing plans for new facilities.
22
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
b. Develop recommendations for accommodating high school enrollment gro\Mth for the
next 10 years if a new senior high school is not built.
This committee recommended the board place the high school on the ballot for the fifth time in
February 2003. The February election approved the new high school at 68.7lYo yes votes. The
school opened in the Fall of 2005.
In the Fall of 2003 the school board directed the administration to begin the planning and design
for Elementary #I3 and Elementary #14. In the Fall of 2004,the Aubum School Board passed
Resolution No. 1054 to place two elementary schools on the ballot in February 2005. The voters
approved the ballot measure in February of 2005 at 64.72Yo. Lakeland Hills Elementary
(Elementary #13) opened in the Fall of 2006. Arthur Jacobsen Elementary (Elementary #14) is
located in the Lea Hill area on a l0 acre site and opened in the Fall of 2007. These two
elementary schools were built to accommodate the housing growth in Lakeland Hilis and Lea
Hill areas of the school district.
In the 2004-05 school year, the Board convened a sixth Citizen's Ad Hoc committee to again
study and make recommendations about the future impacts in the District. One of the areas of
study was the need for New Facilities and Modernization. The committee made a number of
recoÍrmendations including school size, the need for a new middle school, and to begin a capital
improvements program to modernize or replace facilities based upon criterion.
During the 2005-06 school year, a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by
the Auburn and Kent School Boards to make reconìmendations on how best to serve the school
population that will come from an area that includes a number of projected developments in the
north Auburn valley. On May 17,2006 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at
a joint meeting of the Auburn and Kent Boards of Directors. On June 14, 2006 the Kent School
Board adopted Resolution No. 1225 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the
boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On
June 26,2006 the Aubum School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 1073 authorizing
the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad Hoc
Committee's recommendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from the Kent
School District to the Auburn School District effective September 29,2006.
In October of 2008, after two years of review and study, a Steering Committee made
recommendations to the school board regarding the capital improvements program to modernize
or replace facilities as recoÍrmended by the 2004-05 Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee. These
recoÍrmendations, based on specific criteria, led to the school board placing a school
improvement bond and capital improvements levy on the ballot in March 2009. Voters did not
approve either measure that would have updated24 facilities and replaced three aging schools.
This review also identified the need for a Special Education Transition Facility for students with
disabilities that are l8 to 2l years old. This facility is planned to be operational by the Fall of
2009 to address this growth need.
The District is projecting 1998 additional students within the six year period including the
Lakeland, Lea Hill, and north Auburn valley areas. This increase in student population will
23
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
require the acquisition of new middle school and new elementary school sites and construction of
a middle school and elementary school during the six year window.
Based upon the District's capacity data and enrollment projections, as well as the student
generation data included in Appendix 4.3, the District has determined that approximately eighty-
six percent of the capacity improvements are necessary to serve the students generated from new
development, with the remaining additional capacity required to address existing need.
The table below illustrates the current capital construction plan for the next six years. The exact
timelines are wholly dependent on the rate of growth in the school age population and passage of
bond issues andlor capital improvement levies.
2009-15 Capital Construction Plan
(March 2009)
Proiect Funded
Projected
Cost
Fund
Source
Project Timelines
08-09 09-10 t0-il 11-12 12-13 t3-14 l4-15
All Facilities -
Technology
Modernization
Yes $12,000,000
2006
6 Year
Cap Levy
XX XX XX XX
Portables Yes $r.200.000 Impact Fees XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
Property Purchase
New Middle School
New Elementary
Yes
Yes
$9,oo0,ooo
$3,500,000
Impact
Fees
State Mat
XX
XX XX XX
Special Education
Transition FaciliW Yes s750,000 Impact Fees XX XX
Middle School #5 No $42,s00,000
Bond
Impact Fee
XX
plan
XX
const
XX
const
XX
open
Elementary #15 No $21,750,000
Bond
Impact Fee
XX
plan
XX
const
XX
open
Multiple Facility
Tmnrovements No $46,400,000 Capital Levy XX XX XX XX XX XX
Replacement of
three aeine schools No $239,000,000 Bond Issue XX XX XX XX XX XX
Ll
1t
1t
tl
1i These funds may be secured through local bond issues, sale of real property, impact fees, and state matching funds.
The District cunently is not eligible for state assistance at the elementary school level for new construction. The district is eligible for
state matching funds foi modernization.
24
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section Vll
lmpact Fees
TMPACT FEE COMPUTATION (Spríng 2009)Middle school site acquistion within 6 year periodMiddle School #5 within 6 year periodElementary #15 within 6 year periodI. SITE COST PER RESIDENCEFormula: ((Acresx Costx Student FactorII, PERMANENT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCEx StudentAuburn School District No. 408CAPITAL FAGILITIES PLAN2009 through 201 5X.Permanent to Total Square Fto TotaluareFormula:|il. TEMPORARY FACIUW CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCEFormula:x Studentxtv. STATE MATCH CREDIT PER RESIDENCEFormula: (Boeckh lndex x SPIx District Match x StudentCost/Multi Family$0.00$303.88$0.00$303.88Cost/Sinqle Familv$0.00$1,358.53$0.00$1,358.530.07900.03400.0420Student Generation FactorSinqle Family Multi Family0.32000.15200.1580FaciligCapacitv5508001 500CosVAcre$0$0$286,006SiteAcreaqe122540hElem (K - 5)Middle Sch (6 -Cost/Multi Family$3,027.63$1,750.48$0.00$4,778.11$20.089.49CosVSinqle Familv912,263.82$7,825.67$0.000.07900.03400.0420Student Generation FactorSingle Family Multi Family0.32000.15200.1 580% Perm Sq FlTotal Sq Ft0.96910.96910.9691FacilitySize5508001 500FacilityCost$21,750,000$42,500,000$0Elem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr Hiqh (9 - 12)CosVMulti Family$11.31$4.30$0.00815.61CosVSinqle Family$45.80819.22$0.00$65.02Student Generation FactorSinqle Familv Multi Family0.07900.03400.04200.32000. I 5200.1 580% Temp Sq FVTotal Sq Ft0.03090.03090.0309FacilitySize26.53030FacilityCost$122,8459122,845$0Elem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr Hiqh (9 - 12)Cost/Multi Fa.mily$710.10$366.73$545.31$1,622.14$6.567.25Cost/Sinqle Family82,876.34$1,639.52$2,051.390.07900.03400.0420Student Generation FactorSlngle Family Multi Family0.32000.15200.1 580DistrictMatch59.17o/o59.17%59.17o/oSPIFootaqe90108130$168.79$168.79$168.79BoeckhlndexElem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr Hioh (9 - 12)25
V, TAX CREDIT PER RESIDENCEFormula: Expressed as the present value of an annuityTC = PV(interest rate,discount period,average assd value x tax rate)V. DEVELOPER PROVIDED FACILITY CREDITFormula: (Value of Site or Facility/Number of dwelling units)Auburn School District No. 408CAPITAL FACIL¡TIES PLAN2009 through 201 5Tax CreditMulti Family4.080.39Tax CreditSingle FamilyNumb ofYearsBnd Byr lndxAnn lnt RateCurr Dbt ServTax RateAve ResidAssd Value4.99%4.99%1010$1.671.67$316,271729Single FamilyMulti FFacil Credit$0.00No. of UnitsValue$0.00$0.00Single FamilyMulti184.MultiFamilyPER UNIT IMPACT FEESSingleFamilyFEERECAPSUMMARYSite CostsPermanent Facility Const Costs$1,358.53$20,089.49$65.02($6,567.25)$303.88$4,778.11$15.61(91,622.Facility CostsState Match Creditïax Credit$2,369.42$10,865.40FEE (No Discount)FEE (50% Discount)CreditNet Fee$1,184.71$0.00$5,432.70$0.0026
Sife CosfAuburn School District No.408CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANth9-12Sr High9122,84540$286,0061,723,52554,9121,778,43796.91o/o3.09%130$168.7959j7%40.83%$85,729300.0421500$1.674.99%Mid Sch6-8û122,U50.034800$42,500,00025$286,0061,723,52554,9121,778,43796.91%3.09%108$168.7959.17%40.83%$85,72930$1.674.99o/oMULTIFAMILYElemK-58122,8450.079550$21,750,00012$286,0061,723,52554,5121,778,43796.9r%3.09%26.5$85,72990$168.7959.17%40.83Yo$1.674.99%Sr High9-12$122,8459316,27140$286,0061,723þ2554,9121,778,43796.91%3.09%300.1 58I 500130$168.7959.17%40.83%$1.674.99%Mid Sch6-88122,845$316,2710.152800$42,500,00025$286,0061,723,52554,9121,778,437s631%3.09%30108$168.7959.17%40.83o/o$1.674.99%SINGLE FAMILYElemK-5s122,845$316,2710.320550$21,750,00012$286,0061,723,52554,9121,778,43796.91%3.09%26.590$168.7959j7%40.83o/o$1.674.99%ASD District Standard of Service.Grades K - 5 @ 26.5 and 6 - 12 @30.Relocatables, including site work, set up, ênd furnishingSingle Family - Auburn actual count (3/08)ASD District StandardsElementary Cost Estimates Feb 2008Middle School Cost Estimate Feb 2008ASD District Standard or SPI MinimumSee belowSPI Rpt#3 dated Nov 14,200866 portables at 832 sq. ft. eachSum of Permanent and Temporary abovePermanent Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. FootageTemporary Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. FootâgeFrom SPI RegulationsFrom SPI schedule for March 2009From SPI Webpage March 2008ComputedKing County Department of Assessments March 2009(multi family weighted average)Current Fiscal YearCurrent Rate - (Bond Buyer 20 lndex March 2009)IMPACT FEE ELEMENTSTemp Rm CapacityTemp Facility CostStudent FactorNew Fac CapacityNew Facility CostSite AcreageSite Cost/AcrePerm Sq FootageTemp Sq FootageTotal Sq Footage% - Perm Facilities% - Temp FacilitiesSPI Sq FlStudentBoeckh lndexMatch % - StateMatch % - DistrictDist Aver AVDebt Serv Tax RateG. O Bond lnt RateProjectedCoslAcre$286,006Latest Dateof Acquisition2010SitesRequiredMiddle SchoolProjected Annualnflation Factor5.00%AdjustedPresent Day$30r,638$217,194$259,4'16PurchaseCosVAcre8225,087$217J94$2r 9,209PurchasePrice$2,701,043$7,601,799$10,302.842PurchaseYear20a22008Acreage12.0035.0047.00Recent PropertyAcquisitionsLakelandLabradorTotal27
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2009 through 2015
Section Vlll
Appendix
Appendix 4.1 - Student Enrollment Projections
Appendix A.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections
Appendix 4.3 - Student Generation Survey
liiiiiiii
liiiijiii
ltitj::jj
l;: j: i: ì:
l¡:::i:::
t,:::i:::
t::::::::
t,,,,,,,,
I:::iri:i
liiijiiii
ljli::ìijl:j:;:!:;li:;:::::
l::::::: I
t::::::::t::::::::t::::::::
l,:,:,:::l:.:.:.:.
::::::::.
:::::::: I
:ij.::::l
,j,¡,::::l
iiiiiiiiil
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix A.l - Student Enrollment Projections
Auburn School District #408
Student Enrollment Proj ections
October 2008
Introduction
The projective techniques give some consideration to historical and current data as a basis for
forecasting the future. In addition, the 'projector' must make certain assumptions about the operant
variables within the data being used. These assumptions are'Judgmental" by definition. Forecasting
can be defined as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to the future, or from the known
to the unknown. The attached tabular data reviews the history of student enrollment, sets out some
quantitative assumptions, and provides projections based on these numerical factors.
The projection logic does not attempt to weigh the individual sociological, psychological, economic,
and political factors that are present in any demographic analysis and projection. The logic embraces
the assumptions that whatever these individual factors have been in the past are present today, and will
be in the future. It further moderates the impact of singular factors by averaging data over thirteen
years and six years respectively. The results provide a trend, which reflects a long (13-year) and a short
(6-year) base from which to extrapolate.
Two methods of estimating the number of kindergarten students have been used. The first uses the
average increase or decrease over the past 13 and 6-year time frame and adds it to each succeeding
year. The second derives what the average percentage Auburn kindergartners have been of the live
births in King County for the past 5 years and uses this to project the subsequent four years.
The degree to which the actuals deviate from the projections can only be measured after the fact.
This deviation provides a point of departure to evaluate the effectiveness of the assumptions and logic
being used to calculate future projections. Monitoring deviation is critical to the viability and
credibility of the projections derived by these techniques.
Tables
Table I - Thirteen Year Historv qf October I Enrollments - page 3
The data shown in this table is the baseline information used to project future enrollment. This data
shows the past record of enrollment in the district on October 1 of each year.
Table 2 - Historical ( Iserl in Proiections - page 4
This table shows the three basic factors derived from the data in Table 1. These factors have been
used in the subsequent projections. The three factors are:
1. Factor 1 - Average Pupil Change Between Grade Levels
This factor is sometimes referred to as the "holding power" or "cohort survival." It is a
measure of the number of pupils gained or lost as they move from one grade level to the
next.
2. Factor 2 - Average Pupil Change by Grade Level
This factor is the average change at each grade level over the i3 or 6-year period.
3. Factor 3 - Auburn Schooi District Kindergarten Enrollment as a Function of King
County Live Births
This factor calculates what percent each kindergarten class was of the King County live
births in the 5 previous years. From this information has been extrapolated the
kindergarten pupils expected for the next 4 years.
1
Table 3 - Proiection Models - pages 5-13
This set of tables utilizes the above mentioned variables and generates several projections. The
models are explained briefly below.
tr Table 3.13 (pg 5) - shows a projection based on the l3-year average gain in kindergarten
(Factor 2) and the l3-year average change between grade levels (Factor 1). The data is
shown for the district as a whole.
tr Table 3.6 (pg 5) - shows a projection using the same scheme as Table 3.13 except it
shortens the historical to only the most recent 6 years.
tr Table 3.13A and 3.64 (pg 6) - uses the same factors above except Factor 3 is substituted
for Factor 2. The kindergarten rates are derived from the King County live births instead
of the average gain.
E Tables 38.13, 3F,.6,3F..134, 38.64 (pg 7) - breaks out the K-5 grades from the district
projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade
articulation.
tr Tables 3MS.13, 3MS.6, 3MS.134, 3MS.6A (pg 8) - breaks out the 6-8 grades from the
district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by
grade articulation.
o Tables 3SH.13, 3SH.6, 3SH.134, 3SH.6A (pg 9) - breaks out the 9-12 grades from the
district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by
grade articulation.
tr Table 4 (pg 10) - Collects the four projection models by grade group for ease of
comparison.
tr Table 5 (pgs 11-13) - shows how well each projection model performed when compared
with actual enrollments. Data is provided in both number and percent formats for the
past 13 years.
Summary
Historically, average gain in students over the past 6 years is 1.53% annually that equates to 2I3
students. Over the past 13 years the average gain is 1.41% and equates to 189 students annually.
Using the cohort survival models that data below is a summary of the range of variation between the
four models. This data can be used for planning for future needs of the district.
The models show changes in the next six years:t Elementary level shows increase ranging from 286 to 581. (page 7). Middle School level shows increase ranging from 170 to 256. (page 8). High School level shows decreases ranging from -38 to -I12. (page 9)
The models show these changes looking forward thirteen year:s:. Elementary level shows increase ranging from 490 to 1220. (page 7). Middle School level shows increase ranging from 300 to 599. (page 8). High School level shows increase ranging from 106 to374. (page 9)
This data does not factor new developments that are currently under construction or in the planning
stages.
2
Actual08-0999810't5102410481044106910961 03410761256't3411350135214703Percent of GainPupil Gain2.640/o1.35%1730.84% 0.64% 2.48% (0.25)%109 84 326 -342.05% (0.22)% 3.04%275 -30 4160.98%'1410.99%144328330% Gain for'lst 6 years1.28%Average % Gain for last 6 years1.53%213Gain for 1st 61æGain for last 6Yo Gain fo- 13 years.1.41o/o189Gain for 1307-08996995101999710571078100710571 03313371368135212631455906-0794110121002I 0311049998r0581014107213721400132211471441805-069559639631002939106510041028113713791383118210881408804-0589296099291810169571020't't241 1301461126110558861367203-04922982909996947r01 I111111311052147312491010902137A202-03905900961940s73106211041A211026144'l123492793313427TABLE Thirteen Yeâr History of October 1 Enrollments(Rev '10/08)101-028469689499661077I r0B102810171 004140510731 0909301346',100-019129059141031107110119989791 00312221',!5710678651313599-008499431015105410129839811015974120211321036855I 305197t98 98/9985499510231009974982962939959I 1561 16510079171294297810311014980985958941959911I 1631012102681112769961979639989709909619179169349491061108489380512441GRADEKDG12J4567II101112TOTALSAUBURN SCHOOL D¡STRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS. OctobCT 2OO899830376198729430875200629632062110336652994043TABLE1A Grade Group CombinationsKDG9632931579967159783023594668878542872583767998492BO758566837912273158446842846276359146942905276657416845922281357746885892284457356755955288158876891941295560337091996301 061427149K,KK1,2-5-6-3-5-62958483657523025496859093027498359453012500759882850493259302883506860962801483659402887485259632870484358632928493259363045509261 50301 I514661 536-87-87-927991 88329442811187030332860r 898305425701 989319129801982320430492021342631 51204734883294218336563274225437153169216535443144208634583097209034279-1210-123843278240'12284942453089422530234311308944983093453530944634316146633202503236535241386953203983prj08-09.xlsPage 310t20t2008
Factor Average Pupil Change Between GradeI Levels6 YEAR BASE47.80'17.6022.2032.2031.8013.8011.4018.80276.20(53.80)(8û.00)(37.00)total 301 .00Factor 1 is the average gain or loss of pupils as theymove from one grade level to the next. Factor I usesthe past (f 2) OR (5) years of changes.Kto I1lo22lo 33lo 44to55to66to77to88to99 to 1010to1111 to 1213 YEAR BASE54.67't1.0820.0819.1719.0014_4215.6713.25301.42(74.75\(91.17)(84.83)total 218.00Kto I1lo22lo 33to44to55to66to77to88to99 to 1010to1111 to 12AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2008TABLE Factors Used in Projections2Source: Center for Health Statistics, Washington State Department of HealthFactor3AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT KINDERGARTEN ENROLLMENTSAS FUNCTION OF KING COUNTY LIVE BIRTH RATESAUBURN KINDERGARTENENROLLMENTASA%OFADJUSTED LIVE BIRTHS3.95204.417o/o4.585o/o4.4360/o4.2960/o4.856%4.452o/o4.524o/o4.740%4.876%4.216%4.3860/o4.626%4.398%4.5690/o4.210%4.301%3.853%3.619%3.993%4.663%3.959%3.837%3.798%3.724o/o4.186%4.186%77t7878t797918080/8181t8282t8383t8484/8585/868618787t8888/8989/9090/9191t9292t5393t9494/9595/9696t9797t9898/9999/0000/0101lo202t0303/0404t0505/0606t0707t0808/0909/1 010t1111t1212t1313t1414,62513,53913,47813,52413,68714,37514,95816,04816,70817,00018,24118,62618,82719,51019,89321,85221,62424,06226,35824,11620,97321,57322,12924,O1322,71721,62222,02322,07522,32722,01421,83522,24222,72622,74523,72324,6838,30157859861860058869866672679282976981787185890992093092795496397885484991284690592289295594',!996998Actual<-Prjctd<-Prjctd<-Prjctd<-PrjctdAverageAverageAverageAverage* preliminary number of DOH98498410271068YEAROFENROLLIADJUSTEDI uvr I rocI ernrHs lerunoll1i3rdsBIRTHS5,4794,5734,4834,4984,5134,5874,8945,0325,5085,6005,7006,2706,1786,3256,5936,6507,6017,0118,5258,9167,6006,6877,4437,3438,3357,1917,2157,4047,3367,4967,2597,2887,4777,6257,5608,08r8,3011971197219731974197515761977157819791 9801 98119821 98319841 985't98619871 9881 9891 9901 99119921 99319941 9951 9961997r 998I 9992000200120022003240420052006200716,43613,71913,44913,493'13,54013,76114,68215,09616,52416,80017,10018,81118,53318,97419,77819,95122,80321,03425,57626,74922,79920,06022,33022,O2925,00521,57321,64622,21222,00722,48721,77821,86322,43122,87422,68024,24424.90210,9579,1468,9668,9959,0279,1749,78810,06411,01611,20011,40012,54112,35512,64913,r8513,30115,20214,02317,05117,8331 5,1 9913,37314,88714,686'16,67014,38214,43114,80814,67114,99114,51914,57514,95415,24915J2016,16316,6012/3rdsBIRTHSTOTALLIVEBIRTHSCAL-ENDARYEARFactor Average Pupil Change By Grade Level26 YEAR BASE15.206.6023.0010.4019.4010.20(3.00)(19.40)4.80(43.40)18.4068.0090.00Fador 2 is the average change ¡n grade level sizefrom 94/95 OR 01/02.K1254567II101112I3 YEAR BASE2.921.424.504.836.9212.6715.008.3310.5816.2521.4238.0845.58K1234567II101112prj08-09.xlsPage 410t20t2008
PROJ21122101 610671075'10931 10911251 1361114112614311333124811760.91%1361018107010781096111211281139115211281427135612421 1630.400/o611024107610841 1011118't13411451 1581 1681467135412611 '1800.56%8510271079108711041121113711481161117114701352126311760"43%6510041 0561064'10461 063I 0861077I 09911251349I 3031 090'1165(0.30)%(43)KDG12345678I101112TOTALS9981015102410481044106910961034107612561341I 35013521 0011053102610441067I 063't08311121047137711811250126510071 05910671 084106514821101109311121426127412121 00510101 061107010871 1031 08410971116I 10614141352I 18311271013't06410731 090I 1061122109911121 1301408133912601 09810211073108'110981115113111421 1551 1651429135212651157103010821090110711231140115111641174147313951 3011178103310851 093111011261142't't54't't6711771476'139813041216I 036I 088I 096111311291145115711701 't801478140113071215Percent of Gain (0.91)%Pupil Gain (133)0.41o/o601.52o/o2220.70%1040.47o/o720.47o/o730.24%38a.51%76PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16117PROJ15t16PROJ14115PROJ13t14PROJ12t13ÏABLE3.13DISTRICT PROJECTIONSBased on 13 Year HistoryPROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/10ACTUAL08/09GRADEAUBURN SGHOOL DISTRIGT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - OctobET 2OO8PROJ21t22KDG12345678I101112TOTALS99810151024104810441069109610341076125613411 350135210131046I 033I 046I 08010761 08311071 053'135212021261131314281 061I 063't05510781112I 09010941126132912981122122410441 076I 079I 08610871110112611011113140212751218't 085I 0591 0911094110111181119112411371120I 389134911551181107411071 1091116I '133I 150I 13311351 1561396133512691 15810891122112411311148I 1651 1631144115414321342125512321104113711391146I 1631 1801't79117511631430137812621218112011521 15511621179115511541 190119414391377129812251 135116711701177119412101209120512091470138512971261't 1501 183'1 18511921209122612241220122414851416130512601 1651 't981200120712241241123912361239150014311 33612681 18012131215122212391256125512511254151514461 35112991 196122812311238125512711270126612701 53114621 3661314Percent of GainPupil Gain(0.26)0/0t3B)0.11%l60.82%1211.86%2751.28%194't.52%2321.12%1741.29o/o2421.33o/o2111.18o/o1901.27%2071.29%213118%198PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14115PROJ13t14PROJ121',!3TABLE3.6DISTRICT PROJECTIONSBased on 6 Year HistoryPROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/10ACTUAL08/09GRADEprj0B-09.xlsPage 510t20t2008
PROJ21t22KI2J45678I10111299810151024I 0481044I 069I 09610341076125613/.1I 35013529841 0531026104410671 0631083111210471377118112501265984r 0381 0641 046I 063I 08610771099112513491 3031 090I 16510271 0391 0491 0841 0651082110',11 0931112142612741212I 0051 068I 081I 0501 069I 1031084109711161 10614141352I 183112711231093107010891122I 09911121 '1301408I 33912601 098113411't3I 0891 1081 136111411261431'133312481176115411321 1081122115211281427135612421 163117311511123't 138't 16514291352126511571192I 165I 13911511467135412611 18012071181115214521392126311761222119414531378't3011178123614961378128612161537142112871202TOTALSPercent of Gain (1.02)%Pupil Gain (150)(0.43)%(63)0.55%801.93%281PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15116PROJ14t15PROJ13114PROJ12t13TABLE3.134DISTRICT PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & '13 Year HistorvPROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/l 0ACTUAL08/09GRADEAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2008PROJ21t22KDG1.234567I9101112TOTALS998101510241 04810441 069I 0961034107612561341I 35013529841 046I 033't0461 0801076't08311071 0531352120212611313984I 0311063I 05510781112I 0901094112613251298112212241027103210491 086108711101126110111',t3140212751218't085I 06810751 0501071111811191124113711201 38913491 19511811116109210721r03I 15011331 't35I 1561396133512691 1581134111411041 1351 1631144115414321342125512321 '15611471 136114911751 16314301378126212181 18811781 1501 16011941439137712981225122011921 161117914701 3851297126112341204I 180145514161305126012451222145614021336126812641499'14021322't2991540144513221285Percent of Gain (0.46)%Pupil Gain (67)(0.1e)%(28)0.71%1041.93o/o284PROJ20t21PROJ'19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12t13TABLE3.64DISTRICT PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistoryPROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/10ACTUAL08/09GRADEprj08-09.xlsPage 610t20t2008
year6607PROJ21t227418PKUJ21t22PKOJ2',U22PROJ20t2120t21659020t21I-KUJ7327PROJ19t206572PK(JJ19t207235PROJ19t2018t19T'KUJ655518t19PI-(UJ7144PROJ18t196537PROJ17t18705317t18I-KUJ17t18},KUJ696216t17PR(JJ16t17PH(JJ6520PROJ16t1715t16PR(JJ6502PROJ151166871PKOJ15t166779PROJ14t't5PROJ14t15648514t15T'KUJPROJ't3t14646713114PKUJ6688PROJ13t146581PROJ12t136457PROJ12t13641512t13PR(JJ636311t12Pt-(oJ6481PROJ11t12634711t12T'KLJJ10t11T'KUJ631 IPHUJ10t1163C810t11PK(JJ62P')^2?709/l 0PRUJ09/1 0PKUJ6254PROJ09/1 0629,46l q86't 98AC I UAL08/09AL; I UAL08/096198AU I UAL08/09K-5Tc)TK-5Tc)TGRADE1234599810'151024104810441 06910131046I 0331 0461 0601076'1o281 0611 063I 0551A7E1112104410761079108610a711101 0591091109411011118111910741107I 10911161 1331 150108911221124113111481 165110411371 13911461 163I 18011201152115511621179I 1951 135116711701177119412101 150'1 183I 1851192120912261 165I 19812001207122412411 1EO121312151222123912561 19612281231123812551271KDG911071009l9191919l9191104833E.134 Based on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistorGain 96GRADEK12345998101510241 0481044I 069984I 0531026104410671 0639E41 0381064I 04610631086102710391049I 0841 0651082I 0681081I 0501 0691 10310841123109310701 06911221134111310E91 108115211731'15111541132I 108K-5TOT1106545Gain 39IAtsLT K-5PROJESIIONS3E.13 Based on l3 Year HistonGRADE10181 1015 1053 1056 1059 1061 1064 1067 10702 1024 1026 1064 1067 1A70 1073 1075 10783 1048 1044 1046 1084 1087 1090 1093 10964 1044 1067 1063 1065 1103 ',1106 1109 11125 1069 1063 1086 1082 1084 1122 1125 11281021107310811098111511311024107610841 101111811341027107910871104112111371 03010821 0901107112311401 03310851 0931110112611421 0361 0881 096111311291145l818l81718183E.6181752514565Based on 6 Year HistonI Gain 56AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - OctobeT 2OO8PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18/1917t14PR(JJPRUJ16t17PTIOJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t1412t13PKUJ6501PK()J11t1263916324PRUJ10t11PRUJ09/1 06264AC I UAL08/096l98K-5Tc)TIAtsLL K.SPROJEUIION:;3E.6A Based on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistorGRADEKDG12345998101 51024104810441 06998410461033I 0461 0801076984103't10631 0551 078111210271032I 0491 0861 0871110I 06810751 050't07111181115111610921072't 1031 150113411'.t411041 '13512201 18811781 15611471't361106660PI Gain 66prj08-09.xlsPage 710t20t2008
6 year1701 3 year300PROJ21t22678I 09610341076I 0831112104710771 09911251101I 0931112109711161 106I 0991112I 130I 13611141126I 1391152112811421 1551 1651145I 158I 16811481 1611171115111641174115411671177115711701 1803506Percent of GainPupil Gain1j3%361.82o/o590.14%50.40o/o130.640/o1.07%361.26%431.27%430.25o/o 0.25o/o 0.25o/o 025% O.25%21IIIIIPROJ20t213498PROJ151203489PROJ18t193480PROJ17t183471PROJ16t173463PROJ151163419PROJ14t153376PROJ13t143341PROJ12113331 IMIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on 13 Year HistoryPROJ11t123306PROJ10t113301PROJ09/1 03242ACTUAL08/093206TABLE3MS.13GRADE6-8TOTAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2008year599year256PROJ21t2267I1 09610341076r 08311071053I 090I 09411261126110'l11131124113711201't33I 135I 156'1 16311441154117911751 1631194'1 19011941209120512091224122012241239123612391255125112541270126612703805Percent of GainPupil Gain1.15o/o372.07% .90%1.23%411.27o/o431.10o/o381.58o/o551.74o/o611.27%461"261o461.24Yo461.23%461.21%466730PROJ20t213760PROJ19t203714PROJ18t193669PROJ17t183623PROJ16t173577PROJ15t16351 6PROJ141153462PROJ13t143424PROJ12t133381MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on 6 Year HistoryPROJ11t123340PROJ101113310PROJ09/1 03243ACTUAL08/093206ÏABLE3MS.6GRADE6-8TOTyear333yeat170PROJ21t2267I10961034107610831112104710771 099112511011 093111210s71116I 106I 09911121 1301 1361114112611221152112811231 138r 1651 165I 139115112071181115212221't941236Percent of GainPupil Gain1.13%361.82%590.14o/o50.4jo/o 0.64%'1.07%360.75o/o250.71%240.84o/o292.45%132185PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t193539PROJ17t183455PROJ16t173/.26PROJ15t163402PROJ14t153376PROJ13t143341PROJ12t13331 IMIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistoryPROJ11t123306PROJ10t113301PROJ09/1 03242ACTUAL08/093206TABLE3MS.13AGRADE6-8TOTyear411year256PROJ21t2267II 096103410761 083't1071 0531 0901 09411261126110111131124113711201 13311351 156'l 163114411541149't1751 163I 150I 160119411921161117512341204I 180124512221264Percent of GainPupil Gain1j5%372.07%0.90%301.23%411.27%431.10o/o380.72%250.49o/o17O.82% 2.40o/o6t2985PROJ20121PROJ19t20PROJ18t193617PROJ17t183533PROJ16t173504PROJ15t163/.87PROJ14t153462PROJ13t143424PROJ12t133381MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistoryPROJ11t123340PROJ10t11331 0PROJ09/1 03243ACTUALo8/093206TABLE3MS.6AGRADE6-8TOïprj08-09.xlsPage I'10t2012008
year1061 3 year37413year148year(112t6 year6 year1PROJ21t22Il01112125613411 3501352137711811250126513r''9I 3031090I 1651426127412121 00514'1413521 18311271408I 339126010981431'133312481176142713561242I '16314291352126511571467135412611r8014701392126311761473139513011178147613981304121614781401130712195405Percent of Gain (4.25)%Pupil Gain Q23\(3.30)%(167)0.22%113.21%1580.60%1.610/o820.01%1030%151.13o/o590.74o/o390.860/o O.87%0.22%12304646PROJ21t22Il011121256-1U1135013521352120212611313't329129811221224140212751218108513891Ug1'1951181I 396I 335126pI 1581432134212551232143013781262't218143513771298122514701 3851297126114851416130512601 5001431133612681515144613511299153114621 36613145673Percent of Gain (3.22)%Pupil Gain (171\(3.02)o/"(1s5)O.15o/o82.67%1330.86%2.04o/o1030.53%0.94o/o501.38To74O.98o/o531.28%701.38o/o761.08%614428PROJ21t22I10111212561341I 35013521377118112501265134913031 0901 165142612741212I 00514141352I 18311271408133912601 09814311333124811761427135612421 1631429135212651157146713541261I 180145213921263117614531378130'11178149613781286121615371421128712025447Percent of Gain (4.25)%Pupil Gain (225\(3.30)%(167)0.22%113.21%1580.60%1.61%820.01%10.30%l51.13To590.41%210.50%1.25%661.31o/o703026PROJ20t215393PROJ20t215612PROJ20t215376PROJ19t205347PROJ19t205536PROJ19t20531 0PROJ18t195301PROJ18t195466PROJ18t195284PROJ17t185262PROJ17t185413PROJ17t185262PROJ16t175203PROJ16t175339PROJ16t175203PROJ15t1651 88PROJ151165289PROJ15t1651 88PROJ14t15518VPROJ14t155261PROJ14t155187PROJ13t1451 05PROJ13t145158PROJ13t145105PROJ12t135075PROJ121135114PROJ12t135075SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSBased on 13 Year HistoryPROJ11t124917SR, HIGH PROJECTIONSBased on 6 Year HistorvPROJ11t124981SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSBased on Birlh Rates & 13 Year HistoryPROJ111124917PROJ101114906PROJ10t114974PROJ10t114906PROJ09/'t 05074PROJ09/1 05128PROJ09/105074ACTUAL0B/095299ACTUAL08/095299ACTUAL08/095299TABLE3SH.13GRADE9-12TOTTABLE3SH.6GRADE9-12 TOTÏABLE3SH.13AGRADE9-12TOrAUBURN SCHOOL DISTR¡CT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS. OctobeT 2OO8I 3 year2936 yearPROJ21t22I't0'111212561341I 350'1352135212021261131313291298112212241402127512181 0851 38913491 19511811396133512691 15814321342125512321430137812621218143913771298122514701 3851297126114551416I 305126014561402133612681495140213221299I 5401445132212855592Percent ol Gain (3.22)o/oPupil Gain (171\(3.02)%(1 55)0.15%I2.67%1330.86%2.00%r030.53o/o280.94%1.38%74O.43o/o 0.48%1.09o/o601.27%7044502326PROJ20t215522PROJ19t205462PROJ18t155436PROJ17he5413PROJ16t'175339PROJ15t165289PROJ141155261PROJ13t145158PROJ't2t1351',t4SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistoryPROJ111124981PROJ10t114974PROJ09/l 05128ACTUAL08/095299TABLE35H.6AGRADE9-12TOTprj08-09.xlsPage 910t20t2008
13 year381986 year179lPROJ21t22E.13E.6E.134E.6A9989989989981 001'101398498410041028984984100710441027102710't01 0591 0681 068101310741016108910181104102111201024I 1351027I 150r030I 165I 0331 18010361 't96PROJ2012',1PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12113PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUPPROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/10KINDERGARTENACTUAL08/09TABLE4GRADEAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 200813 year37110226 year265490PROJ21t22E.13E.6E.,I3AE.6A52005200520052005253528152535281531 55370529853405357543853205364540555235388543254545614546956905484576654985842551 3591 855275994554260705557614655716222PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16117PROJ15116PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/1 0GRD 1 -- GRD 5ACTUAL08/09GRADE3 year3005996 year170256PROJ21t22MS.13MS.6MS.13AMS.6A320632063206320632423243324232433301331 03301331 03306334033063340331 I3381331 I33813341342433413424337634623376346234193516340234873/.6335773426350434713623345535333480366935393617348937143498376035063805PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/1 0GRD6-GRD8ACTUAL08/09GRADE1 3 year1063741482936 year(112l,(38)(112)PROJ21t22SH.13SH.6SH,13ASH.6A529952SS52995299507451285074512849064974490649744917498149174981507551145075511451 0551 585l 0551 5851875261518752615188528951 88528952035339520353395262541352625413530154665284543653475536531 0546253935612537655225405567354475592PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ11t12PROJ10t11PROJ09/1 0GRD 9 -- GRD 12ACÏUAL08/09GRADE13 year81521936 year345799PROJ21t223.133.63.1343.64147031470314703147031457014665145531463614527146821449014608145861480214570147121480915077148511499614913152701 5048155021510915676151851 587815271160891 5336162791540816485I 54801 66981551816896PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ't5t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ't1t12PROJ't0t11PROJ09/1 0DISTRICT TOTALSACTUAL08/09GRADEprj08-09.xlsPage 1010t20t2008
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - OctobeT 2OO8PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUPTABLE5Total =Diff =October I Actual Count AND Projected CountsNumber Project¡on is under(-) or over ActualPercent Projection is unde(-) or overActualPrj 3.13 - 13 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.134 13 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth RatesPrj 3.64 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty B¡rth Rates2000-01Total Diff58/.4581 I5664591 I5895XXX(33)(180)7551xxx(0.56)%(3.08)%1.28%0.87o/oTotal1 999-00Diff%585657785735581 15735XXX(78)(121)(45)(71)XXX3.15o/o2.74o/o1.51o/o1.15o/oTotalI 998-99Diffo/o58376049602659365917XXX212'1899980no((0.54\o/"(0.e6)%(2.64)0/0(2.93\o/oTotal1997-gtsDiff59465928590457835768XXX(1 8)(42)(163)fi78\XXX(0.30)%(0.71)o/.(2.74)o/o(2.99)%1996-97D¡ffo/oTotalXXX442254(1)57995843582158535798XXX0.76%0.38o/o0.93%(0.02\o/oGradesK-5ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.642000-01Total Diff %29803023300930233009XXX43294329XXX1.44%0.97%1.44o/o0.97%1999-00DiffTotal%29702927289529272895XXX(80)(75)(80)(75)XXX(2.62)%(2.46)0/0(2.62)0/0(2.46)%I 998-99DiffTotal28602910287829102878xxx50185018xxx(2"64)%(2.70)%(2.64)%(2.70)%1 997-93DiffTotal28112820278928202789I(22)I(22\XXX0.32o/o(0.78)%0.32%(0.78)%1 996-97DiffTotalo/o27992875284828752848XXX76497649XXX2.72%1.75o/o2.72%1.75%Grades6-8ACÏUALPrj3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri3E.6A2000-01Total Diff%43114369439443694394XXX58835883xxx135%1.93o/o1.35o/o1.93o/o1 999-00DiffTotalo/o422543)1431 343)14313XXX76887688xxx(0.32)%(1.49)o/o(0.32)%(1.45)%1 998-99DiffTotal%42454110410341104103XXX(135)(142)(135)(142\x)o(2.74o/o1.51o/o2.74%1.51%1 997-93DiffTotal%40124092406939833970XXX8057(2s)ø2\xxx1.99%1.42o/o(0.72)%(.0Ð%1996-97DiffTotal%38433768375037683750XXX(75)(e3)(75)(e3)XXX(1.e5)%(2.42)%(1.95)Yo(2.42)o/oGrades9-12ACTUALPû 3E.13Prj 38.6Prj 3E.134Prj3E.6A2000-01Total Diff0.52%(0.52)%134%1.24%1313513203130671331113298XXX68(68)176163Total1999-00D¡ffo/oxxx(45)(1 08)(12)(58)XXX0.97%a.50%0.10o/o(0.33)%'t305113006129431 303912953Total1998-99Diff%1276514(44\1294213069130071295612898xxx(0.30)%(0.82)%(1.44)%(1.89)%Total1 997-93Diffo/oXXX71(7)(1 83)(242)1276912840127621258612527XXX0.56%(0.05)%(1.43)%(1.e0\%Total1 996-97Diffo/o1244112486124191249612396XXX45(22)55(45\xxx0.36%(0.18)%0.44o/o(0.36)%AilGradesACTUALPrj3E.13Prj3E.6Prj3E.13APri 3E.64prj08-09.xlsPage 1 110t20t2008
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2008PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUP (Continued)TABLE5Total =Diff =October I Actual Count AND Projected CountsNumber Projection is unde(-) or over ActualPercent Projection is underþ) or over ActualPrj 3.13 - 13 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.134 13 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth RatesPrj 3.64 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth Rates2005-06Total Diffo/o58875750579557505784xxx(137)(e2)(137)(1 03)XXX(2.33)o/o(r.56)%(2.33)o/o(1.75\%2004-05Total ' Diffo/o57355761582157095756XXX2686(26)21XXX0.45o/o1.50%(0.45)o/o0.37%2003-04Total Diffo/o57745655566256055631XXX(11e)(112)(16e)(143)xxx(0.4s)%(0.34)Vo(1.24)o/o(0.81\o/o2002-03Total Diffo/o57415723573557435776XXX(1 8)(6)235)o(x(0.31)%(0.10)%0.03%O.610/o2001-02DiffTotal59145827580258395831XXX(87)(112)(75)(83)xxx(1.47)%(1.8e)%(1.27)%(1.40)%GradesK-5ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj3E.13APri 3E.642005-06Total Diff31693't32313731323137XXX(37)(32)(37)(32¡xxx(1.17)%(1.01)%(1.17)%(1.01)%2004-05Total D¡ff%3274329533r 13295331 1xxx21372137XXX0.64%1.13%0.64%1j3%2003-04Total Diff32943214321632143216XXX(80)Íe)(80)(78)xxx(8.86)%(6.06)%(8.88)%(6.06)%2002-03Total Diff3'1513't8531523't853192XXX34413441XXX1.08%'130%1.08%130%2001-02DiffTotal%30493025301 1302530r 1XXX(24)(38)(24)(38))ofi(0.7e)%(1.25)%(0.7e)%(1.25\%Grades6-8ACTUALPrj3E.13Prj3E.6Prj3E.13APri 3E.642005-06Total Diff50324898488048984880XXX(134)(152)(134)(152\xxx(2.66)0/0(3.02)%(2.66)0/,(3.02)%2004-05ïotal Diff46634783476947834769XXX120106120106XXX2.57%2.27%2.57o/o2.27%2003-04Total Diff46344630463946304639XXX(4)5(4)5xxx5.90%3.69%5.90%3.69%2002-03Total DiffoÂ45354577459445774594XXX42594259XXX0.93%1.30o/o0.93o/o1.30o/o2001-02DiffTotal%44984455447644554476XXX(43)(22)(43)(22\XXX(0.e6)%(0.4e)%(0.e6)%(0.49)%Grades9-12ACTUALPrj3E.13Prj3E.6Prj3E.13APri3E.6A2005-06Total D¡ffo/o140881 3780138121 37801 3801XXX(308)(276)(308)(287\XXX(2.19)o/o(1.e6)%(2.1e)%(2.04)%Total2004-05DiffXXX1.22%1.670/o0.u%1.20%136721 38391390113787I 3836xxx1672291151642003-04Total D¡ff%136721 3499135421344713510(173)(130)(225)(162)xxx(1.27)%(0.e5)%(1.65)%(1.18\%2002-03Total Diff%xxx0.43%o.70%0.58%1.01o/o13427134851352',11 35051 3562XXX589478135Total2001-02Diffxxx(1 54)(172)(142)(143)XXX(1.14)%(1.28)o/.(1.05)o/o(1.06)%13461133071 32891331913318AilGradesACTUALPrj 3E.'13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri3E.6Aprj08-09.xlsPage 1210t20t2008
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - OctobEr 2OO8PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUP (Continued)ÏABLE5Total =Diff =October I Actual Count AND Projected CountsNumber Projection is underþ) or over ActualPercent Projection is under(-) or overActualPrj 3.13 - 13 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.13A 13 YEAR HISTORY & l(ing Cty Birth RatesPrj 3.64. - 6 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth RatesHistorical Data is grouped byK - 5, 6-8, 9-12 articulationpattern.Articulation pattern has nonumeric impact on efficacyof projection models.Averageo/oXXX(0.22)o/o(0.27)%(0.72)o/o(0.62)0/0D¡ffAverageXXX(22)(26)(41)(36)Total2008-09Diff61986179623761296172(0.31)%0.630/o(1.11)%(0.42)o/oXXX(1e)39(6s)(26)2007-08Total Diff%61426085613860596094XXX(57)(4)(83)(48))oü(0.e3)%(0.07)%(1.35)o/o(0.78)o/o2006-07Tofal Diff%60335871592158695912(162)(112)(164)(121)xxx(2.6e)%(1.86)%(2.72)%(2.01)%GradesK-5ACTUALPrj3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.64Averageo/o)ofi(0.80)%(0.68)%(0.80)%(0.68)%AverageD¡ffxxx(0)(5)(0)(5)2008-09Total D¡ff3206317931953'1793195XXX(27)(11)(27)(1 1)XXX(O.U)o/"(0.34)%(0.84)%(0.34)%2007-08Total D¡ffo/o3097310731 16310731 16)o(x101910'19xxx0.32%0.610/o0.32o/o0.61%2006-07Total D¡ff31443131314631313146Ðo((1 3)2(r 3)2xxx(0.41)o/.0.06%(0.41)%0.06%Grades6-8ACTUALPrj3E.13Prj3E.6Prj3E.13APú 3E.64Average%xxx0.30%(0.03)%0.09%(0.22)%AverageDiffXXX(24)(22)(33)(2e)2008-09Total Diffxxx(3.21)o/o(2.72)%(3.21)%(2.72)%5299512951 55512951 55XXX(170)(144)(170)('t44)Total%2007-08DiffÐo((130)(1 28)(130)(128)XXX(2.44)%(2.4't)%(2.44)%(2.41)%532051905192519051922006-07Total D¡ffþo((2.98)o/o(2.56)%(2.e8)%(2.e6)%52415085508650855086XXX(1 56)(1 55)(1 56)(1 55)Grades9-12ACTUALPû 38.13PrJ 3E.6Prj 3E.'t3APrj 3E.64Averageo/o)ofi(0.27)o/o(0.34)%(0.5e)%(0.59)%AverageDiffXXX(41)(48)(6e)(66)2008-09Total D¡ffo/oß74314487145871443714522XXX(1.47)%(0.79)o/o(1.81)%(1.23)%xxx(216)(116)(266)(181)Totalo/o2007-08Diff1455914382144461435614402XXX(177)(113)(203)(157)XXX(1.22)o/o(0.78)%(1.3e)%(1.08)%2006-07ïotal D¡ff1441814087141531408514144xxx(331)(265)(333)(274)XXX(2.30)"/"(1.84)o/o(2.31)T"(r.e0)%AIGradesACTUALPrj3E.13Prj3E.6Prj3E.13APrj3E.6Aprj08-09.xlsPage 1310t20t2008
Appendix 4.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
En rol Iment Projections
Buidout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2009BASE DATA - BUILDOUT SCHEDULEASSIJMPTIONS:Student Generation FactorsUses Build Out Estimates received from developers.Student Generation Factor are updated Auburn data for 2009 as allowed per King County OrdinanceTakes area labeled Lakeland Easfslafed for 2007 and divides across 2010-12Takes area tabeted Kersey Project slated for 2005 and divides across 2OO1O-15Takes area labeled Bridges (Kent Impoundment) and projects across 2009-2014lncludes knownin N.Lea Hill and Non-Lakelandils1661234563e38151Multi-Family0.07900.03400.0420SingleFamily2009 AuburnFactorsElementaryMiddle School0.32000.15200.15800.1550hSenior0.6300Total4706957461911612290302120413163176441125208780625296309I 23120155116II00016510II2014-15326252963091231609289301I1992014942954547000029509445472013-1418620134648000098030546482012-13192515244255101398305417198246821201212639560620000126395060622011-12249201133211402512157602010-11238291137144572118370565820108225539404482278530340422009-101681708084334336415844042200&0984404216620c977240I9e.3Auburn School Distr,Development0018600152000003216104832249233Total K-12Lakeland Multi Family UnitsOther Multi F1?.B3UnitsTotalMulti FUnitsK-5PuMid SchoolPupils 6-8Sr. Hiqh Pupils 9-12K-5UnitsPuTotal K-12Mid School Pupils 6-8Sr. High Pupils 9-12Cumulative PTotal K-12Elementary-GradesK-5Mid School- Grades 6 - 8Senior Hiqh - Grades 9 - 12Total1TableLakeland Single Family UnitsLea Hill AreaOther Sinqle Familv Units1107C6C120855012010015012012515016014515514051UnitsTotalElementaK-5leMid School Pupils 6-8Sr. Hish Pupils 9-12Buildouts March 09 + ND3.6 ave projections44
% of changechange +/-Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 20092015-161112121212121212131616141322232324242425252632312926384040404142424344565449455557575858606162638077706468717071727475767799958779808383848587899092117113102938286858788899192941201161059612312014-1511992013-1410132012-138212011-12572New Projects - Annual New Pupils Added & Distributedby Grade Level2010-113342009-101662008-09998101 510241 04810441 0691 0961 0341 076125613411 350135214703Percent of averagePupils by Grade& Level6.70o/o6.96%6.94o/o7.04o/o7.11%7.26%42.01o/o7.39%7.50%7.63%22.53%9.72%9.40o/o8.54%7.80o/o35.46%100.00% Total6 YearAverageEnroll.95198898599910091 03110491 0651 0831 380133412121 10614190TABLE2GRADEKDG1234567II101112Totals%6.7Oo/o6.96%6.94%7.O4%7.11%7.260/o7.39o/o7.50%7.630/o9.72%9A0%8.54%7.80o/o100.00%6Vr Ave950.67987.83984.83998.671008.671030.831049.331064.671083.331379.671333.671211.831106.3314190.336 year Historical DataAveraqe Enrollment and Percentaqe Distributed bv Grade Level08-09998101510241 04810441 0691 096103410761 256134113501352147030.99%14407-08996995101999710571 078100710571 03313371 36813521263145590.98%14106-07s41101210021 0311 0499981 05810141072137214001322't147144182.34%33005-069559639631 0029391 06510041028113713791 3831182I 088140883.04%41604-058929609929181016957102011241 13014611261I 05588613672-O.22o/o-3003-04922982909996947101811111131105214731249101090213702TABLE3GradeKDG12345b78o101112TotalsBuildouts March 09 + ND3.6 ave projections45
Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2009% of changechange +/-% of changechange +/-128412821271129912961285I 5681511138313291200123712391247126512841214125112531261127912981 5851528139913442017-18Froiected755638805857172931.14o/o1942016-17Proiected747238375791170991.14o/o1922015-16Proiected101210641 0381 056107910751026107910871 070108711101045I 0981 10611241 10611241 0651119112711451161114410801 1351143116111781 19ô1 09611511 15911771194121211011 156116411821 199121774191 09611241 060110211241 15011431 1361 156115711781 16911741 1881207122512041217123012441222369613941197126412781 38113341119119114821328126010501494142912531191150614341347117715471446I 35012691547147213471259562516340o57%932015-16Proiected102410571044105810921 08810511 0841087107811021 1361082111611181126112811521114114911511 1591176117811421177117911871205122311701205120712161233125211871223122512331251126573881 0951120I 0651114111911521 168114411571 1851 199118212081211123312521234124612701267125737941 36812181275132613611 330115112501458132912671 13014691426126512451495143113551237154914551 35813251550149413671314572616907'l .230/o2062014-15Proiected698836475612162472.02o/o3212014-15Proiected728337325687167012.57o/o4182013-14Proiected689335695464159261.89%2962013-14Proiected711436525517162842.43%3862012-13Proiected676035045366I 56303.1 1o/o4712012-13Proiected692635665406158983.40%5232011-12Proiected660434355120151592.00%2982011-12Proiected6722346951 8415374239%aÃo2010-11Proiected645933775025148610.85%1252010-11Proiectedô538338550921 50161.24%184New Projects - Pupil Projection Cumulativeby Grade Level Updated March 20092009-10Proiected63243280513314736O.22o/o33New Projects - Pupil Projection Cumulativeby Grade Level Updated March 20092009-1 0Proiected63643280518714831O.87o/o1282008-09Actual998101510241 04810441 06961981 09610341 0763206125613411 35013525299147032008-09Actual998101510241 0481044I 06961981096103410763206125613411 3501352529914703GRADEKDG12345K-5b78GR 6-8I101112GR 9-12TotalGRADEKDG12345K-5678GR 6-8I101112GR 9-12TotalUses a 'cohort surv¡val'model assuming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesprevious years number pluscurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort surv¡val.Uses a 'cohoft suru¡val'model assuming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesprevious years number pluscurrent generation based on% of totalenrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort survival.TABLE 4ND 3.13TABLE 5ND 3.6Buildouts March 09 + ND3.6 ave projections46
Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 20092.O2% 1.14%2015-16Proiected3658367956252014-15Proiected4784364756122013-14Proiected5854356954642012-13Proiected680235045366156723.50%530658734355120151422.14o/o3182011-12Proiected2010-11Proiected642233775025148240.72%1052009-10Proiected99510641 0381056107910751007106210871070108711101 06510791 08911241 106112411231 139110711271161114411931163114211611 1961217119711751 19512411219119863061 09611241 060110211241 15011431 1361 156115711781 16911741 18812071225120412171213124412223280139411971264127813811334111911911482132812601 050149414291253119115061434134711771547144613501269154714721347125951 33147190.11%162008-09Actual9981015102410481044106961981 096103410763206125613411 3501352529914703GRADEKD12345678GI101112TotalNew Developments - Pupil Projection Cumulativeby Grade Level Updated March 2009TABLE 6ND3.I3AUses a 'cohotf suruival'model assumíng 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade ¡evel.Kindergarten calculatesbirth rate average pluscurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort survival.% of changechange +/-ange2015-16Proiected995105710441 05810921 08810071 0551087107811021 1361 06510721 0891126112811521123113211071129117611781187116211431175122312171 1991 18912221243123412251 09511201 0651114111911521 168114411571 1851 199118212081211123312521234124612401267125737641 36812181275132613611 330115112501458132912671 1301469142612651245149514311 35512371549145513581325155014941367131457262014-15Proiected373256872013-14Proiected365255172012-13Proiected684535665406158173.49Yo5332011-12Proiected663134695184152842.29Vo3422010-11Proiected646533855092149420.95%141New Projects - Pupil Projection Cumulativeby Grade Level Updated March 20092009-10Proiected63343280518714802o.67%992008-09Actual998101510241 0481044106961981 096103410763206125613r'.11 3501352529914703GRADEKDG1234567II101112TotalUses a 'coho¡t survival'model assumiing 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade ¡evel.Kindergarten calculatesbirth rate average pluscurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort survival.Based on 6 year historyTABLE 7ND 3.64Buildouts March 09 + ND3.6 ave projectionschange +/-47
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix 4.3 Student Generation Survey
SINGLE FAMILYAuburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1/1i03 March,2009tofJeOccupied000030000000000000000000000003ÇurrentOccupancy30211452232013615856104807640018123I83644341I1133I612042untts/Parcels30211452262013615I56104807640018123I83644341I1133I6120421493Development NameAlder MeadowsAspen MeadowsAuburn PlaceBifrost GateCambridqe PointeCanterberrv CrossinqCrystal CourtDawson HillsHazel ParkKelli MeadowsKinoslev MeadowsLakeland: MontianoLakeland: The ReserveLakeland: TuscanvLakeland: Verona SouthLakeland. Verona NorthLeeAnn MeadowsLittle FieldsMarchini MeadowsMvsterv HeiqhtsPacific MeadowsPacific ViewRiver Park EstatesRiver RimSera MonteVallev View EstatesVintaoe l-lills. Division 6Vintaoe Hills, Division 7Washinoton National, Div 1Student Generation FactorsTotal0.4001.2380.7861.2880.5220.5501.2311.5003.6670.6251.1070.2980.4130.7890.3630.4200.7830.750o.7351.3330.9550.3530.3890.9090.3030.7501.2461.5000.5000.630Htt0.1 330.2860.2140.4040.0000.2000.385CI.5000.7330.2500.3210.0670.08801320.0780.1050.2610.375o.2530.3330.2500.0880.11101820.00001250.3110.3000.1 900.158Mrddle0.1330.4290.2140.2690.1300.0000.4620.3331.20001250.3390.0480.0880.1970.0880.0880.1 300.25CI0.1080.3330.2730.1180.0000.2730.0610.1250.3440.3000.095o.152tslem0.1 330.5240.3570.6150.3910.3500.3850.6671.7330.2500.4460.1830,2380.4610.1 980.2270.3910.1250.3730.6670.4320.1470.2780.4550.2420.5000.5900.9000.2140.320Total12261167121116I55562313360145761I661I4212710106763021938HS4632104531121I7710311I632121132201196I235Middle4I3143062i81I57535,632I212403212164226Elem411532I754262251I1I357941I131419555I43618I47749
To BeOccupied483443647105283CurrentOccupancy122332897164Units/Parcels602676125118169Beaver MeadowsCambridqe PointeLakeland: Pinnacle EstatesLakeland: Vista HeiqhtsRiverpointeTrail RunSINGLE FAMILYAuburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1i1l03 March, 2009Student Generation FactorsTotal30228233066178HSI07671745Middle707571643EIem1511412153491Total2121425317HS0044110Middle2344I4Elem0I617123To BeOccupied3114755783861I9924I31I222010637313034014929I1329251I162194GurrentOccupancy000000000000000000000000000Units/Parcels3114755783861I9924I3I8222010637313034014I29I132925181619112009 and up Under GonstructDevelopment NameAlicia GlennAnderson AcresBackbone RidqeBrandon MeadowsBrandon PlaceBridqesBridle EstatesCam-WestCarrinoton PointeDaliit Dhaliwal PlatEstes ParkHarpreet KanoHazel HeiqhtsHazelViewKendall RidqeKersev 3 ProiectLakeland: East Phase 1Lakeland: East Phase 2/3Lawson PlaceMeoan's MeadowsMountain View EstatesNew Hope Lutheran PlatSpencer PlaceStioos PlatVintaqe PlaceWllow PlaceYates PlatStudent Generation FactorsTotal20943549243116215520514136723582214I61I5I1I161110138rHS5219126131641513317592154215125433346Middle5218125931541513316572052214124432333Elem10421I25124632I310376341194210943I34II6570250
MULTI FAMILY2009 andondAuburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1/1/03March,2009To BeOccupied0000000000CurrentOccupancy29B16817036210179193321268Units/Parcels29I16817036210179193321268Development NameButte EstatesCoxAfr/oodward THLakeland: CapriLakeland: CarraraLakeland: Palermo AptsLakeland: SienaLakeland: SoranoPasa Fino llSeasons at Lea HillVillaqeStudent Generation FactorsTotal0.6210.6250.0420.0590.1270.0590.0380.2110.2920.155HS0.1380.1250.0060.0240.0550.0100.0130.0530.060o.042Middle0.2070.375o.0120.0060.0190.0000.0130.0530.0660.034Elem0.2760.125o.0240.0290.0520.0500.0130.1 050.1660.079Total1857104663497196HS4114201112053Middle632170112243ElemI145195125510013793248To BeOccupied4176CurrentOccupancy57I3600101Units/Parcels70121153248277Development NameLakeland: MaderaPacific Ave DuplexesTrail Run Townhomes"D" Street PlatSundallen CondosStudent Generation FactorsTotal21125727HS103127Middle00312oElem1063414Total133HS110Middle012EIem01151
BURN SCHOO
April 24,2009
RHCEEVEÐ
APR 28 2OüS
*d,'lffin8o*[å$Ë**
Pam Mottram
Department of Planning Services
City of Kent
400 West Gowe Street
Kent WA 98032
Dear Ms. Mottram:
Enclosed are the Determination of Non-Significance ("DNS') and the
Environmental Checklist for the adoption of the Auburn School District 2009 Six-
Year Capital Facilities Plan.
The comment period on the DNS expires at 4:00 p.m. on May 11, 2009.
Sincerely,
ael n
ntendent
ness and Operations
Enclosures
ELL N
glsForuthstreetNortheast Auburn, WA 98002 (253) 981-4930
This page intentionally left blank.
DETERMINATION OF' NONSIGMFI CANCE
Issued with a l6-day comment and appeals period
Description of Proposal :
This threshold determination anaþes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closelyrelated to each other that they are in effect a single course
of action:
1. The adoption of the Aub-urn School Dishict's 2009-2015 Capital Facilities Plan by
the Aubum School District No. 408 for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the
District; and
2. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of King County and the cities of
Aubum and Kent to include the Auburn School District's 2009-2015 Capital Facilities Plan as
part of the Capital Facilities Ele,rnent of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The cities of
Algona and Pacific may also amend their Comprehensive Plans to include the Auburn School
Disffict's Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Element of each jruisdiotion's
Comprehensive Plan.
Proponent: Aubum School DiskictNo. 40S
Location of the Proposal:
The Aubum School District includes an area of approximately 57 square miles. The
Cities of Auburn, Algona, Kent, and Pacific and parts of unincorporated King and Pierce
Counties fall within the Dishict's boundaries.
Lead Agency:
-Aubum School DistrictNo. 408
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse environmental impact on the environment. An environmental
impact staternent (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2Xc). This decision 'tras made
after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance @NS) is issued under \MAC 197-1,1-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 4:00 p.m., May 11, 2009. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based
on timeþ comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likeþ,
withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment
deadline.
Responsible Official Mike Newman
Deputy Superintendent, Business and Operations
Aubum School Dishict No. 408
Telephone (2s3) 931-4900
Address:Auburn School Diskict
915 4th Street N.E.
Auburn, \MA 98002
You may appeal this determination in writing by 4:00 p.m., May 11, 2009, to
Mike Newman, neputy Superintendent, Auburn School Distict No. 408, 915 4th Sfteet N.8.,
Aubum, WA 98002.
Date of Issue:
Date Published:
Apn|24,2009
Apnl24,2009
ENVIRON M ENTAL GHECKLIST
WAC 197-11 -960 Environmental Checklist.
Purpose of Checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all
governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before
making decisions. An environmental impact statement (ElS) must b_e prepared for all
proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment.
The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency
identífy impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if
it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
I nstructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about
your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the
environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an ElS.
Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best
description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your
knowledge. ln most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own
observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. lf you really do not know
the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or
"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary
delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline,
and landmark designations, Answer these questions if you can. lf you have problems,
the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do
them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional
information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The
agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or
provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be
significant adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be
answered "does not apply". ln addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for non-
project actions (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project,"
"applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and
"affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
The adoption of the Auburn School Distict's 2009 Capital Facilities Plan ("Capital
Facilities Plan") for the purposes of planning for the Distict's facilities needs. The cities
of Auburn and Kent and the King County Comprehensive Pl¿ins will be amended to
inolude the Auburn School Distict 2009 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities
Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Cities of Algona and Pacific
Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Auburn School Dishict 2009
Capitat Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jr.uisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan. A copy of the Distict's Capital Facilities Plan is available for
review in the District's offices.
2. Name of applicant:
Aubum School DistrictNo. 408.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Auburn School DishictNo. 408
915 4th St. N.E.
Auburn,IVA 98002
Contact Person: MikeNewman, Deputy Superintendent, Business/Operations
Telephone: (253) g3l-4g00
2
4. Date checklist prepared:April 13,2009
Agency requesting checklist Aubum School District No. 408
Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the Distiot on May 11, 2009.
After adoption, the Distict will fonvard the Capital Facilities Plan to the cities of
Auburn, Algona, Kent, and Pacific, and to King County for inclusion in each
jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually.
Site-specific projects willbe subject to project-level environmental review.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? lf yes, explain.
The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the Distict
plans to implement over the next six years. The District plans to purchase property for
and construct a new middle school and a new elementary school over the next six years to
meet projected student population increases. The Dishict may also add portable facilities
at existing school sites. The Dishict will also conduct technology modernization projects
at facilities throughout the District, construct a special education hansition facility,
replace three aging schools, and perform multiple facility improvements tlroughout the
District.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have undergone or will undergo
additional environmental review, when appropriate, as they are developed.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental
approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? lf
yes, exp¡a¡n.
None known.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your
proposal, if known.
The cities of Auburn and Kent will review and adopt the Capital Facilities Plan for the
puqposes of updating the cities' school impact fees and incorporating the up{ated Plan as
apart of the Capital Facilities Elements ofboth the Aubum and Kent Comprehensive
Plans. King County will review the Plan for the purposes of implernenting the County's
5.
6.
3
impact fee ordinance and incorporatingthe Plan as apart of the Capital Facilities Element
of the King County Comprehensive Plan.
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed
uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to
repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include
additional specific information on project description.)
This is a nonproject action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Aubum School
District's 2009 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District's facilities
needs, This proposal also involves the amendment of the cities of Auburn and Kent
Comprehensive Plans and the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Auburn
School Disfrict 2009 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of eaoh jurisdiction's Caþital
Facilities Element of their Comprehensive Plans.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to
understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if
any, and section, township, and range, if known. lf a proposalwould occur over a range
of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site
plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should
submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or
detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
The 2009 Capital Facilities Plan will affecl the Aubum School District. The Dishict
includes an area of approximately 57 square miles. The Cities of Auburn, Algona, Kent,
and Pacific, and parts of unincorporated King County fall within the District's
boundaries.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
The Auburn School District is comprised of a variety of topographic landforms and
gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects
included in the Capitai Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
4
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Specific
Facilities
review.
slope
Plan
characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
have been or will be identified during project-level environmental
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? lf you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify
them and note any prime farmland.
Specific soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? lf so, describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Auburn School District. Specific soii limitations
on individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project-level
environmentaireview when appropriate.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or
grading proposed. lndicate source of fill.
Individuat projects included in the Capital Faoilities Plan have been or will be subject,
when appropriate, to projectlevel environmental'review and local approval at the time
of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the pury)ose, type, quantitY, and
source of any fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time.
f. Could eros¡on occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? lf so,
generally describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of the consûuction projects currently
proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects
have been or will be evaluated on a site-specifi.c basis at the time of projectJevel
environmental review when appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be
subject to local approval processes.
5
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces
after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have required or will
require thc construction of impervious surfaces. The extent of anY impervious cover
constn¡cted will vary with each project included in the Capitaf Facilities Plan. This
issue has been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
h, Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the
earth, if any:
The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and
appropriate control mea$res have been or will be addressed dwing project-level
environmental review when appropriate. Relevant erosion reduction and control
requirements have been or will he met.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.,
dust, automobile, odors, industrialwood smoke) during construct¡on and when
the project is completed? lf any, generally describe and give approximate
quantities if known.
Various emissions, many conskuction-related, may result from the individual projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The air-quality impacts of each project have
been or will be evaluated during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? lf so, generally describe.
Any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects
inciuded in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air,
any:
The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
subject to project-level environmental review and relevant local approval processes
whån appropriate. The District has been or will be required to comply with all
c
if
o
applicable air regulations and air permit requirements. Proposed measures specific to
the individual'projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
3. Water
a. Sudape:
1) ls there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of
the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes,
ponds, wetlands)? lf yes, describe type and provide names. lf
appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
There is a network of surfaoe water bodies within the Auburn School Dishict.
The surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during
projectJevel environmental review when appropriate. 'When necessary, the
surface water regimes and flow pattems have been or will be researched and
incorporated into the designs of the individual projects.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200
feet) the described waters? lf yes, please describe and attach available
plans.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require work near the
surface waters located within the Aubum School District. Applicable local
approval requirements have been or will be satisfied.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be
placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area
of the site that would be affected. lndicate the source of fill material.
Information with respect to the placement or removal of fiIl and dredge material
as a component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or
will be provided during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied.
7
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
A:ry surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with ttre
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? lf so, note
location on the site plan,
Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area,
has been or will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to
surface waters? lf so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume
of discharge.
Specific infonnation regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be
requiied as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been
or will be provided during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet forNonproject Actions.
b. Ground:
1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to
groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate
quantities if known.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact
grormdwater resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan on groundwater resor¡rces has been or will be addressed
during project-level onvironmental review when appropriate. Each project has
been oi will be subject to applicable local regulations. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground
from septic tanks or other Sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;
industrial, conta¡n¡ng the following chemicals .; agricultural; etc').
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the
number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of an¡mals or
humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
I
The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the
projects included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review.
c. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of
collection and disposal,'if any (include quantities, if known). Where will
this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? lf so, describe.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have stonnwater
runoff consequences. Specific information regarding the stormwater impacts of
each project has'been or will be provided dwing project-level envirorunental
review when appropriate. Each project has been or will be subject to applicable
1o cal stormwater regulations.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? lf so,
generally describe.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of
waste materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of each
project on ground and surface waters have been or will be identified during
project-level environmental review when appropriate. Each project has been or
will be subject to all applicable regulations regarding the discharge of waste
materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for
Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
Specific measures to reduce or conhol runoff impacts associated with the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during
project-level environmental review when appropriate.
I
4. Plants:
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Auburn School Distict.
Inventories of the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Some of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or
alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
The specific ìmpacts to thcse species from the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve
or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to
applicable local landscaping requirements.
10
5. Animals:
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects
proposed in the Càpital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the
site.
Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed dwing
piojecflevel environmentalreview when appropriate.
c. ls the site part of a migration route? lf so, explain
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes
have been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined
dwing projeot-level environmental review when appropriate.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood Stove, solar) will be
used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will
be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life-cycle cost analysis of
all heating lighting, and inzulation systems before it \ryill permit specific school
projects to proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Þlan huve been or will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site
11
design planning when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject
Actions
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? lf so, generally desuibe:
fþs impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar
potential of adjacent projects have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of
this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy
impacts, if any:
Energy conservation mea$res proposed in connection with the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project-level
environmental review when appropriate
7. EnvironmentalHealth
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of'fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous Waste, that could
occur as a result of this proposal? lf so, describe.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet forNonproject Actions
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
Z) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health
hazards, if any:
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan comply or will comply with all
current codes, standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or
will be subject to project-level environmental review and local approval at the
time they are deveþed, when appropriate.
12
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project
(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises from taffig construction, residential, commercial, and
industrial areas exists within the Aubum School Distict. The specific noise
sowces that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be identified during projectJevel environmental review when
appropriate.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated
with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? lndicate what hours noise would come
from the site.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create normal
construction noisês that will exist on short-term bases only. The construction
projects could inorease tafEc around the construction sites on a short-term basis.
È"ıurn" the construction of additional school capacþ will increase the capacity
of the District's school facilities, this project may create a slight increase in
fuaffic-related or operations-related noise on a long-term basis. SimilarlY, the
placement of portables at school sites will increase the capacity of school facilities
and may create a sligþt increase in haffrc-related or operations-related noise.
Neither of these potential increases is expected to be significant. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproj ect Actions.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control no¡se impacts, if any:
The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facjlities Plan
have been of will be evaluated and mitigated during projectJevel environmeirtal
review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local
regulations.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Aubum School District, including
residential, commercial, industial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc.
13
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? lf so, describe.
The known sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have not been
used recently for agriculture.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The structu¡es located on the sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified and described during project-level environmental
review when appropriate
d. Will any structures be demolished? lf so, what?
The shuctu¡es that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan, if any, have been or will be identified dwing projectJevel
environmental review when appropriate.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning
classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site-specific zoning information has
been or will be identified during project-level environmental review'¡¡hen appropriate'
f . What is the current comprehens¡ve plan designation of the site?
Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be oompleted during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
g. lf applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of
the site?
Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities- Plan have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
14
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"
area? lf so, specify.
Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
The Auburn School Dishict currently serves approximately 14,019 fuIl-time
equivalent ("FTE") students. Enrollment is expected to increase to approximately
76,117 FTE students bythe 2014-2015 school year.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
Any displacement of peoplg caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan has been or will be evaluated during project-level environmental review when
appropriate. However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of
the projects contained therein, will displace any people.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject
to project-level environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed
mitigating measures have been or will be developed at that time, when necessary.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with
existing uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive
planning process'and during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
9. Housing:
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? lndicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan.
15
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? lndicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
It is not anticþated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will
eliminate any liousing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan on existing housing have been or will be evaluated dwing projectJevel
environmental review when apptopriate.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Measures to reduce or contol any housing impacts caused by the projects included in
the Capitat Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate
10. Aesthetics:
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including
antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been
or will be addressed dwingprojectJevel environmental review when appropriate.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been
or will be addressed during project-level environmental review wtren appropriate.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Appropriate meâsures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects
i¡-ciu¿e¿ in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project-
level basis when appropriate.
16
11. Light and Glare:
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur?
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or ïrill be addressed during project-level environmental review, when
appropriate.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere
with views?
The light or glare impacts of tåe projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be addressed during projectJevel environmental review when appropriate.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Off-site sources of light or glare that may affect the projects inoluded in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated during project-level environmental
review when appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare irnpacts, if any:
Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
12. Récreation:
a. What designated and informal recreat¡onal opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity?
There are a variety of formal and infonnal recreational facilities within the Aubum
School District.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? lf so,
describe.
The recreational impacts of the projeots included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be addrıssed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
17
14
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed nèw school
facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be zubject to mitigation during project-level environmental review when
appropriate. School facilities usually provide recreational facilities to the community
inthe fonn of play fields and glurnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state,
or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? lf so,
generally describe.
There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for, such registers for the
project sites included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and
òultural resources on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in detail during
project-level environmental review when appropriate.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeologica¡,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Pian has been or \¡¡iil be developed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures will be proposed on a projectJevel basis when appropriate.
Transportation:
a.' ldentify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The impact on public steets and highways of the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
18
b. ls site currently served by public transit? lf not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan
and public hansit has been or will be addressed during project-level environmental
revie'r when appropriate.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate?
Inventories of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability have been or
will be conducted during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or ¡mprovements to
existing roads or streets, not including driveways? lf so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private).
The need for new sheets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has
been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? lf so, generally describe.
Use of water, rail; or air hansportation has been or will be addressed during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project? lf known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
The haffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed duringproject-level enviroamental review when appropriate.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
The mitigation of haffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital
FacilitieJ Phn has been or will be addressed dwing project-level environmental
review when appropriate
19
15. Public Services:
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for
example: fire protection, police protection, health care' schools, other)? lf so,
generally describe.
The Distict does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities
Plan will significantly increase the need for public services.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services,
if any.
New school facilities have been or will be built with automatic security systems, fire
alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinHer systerns.
16. Utilities:
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water,
refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary serüer utilities
are availàble at the known sites of the projeots included in the Capital Faoilities Plan.
The types of utilities available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed
in morè detail dwing project-level environmental review when appropriate.
b, Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing
the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the
immediate viciníty which might be needed.
Utility revisions and constuction needs have been or will be identified during project'
level environmental review when appropriate.
20
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge.
I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature:
Date Submitted:4-a4 :01
21
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in
conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the
types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater
iñiensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly
and in generalterms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;
emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or
production of noise?
To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities,
including new high school, middle school and elemenlary school.capacity,_wi11 be
constructed, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional
impertneable surfaces, such as rooß, access toads, and sidewalks could increase
stormwater runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters. Heating systems,
emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed pursuant to the
Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or
hazardous substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or
gasoline for emergency generating equipment. The Distict does not anticþate a
significant increase in the produotion of noise from its facilities, although the projects
included in the Capitat Facilities Plan will increase the Dishict's student capacities.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such ¡ncreases are:
Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above havebeen or will
be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Stormwater detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City
requirements and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
("NPDESU) permitting requirements. Discharges to air will meet applicable air
pollution contol requirements. Fuel oil will be stored in accordance with local and
state requirements.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine
The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the
environment. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require clearing
plants offof the project sites and a loss to animal habitat. These impacts have been or
life?
22
are
will be addressed in more detail during project-level environmental review when
appropriate. The projects included in the Plan a¡e not likely to generate significant
impacts on fish or marine life.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fÏsh, or marine life
Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be
identified at this time. Specific mitigation proposals will be identified, however,
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The consfuction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the
consumption of energy.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constucted in accordance
with applicable energy efficiency standards.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive
areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for govemmental protection; such
as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no
impact on these resources.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
No specifi.c measures arebeing proposed at this time. Appropriate measures would be
proposed during project-specific review. Annual updates of this Plan will be
ioordinated with the Cities of Auburn, Algoua" Kent, and Pacific, and King County as
part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to
protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the School Dishict's faoilities
planning process is part of the overall Growth Management planning process, these
resources are more likely to be proteoted.
S. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use,
including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with
existing plans?
The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is
incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline
23
management plans. The Distict does not anticþate that ttre Capital Facilities Plan or
the projects contained therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area
served by the District.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities
Plan or the projects oontained therein are proposed at this time.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation
or public services and utilities?
The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary
increases in the Dishict's need for public services and utilities. The new school
facilities will increase the District's demands on transportation and utilities. These
increases are not expected to be significant.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time.
7. ldentify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or
federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the
protection of the environment.
24
*î
A
ø&
%øDg - 2Ðrø 20\4 - 2.CI16
New Panther Lake Flementary School open in Fall 2009
Kent Scfroof Dßtríct l{"0, 415 proailes e[ucøtíonø[ seraíce to
Kæilents of 'Unincorporøtel ryng County
ønl \esilenß of tfre Citíes of
fþft, Cor)ingtory Au6urn, fo:ntort
ßkcfrDiømord, Møpte ilof@, ørd SeøTøc, Wøsfiirqtorl
Á
H
ñ
r
*
{ql
#
i
s
qr
Aprit 2009
È{
*
$lÍ
tì
Kent School District No. 415
12033 SE 256th Street
Kent, Washington 98030-6643
(253) 373-7295
SIX - YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 - 2010 20t4 -20ts
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Jim Berrios
Bill Boyce
Sandra Collins
Chris Davies
Debbie Straus
ADMINISTRATION
Barbara Grohe, Ph.D. - Superintendent
Fred H. High - Assistant Superintendent for Business Services
Merri Rieger, Ed.D. - Assistant Superintendent, Learning & School lmprovement
Larry Miner - Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources
John Knutson - Executive Director of Finance
Janis Bechtel- Executive Director, School lmprovement 7 - 12
Jeanette Ristau - Executive Director, School lmprovement K - 6
David Staight - Executive Director, School lmprovement K - 6
Becky Hanks - Executive Director, Community Connections
Charles Lind - Executive Director, Labor Relations & Legal Services
Laura Madeo * Executive Director of lnstructional Services
Thuan Nguyen - Chief lnformation Officer
Kenl School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009
*
Ë
t
SIX - YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 - 2010 2At4 - 201s
April 2009
For information on the Plan, please call the
Finance & Planning Department at (253) 373-7295
Capital Facilities Plan
Contributing Staff
Gwenn Escher-Derdowski
Forecast & Planning Administrator
Fred Long, Supervisor of Facilities & Construction
Karla Wilkerson, Facilities Department
Don Walkup, Supervisor of Transportation Department
Kathy Fosjord, Transportation Manager
Maps by Jana Tucker, Printing Services
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilitiês Plan April 2009
Stfleør Cøpitø[ føci[ities Q[nn
Tø6[e of Conten*
tr t
Page Number
12
15
l8
t9
3r
Section
Executive Summary
II Six-Year Enrollment Projection & History
III District Standard of Service
I V lnventory, Capacity & Maps of Existing Schools
V Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan
VI Relocatable Classrooms
V I I Projected Classroom Capacity
V I I I Finance Plan, Cost Basis and lmpact Fee Schedules
I X Summary of Changes to Previous Plan
X Appendixes
2
4
9
24
32
s
r
*{
*
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facil¡t¡es Plan April 2009
I Executive Summary
This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent
School District (the "District") as the organization's facilities planning document,
in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act,
King County Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton,
Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac. This annual plan update was
prepared using data available in the spring of 2009 for the 2008-2009 school
year.
ïhis Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the
Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document
for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long
Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies, taking into account
a longer or shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities,
and other needs of the District as may be required.
Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by
Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and
Renton and included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive
Plans of each jurisdiction. The first ordinance implementing impact fees for the
unincorporated areâs was effective September 15, 1993.
ln order for impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of Kent
School District, the Metropolitan King County Council must adopt this Plan and a
fee-implementing ordinance for the District. For impact fees to be collected in the
incorporated portions of the District, the cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and
Renton must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances.
This Plan has also been submitted to cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and
SeaTac.
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes a standard of service in order to ascertain
current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public lnstruction
establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not
account for local program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act,
King County and City codes and ordinances authorize the District to make
adjustments tô the standard of service based on specific needs for students of
the District.
This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District.
Program capacity is based on an average capacity and updated to reflect
changes to special programs served in each building. Relocatables in the
capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent
facilities.
(continued)
Page 2Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009
I Executive Summary (continued)
The capacity of each school in the District is calculated based on the District
standard of service and the existing inventory, which includes some relocatable
classrooms. The District's program capacity of permanent facilities reflects
program changes and the reduction of class size to meet the requirements of
Student Achievement lnitiative 728. Relocatables provide additional transitional
capacity until permanent facilities are completed,
Kent School District is the fourth largest district in the state. Enrollment is
electronically reported monthly to the Office of the Superintendent of Public
lnstruction (OSPI) on Form P-223. Although funding apportionment is based on
Annual Average Full Time Equivalent (AAFTË), Enrollment on October 1 is a
widely recognized "snapshot in time" that is used to report the District's
enrollment for the year.
P-223 Headcount for October 1, 2008 was 26,831. P-223 FTE (Full Time
Equivalent) enrollment was 25,827.82. (FTE reports Kindergarten at .5 and excludes
Early Childhood Education [ECE] and college-only Running Start students.) The actual
number of individual students per the October 2008 full head count was 27,579.
(Full Headcount reports all enrolled students at 1.0 including Kindergarten, ECE and
college-only Running Start students. )
The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of
transitional facilities are reviewed in detail in various sections of this Plan. The
District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the
transitional use of relocatables.
A financing plan is included in Section V I i I which demonstrates the District's
ability to implement this Plan. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act, this Plan will be updated annually with changes in the fee
sched ules adjusted accordi ngly.
Kent School Dislrict Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 3
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection
For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on cohort survival and
student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years.
(seeTabtez¡The student generation factor, as defined on the next page, is the basis for
the growth projections from new developments.
King County births and the District's relational percentage average were used to
determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see rable l) 8.48% of
22,874 King County live births in 2004 is projected for 1,940 students expected in
Kindergarten for October 1, 2009. Together with proportional growth from new
construction, 8.48% of King County births is equivalent to the number of students
projected to enter kindergarten in the district for the next six-year period. (seerabte2)
State Funded Full Day Kindergarten ("FDK") programs required a revision to the
methodology for project¡ng Kindergarten at 1.0 FTE for qualifying schools.
Schools with half-day Kindergarten programs and the optional Tuition-based
FDK are projected at .50 FTE. 1s"" rabte2A)
Early Childhood Education students (sometimes identified as "Preschool Special
Education tSEl or handicapped students") are forecast and reported separately.
Capacity is reserved to serve the ECË programs at seven elementary schools.
The first grade population is traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten population
due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens. Cohort survival
method uses historical enrollment data to forecast the number of students projected for
the following year.
Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset by
current local economic conditions. With notable exceptions, the expectation is that
enrollment increases will occur District-wide in the long term. District projections are
based on historical growth patterns combined with continuing development of projects in
the pipeline dependent on market/growth conditions.
The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact to
schools and monitor conditions to reflect adjustments in this assumption. The six-year
enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new development
currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district.
lnformation on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed
developments in all jurisdictions may be considered in the District's future analysis of
growth projections.
Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The
Kent School District serves seven permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County,
the cities of Kent, Covington, and Auburn and smaller portions of the cities of Renton,
SeaTac, and Maple Valley. The west Lake Sawyer area of Kent School District is in the
city of Black Diamond.
(Continued)
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 4
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection (continued)
STU TION FACTOR
"Student Factor" is defined by King County code as "the number derived by a
school district to describe how many students of each grade span are expected
to be generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual
student generated rates for developments completed within the last five years.
Following these guidelines, the student generation rate for Kent School District is
as follows:
Single Family
Multi-Family
Elementary
Middle $chool
Senior High
Total
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total
.445
.118
.245
808
.296
.075
.1,17
482
The student generation factor is based on a survey of 1,878 single family
dwelling units and 1,283 multí-family dwelling units with no adjustment for
occupancy rates. Please refer to Appendix E on Page 36 of the Capital Facilities
Plan for details of the Student Generation Factor survey.
The actual number of students in those residential developments was
determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation
System.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Fac¡lities Plan April 2009 Page 5
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4I5OCTOBER P 223 F T E (Full Time Equivalent) ENROLLMENT HISTORY r200820072A06200520042003200220412000199919981997199619951994199319921 9911990October FTE EnrolknentKing County Live Births 2lncreâse / DecreaseKindergarten/8irth%219,8258518.88%1,8521,773't,8241,7931,7021,6291.6241,54s1,483't,4681,3601.20221,2898409.07%22,5411,2528-47"/o23,1045638.54Yo23,t02-1028.44%23,1881868.38o/o22,355-8338-274/o22,010-3458.56%21,817-1 938.25o/o21,573-24421,646738.06%22,2125668.05%22,O47-N58.33%19,999 20,449174 4509.49% 9.40Vo22,487 21,778 21,863 22,4314AO -709 85 5688.41o/o 8.22a/o 8.29% 8'48o/o8.41Yo962 965 955 987 971 972 925 542 900 907 873 894 917 943 895 906Kindergartenl-2-3 BBo 949State Funded Full Day Kindergarten 1'2-3I,S451,944I,8661,9'16f ,8651,7331.72t1,6281,6121,4801,4002552,0291,9981,9501,9001,91 11,8851,8121,7241.6892,0172,0481,9721,939f ,9071,951't,9151,7991,7161,698't,5373401,9671,9371,9651,9421,8991,9151,9461,8821,8001,9752,0111,9592,O12't,9241,8951,9251,9411,8941.765't,6064302,152I,9792,025I,9661.9881,9241,8991,9271,9632,0852J942,0582,4642,0232,0361,9821,9361,9311,9771,7972,0642,0952,2082,O452,1082,0452,0631,9701,9251,9531,8491,9892,0782,1112,2222,0372,1192,O8'.12,0152,1022,O451_7822,0692,4152,0982,0862,2512,0562,2082,0332,2082,1131,770I Ã421,9362,0672,4402j662,1092,2532,1272,1U2,2462.4641,8351,9221,9362,O552,0682,1492,1512,3802,O7524042,0391,8231,8511,S651,9752,O722,0672,2052,2092,35'l2,3092,2471,787'r,9*1,9352,A202,O572,1022,1392,2432,2212,7052,1241,907't,446193819811962202420s02164220022932767217317991475200319t)820262015205121012205225l-277222121881145118732045203320/'9202020982130218/2560247418821491768365'¡92019162081206020442081211721432573224519661549Grade 1Grade 2Grade 3Grade 4Grade 5Grade 6Grade 7Grade IGrade 9-JuniorHighGrade 9-SeniorHíghGrade 10Grade 11Grade 12Total Enrollment 41,6631,4092901,690I,5293681,8511,681465'l507 1Ãa,'i27á,¿(r¿7546620,135 21,g12 22,222 n,803 22,754 23,323 23,792 24,560 24,882 25,060 25,298 25,344 25,354 25,358 25,770 25,809 25.864 25'745 25'828836,610Yeârly FTE lncreâse 916 1J7A 909 æ2 -10 52g 469 768 322 178 178 106 I 4 412 39 55 -119Cumulative lncreâse 916 2,Og4 3,003 3,585 3,575 4,104 4,574 5,341 5,663 5,841 6,019 6,126 6,135 6,140 6,552 6,591 6,646 6,527Kent School Distric{ Six-Year Capital Fac¡litíes PlanTable 1April 2009 Page6
State Funded FDK at 14 schools
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
SIX.YEAR F T E ENROLLMENT PROJECTION
LB in 2003 LB in 2004 LB ¡n 2005 LB in 2006 LB ln 2007 [B est 08 LB es¿ 09
Klng County Live Birthsl
lncrease / Decrease
Kindergarten t Birth o/o 2
22,431
568
8.48Yo
22,874
443
8.48%
22,680
.194
8.48%
24,244
1,564
8.48Vo
24,899
ô55
8.48%
25,000
101
8.49o/a
25,100
100
8.48%
'" Kindergarten FTE @ .5
2/3 FD Kindergarten @ 1.0
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade I
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
Total FTE Enrollment
Yearly lncrease
Yearly lncrease/Decrease %
Cumulative lncrease
26,118 26,310 26,934 27,325
768
365
1,920
1,916
2,081
2,060
2,044
2,081
2,117
2,143
2,573
2,245
1,966
1,549
479
982
2,021
1,961
1,971
2,073
2,065
2,091
2,096
2,131
2,497
2,249
1,841
1,661
471
982
2,081
2,083
1,989
2,001
2,085
2,114
2,111
2,129
2,507
2,210
1,889
1.662
537
982
2,054
2,145
2,122
2,029
2,023
2,140
2,130
2,144
2,505
2,219
1,857
1,705
565
982
2,183
2,117
2,184
2,163
2,051
2,077
2,160
2,163
569
982
2,232
2,249
2,156
2,226
2,185
2,106
2,097
2,1 93
573
982
2,234
2,299
2,289
2,198
2,248
2,242
2,126
2,1 30
2,522
2,227
1,864
1,676
2,544
2,232
1,871
1,683
2,579
2,251
1,875
1,689
25,828
Note:2/3i4
83
0.32%
83
290
1.12o/o
373
192
0.74o/o
565
26,592
282
1.07%
847
342
1.29Yo
1 ,189
391
1.45%
1,580
27,711
386
1.41o/o
1,966
ACTUAL
2008 2009 2010 2011 l{ zot z ll zots li zor¿
2ı.118 26,310FullTime Equivalent (FTE) 25,828 26,592 26,934 27,325 27,711
1 Kindergarten enrollment projection is based on KSD percentage of live birthç in King County fìve years previous.
2 Kindergarten FTE prôjection is calculated by using the District's prêvious year percentage of King County births
5 years earlier compared to actual kindergarten enrollment in the previous year. (Excludes ECE - Early Childhood Education)
3 Kindergarten projection is at 1.0 FTE for 14 schools qualifying for Grant & State Apportionment Funded Full Day Kindergarten (FDK)
Schools with 1/2 Day Kindergarten and Optional Tuition-based Full Day Klndergarten programs are projected at .5 FTË.
4 Oct. 2008 P2æ F'f E is 25,828 & Headcount is 26,831 . Full student count wlth ECE Preschool & Runn¡ng Start = 27,579.
G R O W T H PROJECTIONS stments for current economic factors
For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment
growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 Aprit 2009 page 7
2008-2009ProgramABRELEMENTARY SCHOOL452402498456464504408450456452504398464524474¿164524498440396480522s04504464408338504ccCVcocwEHEPFWDEGRGLHEJCMEMLNOPLKELYMSMRPOPTSWSHSCSBSR13,A12Elementary TOTALCarriage Crest ElementaryCedar Valley ElernentaryCovington ElementaryCrestwood ElementaryEast Hill ElementaryEmerald ParkFa¡rwood ElementaryGeorge T. Daniel ElementarvGlenridge ElementaryGrass Lake ElementaryHorizon ElementaryJenkins Creek ElementaryKent ElementaryLake Youngs ElementaryMartin Sortun ElementaryMeadow Ridoe ElementarvMeridian ElementaryMillennium ElementaryNeely-O'Brien ElementaryPanther Lake ElernentarvPark Orchard ElementaryPine Tree ElementaryRidgewood ElementarySawyer Woods ElementaryScenic H¡ll ËlementarySoos Creek ElementarySpringbrook ElementarySunrise EIementaryKENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415GAPACITY of ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS & KINÐERGARTEN PROJECTIONS for October 200928 Elementary Schools 2HdCntNote 1: KAI = Kindergarten Academic lnlervention at ML & PT: FDK Program for qualified Kindergarten students & 1t2 Day Kindergarten for rema¡nder of Kindergarten students.Kent School D¡str¡cl S¡x-Year Capital Facil¡ties Plan Table 2 A Aprít 2009 page I9589821940ElemSchlÀbrvCodeccCVcocwEHEPFWDEGRGLHEJCKELYMSMRMEMLNOPLPOPTRWSWSHSCSBSROct-09ProjectedKindergartenStudentsFTE@.503437363034321933223l251636352336380g26041292146982 479x2@ 1.058987150799683401028271207656.5 FTEForecastfor0.50 FundedBas¡c Ed1/2 Day K Only3436373034321933227110282402025163136352336.5 FTEForecastfor0.50 FundedOptionalTuition-Based112 Day (& FDK)I.O FTEForecastfor1.0 FundedTille IKAI FDK.5 FTEForecastlor0.50 FundedKindergarten1l2Day5871985079839676561,0 FTEForecastfor1.0 Fundedt-728FDK1.0 FTEForecastfor1.0 FundedStateApportionmentFDK59266
I I I Gurrent Kent School District "Standard of Service"
ln order to determine the capacity of facilities in a school district, King County
Code 214.06 references a "standard of service" that each school district must
establish in order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service
identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students
and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the district which
would best serve the student population.
This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District.
The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as
"impact" schools and the standard of service targets a lower class size at those
facilities. Relocatables included in the capacity calculation use the same
standard of service as the permanent facilities. (See Appendix A, B & C)
The standard of service defined herein may continue to change in the future.
Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process
combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service
adjustments to meet the requirements of Student Achievement lnitiative 728.
This process will affect various aspects of the District's "standard of service" and
future changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans. Because the
funding for lnitiative 728 is incremental, implementation of the lnitiative is also
incremental and may result in changes to school capacity.
Current ards of Service for Elemen tarv Students
Class size for Kindergarten is planned for an average oÍ 22 students
Class size for grades 1 - 4 is planned for an average of 23 students.
Class size for grades 5 - 6 is planned for an averâge of 29 students.
Program capacity for general education elementary classrooms is calculated at
an average of 24 students per classroom because of fluctuations between
primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e, thirdifourth or fourth/fifth grade split
classes, etc.). Most elementary schools provide full day kindergarten programs
(FDK or KAI - Full Day Kindergarten or Kindergarten Academic lntervention) with
the second half of the day funded by grants or tuition.
Students have scheduled time in a computer lab. Students may also be provided
music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility.
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program.
(continued)
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page g
I I I Gurrent Kent School District "Standard of Service'r (continued¡
ldentified students will also be provided other educational opportunities in
classrooms for programs such as those designated as follows:
English Language Learners (E L L)
Self-contained Special Education Support Genter Programs (SC)
lntegrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Early Childhood Education (ECE) (3-4 yr. old students with disabilities)
School Adjustment (sn) Program for severely behavior-disordered students
Speech & Language Therapy & Programs for Hearing lmpaired students
Adaptive Support Center for Mild, Moderate & Severe Disabilities (ASc-DD)
Occupational & Physical Therapy Programs (OT/PT)
Developmental Kindergarten in SC Programs
Kindergarten Academic lntervention Program (KAl-Full Day Kindergarten)
Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I) - Federal Program
Learning Assisted Programs (LAP)- State Program
District Remed iation Programs
Education for Highly Capable Students (formerly "Gifted" Program)
Some of the above special programs require specialized classroom space, as
well as music and physical education classrooms, computer labs, etc.; thus, the
permanent capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced,
Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of
time to receive instruction in these special programs and "pull-out" space must
be allocated to serve these programs. Some newer buildings have been
constructed to accommodate most of these programs; some older buildings have
been modified, and in some circumstances, these modifications reduce the
classroom capacity of the buildings. When programs change, program capacity
is updated to reflect the change in program and capacity.
Current Standards of Servi ce for Secondarv Students
The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and
educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affec-t
the capacity of the school buildings. Reductions have been made in 7th and 1Oth
grade English classes for lnitiative 728. These standards are subject to change
pending annual updates based on staff and public review for changes funded by
Student Achievement I nitiative 728.
Class size for grades 7 - I is planned for an average oÍ 29 students.
Class size for 7tn & 10th grade English class is planned for an average of 25
students.
Class size for grades I - 12 is planned for an average of 31 students.
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program. (cont,d.)
Kent School D¡stflct Slx-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 10
I I I Gurrent Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued)
ldentified secondary students will also be provided other educational
opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows:
Computer, Multi-media & Technology Labs & Programs - (Nova Net - Advanced Academics)
Technology Academy programs at Kent-Meridian High School & Mill Creek Middle School
Science Programs & Labs - Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Oceanography, Astronomy,
Meteorology, Marine Biology, General Science, etc,
English Language Learners (E L L)
lntegrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Basic Skills Programs
Transition Outreach Program (TOP) for 1B-21 year old Special Education students
Child Development Preschool and Daycare Programs
Music Programs - Band, Orchestra, Chorus, Jazz Band, etc.
Art Programs - Painting, Design, Drawing, Ceramics, Pottery, Photography, etc.
Theater Arts - Drama, Stage Tech, etc,
Journalism and Yearbook Classes
Highly Capable (Honors or Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs
lnternational Baccalaureate ("1 B") Program
Kent Phoenix Academy - Performance Learning Center, Gateway, Virtual High School &
Kent Success program with evening classes designed for credit retrieval
Traffic Safety Education
JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps
Variety of Career & Technical Education Programs (CTE-Vocational Education)
Family & Consumer Science - Culinary Arts, Sewing, Careers w/Children/Educ., etc.
Health & Human Services * Sports Medicine, Sign Language, Cosmetology, etc.
Business Education - Word Processing, Accounting, Business Law & Math, DECA,
FBLA (Future Business Leaders), Sales & Marketing, Economics, Web Design
Technical & lndustry - Woodworking, Cabinet Making, Building Trades, Metals,
Automotive & Manufacturing Technology, Welding, Machine Shop, Drafting, Drawing,
CAD (Computer-aided Design), Electronics, Engineering & Design, Aviation, etc.
Graphic & Commercial Arts, Media, Photography, Theater & Stage, Ag & Horticulture
Many of these programs and others require specialized classroom space which
can reduce the permanent capacity of the school buildings. ln addition,
alternative home school assistance, choice and transition programs are prov¡ded
for students in grades 3 - 12 at Kent Mountain View Academy.
Soace or Classroom Utilizatio n
As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized
rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space
during their planning periods, it is not poss¡ble to achieve 100% utilizatíon of
regular teaching stations at secondary schools. Based on the analysis of actual
utilization of classrooms, the District has determined that the standard utilization
rate is 85% for secondary schools. Program capacity at elementary schools
reflects 100o/o utilization at the elementary level with adjustments for pull-out
programs served in relocatables. ln the future, the District will cont¡nue close
analysis of actual utilization.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facllities Plan April 2009 Page 11
I V lnventory and Gapacity of Existing Schools
Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 27,321 students
and transitional (relocatable) capacity to house 1,552. This capacity is based on
the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section I I I. lncluded in this Plan
is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current capacity.
(See Table 3 on Page 13)
The ratio between permanent capacity and transitional capacity has changed
from 96 - 4% lo 97 - 3o/o since the previous Plan.
The program capacity is periodically updated for changes in programs, additional
classrooms and new schools. Program capacity has been updated in this Plan to
reflect program changes and new capacity for building additions at the high
schools.
Program capacity also reflects adjustments for the Student Achievement
lnitiative 728 reduction in class size, The class size reduction received voter
approval in the Educational Programs and Operations Levy as well as through
funding for Student Achievement lnitiative 728. The District will conduct annual
public review and update class size recommendations in accordance with the
requirements and incremental funding of Student Achievement lnitiativeT2S.
Kent Mountain View Academy (formerly Kent Learning Center and Grandview
Elementary) serves Grades 3 - 12 with transition, choice and home school
assistance programs. lt is located in the former Grandview School in the western
part of the District in the city of SeaTac. This school was originally designed as
an elementary school and is included in the elementary capacity for this Plan.
Kent Phoenix Academy is a non-traditional high school which opened in Fall
2007 in the renovated site and building that formerly served Sequoia Middle
School. KPA has four special programs including the Performance Learning
Center, Gateway, Virtual High School and Kent Success. Kent Success replaced
the former Night Academy at KentMeridian High School and provides afternoon
and evening classes for credit retrieval.
Calculation of Elementary, Middle School and Senior High School capacities are
set forth in Appendices A, B and C. A map of existing schools is included on
Page 14.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 12
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.415
INVENTORY and CAPAGITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS
I Changes to capaciiy reflect program changes and new building additions at high schools.
2 M¡ll Creek Middle School and Technology Academy replaced renovatêd Kent Jun¡or H¡gh in 2005.
3 Kent Mountain View Acadêmy serves grades 3-12. The school was formerly known as Kent Learning Center & Grandview Elementary
4 Kenl Phoenix Academy is a non-traditionãl high school which opened ¡n Fall 2007 in the former Sequoia MS building.
2008-2009
ProgramscHooL
Year
Opened ABR ADDRESS
Caniage Crest Elementary
Cedar Valley Elementary
Covington Elementary
Crestwood Elementary
1990
1 971
1 961
1980
CC 18235 - 140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
CV 26500 Timberlane Way SE, Covington 98042
CO 17070 SE Wax Road, Covington 98042
CW 25225-180thAvenueSE. Covinoton 98042
452
402
498
456
East Hill Elèmentêry
Emarald Park
Fairwood Elementary
George T. Dan¡el Elementary
1 953
1999
1 969
1 992
EH 9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031
EP 11800 SE 216th Street, Kent 98031
FW 16600-148thAvenueSE, Renton 98058
DE 11310 SE 248th Street. Kent 98030
464
504
408
450
Glenridge Elementary
Grass Lake Elementary
Horizon Elementary
Jenkins Creek Elementary
1 996
197'l
1990
1 987
GR 13405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
GL 28700 - 191st Place SE, Kent 98042
HE 27641 - 144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042
JC 26915 - 186th Avenue SE, Covlngton 98042
456
452
504
3S8
Kent Elementary
Lake Youngs Elemèntâry
Martin Sortun Elementary
Meadow Ridge Elemeniary
1 999
1 965
1 987
1 9S4
MS
MR
KE
LY
24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032
19660-142ndAvenue SE, Kent 98042
12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030
2771 0 - 1 08th Avenue SE, Kent 9E030
464
524
474
464
Meridian Elêmentary
Mlllennium Elementary
Neely-O'Brien Elementary
Panther Lake Elementary
1 939
2000
'1990
1 938
524
498
440
3S6
ME
ML
NO
PL
25621 - 140th Avenue SE, Keni 98042
1 1919 SE 270th Skeet, Kent 98030
6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032
20831 - 108th Avenue SE, Kent 98031
Park Orchard Elementary
Pine Tree Elementary
Ridgowood Elementåry
Sawyer Woods Elementary
1 963
1 967
1 987
1 994
PO '1 1010 SE 232nd Street, Kênt 98031
PT 27825 - 1'18th Avenue SE, Kent 98030
RW 18030- 162ndPlaceSE, Renton gB05B
SW 31135 - 228th Ave SE, Black Diamond 98010
480
522
504
504
Scenic Hill Elementary
Soos Creek Elementary
Springbrook Elementary
Sunrise Elementary
Elementary TOïAL
Cedar Heights Middle Sehool
Mattson Middle School
Meeker Middle School
Meridian Middle School
Mill Creek MS (former Kent Jr Hi) 2
Norlhwood Middle School
M¡ddle School TOTAL
Kent-Meridian Senior High School
Kentlake Senior High School
Kentridge Senior High School
Kentwood Senior High School
Senior High TOTAL
Kent Mounla¡n View Academy 3
L
Kent Phoênix Academy '
DISTRICT TOTAL
SH 26025 Woodlând Way South, Kent 98030
SC 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031
SB 20035 - 100th Avenuo SE, Kent 98031
SR 22300 " 132nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042
I 960
1971
1969
1 992
1993
1 981
1 970
1 958
2005 / 1952
1 996
1 951
1 997
1 968
1S81
CH
MA
MK
MM
MC
NW
1 9640 SE 272 Skeet, Covington 98042
'16400 SE 251st Street, Covington 98042
12600 SË 192nd Street, Renton 98058
23480 - 'l20th Avenue SE, Kênt 98031
620 North Central Avenu6, Kent 98032
17007 SE 184th Stroet, Renton 98058
13,012
5,207
1,772
2,157
2,270
2,137
8,336
416
350
27,321
464
408
398
504
923
804
890
790
828
972
1 965
1 966
KM 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98030
KL 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent 98042
KR 12430 SË 208th Street, Kent 98031
KW 25E00 - l64thAvenue SE, Covington 98042
MVILC 22420 Mililary Road, Des Moines 98198
PH 11000 SE 264th Street, Kent 98030
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 April 2009 Page 13
xof(t,oo9.s(tl=.ooxotto!¡E.ÊrÀtgı'o!ô)NhFoirwoodR¡dgewoodOYoungssE 208rh stEmerold PorkElemenforyaSoos CreekOElemenloryOsunriseOrchordElemenloryoMerid¡on¡Middle SchoolsE 25óth st28 Elementory Schoolsó Middle Schools4 Senior High SchoolsKent Mountoin View Acodemy (Grodes 3-12)Kent Phoenix Acodemy (9-12)Kenl School District No. 415Serving residents ofUnincorporoled King CountyCity of KenlC¡ty of RentonCity of AuburnCity of Seo TocCily of CovinglonCity of Mople VolleyCity of Block Diomond\ÛuthosElêmenloryoaElemenloryNo¡lhwoodLokesE 240th stJenCreek OCedor HlsiddleLdkêElemenloryRdÉl'o!c,çllftual,o!+ILokeP¡ffiO MiddleSE 272nd StLokeocll(v)Sowyerî,=l\'eo(0!o,(CIoèGross LdkeKent-Kongley RoodI GovingtonElêm€nloryElemenloryaMolÌsonM¡ddle SchotOaKentwoodHigh SchoolwäSESowyer WoodsElementoryKenllokeOHigh SchoolLokeMorlônHorizonOElemenloryUat,I Merid¡onê. Elemenidrv%*#,?*onwPGlenridgeElementoryKentr¡dgeHioh School-¡uøtuCreslMeekefMiddleaaomin¡sholionCenterP¡ne TreêElementoryaaMillênoKenlAcodemyODonielO ElemenloryElemenloryMortin aSortunoEco()o!\toPonlher LokeElementoryScenic Hill IElêmenlqrys 212th staoMeodowSpringbrookElementoryEosl HillKenl-MeridionHigh SchSchool¡ll Creek aKenlMountoin V¡ewAcodemyoE¡oìO'BrienKenla
v Six-Year Planning and Gonstruction Plan
At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring of 2009, the following projects are
completed or in the planning phase in Kent School District:
Construction is in progress for additional classroom capacity at Kent-Meridian High
School and has recently been completed at Kentlake High School'
Sequoia Middle School was renovated and reconfigured to provide capacity for
approximately 350 high school students at the non-traditionaì high school, Kent Phoenix
Academy in 2007-08.
Kent Junior High was renovated and renamed Mill Creek Middle School. Mill Creek MS
also serves the Kent Technology Academy program for students in Grades 7 - 8. The
construction of Phase I I of the renovation of Mill Creek MS is in progress.
ln February 2006, voters approved construction funding for replacement of Panther Lake
Elementary School and a future Elementary School to accommodate new growth. A new
site was acquired and construction is in progress for replacement of Panther Lake
Elementary, The new Panther Lake will open to replace the current school in Fall 2009.
Planning is in progress for a replacement schoolfor Covington Elementary School.
Ënrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the elementary school
level. Future facility and site needs are reflected in this Plan.
. Some funding is secured for purchase of additional portables and some funding may be
' provided by impact fees as needed. Sites are based on need for additional capacity.
As a critical component of capital facilities planning, county and city planners and
decision-makers are encouraged to consider safe walking cond¡t¡ons for all
students when reviewing applications and design plans for new roads and
developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety as well as bus
pull-outs and turn-arounds for school buses,
lncluded in this Plan is an inventory of potential projects and sites identified by the
District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future. (see rabre 4on Pase 16
& Sfte map on Page 17)
Voter approved bond issues have included funding for the purchase of sites for some of
these and future schools, and the sites acquired to date are included in this Plan. Some
funding is secured for purchase of additional sites but some may be funded with impact
fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction
requirements and some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs.
2006 voter approval of $106M bond issue for capital improvement included the
construction funding for a new elementary school, replacement of Panther Lake
Elementary, and classroom additions to high schools. Some impact fees will also be
applied to those projects. Student Achievement lnitiative 728 funds are being utilized to
reduce class size and provide extended learning opportunities. Based on community
input at public hearings, the Board will continue annual review of standard of service and
those decisions will be reflected in the each update of the Capital Facilities Plan.
a
a
a
a
a
a
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 15
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Gapacity
SCHOOL/FACILITY/SITE LOCATION Status
Projected
Compl€tion
Datê
Projected
Program
o/o lo¡
new
Growth
Approxlmale
on
Map ELEMENTARY
#on
Map 3 otHEn strEs AcoutRED
13 Replacement for Pânther Lake Elementary (F) SE 21ôth Street & 102nd Ave SE
PL Elementary Site (F) SE 21 6th Street & 102nd Ave SE
Panther Lake Elementary - Replaced in 2009 SE 208 Street & '108th Ave SE
5 Replacement for Covinglon Elementary (U) SE 2561h Street & 1541h Ave SE
Covington Elem - Replacement plannêd îoî 2011 17070 SE Wax Road, Covington
Elementary # 31 (Actuat#29) (F) To be delermined 2
Siie for El€mentary # 31 (Unfunded)1 To be determined 2
MIDDLE SCHOOL
Mill Creek Middle School
Phase ll of Renovation
Sequoia Middlê School
620 N. Central Avenue, Kent
Renovat¡on & Reconfiguration
for Kenl Phoenix Academy
SENIOR HIGH
New Non-traditional High School Former Sequoia Middle School
Kent Phoenix Academy (Funded) 1 1 000 SE 264th Street, Kent
Classroom additions at Kentlake High School (F) 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent
Classroom additions at Kent-Meridian HS (F) 10020 SE 256th Streel, Kent
TEMPORARY FACILITIES
Relocatables For placement as needed
SUPPORT FACILITIES
Bus Fac¡l¡ty (Unfuncted) I
(Numbers assrgnêd fo fufuæ schoo/s may not corÊlâte with number of exls¿jng schools.)
Replacement
Site
Replacement
Replacement
Replãcement
New
Slt€
Conslruction
ln pr0grss6
Planning
2009 828 NiA
Renovat¡on
Additions
Add¡tions
Utilized
Ulilized
In progEss
2007-08
. 2008
2009
constructton Fall 2009
200s
Planning 200S
Planning 2011
Planning 2011
Planning 2012-13
Planning 2012-'13
500
-396
600
498
600
21o/o
21olo
20%
100o/o
100%
100%
100%
100%
Ronovation
Ronovatlon 2007 771 N/A
350
171
79
Additional
Capacity
New Planning 2008 + 24-3t oâch 100%
Near Kent.Meridian High School Nsw Planning TBD2 N/A
Tvpe
Land Use
Jurisd¡ct¡on
4 Covington areâ North (Near Mattson MS)
7 Covington area Soulh (Scârsella)
5 Cov¡ngton areå West (Halleson-Wikstrom)
3 Ham Lake area (Pollard)
I SE of Lake Morton area (West property)
2 Shady Lk area (Sowers, Blaine, Drahota, Paroline)
1 So. King Co. Activity Center (Nike site)
12 South Central s¡te (Plemmons-Yeh-Wms)
SE251 &164SE, Covinglon 98042
SE 290 & 156 SE, KentgB042
SE 256 & 154 SE, Covington 98042
16820 SE 240, Kent 98042
SE 332 & 204 SE, Kent 98042
17426 SE 192 Streêt, Renton 98058
SE 167 & 170 SE, Renton 98058
SE 286th Street & 124th Ave. SE, Kent
Elementary
Elementary
Elementary
Elêmentary
Secondary
Elemenlary
TBD 2
TBD 2
City of Covington
King Couniy
Cily of Covington
King County
King County
King County
King County
King County
Notes:
1 Unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future.
2 TBD - To be determined - Some sites are acquired but placement, t¡ming and/or conf¡guration have not been determined.
3 Numbers correspond to sites on Site Bank Map on Page 17. Other sile locations are parcels identif¡ed in Table 7 on pagë 27
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 April 2009 Page 16
Ãov,oo9.oı':.clq,i'io!¡c)q¡ı!L.nÐ9.IooTıUØoìç,I{hKenl School Distilcl No. 415Site Bonk&Property Acquisitionsu)o ¡f;'?å%Cedor VolleyElemeniorvOKent-Kongley RoodGrÕss LokeilCovingtonElementoryentorySchooloKentloke OHigh SchoolLokeMorlonLôkêoÐRidgewoodElemenloryaFoirwoodElementoryUØoE€sE 25óthMeridionHorizon OElêmentorysE 2081h SiO SunriseElementory*SELoke YoungsOElementoryGlenridgeElementoruKenlridoeHigh Sch"ooloahoolleCenterMeodow R¡dgeaElemenloryoaKent PhoenixAcocemyEmerold PorkElemenlorya $oos CreekHementoryOMeridionMiddle Schoolark OrchordElementorya$åflleElemênioryDonielOElemenîoryØoIcPaSpringbrookElemenloryPonlher LokeReplocemeniEosi Hill{ÞScenic H¡llaElementorySE ì92ndSts 2l2fh siNeelv O'BrienElemêntory ¡Mountoin Viêw03AcodemyPipe LokeSE 272 nd StLokêSowyerÞttI'.oo(o!q,(oo\¡
v I Relocatable Glassrooms
For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively
accurate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan. The Plan
also references use of portables or relocatables as interim or transitional
capacity/facilities.
Currently, the District utilizes 128 relocatables to house students in excess of
permanent capacity, for program purposes at school locations, and several for
storage or other purposes. (See Appendices A B c D)
Based on enrollment projections, implementation of additional full day
kindergarten programs, program capacity and the need for additional permanent
capacity, the District anticipates the need to purchase some additional
relocatables during the next six-year period. The continually escalating cost of
moving relocatables will increasingly limit the choice between building new
relocatables on site and relocating older ones.
During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that
all of the District's relocatables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During
the useful life of some of the relocatables, the school-age population may decline
in some communities and increase in others, and these relocatables provide the
flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community.
Portables, or relocatables, may be used as interim or transitional facilities:
1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school
facilities.
2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased
capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet
that demand.
3. To meet unique program requirements.
Relocatables currently in use are continually evaluated resulting in some being
improved and some replaced. Quality concerns will be among those addressed
by the next Community Facilities Planning Committee for review of capital
facilities needs for the next bond issue.
The Plan projects that the District will use relocatables to accommodate interim
housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of relocatables, their
impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the
interrelationship between relocatables, emerging technologies and educational
restructuring will continue to be examined.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 18
V I I Projected Six-Year Glassroom Gapacity
As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study is periodically updated for
changes in special programs and reflects class size fluctuations in Grades K - 4.
As sñown in the lnventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 13, the
program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison
ChaftS, (See lables 5 & 5 A-B-C on pages 20 - 23)
Enrollment is electronically reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis
and funding apportionment is based on Annual Average FTE (AAFTE). The first
school day of October is widely recognized as the enrollment "snapshot in time"
to report enrollment for the year.
Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student enrollment for October 2008 was 25,827.82.
Kindergarten students are reported at .5 although many schools provide full day
kindergarten ("FDK") with alternative funding for the second half of the day.
State-funded Full Day Kindergarten programs will report and project some
Kindergarten students at 1.00 FTE at qualifying FDK schools. P-223 FTE
excludes Early Childhood Education (preschool) students and College-only
Running Start Students. ¡see Tabtes 5 & 5A-a-con pases 20 -23)
ln October there were 679 students in 11th and 12th grade participating in the
Running Start program at 10-20 different colleges and receiving credits toward
both high school and college graduation. 334 of these students attended classes
only at the college ("college-only") and are excluded from FTE and headcount for
capacity and enrollment comparisons.
Kent School District continues to be the fourth largest district in the state of
Washington. P-223 Headcount for October 2008 was 26,831 with kindergarten
students counted at 1.0 and excluding ECE and college-only Running Start
students. A full headcount of all students enrolled in October 2008 totals 27,579
which includes ECE and college-only Running Start students.
Based on the enrollment forecasts, current inventory and capacity, current
standard of service, relocatable capacity, and future planned additional
classroom space, the District anticipates havíng sufficient capacity to house
students ovef the next six yeafS. ,see Tabte 5 and rabtes 5 A-B-c on Pases 20 - 2s)
This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There
may be significant need for additional portables and/or new schools to
accommodate growth within the District and class size reduction mandated
under Student Achievement lnitiative 728. Some schools, by design, may be
opened with relocatables on site. Boundary changes, limited and costly
movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational
restructuring will all play a major role in addressing overcrowding and
underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 19
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415
PROJEGTED ENROLLMENT and CAPAGITY
TOTAL DISTRICT
Permanent Proqram Capacitv 1 27,150 27,321 27,504 27,504 27,606 28,206 28,206
Changes to Permanent Capacitv 1
Classroom additions at Kentlake HS (F)
Classroom additions at Kent-Meridian HS (F)
Mill Creek MS Renovation - No new Capacity 2
171
79
500
Replacement schools with projected increase in capacity
Panther Lake Elementary 3
1r'unoeo¡
To Replace cunent school capacity
Covington Elementary 3
lunfunded¡
To Replâcê current school capacity
New Elementary # 31 (Funded)
-396
600
-498
600
SCHOOL YEAR 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-20't4 2014-201s
Actual PROJECTED
27,321 27,504 27,504 27,606 28,206 28,2A6 28,206
lnterim Relocatable Capacitv
Elementary Relocatable Capacity Required
Mlddle School Relocatable Capacity Required 4
Senior High Relocatable Capacity Roquired
0
0
0
1 8404808822A96
0
0
408
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SubtotalPermanent
Total Relocatable .1&6Kequtfeo 0 120 288 408 96 480 840
TOTAL CAPACITY 1 27,321 27,624 27.792 28,014 28,302 28,686 29,046
TOTAL FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION 5 25.828 26,118 26,310 26,592 26,934 27,325 27,711
DISTRICT AVAI LABLE CAPACITY '1 ,493 1,506 1,4s:2 1,422 ,1 ,368 1,361 .t,335
r Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and updated periodicaily to reflect program changes.
2 Phase I I of renovation continues for Mill Creek Middle School & Kent Technology Academy. (No new capacity added.)
3 Replacement schools for Panther Lake & Covington Elementary will be built on new sites with increased capacity.
o ln Fall 2004, gth grade moved to the high schools which increased capacity available at Middle School 7 - I grade levels.
u FTE = Full Time Ëquivalent EnrollmenVProjections (i.e. 1/2 day Kindergarten student = .5 & Fuil Day Kindergarten student = 1.0 FTE).
u eOOg-z0Og total classroom relocatable capacity is 1,552.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plân Table 5 April 2009 Page 20
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPAGITY
SENIOR HIGH Grades I - 12
Senior High Permanent Capacity I 8,5'15 8,686 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765
lncludes Kent Phoen¡x Academy 2
Chanqes to High School CaPacitY
Classroom additions at Kentlake HS (F) 171
Classroom additions at Kent-Meridian HS
and KM Technology Academy 3
1F¡
Subtotal 8,686 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765
Relocatable Capacity Required 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
79
SCHOOL YEAR 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Actual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 1 8,686 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765 8,765
FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 4 8,333 8,248 8;268 8,286 B,2Bg 8,330 8,394
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 353 517 497 479 476 435 371
NumberofRelocatablesRequired 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
No Classroom Relocatables required at this time. Some Relocatables used for classroom and program purposes.
1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and updated periodically to reflect program changes.
2 Sequoia Middle School was renovated and reconfigured as a new non-traditional high school, and re-opened in Fall 2007
as Kent Phoenix Academy serving grades 9 - 12 with four special programs.
3 KM add"d a new high school Technology Academy program in 2007 seruing students in grades I - 10 in 2008-09.
a fTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or projoctions, excluding College-only Running Start students,
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A April 2009 Page 21
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
MIDDLE SCHOOL Grades 7 - I
Middle School Permanent Capacity 1 5,2A7 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207
Changes to Middle School Capacity
4 Mill Creet< MS & Kent Technology Academy
are open during Phase 2 of Renovat¡on
(No new capäcity added in renovation)
Subtotal 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207
Relocatable Capacity Requíred 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCHOOL YEAR 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Actual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 1&3 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207
FTE ENRoLLMENT ¡ pno¡ecttoN t 4,260 4,227 4,240 4,274 4,323 4,290 4,256
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 5 947 980 967 933 884 917 951
No Classroom Relocatables required at middle schools at this time. Some Relocatables used for classroom and program purposes.
1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and updated periodically to reflect program changes
' F fE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projections
3 Grade level reconfiguration - All 9th grade students moved to the high schools in Fall 2004.
4 lVill Creek Middle School & Technology Academy - Kent Junior High was renovated and re-opened in
Fall 2005 with a Technology Academy serving 7th & 8th grade students from all service areas.
Phase I I of Mill Creek renovation continues in 2008-09 and the school is open during construction
5 Middle School capacity meets concurrency requirements and no impact fees are collected for middle schools
Kent School Dishict Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B April 2009 Page 22
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No,415
PROJECTED ENROLLMËNT and CAPACITY
ELEMENTARY Grades K - b
Elementary Permanent Capacity 1 13,012 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,634 14,234 14,234
Kent Mountain View Academy 2 416
Changes to Elementary Capacity
Replacemeni schools with projected increase in capacity
Panther Lake Elementary 4
lrunoec¡
Replaces current school capacity
500
-396
Covington Elementary a (unfunded)
Replaces current Covington Elem, capacity
New Elementary # 31 (Funded) 5
600
-498
600
Subtotar 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,634 14,234 14,234 14,234
Relocatable Capacitv Required 1 120 288 408 s6 480 8400
SCHOOL YËAR 2008-2009 2009-201 0 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Actual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,428 13,652 13,820 ß,442 14,330 14,714 15.074
FTÊ ENRoLLMETT l pRoJecro¡r 3 13,235 13,643 13,802 14,032 14,322 14,705 '15,0ö1
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 193 o 18 10 I o 13
Numberof Relocatables Required 0 5 13 17 4
35 Classroom Relocatables required in 2014-15. Some additìonal Relocatables used for program purposes.
20 JC
I Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes
2 Kent Mountain View Academy is a special program at the former Grandview $chool serving students in Grades 3 - 12.
The school buildìng (formerly Kent Learning Center & Grandview Elem.) was designed as an elementary school.
3 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projections (Kindergarten @ .5 or '1 .0 & excluding ECE)
K¡ndergarten projection is at .5 FTE for Half Day Kindergarten programs or optional Tuition-bâsèd Full Dêy Kìndergarten.
Kindergarten project¡on is at 1.0 FTE for Full Day Kindergarten programs funded by state apportionment or grants.
4 Replacement schools for Panther Lake & Covington Elementary wìll be built on new sites with increased capacity.
5 Site seleciion and construction timing for Elementary #31 is pending review of location and capaciiy needs.
Kent School Dislrìct Six-Year Capilal Facilities Plan Table 5 G April 2009 Page 23
VIII FinancePlan
The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District
plans to finance improvements for the years 2009 - 2010 through 2014 - 2015.
The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact
fees. The plan is based on voter approval of future bond issues, collection of
impact fees under the State Grovvth Management Act and voluntary mitigation
fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act.
Voters approved a $69.5 million bond issue for Capital Construction and
lmprovements in February 2002. The bond issue partially..funded building
additions at three high schools which coincided with moving I'n grade students
from junior high to senior high schools in September 2004. The District received
some District Equalization funds (formerly known as "state matching funds") and
has utilized impact fees for the senior high additions.
ln February 2006, voters approved a $106 million bond issue for replacement of
Panther Lake Elementary School with increased capacity, as well as construction
of a new elementary school to accommodate growth. The new Panther Lake
Elementary School is under construction and will be open in Fall 2009.
The bond issue also funded Phase II of the renovation for Mill Creek Middle
School and renovation of Sequoia Middle School for reconfiguration as a new
non-traditional high school. Kent Phoenix Academy opened at the former
Sequoia Middle School site in September 2007.
2006 construction funding approval also provided for some additional classrooms
to be constructed at Kentlake and Kent-Meridian High Schools. Some impact
fees will be utilized for the new construction that will increase capacity.
Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the
elementary level and unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future.
Some funding is secured for additional portables and some will be funded from
impact fees.
For the Six-Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates
from Kent School District Facilities Department. Please see pages 26-27 for a
summa!-y of the cost basis.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Pase 24
KENT SGHOOL DISTRICT No.4l5SIX.YEAR FINANCE PLANlmpact_5FeesUnsecuredstate 2 or Local 3SecuredLocal & StateTOTAL$5,700,000$2,500,000$26,700,000$4,485,013$28,900,000$30,320,000$2.500,000$4,000,000$1,500,000$5,607,000$941,8s3$s,780,000$10,720,000$2,500,000$427,060$79,000$506,060$21,270,OOA$5,600,000$1.700,000$l,000,000$2r,093,000$3,543,160$1,850,000$14.000.000201420132012201120102009$28,900,000$246,860 $259,2002 refocatables 2 relocatables$30,320,000$2,500,000$5,700,000$2,500,000$26,700,000$4,485,013$1013$o$o160 $26.870,000$39,385,013 $246,860 $29,159,20007311FUFFFUSCHOOL FACÍLITIESPERMANENT FACILITIESAddition to Kentlake HS I - 2Adclition to Kent-Meridian HS 1- 2Panther Lake Elem Replacement 1Panther Lake Elementary Site sCovington E¡ementary Replacement IElementary#311-2'3Elementary Site 3TEMPORARY FACILITIESAdditional Relocatables 3 - 4OTHERN/ATotals" F=Funded U=Unfunded1 Based on estimates of actual or future construction costs from Facilities Department. (See Page 25 for Cost Basis Summary)t The D¡strict anticipates receiving some state matching funds for these projects.3 Facility needs are pending review. Some of these projects may be funded with impact fees.a Cost of Relocatables based on cunent cost ând adjusted for inflation for future years.5 Fees in this column are based on amount of fees collected to date and estirnated fees on future units.Kent School District S¡x-Year Capital Facilities PlanTable 6April 2009 Page 25
V I I I Finance Plan - Cost Basis Summary
For impact fee calculations, construction costs are based on cost of the last
elementary school, adjusted for inflation, and projected cost of the next
elementary school.
Elementary School Cost Projected Cost
Millennium Elementary #30
Opened in 2000 $12,182,768
Cost of Panther Lake Elementary
Replacement (To open in 2009)$26,700,000
Projected cost - Covington Elementary
Replacement (Projected to open in 2011)$29,900,000
Projected cost of Elementary #31 in 2012 $30,320,000
Average cost of Covington Ëlem.
replacement & Elementary #31 $29,610,000
Construction cost of the additions to two high schools:
Senior High School Additions Projected Cost Total
2008 Addition to Kentlake High School $5,700,000
2009 Addition to Kent-Meridian HS $2,500,000
Construction cost of new HS capacity $8,200,000
Site Acquisition Gost
The site acquisition cost is based on an average cost of sites purchased or built
on within the last ten years. Please see Table 7 on page 27 for a list of site
acquisition costs and averages.
District Adjustment
The impact fee calculations on pages 29 and 30 include a "District Adjustment"
which is equal to the amount of increase that the impact fee formulas drive out
for this year and adjusted for increase in the Consumer Price lndex.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 26
KENT SGHOOL DISTRICT No.415Site Acquisitions & GostsAverage of Sites Purchased or Built on within last 10 YearsTotal Average Cost / AcreElementary13 I Urban5 / UrbanPanther Lake Elementary Replacement SiteElementary Site {Halleson & Wikstrom)20082to4102xx SE 216, Kent 980311 5435 SE 256 St, Covington 98042Elementary Site Subtotal9.4010.00$4,485,013$1,093,910$477,129$109,39119.40 $5,578,923$287,573Elem site averageMiddle Schoolurban Northwood Middle Schoot101 Urban M¡ll Creek MS (Kent JH) / McM¡llan St. assemblage12 I Urban So Central Site - Un¡ncorp KC (Plemmons, Yeh, Wms)19962AA2199917007 SE 184 St, Renton 98058411-432 McMillan St., Kent 98032Eot 124 SE btw286-288 Pl (UKC)24.42 $655,1381.23 $844,8663e.36 $1,936,02065.01 $3,436,024$26,828$686,883$49,188Middle School Site Subtotal$s2,8#Middle Schl SiteSenior High11 / UrbanSenior High6l UrbanK-M High Schaol Addition (Keni 6 & Britt Smith)Kentlake High School (Kombol Morris)Kentwood Sr l.iAddition (sandhu)20a2 & 2003 10002 SE 256th Street1937 21401 SE 300 St, Kent 980421998 16807 SE 256th StreetSenior High S¡te Subtotal6.3140.003.83$3,310,000$537,534s302.117$524,s64$13,438$78,88250.14 $4,149,651$82,761Sr Hi Site AverageNote: All rural sites were purchased prior to adoption of Urban Growth Area.Numbersto locat¡ons on S¡te Bank &on17to 1996Total Average Cost / Acre$97,U2Total Acreage & Cost134.55 $13,164,598Àvq cosvacreCostAcreaqeLocationYear Open iPurchasedSchool / SíteType &# on MapKent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities PlanTable 7April 2009 Page27
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Student Generation Factors - Multi-FamilyStudent Generation Factors - Single Family
Elementary (GradesK-6)
Middle School (Grades 7 - 8)
Senior High (Grades I - 12)
Total
Projected lncreased Student Capacity
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Required Site Acreage per Facility
Elementary (required)
Middle School (required)
Senior High (required)
New Facility Gonstruction Cost
Elementary *
Middle School
Senior High *
* See cost basis on Pg. 26
Temporary Facility Square Footage
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
ïotal 3%
11 Average Site Cost / Acre
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
21
32
$29,610,000 Temporary Facility Capacity & Gost
$o Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
$8,200,000
State Eq ual izatio n Gredit (rormerry "state March')
____ I3,7.!p Current District Equalization Percentage
18,544
22,960
115,252
0.445
0.1 18
0.245
0.808
600
900
254
1,475,936
660,904
1 ,'121 ,963
3,258,803
549 684
679,448
1,144,923
3,374,055
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total
OSPI - Square Footage per Student
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Special Education
@24
@2e
@31
General Obligation Bond lnterest Rate
Current Bond lnterest Rate
0.296
0.075
0.111
0.482
90
117
130
144
$287,573
$o
$o
$123,430
$o
$o
4.96Yo
Permanent Facility Square Footage
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total 97%
Total Facilities Square Footage
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total
55.78o/"
Area Gost Allowance ACA - CosUSq. Ft.
Area Cost Allowance (Effective July 08) $168.79
District Average .Assessed Value
Single Family Residence $348,876
District Average Assessed Value
Multi-Family Residence
Apartments 71% Condos 29%
$1 21 557
Capital Levy Tax Rate/$1,000
Current / $1,000 Tax Rate (1 .73255)$1.73
Developer Provided Sites / Facilities
Value
Dwelling Units
0
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
0
April 2009 Page 28
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION fOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence
Formula: ((Acrês x Cost Acre Ca x Sludent Generation Factor
Required Site Acreage Averaqe Site CosUAcre Facilitv Capacìtv Student Fâctor
A 1 (Elementary)
A 2 (Middle School)
A 3 (Senior High)
B 1 (Elementary)
B 2 (Middle School)
I 3 (Senior High)
Formula: ((Facility Cost /
C 1 (Elementary)
C 2 (Middle School)
C 3 (Senior High)
D 1 (Elementary)
D 2 (Middle School)
D 3 (Senior High)
11
21
32
$o
$0
$287,573
$o
$o
600
1,065
1,000
0.445
0.118
q.245
O.BOB
0,445
0.1 18
0.245
0.808
AA
,346.$2 12
$0
$0
Permanent Facil¡ty Constructlon Gost per Single Family Residence
Formula: {(Facility Cost /x Student X
Construction Cost Facilitv CaÞacitv Student Factor Footase Ratio
$29,610,000
$0
$8,200,000
0.97
0.97
0.97
B
0,03
0.03
0.03 C+
0.445
0.118
0.245D+
$2,346.12
$21,301.93
$o
97,794.92
') $29,096.8s
$68.66
$0
$0
Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence
Facilitv Cost Fåcilitv Capacitv Student Factor Footâqe Ratio
x Student
600
900
250
24
29
31
x / Total
23,430$1 0.445
0.1 18
0.245
0.808
0,5578
0
0.5578
D¡str¡ct Equalization Credit per Single Family Residence (formerly "State Match')
Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Feet student x District % x Student Factor
$68,66
$3,770.7s
$o
$2,998.71
$168.79
$168.79
$168.79
90
117
130
Tax Gredit per Single Famlly Resldence
Average SF Residential Assessed Value
Current Capital Levy Rate / $1,000
Current Bond lnterest Rate
Years Amortized (10 Years)
Developer Províded Facility Credit
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisition per SF Residence
B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence
C = Temporary Facility Cost per Residence
Subtotal
D = State Match Credit per Res¡dence
TC = Tax Credit per Residence
Subtotal
0
$348,876
$1.73
4,960/o
10
$31,511.62
911,445.12
$6,769.46
TC E) $4,675.66
FCÐ 0
$2,346.12
$29,096.85
$68.66
$6,769.46
$4,675.66
Total Unfunded Need
50% Developer Fee Obligation
FC = Facility Credlt (if applicable)
District Adjustment (See Page 26 for explanation)
Net Fee Obligation per Single Family Residence
$10,033
0
Area Cost Allowance Ft. / StudentsPt o/o Sludent Factor
Facility / Site Value Units
394
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
$20,066-50
April 2009 Page 29
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION fOT MULTI.FAMILY RESIDENCE
Site Acquisition Gost per Multi-Family Residence Unit
x Student Generation Factor
Required Site Acreage Averaqe Sltê Cost/Acre Facililv Caoacitv Student Factor
Formula: ((Acres x Cost
A 1 (Elementary)
A 2 (Middle School)
A 3 (Senior High)
B 1 (Elementary)
B 2 (Middle School)
B 3 (Senior High)
't1
21
32
$287,573
$0
$0
90
117
130
500
1,065
1,000
0.296
0.075
0.111
0.482
AE+
0.97
0.97
0.97
B
0.296
0.075
0,1'r1
D
$7,195
0
$1,872.68
$14,169.37
$0
$3,531.s8+ g17,700.95
,872$.68
$0
$o
Permanent Facility Gonstruction Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit
Formula: ((Facili ty Cost /x Student x / Total
Temporary Facility Gost per Multi-Family Residence Unit
Formula: ((Facility Cost /x Student X / Total uare
FaciliW Cost Fac¡litv Capacitv Stud6nt Factor Footaqg Rat¡o
C'l (Elementary)
C 2 (Middle School)
C 3 (Senior High)
0.296
0.075
0.111
0.482
0.03
0.03
0.03 C+
District Equalization Gredit per Multl-Family Residence (formerly "State Match")
Formula: Area CostAllowance x SPI Feet student x District ization % x Student Factor
600
900
250
24
29
31
$123,430
$o
$o
$29,610,000
$o
$8,200,000
$168.79
$168.79
$168.79
0.296
0,075
0.111
0.482
0.5578
U
0.5578
$45.67
$o
$0
Dl
D2
D3
(Elementary)
(Middle School)
(Senior High)
$45,67
$2,508.18
$0
$1,358.60+ 93,866.78
TC + 91,3ô3.29
FC +0
Tax Gredit per Multl-Family Residence Unit
Average MF Res¡dent¡al Assessed Value
Current Capital Levy Rate / $1,000
Current Bond lnterest Rate
' Years Amortized (10 Years)
Developer Provided Facility Gredit
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisition per Multi-Family Unit
B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit
C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit
Subtotal
D = State Match Credit per MF Unit
TG = Tax Credit per MF Unit
Subtotal
00
$121 ,557
$1,73
4.96%
10
$19,619.29
$5,230.07
$1,872.68
$17,700.95
$45.67
$3,866.78
$1,363.29
Total Unfunded Need
50% Developer Fee Obligation
FC = Faciliiy Credit (if applicable)
District Adjustmeni (See Pâge 26 for explanation)
Net Fee Obligation per Multi-Family Res¡dence Unit
Construction Cost Student Factor Ratio
Araa Cost Allowance Ft. / StudentsPr Equalization %Student Factor
Facility / Site Value Units
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
$14,389.22
April 2009 Page 30
IX Sumrnary of Ghanges to April 2008 Capital Facilities Flan
The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") is updated annually based on previous
Plans in effect since 1993. The primary changes from the April 2008 Plan are
summarized here.
Projects in progress include replacement and expansion of Panther Lake and
Covington Elementary schools, a future new elementary school, classroom
additions at high schools to accommodate new grovuth, renovation for Kent
Phoenix Academy and Phase ll of the renovation at Mill Creek Middle School.
Changes to capacity continue to reflect fluctuations in class size as well as
program changes. Reduction in class size and extended learning opportunities
for Student Achievement lnitiative 728 are reflected in this update. Changes in
relocatables or transitional capacity reflect use, purchase, sale, surplus and/or
movement between facilities. Permanent and temporary facility ratio has
changed from 96 - 4o/a to 97 - 3o/o.
The student enrollment forecast is updated annually. Six-year Kindergarten
projections were modified to meet the requirements for State Funded Full Day
Kindergarten programs.
The district expects to receive some state equalization (formerly "matching")
funds for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually.
Biennieal update of student generation rates was reported last year. Unfunded
site and facility needs will be reviewed in the future.
Changes to lmpact Fee Calculation Factors include
ITEM Grade/ïype FROM TO Comments
Student Generation Factor
Single Family (SF)
Student Generation Factor
Multi-Family (MF)
District Equalization Ratios lrormer Stato Match)
Area Cost Allowance (former Boeckh lndex)
Average Assessed Valuation (AV)
AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts,
Debt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000
General Obligation Bond lnterest Rate
lmpact Fee - Single Family
lmpact Fee - Multi-Family
No Change - Update in 2010
No Change - Biennial Update
No Change - Update in 2010
No Change - Biennial Update
Per OSPI Website
Per OSPI Website
Per Puget Sound ESD
Per Puget Sound ÊSD
Per King Co. Assessor Report
Market Rätè
Change to fee + $90
Change to fee + $56
Elem
MS
SH
Total
Elem
MS
SH
Total
SF
MF
SF
MF
0,445
0.118
0.245
0.445
0.118
0.245
0.808
0.296
0.075
0.111
0.808
0.296
0.075
0.111
0.482
57.06%
$;1ri8.79
$316,091
$102,465
$1.73
5.11%
$s,304
$3,266
0,482
55.78%
{B 168.79
$348,876
$121,557
$1.73
4.96%
$5,s94
$3,322
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 31
X
Appendixes
Appendix A: Calculations of Capacities for Elementary Schools
Appendix B: Galculations of Gapacities for Middle Schools
Appendix C: Calculations of Gapacities for Senior High Schools
Appendix D: Use of Relocatables
Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2009 Page 32
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415STANDARD of SERVICE - PROcRAfi,l CAPAC¡TY - INVENTORY of RELOCATABLES - FTE and HEADCOUNT ENROLLMENTCaniage CrestCedar ValleyCovingtonCrestwoodEast H¡llEmerald ParkFairwoopGeorge T. Daniel ElemGlenridgeGrass LakeHorizonJenkins CreekKent Elem.Lake YoungsMartin SortunMeadow RidgeMeridian ElementaryMillennium ElementaryNeely-O'BnienPaniher LakePark OrchardPine TreeRidgewoodSawyer WoodsScenic HiltSoos CreekSpringbrookSunriseKenl Mtr. V¡ew AædemyccCV/eCO/eCWÊHEPFW/eDEGRGUhHEJCKgehLY/hMSMR/eMghMLNOPLPOPT/hRW/hSWSHSCieSBsR/hf\íV4324804564085044084324564325043604085044564085044803843604325045045044084083605043564524024984564645044084504564525043384645244744645244984N3964{ì0522504504ß4408398ñ4416445.38326.50518.50474.50527.O0465.50406.17æ2.1'l428.204n.53501.36382.09541.00497.O7485.50445.O4493.03530.50650.1 54A2.50467.03460.00494.08465.66502.00374.50371.03529.5068.654803565575105764964425034574405363885415n532447522576709517468484531501fi239740156573181620191721171819182115172119'1721n161518212121171715211400005o5272ù5442767363o5712645232018l805600180203856201856n18563648185603860TIHTITTTHHHATKIKKTHATIT0r Elementary classrocm capacity is based on averaç of 24: 18-22in K3, 23 in Grade 4 I 29 in Grades 5-6. lncludes adjustments for class size reduction or program chânges-2Kentschool DistrictStandardof Servic¡res€ryessome roomsforpull-outprograms. ie-20Total = lTStandard+ l ComputerLab+ l Music+ 1 lntegratedProgramclassroom.3 Elementary schoots have 100% space utilization rate, 4 Elementary FTÊ reports Kind @ .5 Fr¡K @ 1 .o - P223 Headcount reports Kindergarten @ 1.0" Excludes ECE preschoolers-5roK=Full DayKincergarten T=Tuition-based l=l-T2SFundedSchoohruide K=KAl TiüelFunded A=StateApportionmentFunded H=HalfDayKindergartenonlyKSDELEMENTARYSCHOOLNumber ofstd tr H¡gh capClassroomsStd/HightsE/rPELLCR2 SpecialProgram2008-2009ProgramProgramUseRelocâtablesClassroomUseRdocalablesRelocatable10l1poag'to1112008FCapaciiyat 24 aveEge tCapacity^P223FTE'P223 HdcountD2d 24 averæe IEnrollmentEnrollmentK-ê=ECÉ&h=O ECE&-5or'f,0 0&K'1.013,235.08 14,02712142â12I352o10305723103o23000130oo0001201050o02000024720000002448024964801m00014802400000006'l22528TOTAL 353012,740 122 688Kent School Distríct Six-Year Capital Facílities PlanAPPENDIX AApr¡l 2OOg Page 33
KENT SGHOOL DISTRICT No.4I5STANDARD of SERVIGE - PROGRAM CAPACITY - INVENTORY of RELOCATABLES - FTEandHEADGOUNTENROLLMENTCedar Heights Middle School CH 32 782 I 93 2Mattson Middle School MA 24 585 6 59 TMeeker Middle School MK 33 807 4 Sg 1Mer¡d¡an Middle School MJ 26 631 5 64 4Mill Creek Middle School MC 30 729 5 51 2Northwood Middle School NW 33 807 4 46 5Kent Mountiain View Academy (Grades 3 - 12) Middle School Grade 7 - I EnrollmentKent-Meridian Senior High KM 53 1,376 I 110 12Ken8ake Senior High KL 58 1,508 12 145 14Kentridge Senior High KR 69 1,766 11 '123 16Kentwood Senior High KW 65 I,692 5 51 17Kent Mountain ViewAcademy (Grades 3 - 12) Senior High Grade g - 12 EnrollmentKent PhoenixAcademy PHRegional Justice Center RJ NiA48160249548119APPENDIX B2863333813949238048907908289721,7721,S862,2702,137See Elem350N¡/AAPPENDIX C1 Special Program capacity includes classrooms requiring specialized use such as Special Education, Career & Technical Education Programs, Computer Labs, etc.2 Secondary school capacity is adjusted for 85% utilization rate and l-728 class s¡ze reduction in 7th & 1Oth grade English classes. 9th grade moved to HS in 2004.3 Enrollment ¡s reported on FTE & Headcount bas¡s. P223 Headcount excf udes ECE & College.only Running Start students. Full headcount including ECE & RS = 27,579.Sorne toials may be slightly different due to round¡ng.Kentschool DistrìctSix-Yearcapitat Facilit¡esPlan TOtal Of AppendiCeS A B & CKSDMIDDLEscHool#ofsrdClsrmsStândardCapacity 2at 25-29SETIPELLClsSpecÌel EdSpecPrgmClsrmsSpecial 1Program2008-2009ProgramCapacily 2ProgramUseRelocatablesClassroomUseRelocatablesRelocatebleCapacityat 29 ea.1Ahno0810i1i2008€LLP223FTÊ3Headcount 3EnrollmentEnrollment745.09ôô7.00652.11714.20762.00662.6056.207476706s5716762663574.259-20 4.27006020020nf)40145001741160I12435Middle School TOTAL178 4,U1 33 37221494KSDSENIOR HIGHscHool#ofstdClsrmsStandardCapacityat 25-31SE/IPELLClsSpecial EdELLSpecPrgmClsrmsSpecial IProgram2008-2009ProgramCapacity 2ProgramUseRelocatablesClassroomUseRelocãtablesRelocatableCapacityat31 ea.fiht2ao810t112008P223F-Í8 3Headcount 3EnrollmentEnrolÌment1,778.201,798.202,192.6D2,097.37154.57279.6033.001,8t31,8332,2372,171157250338,333-54 8,534Excludes Runníng Start &Early Childhood Ed students26,83'125,827.821004554515515512415551958S1,5525375SeniorTOTAL245u2 36 429 59 18,51527,1501,888801,48919123,423953DISTRICT TOTALApril 2009 Page 34
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415USE of RELOGATABLES1 Use of additional relocatablgs for classrooms or special programs ¡s based on need and fluctuations of enrollment at each school.2 Full Day Kindergarten will ¡ncrease the need for áiocatables at the elementary level until permanent capacity can be prov¡ded.3 Grade Level Reconfigurat¡cn - ln 2004, 9th grade studenis moved to high schools creating sufficient permanent capacity at middle schools.a Although relocatables are ¡.tiljzed for a wide variety of purposes, new construction and boundary a-djusbnents are limed to minimize the requirement for relocatabtes.2008 - 20092009-20102010-20112011-2D122012-20132013-20142014-2415StudentCãgacity53755353755375537553757575005120t33',|217408400962048035840000oo000000o00o000000000124128128't2812812812800512f}13312'174084962A¡¡80358¿t0Plan for Ailocation of Required Classroom Retocatable Facilities included in Finance Plan:Elementary 1¡2 o 5 13Middleschool 3 o o oSenior High o __g_ o oTotal 0 5 131740U2035000001712035No. ofRelocatablesStudentNo. ofRdocatablesSludenlCaDacitvNo. ofRelocatablesStudentCapacityNo- ofRdoætablesShidentCâpac¡tyNo- ofRelmtabl6StudentCâpacivNo- ofRelocatablesStudentCapacityNo. ofReþcatable.sSchool YearRelocatable Use 1Relocatables for classrocm useRelocatables for program use(ie. Computer labs, music, etc.)Elementary Capacity Required @ 24 2Middle School Capacity Required @ 29 3Senior H¡gh Câpacity Required @ 31# of Relocatables Utilized 4Classroom Relocaiable/Capacny RequiredKent School District Six-Year Cap¡tãl Fâc¡lities PlanAPPENDIX ÐApril 2009Page 35
Student Generation FactorHS1.0261.6154.7720.6080.6971.1042.3130.7490.5820.8904.257a.7430.8310.4810.6920.5030.3620.4850.6601.5000.4520.2990.4130.'1350.4850.4740.1770.1540-1170.0770.1340.1420.3750.1100.090oj220.0610.0660.r040.3680.7690.1520.1694.27843020.4380.1870.1940.3550.0610.1s20.2530.808 0.445 0.118 0.245MSElemTotalStudentsHS360211327987117371d47815338124128169I8647477A24994A7120817362220101315A241221o111612910262227327412661I3239461MS221Elem836TotalI,518ToÞlUnits3511317113097106162191341721,+tÌ1671541,879ElementaryAreaHills I Savana / The Reserve / Stonefield - CovingtoncoSCSRSRSWCWMLHEcwRWNORWCWEastland Meadows - KentFem Cresl East - KentFern Crest Wast - KentKentlake Highlands - KentParke Meadows & North Parke Meadows - CovingtonRhododendron Estates - Kentridge - Eagle Crest - Park View - KentRidge - CovingtonParks - RentonThe Parks at Riverview - KentTrovitsky Park - RentonWood Creek - CovingtonTotalSingle Family DevelopmentsEdulog#78187393400228369410419420179337416417KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415Student Generation Factor SurveyStudent Generation FactorHS0.3050.5700.6300.1701.7250.3650.6490.3070.1440"3770.3090.'t081.2160.1940.4300.1930.0600.0870.1730.036a.1760.0660.0840.0110.1050.106a.1480.0260.3330.1 040.1350.1020.482 0.296 0.075 0.111MSElemTotalStudentsHS611185133BB7716327287825216241108171218147I142112122125172234o142MSg6Elem380Total618TotâlUnib2002078'l19451211251881,283ElementaryAreaAdagio Aparhnents - CovingtonAlderbrook Apartments - KentBrentwood Townhomes - KentFairwood Pond Apartments - RentonPark Place Apartments - KentRock Creek Landing - KentcoEHSHFWSHPLPLGRSprings Aparûnents - KentSunrise at Benson Condos - KentTotalMulti-Family DevelopmentsEdulog#414412156146414102413192Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facífities PlanAPPENDIX EApril 2009 Page 36
DFT ERMINATION OF NONSIG IFICANCE
for
Kent School District No.415
2009 Capital Facilities Plan
lssued with a 14-day comment and appeal period
Description of Proposal:
This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single
action:
1. The adoption of the Kent School District 2009 Six-Year Capital Facilities Ptan by
the Kent School District for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District.
2. Ïhe amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Kent
School District 2009 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the
King County Comprehensive Plan.
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent to include the
Kent School District's 2009 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Kent.
4. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Covington to include
the Kent School District's 2009 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Faciiities plan
Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Covington.
5. Ïhe amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Auburn to include the
Kent School District's 2009 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Auburn.
6. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton to include the
Kent School District's 2009 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Renton.
7. This proposal may also involve amendment of Comprehensive Plans of the
Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and/or SeaTac to incorporate the Kent School District
2009 Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities element of that jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan.
Proponent: Kent School District No.415
Location of the Proposal
The Kent School District includes an area of approximately 72 square miles. The City of
Covington and portions of the cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple Valley,
and SeaTac fall within the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County.
Lead Agency:
Kent School District No, 415 is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not pose a
probable significant adverse impact to the environment. An environmental impact statement
(ElS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2) (c). This decision was made after a review of
the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This
information is available to the public upon request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 4:00 p.m., June 19, 2009. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based
on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely,
withdraw the DNS. lf the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment
deadline.
""#,Responsible Official:
Fred
Assistant rintendent ness Services
Kent School District No. 415
Telephone (253) 373-72e5
Address 12033 SE 256th Street #A-600
Kent, Washington 98030-6643
Appeals of this determination are governed by Board Policy No. 9280 which can be obtained
from Fred High, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services, Kent School District No. 415,
12033 SE 256th Street #A-600, Kent, Washington 98030-6643 and pursuant to WAC 197-11-
680 and RCW 43.21C.075.
Date of lssue:
Date Published:
June 5, 2009
June 5, 2009
This page intentionally left blank.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
WAC 197 -11 -960 Environmental Checklist
Purpose of Checklist:
Ïhe State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all
governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making
decisions. An environmental impact statement (ElS) must be prepared for all proposals with
probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this
checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts fròm your
proposal (and to reduce or avoid ímpacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the
agency decide whether an EIS is required.
lnstructions for Applicants:
Ïhis environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your
proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental
impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an ElS. Answer the questions
briefly, with the most precise information known, or gíve the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge
ln most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations orproject plans without the need to hire experts. lf you really do noi know the answer, or if aquestion does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete
answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary dela¡rs later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, andlandmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. lf you have prollems, thegovernmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them
over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will
help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The ágency to which you submit this
checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additiınal information reasonably
related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be
answered "does not apply" ln addition, complete the Supplementaisheet for nonprô¡ect
actions (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project,"',applicant,"
and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "prepares," and "affected geographic area,,,respectively.
1
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable
The adoption of a six-year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District.
The Comprehensive Plans of King county, city of Kent, city of covington, city of
Renton, City of Auburn and possíbly Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond and SeaÏac
have been and/or will be amended to include the Kent School District 200g Capital
Facilities Plan in the Capital Facílities Plan Element of each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan. A copy of the District's Plan is available for review in the District
Finance & Planning Department.
2. Name of applicant:
Kent School District No.415.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Kent School District No. 415
12033 SE 256th Street # A-600
Kent, WA 98030-6643
Contact Person: Fred H. High, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services
Telephone: (253) 373-7295
4. Date checklist prepared: June 2,2OQg
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Kent School District No. 415
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The 2009 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted in July,
2009 and fonvarded to King County, Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton, Maple
Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac for possible inclusion in each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually. Site-specific
projects have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review.
7. Do you have any plans for futrlre adclitions, expansion, or further activity related
to or connected with this proposal? lf yes, explain.
The Capital Facilities Plan reviews additions to existing high schools, renovations at Mill
Creek Middle School and Kent Phoenix Academy, construction replacing panther Lake
Elementary School and proposes construction of a new elementary schıol and a
replacement of Covington Elementary School.
2
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The above-referenced projects will undergo environmental review at the time of formal
proposal.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal?
lf yes, explain.
No.
10.
known.
List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
King County and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn will review and approve the
Capital Facilities Plan for the purposes of impact fee ordinances and wili need to adopt
the Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive
Plans of King County and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn. Cities of Maple
Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac may also review and approve the Plan for the
purposes of any school impact fee ordinances and may adopt the plan as an
amendment to the Capital Facilities element of their Comprehensive Plans.
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses
and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist
that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat
those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional
specific information on project description.)
This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Kent School
District 2009 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the facilities needs of the
District and for inclusion in the Capital Facilities Plan element and possible amendrnent
of the Comprehensive Plans for King County, City of Covington, City of Kent, City of
Renton, City of Auburn, City of SeaTac, City of Maple Valley and Ciiy of Black Diamond.
A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the Kent School District Business
Services Department office.
12' Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand
the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and
section, township, and range, if known. lf a proposal would occur over a range of area,
provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, sile plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. Wnite you should submit
any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed
plans submitted with any permit applications rerated to this checklist.
Ïhe 2009 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Kent School District. The District includes
an area of approximately 72 square miles. The City of Covington, and portions of the
cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, seaTac and parts of
unincorporated King county fall within the District's boundaries.
3
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hiily, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
The Kent School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and
gradients, including all of those listed. Specific topographic characteristics will be
identified,during the planning and permit process for each capital project.
b. what is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Specific slope characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit process
for each capital project.
c. what general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? lf you know the classificatíon of agricultural soils, specify them
and note any prime farmland.
Specific soil types will be identified during the planning and permit process for each
capital project.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? lf so, describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Kent School District. Specific soil limitations on
individual project sites will be identified at the time of environmental review.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any, filling or grading
proposed. lndicate source of fill.
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-
specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. Þróposed
grading projects, as well as {he purpose, type, quantity, and source of fill matèrials
will be identified as appropriate to each project.
f ' Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? lf so, generally
describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of construction projects curren¡y
proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. lndividual projects and their erosion impacts
will be evaluated on a site-specific basis. lndividual projects will be subject to
environmental review and local approval on the time of proposal.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces afterproject construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
Percentage of impervious cover will vary with each capital facilities project and will be
addressed during project-specific environmental review.
4
h.
any:
Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
Erosion potential on individual project sites will be addressed during project-specific
environmental review. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be
met.
2. Air
a. What types of emíssions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust,
automobile, odors, industrialwood smoke)during construction and when the project
is completed? lf any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from individual projects.
Air-quality impacts will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? lf so, generally describe.
Off-site sources and necessary mitigation will be addressed during project-specific
environmental review.
3.
c, Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
Plans for individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
subject to environmental review and relevant local approval processes, including
obtaining of any necessary air quality permits, at the time individual projects are
formally proposed. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
Water
a.Surface:
1) ls there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, welands)?
lf yes, describe type and provide names. lf appropriate, state what stream or
river it flows into.
There is a network of surface water bodies within the Kent School District. The
surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and
incorporated in the design of each individual project.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet)
the described waters? lf yes, please describe ancl attach available plans.
some projects may require work near these described waters. lndividual
projects in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental review and
local approval requirements at the time the project is formally proposed.
5
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected. lndicate the source of fill material.
lnformation with respect to placement or removal of fill or dredge material will be
addressed at the time of project-specific environmental review. Applicable local
regulations have been or will be satisfied.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions have been or will be addressed
during project-specific environmental review.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 1O0-year floodplain? lf so, note locatíon on
the site plan.
Each capital facilities project, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to
meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface
waters? lf so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
specific information regarding discharges of waste materials, if any, will be
addressed during project-specific environmental review. please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Ground
1) will ground water be withdrawn, or wiil water be discharged to ground
water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quántitieJif known.
lndividual projects included in the capítal Facilíties plan may impact ground
water resources. Each project will be evaluated during project-specific
environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from
septig tanks orother sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial,
containing the following chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describé the general
size of the system, the numher of such systems, the number of houses io be
served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are
expected to serve.
lmpacts of discharged waste material, if any, have been or will be addressed
during site-specific, project-level environmental revíew.
6
c.Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). where will this
water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? lf so, describe.
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying storm
water runoff consequences. Each project will be subject to environmental review
and applicable local regulations.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? lf so, generally
describe.
lndividual projects included in the capital Facilities plan wilt have varying
environmental impacts and will be subject to appropriate review and locãl
regulations prior to construction. lnformation regarding waste mate¡als will be
presented at the time of such review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for
Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, giound, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts have been or will be developed
on a project-specific basis in cooperation with the appropriate jurisdiction.
4.Plants:
Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:a
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
There are various vegetative zones within the Kent School District. An ínventory of
species has been or will be produced as part of project-specific environmental
review.
b. what kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
7
lmpacts on vegetation will be determined at the time of project-specific environmental
review at the time the project is formally proposed. Please see the Supplemental
Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the síte.
Specific impacts to these species from individual projects has been or will be
determined at the time of project proposal and will be addressed during site-specific,
project-level envi ronmental review.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
lndividual projects included in the capital Facilities Plan will be subject to
environmental review and local approval at the time of project proposal.
5. Animals
a, Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or
are known to be on or near the site:
bírds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species observed on or near sites has been or will be developed
during project-specific environmental review.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site
Specific impacts to these species from individual projects will be determined at the
time of project proposal and will be reviewed in cooperation with the affected
jurisdictions.
c. ls the site part of a migration route? lf so, explain.
lmpacts on migration routes, if any, will be addressed during site-specific, project-
level environmental review.
B
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be
determined at the time of site-specific, project-level environmental review.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to
meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for
heating, manufacturing, etc.
The State Board of Education requires a life-cycle cost analysis of all heating,
lighting, and insulating systems prior to allowing specific projects to proceed. Energy
needs will be decided at the time of specific engineering and site design planning.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? lf so, generally descrÍbe:
lndividual projects of this Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated as to their impact on
the solar potential of adjacent projects during environmentar review.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Energy conservation measures will be considered at the project-specific design
phase and environmental review.
7. Environmental Health:
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a
result of this proposal? lf so, describe.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required
Please see the Suppiemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2)
any:
Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if
Proposed projects will comply with all current codes, standards, and rules and
regulations. lndivielual projects have been or will be subject to environmental
review and local approval at the time of formal submittal.
9
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for
example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises exist within the Kent School District. Specific noise sources
have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with
the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? lndicate what hours noise would come from the
site.
Normal construction noises would exist on a short{erm basis during school
construction. There could be an increase in traffic or operations-related noise
which would be addressed during project specific environmental review. Please
see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Froject noise impacts have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during the
project-specific environmental review. Each project is or will be subject to
apþlicable local regulations.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Kent School District, including residential,
commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, agricultural, forestry, open space,
recreational, etc.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? lf so, describe.
Ïhis question will be addressed during site-specific, project-level environmental
review.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
Structures located on proposed sites have been or will be identified and described
during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
d. Will any structr¡res he clemolishecl? lf so, what?
Structures to be demolished, if any, will be identified as part of the project-specific
environmental revíew process.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
10
I
There are a variety of zoning classifications within the Kent School District. Site
specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project-specific
environmental review.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
An inventory of comprehensive plan designations has been or will be completed
d u rin g project-specif ic environmenta I review.
g. lf applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
Any shoreline master program designations have been or will be identified during
project-specific environmental revier,v.
h. Has any part of the síte been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area?
lf so, specify.
Environmentally sensitive areas, if any, will be identified during project-specific
environmental review.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
This information has been or will be provided at the time of project-specific
environmental review.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
It is not anticipated that proposed projects will displace any people. Displacement of
people, if any, will be evaluated during projeet-specific environmental review.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-
specific environmental review and local approval at the time the project is formally
proposed.
L Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have
been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during
project-specific environmental review.
Housing:
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? lndicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units would be provided.
Ll-
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? lndicate whether
high, middle, or low-income housing.
Any impact of project proposals on existing housing have been or would be evaluated
d u ri n g project-specific e nvi ronmental review proced u res.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts have been or will be addressed
during site-specific, project-level environmental review.
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas;
what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific, projec!
level environmental review.
b. what views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific, project-
level environmental review.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts have been or will be
determined at the time of project-speeifie environmental review.
11. Light and Glare:
a' What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific
environmental review.
b- Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
Light or glare impacts have heen or will he cletermined at the time of projeot,"specific
environmental review.
c' What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect yilur proposal?
Off-site sources of light or glare have been or will be evaluated at the time of project
specific environmental review
12
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Mitigation of light and glare impacts has been or witl be addressed during project-
specific environmental review
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreationalopportunities are in the immediate
vicinity?
There âre a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Kent
School District.
b Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? lf so,
describe.
Recreational impacts have been or will be addressed during project specific
environmental review. Projects in the Capital Facilities plan may enhance
recreational opportunities and uses.
c' Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunitíes to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Any adverse effects on recreation stemming from individual project proposals have
been or will be subject to mitigation during the environmentai review procedure. A
school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of
additional play fields and gymnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
a' Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, natíonal, state, or localpreservation registers known to be on or next to the site? lf so, generally desc¡be.
The existence of historic and cultural resources will be determined at the time ofproject-specific environmental review.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historíc, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites has been or will be conducted as part of project
specific environmental review.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Approoriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis.
13
14. Transportation:
a. ldentify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed
access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
lmpact on public streets and highways has been or will be assessed during project-
specific environmental review.b. ls site currently served by public transit? lf not, what is the approximate distance
to the nearest transit stop?
The relationship between specific projects and public transit has been or will be
assessed during project-specific environmental review.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would
the project eliminate?
An inventory of parking spaces and the impacts of specific projects on parking
spaces has been or will be conducted during project-specific environmental review.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? lf so, generally describe (indicate whether
public or private).
The development of new schools may require new access roads or streets. This
issue will be fully addressed during project-specific environmental review.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? lf so, generally describe
Use of water, rail or air transportation has been or will hre addressed dur.ing site-
specifi c, project-level envi ron menta I review.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project?
lf known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Mitigation of impacts on transportation has been or will be addressed during project-
specific environmental review.
15. Public Services:
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example:
fire protection, police protection, health cûre, schoors, other)? lf so, generally
describe.
L4
c
The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities
Plan wíll substantially increase the need foiother public services. lmpacts have been
or will be evaluated on a project-specific basis.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
Schools are built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat
sensors and sprinkler systems.
16- Utilities:
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse
service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Utilities available at project sites have been or will be identified during project specific
environmental review.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the
service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity
which might be needed.
Utility revisions and construction needs will be identified during project-specific
environmental review
SIGNATURE
Ïhe above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand
that the lead agency ís relying on them to make its deeision.
*-ff.
Signature:
Fred H. High,
Date Submitted: June 5, 2009
Business Services
15
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of
activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or
at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in
general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of
noíse?
To the extent this Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be constructed,
and/or renovated or remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more
likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks,
access roads and playgrounds will increase storm water runoff, which could enter
surface or ground water. Emissions to air could result from heating systems,
emergency generators and other equipment, and from additional car and bus trips to
and from the school for students and faculty, Any emissions resulting from this Plan
should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous
substances, with the possible exception of storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for
emergency generating equipment. Noise may result fr"om additiona! traffic and ft'orn
concentrating several hundred children at a new facility, especially before and after
school and during recesses.
To the extent this proposal allows additional residential development to occur, these
impacts would also increase somewhat, but it is not possible to quantify those
impacts at this time. The impacts would depend on the type, location and distribution
of housing, for example, whether single or multiple family and the location of the
school.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are
Facilities implementing the Plan have been or will be evaluated at the project specific
level and impacts will be mitigated accordingly. Storm water detention and runoff will
meet applicable County and/or city requirements and, depending on the date of
actual construction, may bc subjcct to a National Pollutant Discharge flimination
System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will be minimal, and
will meet any applicable requirernents of the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control
Authority. Fuel oilwill be stored according to local and state requirements.
1,6
2.How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. Depending
on the particular site, construction of facilities may require clearing sites of plants and
loss of animal habitat. To the extent residential development is allowed, additional
area may be cleared and eliminated as habitat for animals. There are not likely to be
any impacts on fish or marine life, although some water quality degradation in
streams and rivers could occur due to increased residential development. These
impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are
lndividual projects will be evaluated and mitigated appropriately on a project-specific
basis, but specific mitigation proposals cannot be identified at this time.
3 How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Any actual projects resulting from this Plan would consume heating fuel and electrical
energy. lncreased traffic resulting from the construction of additional facilities would
consume petroleum based fuels. Reduced traffic resulting from construction of
another neighborhood school may also reduce amounts of fuel consumed, but it is
not possible to quantify such reduction in consumption at this time. These impacts
have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to protect or conserye energy and natural resources are:
Facilities would be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency
standards.
4' How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as
parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Plan and facilities constructed pursuant to the Plan should have no impact on
these resources. lt is not possible to predict whether other development made
possible by this Plan would affect sensitive areas.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures have
been or will be proposed during project-specific review. Annual updates of this plan
will be coordinated with King county, cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton,
SeaTac, Maple Valley and Black Diamond as part of the Growth Management Act
process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas.Ïo the extent the School District's facilities planning process is part of the overall
growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be
protected.
1,7
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
The Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with
existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
None are proposed at this time. Actual facilities constructed to implement the Plan
will be sited and constructed to avoid or reduce land use impacts.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
This proposal should not create substantial new demands for transportation. The
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create an increase in traffic near
new District facilities but also reduce traffic by creating the opportunity for more
students to walk to a closer school. The construction of the facilities included in the
Capital Facilities Plan may result in minor increases in the demand for public services
and utilities, such as fire and police protection, and water, sewer, and electric utilities.
None of these impacts are likely to be significant. The impacts on transportation and
public services and utilities of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will
be addressed during project-level review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this tíme.
7. ldentify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal
laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or
reQuirements for the protection of the environment.
18
FEDERAL \ilAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
20L0
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BOARD OF EDUCATION
Suzanne Smith, President
Tony Moore, Vice President
Ed Barney, Director
Amye Bronson-Doherty, Director
Angela Griffin, Director
SUPERINTENDENT
Thomas R. Murphy
Prepared by: Sally D. Mclean
Tanya Nascimento
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OIO CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
SECTION 1 THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Introduction
Inventory of Educational Facilities
Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities
Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities
Needs Forecast - New Facilities
Six Year Finance Plan
SECTION 2 MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Introduction
Map - Elementary Boundaries
Map - Middle School Boundaries
Map - High School Boundaries
SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Introduction
Building Capacities
Portable Locations
Student Forecast
Capacity Summaries
King County Impact Fee Calculations
I
2-3
4
5
6
7
8
9
SECTION 4
1l
t2
l3
t4
l5
t6-17
18- 19
20-22
23-27
28-30
3l-33SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2OO9
PLAN
1_
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In response to the requirements of the State of V/ashington Growth Management Act
(SHB)2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee
Ordinances of King County Code 214, City of Federal'Way Ordinance No. 95-249
effective December 21,1995 as amended, City of Kent Ordinance No.3260 effective
March 1996, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal V/ay
Public Schools has updated its 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2009.
This Plan is scheduled for adoption by King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal
Way and the City of Auburn and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each
jurisdiction by reference. This plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the
Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Des Moines has not
adopted a school impact fee ordinance. The City of Des Moines collects school impact
fees as part ofthe SEPA process.
The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas
within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning
Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area
Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the
Federal V/ay planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries.
King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to
meet the region's need for housing, jobs, services, culture, and recreation. This Plan's
estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption.
This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which
requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not
intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may
prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies or management need.
The District has prepared a multi-phase plan for the renovation and construction of
Federal Way Schools and support buildings. The Board authorized presenting the $149
million bond on May 15, 2007. The bond, passed at 63.93Yo, will replace four
elementary schools, Lakeland; Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla and one middle
school, Lakota.
Plans to replace Federal V/ay High School and Decatur High School and to increase
capacity by approximately 400 students at each school are planned in later phases.
Federal Way High School was built in 1938. It has been added onto at least 10 times and
currently has an almost maze-like layout. Based on an annual 4Yo increase in
construction cost, the estimated cost to rebuild Federal Way High School is $122 million.
Estimated construction costs will be re-calculated prior to the next bond election. None
of the cost to replace Federal V/ay or Decatur High School is included in the Impact Fee
calculation in this Plan.
2
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The non-instructional projects included in the plan will consolidate support servlces
operations at a single location. The current Transportation and Maintenance facility
cannot continue to meet the District needs in the future. Nutrition services and other
administrative functions will also relocate to this centralized location.
The District continues to study school boundaries as new housing and fluctuating
populations impact specific schools. Some shifts in boundaries may be required in the
coming year.
In Septemb er 2007 Woodmont Elementary School began a K-8 program by adding a 6th
grade and progressively adding a grade level each year. In March 2008, the Board
approved a second K-8 program at Nautilus Elementary School. Nautilus began the
2008109 school year with K-6th grade. As the program grows there will be more data
available about the unique facility needs for this grade configuration.
The District opened a new school in September 2008. The Technology Access
Foundation (TAF) Academy will proviàe a small school setting for 6th through 12ú grade
students. This academy is funded through a unique public/private partnership between
the Technology Access Foundation and Federal Way Public Schools. The focus of the
school is Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM). The TAF Academy
opened in September of 2008 with students in grades 6,7 and 9. In the 2009110 school
year TAF Academy added 8th and 10th grade. Grades 11 and 12 will be added in
successive years with a target population of about 350.
3
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 1 - TTTE CAPITAL F'ACILITIES PLAN
The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be
gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing
community.
This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and
expected future facility requirements for Federal V/ay Public Schools. A Financial Plan
that shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed
follows this.
4
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
III\¡ENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Adelaide
Brigadoon
Camelot
Enterprise
Green Gables
Lake Dolloff
Lake Grove
Lakeland
Mark Twain
Meredith Hill
Mirror Lake
Nautilus (K-8)
Olympic View
Panther Lake
Rainier View
Sherwood Forest
Silver Lake
Star Lake
Sunnycrest
Twin Lakes
Valhalla
Wildwood
Woodmont (K-8)
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
1635 SW 304th Street
3601 SW 336th Street
4041 S 298th Street
35101 5th Avenue SW
32607 47th Avenue SW
4200 S 308th Street
303 SV/ 308th Street
35827 32nd Avenue S
2450 S Star Lake Road
5830 S 300th Street
625 S 314th Street
1000 S 289th Street
2626 SW 327th Street
344241st Avenue S
3015 S 368th Street
3460012th Avenue SW
1310 SW 325th Place
4014 S 270th Street
24629 42nd Avenue S
4400 SW 320th Street
27847 42nd Avenue S
2405 S 300th Street
26454161h Avenue S.
34620 9th Avenue S
36001 lst Avenue S
4400 S 308th Street
l4l5 SW 3l4th Street
1101 S Dash Point Road
3391419th Avenue SW
3450 S 360th ST
26630 40th Ave S
26630 40th Ave S
2800 SW 320th Street
30611 16th Avenue S
4248 S 288th Street
35999 16th Ave S
31455 28th Avc S
36001 l't Ave S
31455 28th Ave S
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal'Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Kent
Kent
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Des Moines
98023
98023
98001
98023
98023
98001
98023
98001
98003
98001
98003
98003
98023
98003
98003
98023
98023
98032
98032
98023
98001
98003
98198
Federal Way Public Academy (6-10)
Illahee
Kilo
Lakota
Sacajawea
Saghalie
Sequoyah
Totem
TAF Academy (6-12)
HIGH SCHOOLS
Decatur
Federal Way
Thomas Jefferson
Todd Beamer
Career Academy at Truman
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS
Merit School
Internet Academy
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Kent
Kent
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Fcdcral Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
98003
98003
98001
98023
98003
98023
98001
98032
98032
98023
98003
98001
98003
98003
98003
98003
5
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CURRENT INVENTORY NON.INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES
I)eveloped Property
Administrative Building
MOT Site
Central Kitchen
Federal Way Memorial Field
Leased Space
Community Resource Center
Available Office Space
Undeveloped Propertv
31405 18th Avenue S
1066 S 320th Street
1344 S 308th Street
1300 S 308th Street
1813 S Commons
32020l't Ave S
Federal \May
Federal Way
Federal V/ay
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
98003
98003
98003
98003
98003
98003
Site #Location
75
65
60
t3
7T
82
96
8l
SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SV/ - 9.2 Acres
S 351st Street &.52nd Avenue S - 8.8 Acres
E of 10th Avenue SV/ - SV/ 334th & SW 335th Streets - 10.04 Acres
N of SW 320ú and east of 45th PL SW -23.45 Acres
S 344th Street &,461h Avenue S - 17.47 Acres
l't Way S and S 342"d St - Minimal acreage
S 308th St and 14th Ave S - .36 Acres
S 332od St and 9th Ave S - 20 Acres
Notes:
Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction
requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed
to house students in the District.
6
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES
The District is also planning the replacement of some non-instructional facilities. The
District has purchased 20 acres (Site #81) for construction of consolidated facilities for
support services functions. Transportâtion, Nutrition Services, Maintenance and other
non-instructional functions will be housed at this centralized location.
As part of the multi-phase plan, the District intends to increase capacity for high school
students with expansion at the Decatur High School site. Increased capacity at Federal
V/ay High and at Decatur High in later phases supplant the need for construction of a
fifth comprehensive high school.
EXISTING FACILITY FUTT]RE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOT]RCE OF
FUNDS
Purchase and Relocate
Portables
Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is
Impact Fees.
Elementary Schools:
Lakeland, Panther Lake,
Sunnycrest and Valhalla
Replace Existing Buildings
Increase capacity at Lakeland,
Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and
Valhalla by a total of 200 seats
Voter approved bonds.
Lakota Middle School Replace Existine Buildine Voter approved bonds
Federal Way High School Replace Existing Building,
Increase Capacity
Future bond autho rization
Decatur High School Replace Existing Building,
Increase Capacity
Future bond autho rization.
7
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NEEDS F'ORECAST . ADDITIONAL F'ACILITIES
NE}V FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOI]RCE
OF F'UNDS
No current plans for additional facilities
I
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANSix Year Finance PlanSecured FundingProjected RevenueActual and Planned ExpendituresNOTES:1. ThesefeesæecurrentlybeingheldinaKingCounty,CityofFederalWayandCityofKentimpactfeeaccount,andwillbeavailable for use by the District for system improvements. This is year end bal ance on 12131108.2. These funds come fiom various sales ofla¡d and are set aside for estimated expendi¡ures- This is year end balalce on 1213 l/08.3. This is the 12131/08 bala¡¡ce ofbond fi¡nds. This figure includes interest eamings.This is a year end balance on l2l31/08.ald system improvenrcnts to ex:sting buildings. These improvements include HVAC, and other structural improvements are not related to capacity increase.ó.Theseareanticipatedbondfunis. Votershaveapprovedabondfor$l4gnUM5mofthisbondisfornonschoolconstruction.Asofl2/31/08,$S2mhasbeensold.7. Projected sale ofsrtrplus properties.8. These are projected fees based upon known residential developments in the District over the next six years. This ñgure assumes $25,000 per month for the next six years.This figure has been adjusied to reflect the current economy.9. These fees represent tlìe cost of purchasíng a¡d instatling new portables. The porlable expenditure in fture years may replace existing portables that are not fuctional.These may not increase capacity and are not included in the capacity summary.9$69.87sst43.642$8l-545-134($4.s98.2s9)s77.160"392SourcesImpactFees(l)Land Sale Funds (2)Bond Funds (3)State Match (4)TOTAL$20"000"00cs67.000-00c$ l 0"000.00c$1-800.00cs98,800,000Sourcessrare Match (5)Bond or Lew Funds (6)Land Fund Sales (7)Impact Fees (8)TOTALs175,960,392Secured Funding and Projected RevenueTotâl Costs18.500.000$17.s00,000$r7.500.00($17,500,000$34,000,000s800,000sl0s^800.000Totâl2010-201s$c$($9.930.00($9"930"00($l 8,638,7s($800.00($39,298,75{201520t5lt6$020142014/L5s0201321fl3/14$020122012n3$200.000s200^00020tt20tl/12s200-000s200,00020102010/lts3.600.000$200.000s3,800,000Budget2009/r0s9.930.000s9.930.000s1 5"038.7s0$200.000s35.098.7s0Currenf andPrior Yearssr8.s00.000s17,500,000s7.570.000$7,570,000$1s361,250s66.s01.2s0NEW SCHOOLSMODERNIZATION AND EXPANSIONValhalla ElemenuryPanther Lake ElementarvLakeland ElementaryJunnvcrest ElementaryLakota Middle SchoolTEMPORARY FACILITIESPortables l9)rOTAL
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 2 . MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Federal V/ay Public Schools has twenty-one elementary schools (grades K-5), two
schools with a K-8 grade configuration, seven middle school schools (grades 6-8), four
high schools (grades 9-12) and three small secondary schools. The Federal Way Public
Academy serves students in grades 6-10. The TAF Academy serves students in grades 6-
12 who reside in the Totem Middle School service area. The Career Academy at Truman
High School serves students in grades 9-12. The Internet Academy serves grades K-12.
The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school, by school type.
(Career Academy at Truman High School, Merit School, Internet Academy and Federal
Way Public Academy serve students from throughout the District). The identified
boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of
programs that affect school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas.
The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility
infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public
facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to
that development. School District are different. If the District does not have permanent
facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or
until boundaries can be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding
facilities.
Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken
lightly. It is recognizedthat there is a potential impact on students who are required to
change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school.
It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the
construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth
throughout the district and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the
district, not just around a single development.
1_ 1_
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BOUNDARIES
n Elementary Schoolr ffi Middle Schools
I Adelaide
2 Brigadoon
3 Camelot
4 Enterprise
5 Green Gables
6 Lake Dolloff
7 Lake Grove
8 Lakeland
9 Mark Twain
10 Meredith Hill
1l Minor Lake
l2 Nautilus
13 Olympic View
14 Panther Lake
15 Rainier View
16 Sherwood Forest
l7 Silver Lake
l8 Star Lake
19 Sunnycrest
20 Twin Lakes
2l Yalhalla
22'Wildwood
23 Woodmont
N
36 Federal Way Public Academy
30Illahee
31 Kilo
32Lakota
33 Sacajawea
34 Saghalie
37 Sequoyah
35 Totem
N uigh Schools
40 Decatur
4l Federal V/ay
42I Thomas Jefferson
45 Todd Beamer
49 Career Academy at
Truman
ffi Administrative
Building
ffil Und.'rreloped Property
ú
{'{"-'--tl
'\¡/
S
E
1 Adelaide
2 Brigadoon
3 Camelot
4 Enterprise
5 Green Gables
6 Lake Dolloff
7 LakeGrove
8 Lakeland
9 Mark Twain
10 Meredith Hill
11 Mirror Lake
12 Nautilus
13 Olympie View
14 Panther Lake
15 Rainier View
16 Sherwood Forest
l7 Silver Lake
18 Star Lake
19 Sunnycrest
20 Twin Lakes
2l Yalhalla
22 Wildwood
23'Woodmont
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
MIDDLE SCHOOL BOUNDARIES
Elementary Schools M tr¡i¿¿t" Schools '
36 Federal Way Public Academy
30Illahee
31Kilo
32Lakota
33 Sacajawea
34 Saghalie
37 Sequoyah
35 Totem
ffi Hign schools
40 Decatur
4l Federal Way
42I Thomas Jefferson
45 Todd Beamer
49 Career Academy at
Truman
ffi Administrative Building
MOT Site
ffi Utrd.ueloped Property
N
E
S
'lJ
\
:J
ïr¡
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
HIGH SCHOOL BOUNDARIES
I Elementary Schoolr N Middle Schools
36 Federal Way Public Academy
30 Illahee
31 Kilo
32Lakota
33 Sacajawea
34 Saghalie
37 Sequoyah
35 Totem
I nlgn Schools
40 Decatur
4I Federal'Way
421Thomas Jefferson
45 Todd Beamer
49 Career Academy at
Truman
ffi Administrative Building
MOT Site
ffi Und"ueloped Property
N
1 Adelaide
2 Brigadoon
3 Camelot
4 Enterprise
5 Green Gables
6 Lake Dolloff
7 LakeGrove
8 Lakeland
9 Mark Twain
10 Meredith Hill
11 Minor Lake
12 Nautilus
13 Olympic View
14 Panther Lake
15 Rainier View
16 Sherwood Forest
17 Silver Lake
18 Star Lake
19 Sunnycrest
20 Twin Lakes
2l Yalhalla
22 Wildwood
23 V/oodmont
S
j*rl
t
I
L-
i!"*l
:,¡
I
..r...1.....
J
I
$
_il
!
w E
FEDERAL VIAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Building Capacities - The Education Program
Portable Locations
Student Forecast - 2010 through 2016
Capacity Summaries
King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi-Family Units
l_5
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Buildine Caoacities
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to
ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public
Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not
take into consideration the education program needs.
In general, the District's current target class size provides that the average class size for a
standard classroom for grades K through 2 should be 20 students. In grades 3-5 the target
is 25 students. For grades 6 to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for
students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated
at 12 seats per classroom.
Using the OSPI square footage calculation as a base line, the District has calculated a
program capacity for all schools. A recent Study & Survey was the basis for changes to
the OSPI building report. The following list clarifies the adjustments to the OSPI
calculation.
Music Rooms:
Each elementary school requires a standard classroom for music instruction.
All Day Kindergarten:
Every elementary school operates at least one all day Kindergarten program. These all
day Kindergarten program require additional capacity because the standard classroom is
available for one all day session rather than two half day sessions. The District will
operate 52 sections of all day Kindergarten in 2009/10
Special Education Resource Rooms:
Each elementary and middle school requires the use of a standard classroom(s) for
special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities
English as a Second Language Programs:
Each elementary, middle school and high school requires the use of a standard classroom
for students learning English as a second language.
Middle School Computer Labs:
Each middle school has computer labs
High School Career Development and Learning Center (Resource) Room:
Each high school provides special education resource room and career development
classrooms for students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities.
1,6
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES
ELEMENTARY BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY
MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY
HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY
School Name Headcount
Adelaide 372
Brigadoon 327
Camelot 269
Enterprise 458
Green Gables 437
Lake Dolloff 433
Lake Grove 323
Lakeland 392
Mark Twain 327
Meredith Hill 453
Mirror Lake 325
Nautllus J5ó
Olympic View 328
Panther Lake 383
Rainier View 432
iherwood Forest 423
Silver Lake 390
Star Lake 36L
Sunnycrest 369
Twin Lakes 297
Valhalla 449
Wildwood 317
Woodmont 3s0
2009't'()'l'AL E,571
School Name Headcount FTE
Illahee 8s5 864
Kilo 827 835
Lakota 766 774
Sacaiawea 700 707
Saehaiie 829 837
Sequoyah s89 s95
Totem 714 721
Federal Way Public Academy 209 ztt
Technology Access Foundation Academy* *
2OO9 TOTAL 5.489 5,544
154 762*Middle School Average
School Name Headcount FTE
Decatur 1239 1,32s
Federal Way L482 1.585
Thomas Jefferson 1339 L,432
Todd Beamer tt34 1,2t3
Career Academy at Truman 130 139
Federal Way Public Academy r09 117
'I echnology Access ¡ oundatlon Academyr r
2OO9 TOTAL 5,433 5,811
Elementarv Averase
*Hish School Averase IM
Notes
* Federal Way Public Academy and Career Academy at Truman High School
are non-boundary schools. These schools are not used in the calculated averages.
** Technology Access Foundation Academy is housed entirely in portables
on the Totem Middle School site.
1,7
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Portable Locations
The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic
education. It is not an efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity
for 500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates
throughout the year and from year to year.
Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students when
increasing population impacts a school attendance area. Portables may also be required
to house students when new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also
provide temporary housing for students until permanent facilities can be financed and
constructed. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s) is either used
for other purposes such as storage or child care programs, or moved to another school for
an interim classroom. Some portables may not be fit to move due to age or physical
condition. In these cases, the District may choose to buy new portables and surplus these
unfit portables. It is the practice and philosophy of Federal V/ay Public Schools that
portables are not acceptable as permanent facilities.
The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for
temporary educational facilities by Federal V/ay Public Schools.
1_8
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OIO CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NSRUCTIONAL
NON
NSTRUflIONAL
Adelaide .,
1
Brieadoon I
Camelot 1
Enterprise 2
Green Gables 1
Lake Dolloff I 1
Lake Grove 1 I
Lakeland ,,
Mark Twain 3
Meredith Hill 3
Miror Lake 4
Nautilus 1
Olymplc Vlew z
Panther Lake
Rainier View 1 I
Sherwood Forest 4
Silver Lake 2 2
Star Lake 3 1
iunnycrest ,
Twin Lakes )1
Valhalla
Wildwood 4 1
Woodmont 3
.I'OTAL 43 II
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS
PORTABLE LOCATIONS
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT HIGH SCHOOLS
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT SUPPORT FACILITIES
MOT I
TDC 5
TOTAL 6
HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES
Sherwood Forest 1
I otal I
INSTRUtrIONAL
NON
NSMUCTIONAL
Decatur 9
Federal Way t I
Thomas Jefferson 10
Todd Beamer I 1
TAF Academy 8
TOTAL 5t ,,
NSRU$IONAL
NON
INSTRUCTIONAL
Illahee 3
Kilo 7
Lakota 4
Sacaiawea 4
Saehalie 4
Sequovah I
Totem
Merit 2
TAF Academy 6 1
28 4
1,9
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OIO CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Student Forecast
Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development.
Enrollment projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget
preparation. The majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the
forecasted number of students. Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are
also made on the basis of projected enrollment. Other expenditures and certain revenue
projections are directly related to enrollment projections.
Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department.
Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school-building totals, grade
level and program level to include vocational and special education students.
The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis
of a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time.
In a stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses
historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This
method does not trace individual students; it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each
grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted
factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out ofthe school system are
coÍrmon, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases
survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The
district collects information on birth rates within the district's census tracts, and treats
these statistics as a cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years.
The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting
student enrollments. The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated below.
The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts. These
are forecast of enrollment for one year. The projections vary depending on the number of
years of historical information and how they are weighted.
A second method is a projection using an enrollment projection software package that
allows the user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these
projections for the district level. The Enrollment MasterrM software provides statistical
methods including trend line, standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of
these methods. This software produces a five-year projection of school enrollment.
In December 2006, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the
Federal Way School District. The report was complete in January 2007. The model used
to forecast next year's enrollment uses cohort survival rates to measure grade to grade
growth, assumes market share losses to private schools (consistent with county-wicle
average), assumes growth from new housing or losses due to net losses from migration.
This forecast was provided as a range of three projections. The long-range forecast
provided with this report used a model with cohort survival rates and growth rates based
on projected changes in the 5-19 age group for King County. Most of the methods used
for long range enrollment reporting assume that enrollment is a constant percent of
20
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
something else (e.g. population) or that enrollment will mirror some projected trend for
the school-age population over time. The report included 5 different calculations to
provide a range of possible projections for the District to the year 2015. This model
produces a projection that is between 23,000 and24,000 when applied to the low,
medium and high range modes. This provides a reasonable range for long-range planning
and is consistent with estimates from various models.
Long-range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the
cohort survival method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther
out the projections are made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections
are studied annually. The study includes information from the jurisdictional
demographers as they project future housing and population in the region. The long-range
projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student
populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the
State of Washington.
Near term projections assume some growth from new housing, which is ofßet by current
local economic conditions. Current economic conditions do appear to be affecting
enrollment. This is reflected in the District's projections. The District tracks new
development from five permitting jurisdictions. Long range planning assumes a student
yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth patterns.
Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The
Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions
comprising the school district geography. These projections create a vision of the school
district community in the future.
2t
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections
Simplified FTE (K Headcount: .5 FTE; Middle School FTE:.99 Headcount; High School FTE = .935Headcount)
Calendar Yr School Year Middle School Senior
Total K -12
FTE
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
82009-10
P2010-11
P2011-12
P2012-13
P2013-14
P20l 4-t 5
P2015-16
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
20t0
20tt
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
9,127
9,164
9,1 05
9,022
8,912
8,865
8,793
8,838
8,894
8,988
9,091
9,175
9,253
Elementary K-5
s {r4
5,473
5,309
5,26r
s,167
5,155
5,076
5,077
5,042
4,995
4,969
5,012
5,086
Míddle School 6-8
6,408
6,515
6,770
6,754
6,637
6,456
6,325
6,167
6,129
6,109
6,111
6,066
6,022
Hígh School 9-12
21,059
2t,152
21,184
2r,037
20,716
20,476
20,194
20,082
20,065
20,092
20,1',71
20,253
20,361
0.4%
0.2%
,o///o
-1.5%
-1.2%
-1.4%
-0.6%
-0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.4%
0.s%
* New
Enrollment H¡story and Six Year Forecast
Joo
ìE
(go
I
c,.oo
oo
22,000
21,000
20,000
19,000
18,000
17.000
16,000
15,000
I] FTE
JJJ'ø,ì '%, '%6 oo'
'o? þó 'oô Ò)
ùo^È^ ó- .ó- ,ó_ 'ó_no-ù""2VÈo
-@>o\rè>d
School Year
Ò*
'Ó^
"r,o2,
,ó ,óV uo'
(tç2o >ó
22
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Capacity Summaries
All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools
The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student
Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled
facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim
measures.
The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page surnmarizing the entire
District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle
school, and high school levels individually.
The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are
in place each year.
23
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY - ALL GRADES
CAPACITY
ENROLLMENT
Budget -- Proiected--
Calendar Year 2At0 20ll 2012 2013 2014 2015 20r6
School Year 2009110 20t011.1 20rL/12 20t2n3 20t3lt4 20t4/15 20l5l16
BUILDINC PROGRAM
HEADCOUNT CAPACITY
FTE CAPACITY
19,493
19.926
19,493
19.926
19,493
19.926
19,593
2A,t26
19,593
20,426
19,593
20,426
19,593
20-t26
Add or subtract changes to capacity
Increase Capacity, Lakeland, Panther Lake
Sunnycrest and Valhalla 100 100
Adlusted Program Headcount Capacity 1 9,593 t9,493 19,593 19,593 t9,s93 19,593 19,593
20,026 19,926 2t,026 20,026 20.026 20.026 20.026
Basic FTE Enrollment
Internet Academy Enrollment (AAFTE)
Basic FTE Enrollment without Intemet Academy
20,194
(315)
19,879
20,082
(315)
f9,767
20,065
(315)
19,750
20,092
(315)
19,777
20,171
(315)
19,856
20,253
(3r5)
19,938
20,361
(315)
20,a46
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRÄ.M FTECAPACTTY 147 159 276 249 t70 88 (20)
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY
Current Portable Capacity
Deduct Portable Capacity
Add New Portable Capacity
2,700
(t2s)
t25
2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700
Adiusted Portable Capacity 2,700 2,744 2,700 2,740 2,744 2,700 2,700
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY 2,847 2,859 2,976 2,949 2,870 2,788 2,680
24
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
CAPACITY
ENROLLMENT
Budget -- Projected--
Calendar Year 2010 2011 2012 20t3 20t4 2015 2016
School Year 2009110 2010/tt 2011112 2012/t3 2013/14 20t4lt5 20t5l16
BUILDING PROGRAM
HEAD COUNT CAPACITY
FTE CAPACITY
8,571
8-571
8,57t
8,571
8,571
8,571
8,671
8,671
8,671
8.67r
8,671
8,671
8,671
8,671
l. Increase Capacity Lakeland
and Sunnycrest 100
Adi usted Program Headcount Capacity 8,571 8,571 8,671 8,671 8,671 8,671 8,671
Adiusted Prog¡arn FTE Capacrty 8,571 8,571 8,67t 8,67r 8,671 8,671 8,67t
Basic FTE Enrollment
2. Internet Academy (AAFTE)
Basic FTE Enrollment without Intemet Academy
8,793
(36)
8,757
8,838
(36)
8,802
8,894
8,858
(36)
8,988
(36)
8,952
9,091
(36)
9,055
9,175
(36)
9,139
q ?5?
(36)
9,2f7
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPACITY (r86)(231){187}(28r)(384){468)(s46)
RELOCATABLECAPACITY 3
NOTES:
1. Increase Capacity at Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla
2. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities.
3. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which
can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasibility for continued instructional use.
Current Portable Capacity
Adiusted Portablc Caoacity
1,07 5
I,075
r,075
1.075
1,075
1,475
r,075
I.075
r,075
1,075
1,075
1.û75
I,075
I,075
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY E89 844 888 69f 6A7 529
25
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY - MIDDLE SCHOOLS
CAPACITY
ENROLLMENT
Budget -- Projected--
Calendar Year 2010 20rt 2012 2013 2014 2015 20t6
School Year 2009110 20t0lrt 20tt/12 20r2lt3 20t3lr4 20141t5 20t5lt6
BUILDING PROGRAM
HEADCOLTNT CAPACITY
FTE CAPACITY
5,489
5,544
5,489
5,544
5,489
5,s44
5,489
5.544
5,489
5.5,f4
5,489
5.544
5,489
5.544
Add or subtract changes in capacity
Adiusted Program Headcount Capacity 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489
Adjusted Program FTE Capacity 5,544 5,544 5,544 5,544 5,544 s.544 5,544
Basic FTE Enrollment
1. InternetAcademy (AAFTE)
Basic FTE Enrollment without Interset Academy
5,076
(74)
5,002
5,077
(74)
5,003
5,042
(74)
4,968
4,995
(74)
4,92t
4,969
(74)
4,895
5,012
(7 4)
4,938
5,086
(7 4)
5,AÍ2
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRÄM C.APÁ,CITY 542 541 576 623 649 606 s32
RELOCATABLE CAPACI"TY 2.
NOTES:
1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities
2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which
can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number ofportables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasibility for continued instructional use.
Current Portable Capacity
Add/Subtract portable capacity
Add new portable capacity Sequoyah
Subtract portable capacity from Totem
Adiusted Portable Capacity
825
25
(12s)
725
725
725
725
725
725
725
725
725
725
725
725
725
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY r267 r'.66 lJor rJ48 1,374 r3¡r 1,2,57
26
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY- HIGH SCHOOLS
CAPACITY
ENROLLMENT
Budget -- Projected--
Calendar Year 2010 20rt 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
School Year 2009/10 2010/tl 20tt/12 2012/t3 2013/r4 2014/r5 2015/t6
BUILDINGPROGRAM
}IEADCOLINT CAPACITY
FTE CAPACITY
5,433
5.811
5,433
5,811
5,433
5.811
5,433
5,Et t
5,433
5,811
5,433
5,811
5,433
5,81I
Add or subtract changes in capacity
Adiusted Program Headcount Capacity 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433
A justed Frogram FTE Capacity 5,811 5,81I 5,811 5,811 5,811 5,811 5,81I
Basic FTE Enrollment
Internet Academy (AAI'TE)
Basic Ed without Internet Acaderny
6,325
(20s)
6,124
6,167
(20s)
5,962
6,129
(205)
5,924
6,109
(205)
5,904
6,lll
(20s)
5,906
6,066
(20s)
5,861
6,022
(205)
5,E17
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPACITY (30e)(1s1)(113)(e3)(eÐ (so¡(6)
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2.
NOTES:
1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require fulI time use of school facilities.
2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which
can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasibility for continued instructional use.
3. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and
no planning time in some classrooms. Puget Sound Early College will house approximately
60 ofthe unhoused students.
Current Portable Capacity
Add/Subtract portable capacity
Add portable capacity at TAF Academy
Adj usted Portable Capacity
800
100
900
900
900
900
9û0
900
900
900
900
900
900
900
900
STJRPLUS OR(UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
3. CAPACITY 591 749 787 8û7 805 850 894
27
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
the ofFederal V/and the
Single and Multi-Family Residences
Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees
to help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities.
To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was
established. This formula can be found in King County Code 214 and was substantially
adopted by the City of Federal V/ay and Kent. The formula requires the District to
establish a "Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be
added to a school district by each new single or multi-family unit and to gather some
standard construction costs, which are unique to that district.
- STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS
Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for
single-family units and multi-family units. The factors used in the 2010 Capital Facilities
Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single-family units that were
constructed in the last five (5) years.
- IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee
Calculation for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 214 and
the Growth Management Act.
months.
Plan Year 2010 Plan Year 2009
Single Family Units $3,832
Multi-Units $2 t4
84,017
81,733
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OIO CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANSTUDENT GENERATIONNEW CONSTRUCTION IN PRIOR 5 YEARSSingle Family Student GenerationTotalStudentFactor0.29270.66670.60000.61900.81480.59171.31030.98000.95000.7137Student Generation*0.33170.16530.22240.7't94High SchoolStudentFactor0.04880.05560.'t6670.0476o.27160.23080.58620.26000.27500.2241Middle SchoolStudentFactor0.17070.11110.r0000.1'1900.16050.14790.20690.22000.22500.1784ElementaryStudentFactoro.07320.50000.33330.45240.38270.2130o.51720.50000.45000.3112Number ofHigh SchoolStudents21152223917132254Totel8410279139187Number ofMiddle SchoolStudents72I513256111843Number ofElementaryStudents3I3019313615253675Number ofMulti-FamilyDwellinqs0000000000Number ofSingle FamilyDwellings4118904281169295080241DEVELOPMENT(09) Lakota Crest(09) Tuscany(08) Northlake Ridqe lV(08) Collinotree Park(07) Colella Estates(07) Woodbrook(06) Devonshire(06) Orchid Lane(05) Danville Station(05) Northlake Ridoe l. IIAND lll* Student Generation rate is based on totals.Multi-Family Student GenerationTotal0.1550.2030.4820.212Average0.1520.0520.0590.263Hiqh Schoolo.o420.052o.1110.031Middle School0.0340.0490.0750.049EIementary0.0790.1020.2960.132AuburnlssaouahKentLake Washinqton29
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OIO CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
School Site Acquisition Cost:
Facilþ
Elementary
Middle School
High School
0.3317 0.1 520 $0 $o
0.1653 0.0520 $o s0
0.2224 0.0590 $0 $o
$o $0TOTAL
Cost /
Acre
Facilþ
Cost
Facilþ
Cost
Sq. Ft.
Student
IMPACT F'EE
Facility
Facility
Facilþ
Size
State
Match
Student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
TOTAL
Student
Factor
MFR
Student
Factor
MFR
Student
Factor
Student
Factor
MFR
CosV
SFR
Cost/
SFR
Cost/
SFR
Cost/
SFR
SFR
CosV
MFR
Cost/
MFR
CosV
MFR
Cost/
MFR
MFR
School Construction Cost:
o/oPermFac.l
Total Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Temporary Facility Cost:
oá Temp Fac
Total Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
State Matching Credit Calculation:
Area Cost
Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Tax Payment Credit Calculation
Average Assessed Value (March 2009)
Capital Bond Interest Rate (March 2009)
Net Present Value of Average Dwelling
Years Amortized
Properfy Tax Levy Rate
Present Value of Revenue Stream
TOTAL
Total
Single Family Multi-Family
Residences Residences
Mitigation Fee Summary
Site Acquisition Cost
Permanent Facility Cost
Temporary Facility Cost
State Match Credit
Tax Payment Credit
Sub-Total
50% Local Share
$
$
$
$
$
14,431
56
(3,078)
(3,745)
$
$
$
$
$
6,613
18
(1,411)
(ee2)
$
$
7,664 $
3,832 $
+228
2,r14
0. I 520 s14.431 $6,6139s.62%$9,100,000 200 0.3317
So0. l6s3 0.0520 $o
0.2224 0.0590 $o $0
$14,431 $6,613
0.3317 0.1 520
s193.607 25 0. l 653 0.0520 $s6 sl84.38%
0.2224 0.0590
$s6 $r8
$168.79 90 6t.09%0.3317 0.1 520 $3,078 sl,4l I
0.16s3 0.0520 $o $os168.79
0.0590 $o $o$168.79 0.2224
$1.411$3,078
$326.409 s86.497
4.96%496%
82.s2s,346 $669,206
l0 l0
$ 1.48 $ 1.48
$3,745 s992
Impact Fee $ 3,832 $ 2,114
30
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 4
SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2OO9 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The 2010 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 2009 Capital
Facilities Plan. The changes between the 2009 Plan and the 2010 Plan are listed below
SECTION I - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN
The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 201012016
SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
CAPACITY
Elementary capacity includes space for All Day Kindergarten programs at every
elementary school. Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on
page 17.
PORTABLES
The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new
portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on page 19.
STUDENT FORECAST
The Student Forecast now covers 2010 through 2016 Enrollment history and projections
are found onpage22.
CAPACITY SUMMARY
The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities
and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown
as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 24-27.
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION - KING COUNTY CODE 21A.
The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The
adjustment made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee
between the 2009 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan can be
found on page 32 and33.
31
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OIO CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES F'ROM 2OO9 TO 2O1O
ENT
Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a
period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation. The changes in
student Generation factors between the 2009 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2010 Capital
Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age of
the developments and the year placed in the survey. The Student Generation worksheet
is found onpage29.
SC HO O L CONSTRUCTI ON C OSTS
The anticipated costfor replacing Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla is
870,000,000. The replacement will add 50 new seats to the school copacity at each
building. The total capacity at thesefour elementary schools is currently 1505. Adding
200 additional seats will increase the bv I3%.
Total Cost .13 X 870,000,000: 89,100,000
The District will use the above formula created as a base from the 2008 Capital Facilities
Plan for the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan. The capacity of the four elementary schools
may vary from year to year as programs are added or changed and construction cost may
increase over time. For instance, for each new all day Kindergarten program, the
building capacity will effectively be reduced by 20 headcount and the Board authorized
an increase in construction cost of $lm for Valhalla. These changes would increase the
construction cost. The District is using the base formula established in the 2008 plan in
the Impact Fee calculation.
32
FEDERAL V/AY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OIO CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2OO9 TO 2O1O
IMP ACT FEE
Item
Percent of Permanent Facilities
Percent Temporary Facilities
Average Cost of Portable
Classroom
Area Cost Allowance
State Match
Average Assessed Value
Single Family Student Yield
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Multi-Family Student Yield
Elementary
Middle School
High School
From/To
96.81% to 95.620/o
3.19%to 4.380/"
SFR_
5297,242 to $3260409
MFR _
$68,998 to $86,497
.3285 to.3317
.16311o.1653
.2446 to .2224
.1222 to.1520
.0621 to.0520
.0942 to.0590
Comment
Report #3 OSPI
Updated portable inventory
Per Puget Sound Educational
Service District (ESD 121)
Market Rate
King County Treasury Division
Updated Housing Inventory
Updated Housing Inventory
$168,307 to $193,607 Updated average of portables
purchased and placed in2009
$168.79 to $L68.79 No change from the prior year
61.84% to 61.090/" Change effective July 2008
Capital Bond Interest Rate 5.II% to 4.960/o
Property Tax Levy Rate $1.49 to $1.48
33
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
WAC 197 -1 | -960 Environmental Checklist.
Purpose of Checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RC'W, requires all govemmental
agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on
the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the
agency identifu impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be
done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most
precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must ans\iler each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most
cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your owr observations or project plans without the
need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your
proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid
unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark
designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can
assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a
period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe
your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be
significant adverse impact.
I
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does
not apply" In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject actions þat D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and
"property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic atea," respectively.
2
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
The adoption of a Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan by the Federal Way School District No. 21 0 for
the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. The King County, City of Federal Way,
City of Kent and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan will be amended to include the
District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element. This project may also
involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the city of Des Moines to incorporate the
District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan.
2. Name of applicant:
Federal Way School District No. 210.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Federal Way School DistrictNo.2l0
31405 18th Avenue South
Federal V/ay WA 98003
(2s3) e4s-2000
Contact Person:Ms. Tanya Nascimento
Enrollment and Demographics
(2s3) e4s-207tTelephone
4. Date checklist prepared:
April 18,2009
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Federal Way School District No. 210
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable)
The Federal Way School District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the
District in May 2009. The Capital Facilities Plan will be forwarded to King County, the City of
Federal 'Way, City of Kent and the City of Auburn for inclusion in each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan. It will also be forwarded to the city of Des Moines for possible inclusion in
this jurisdiction's Compfehensive Plans. The District will continue to update the Capital Facilities
Plan annually. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to
project-specific environmental review.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
J
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the District plans to
implement over the next six years. These include construction of four elementary schools,
Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla. This plan also includes construction of Lakota
Middle School. Additionally the plan covers the purchase and siting of temporary facilities at
various locations. Non-instructional projects included in the plan will consolidate support
services operations at a single location. This will include the construction of new facilities to
house the Transportation, Maintenance and Nutrition Services departments. Current plans are for
all the projects to be complete by 2013.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will undergo additional environmental review,
when appropriate, as they are developed.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for govemmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
Permits will be applied for with the appropriate jurisdiction for siting the temporary facilities and
for the construction of Lakeland and Sunnycrest Elementary Schools during the 2009 calendar
year.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
The District anticipates that King County, the City of Federal Way, the City of Kent and the city
of Auburn will adopt this Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plan. The city of Des
Moines may also adopt this Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities Elements of their
Comprehensive Plans (when issued).
I 1. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page.
(Lead agencies may modif' this form to include additional specific information on project
description.)
This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Federal Way School
District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan for the pu{pose of planning the District's facilities needs.
The District's Capital Facilities Plan will be incorporated into King County's, the City Federal
Way's, the City of Kent's and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plans. It may .also be
incorporated into the Comprehensive Plans of the city of Des Moines. The projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review.
A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the District's offices.
4
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
12. Location of the proposal. Give suffrcient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township,
and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of atea, provide the range or
boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map,
if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this
checklist.
The Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Federal Way School District. The District includes an
areaof approximately 35 square miles. The City of Federal Way, parts of the cities of Kent, Des
Moines and Auburn, parts of unincorporated King County, fall within the District's boundaries. A
detailed map of the District's boundaries can be viewed at the District's offices.
5
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
The Federal Way School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and
gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Specific slope characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan
have been or will be identified during project-level environmental review.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, speciff them and note any prime
farmland.
Specific soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Federal Way School District. Specific soil limitations on
individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
e. Describe the purposo, typo, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed.
Indicate source of fill.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when
appropriate, to project-specific environmental review and local approval at the time of
proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of any
fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of the construction projects currently proposed
in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects have been or will
be evaluated on a site-specific basis at the time of project-specific environmental review when
appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be subject to local approval processes.
6
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
The proposed renovation projects will require the construction of impervious surfaces. The
extent of any impervious cover constructed will vary with each capital facilities project
included in the Capital Facilities Plan. This issue has been or will be addressed during project-
specifi c environmental review when appropriate.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any
The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and appropriate
control measures have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile,
odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any,
generally desmibe and give approximate quantities if known.
Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from the individual projects included
in the Capital Facilities Plan. The air-quality impacts of each project have been or will be
evaluated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
Any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to
project-specific environmental review when appropriate and relevant local approval processes.
The District will be required to comply with all applicable air regulations and air permit
requirements. Proposed measures specific to the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
7
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
3. 'Water
a. Surface
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes,
describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
There is a network of surface water bodies within'the Federal V/ay School District. The
surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate. When necessary, the surface water regimes and
flow pattems have been or will be researched and incorporated into the designs of the
individual projects.
2) V/ill the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require work near the surface
waters located within the Federal V/ay School District. Applicable local approval
requirements have been or will be satisfied.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material.
Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material as a
component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be
provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Applicable local
regulations have been or will be satisfied
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, pu{pose, and approximate quantities if known.
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-
specific environmental review when appropriate.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site
plan.
Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area, will be
required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If
so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
I
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a
result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided
during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions
b. Ground:
1) V/ill groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater
resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on
groundwater resources has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following
chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of
such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals
or humans the system(s) are expected to serye.
The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the projects
included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review.
c.Water Runoff (including storm water):
l) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water florv? Will this rvater
flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have storm water runoff
consequences. Specific information regarding the storm water impacts of each project has
been or will be provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
Each project is or will be subject to applicable local storm water regulations.
9
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of waste
materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of each project on ground
and surface waters have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to all applicable regulations
regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any:
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
4 Plants:
Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:a.
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Federal Way School District. Inventories
of the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Some of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or
alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in the
' Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
c.List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
10
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local landscaping
requirements.
5. Animals:
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or neal the site or are known to
be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects proposed in
the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
c.Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes have
been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined during
proj ect- specific environmental review when appropriate.
11
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,
etc.
The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life cycle cost analysis of all
heating, lighting, and insulation systems before it will permit specific school projects to
proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site design planning when
appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. V/ould your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,
generally describe:
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar potential of
adjacent projects have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List
other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
7. EnvironmentalHealth:
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of
f,rre and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so,
describe.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will comply with all current codes,
standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to
project-specific environmental review and local approval at the time they are developed
when appropriate.
t2
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. Noise:
l) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises from traffic, construction, residential, commercial and industrial areas
exists within the Federal Way School District. The specific noise sources that may affect
the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during
proj ect-specific environmental review when appropriate.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project
on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
The District does not anticipate that the projects will create long-term increases in traffic-
related or operations-related noise levels.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a.What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Federal \May School District, including residential,
commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, open space, recteational, etc.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
The project sites covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have not been used recently for
agriculture.
Describe any structures on the sitec
The structures located on the proposed sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified and described during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
13
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
The remodeling and renovation projects will require the demolishment of school structures.
The structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
e.What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning
classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site-specific zoning information has been or
will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be completed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
speciS'.
Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the Plan
have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review.
Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
The Federal Way School District currently serves approximately 22,200 students. lhe student
population is expected to increase to 23,000 by the year 2015. This projection has been
adjusted to reflect the current economic conditions. The District employs approximately 3,200
people.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has
been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of the projects contained
therein, will displace any people.
t4
FNVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-specific
environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed mitigating measures will
be proposed at that time, if necessary.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing
uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and
during proj ect-specific environmental review when appropriate
9. Housing:
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle,
or low-income housing.
No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects included
in the Capital Facilities Plan.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will eliminate any
housing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on existing
housing have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the
principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during proj ect-specific environmental review when appropriate.
15
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
determined during proj ect-specific environmental review when appropriate.
c Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects included inthe
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project-specific basis when
appropriate.
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed during project-specific environmental review.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
c.What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Off-site sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during
proj ect-specific environmental review when appropriate.
12
a.
Recreation:
What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Federal Way School
District.
t6
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. V/ould the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe
The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will
be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. The projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed renovated school and support
facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be subject to mitigation during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. A
school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields
and gymnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for such registers on the sites of the
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and cultural resources
on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis when
appropriate.
14. Transportation:
a. Identifr public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the
existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The impact on public streets and highways of the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
t7
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public
transit has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
An inventory of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability has been or will be
conducted during proj ect-specific environmental review when appropriate.
d. V/ill the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or
streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private).
The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has been or
will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
Use of water, rail, or air transportation has been or will be addressed during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during proj ect-specific environmental review when appropriate.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any
The mitigation of trafÍic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate
15. Public Services:
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools; other)? If so, generally describe.
The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will
substantially increase the need for other public services.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any
18
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Remodeled/renovated school or facilities will be built with automatic security systems, fire
alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems.
16. utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities are
available at the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The types of utilities
available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-
specific environmental review when appropriate.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and
the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be
needed.
Utility revisions and construction needs have been or will be identified during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature:
Date Submitted: April 16,2008
r9
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpfirl to read them in conjunction with the
list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities
likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the
proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;
production, storage, or release oftoxic orhazardous substances; or production ofnoise?
To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be
constructed and/or renovated and remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be
more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access
roads, and playgrounds could increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground
waters. Heating systems, emergency generators, and other scirool equipment that is installed
pursuant to the Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or
hazardous substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for
emergency generating equipment. The District does not anticipate a significant increase in the
production of noise from its facilities, although the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan will increase the District's student capacities.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are
Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above have been or will be
addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Storm water
detention and runoff will meet applicable County andior City requirements and may be subject
to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements.
Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be
stored in accordance with local and state requirements.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment.
These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Plan are not likely to
generate severe impacts on fish or marine life.
20
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are
Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be identified at this
time. Specific mitigation proposals have been or will be identified, however, during project-
specific environmental review when appropriate.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the
consumption of energy.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance with
applicable energy efficiency standards.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas
designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness,
wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,
wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no impact on
these resources.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate. Updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County and the
cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines, and Auburn as part of the Growth Management Act
process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the
extent the District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management
planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected.
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plaqs?
The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is
incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management
plans. The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained
therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities Plan or
the projects contained therein are proposed at this time.
2I
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services
and utilities?
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary increases in the
District's need for public services and utilities. Upon the completion of the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan, however, the District does not anticipate that its need for public
services and utilities will increase substantially beyond existing levels.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time.
7. Identiff, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of
the environment.
22
This page intentionally left blank.
ADDENDT]M TO
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIF'ICAIICE
FOR TIIE F'EDERAL \ryAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
2O1O SIX YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAI\
Prepared in Compliance with
The S/ashington State Environmental Policy Act
Chapter 43.21C Revised Code of \Mashington
Chapter 197 -ll, Washington Administrative Code
Date of Issuance:
May 4,2009
ADDENDTJM TO TI{E
DETERMINATION OX' NONSIGMF'ICANCE
X'OR TI{tr F'EDERAL \ryAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
2O1O SIX YEAR CAPITAL F'ACILITIES PLAN
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:
The proposed action includes the following actions, which are so closely related to each other
that they are in effect a single action:
l. The adoption of the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Six Year Capital Facilities
Plan by the Federal Way Public Schools for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of
the District.
2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan by King County to
include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital
Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan.
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Federal Way, City of
Kent and the City of Aubum to include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Capital Facilities
Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City of Federal Way's, City of Kent's,
and the City of Aubum's Comprehensive Plan.
This proposal may also involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City
of Des Moines to incorporate the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Capital Facilities Plan into
the Capital Facilities Element of the City of Des Moines' Comprehensive Plan.
REASONS X'OR TIrE ADDEIIDUM:
This addendum is issued pursuant to WAC 197-ll-625 to provide notice of an extended public
comment period. The Determination ofNonsignificance identified a comment deadline of May
2,20A9. The District has extended the comment deadline to May l8j 2009. A copy of this
Addendum is being mailed to all interested agencies. These changes do not indicate any new or
increased significant environmental impact
PROPOSED TIMING OR SCHEDIJLE:
The Board of Directors for the Federal Way Public Schools will review and could adopt the
revised 2010 Capital Facilities Plan May 2009.
LOCATION OF BACKGROUND INF'ORMATION:
Copies of the following documents are available for review at the Federal'Way Public Schools
offices, 31405 l8h Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003.
¡ Determination of Nonsignificance issued on April 18, 2009
o Environmental Checklist prepared on April 18, 2009.
CIRCT]LATION AI\D COMMENT:
A copy of this Addendum is being mailed to all interested agencies. The District has extended
the comment deadline to 5:00 p.m., May 18,2009.
PROPOF{ENT:Federal Way Public Schools
LEAD AGENCY:Federal Way Public Schools is the lead agency pursuant to WAC
t97-Ll-926.
RESPONSTBLE OX'F ICIAL ¡
POSITIONÆITLET
TanyaNascimento
Enrollment and Demo graphics
For firrther information, contact Tanya Nascimento at (253)945-207 l.
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGMFICANCE
Issued with a 14 Day comment and appeals period
Description of Proposal:
This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closely related to each otherthat they are in effect a single action:
l. The adoption of the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Six Year Capital Facilities
Plan by the Federal V/ay Public Schools for the puqposes of planning for the facilities needs of
the District.
2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan by King County to
include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital
Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan.
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Federal Way, City of
Kent and the City of Auburn to include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Capital Facilities
Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City of Federal Way's, City of Kent's
and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan.
This proposal may also involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of
Des Moines to incorporate the Federal Way Public Schools' 2010 Capital Facilities Plan into the
Capital Facilities Element of the City of Des Moines' Comprehensive Plan.
Proponenü Federal Way Public Schools
Location of the Proposal:
The Federal Way Public Schools District includes an area of approximately 35 square
miles. Areas of the cities of Federal Way, Kent,'Des Moines and Auburn fall within the District's
boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County.
Lead $.gency:
Federal Way Public Schools is the lead agency pursuant to'WAC 197-ll-926.
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse environmental impact on the environment. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2Xc). This decision \ryas made
after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request.
This Determination ofNonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-ll-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 5:00 p.m., May 2,2008. The responsible offrcial will reconsider the DNS based on
timely comments and may retain, modiff, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw
the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it \l¡ill be final after the expiration of the comment deadline.
Responsible Official:
Telephone
Address:
Ms. TanyaNascimenot
Enrollment and Demo graphics
Federal Way Public Schools
Q53) 94s:207t
31405 lSth Avenue South
Federal Way WA 98003
You may appeal this determination in writing by 5:00 p.m., May 2,2009 to Tanya
Nascimento, Federal Way Public Schools, 31405 lSth Avenue South, Federal V/ay, WA 98003.
Date of Issue: April 18,2009
Date Published: April 18, 2009
2
This page intentionally left blank.