HomeMy WebLinkAbout3951ORDINANCE NO. 3q51
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, amending the Park and
Open Space Element and the Capital Facilities
Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan related
to the adoption of a Park and Open Space Plan.
(cPA-2009-18).
RECITALS
A. In the spring of 2009, the City began the process of
developing an updated Park and Open Space Plan (Park Plan). When the
Park Plan is integrated into the Park and open Space Element of the city's
Comprehensive Plan, it will direct future development, acquisition and
renovation of parks and open spaces for the short and long-term future.
The Park and Open Space Element provides the foundation and guidance
for the park system within the City, The Park and Open Space Element
includes an inventory of existing parks and open spaces, level of service
standards, a summary of public participation, goals and policies, and
opportunities for regional coordination.
B. In general, the Capital Facilities Element provides guidance
for the provision and maintenance of public services and capital facilities
I Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space PIan
cPA 2009-78
required to support anticipated growth over the next 20 years. The
Capital Facilities Element includes a summary of park facilities and level of
service standards that need to be amended with the information from the
updated Park Plan.
C, The Growth Management Act ("GMA") requires the City to
establish procedures governing amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
that limit amendments to once each year unless certain circumstances
exist. RCW 36.704.130(2),
D, The amended Park and Open Space Element, Capital Facilities
Element, and Park Plan have undergone an extensive public process. A
survey was taken during the spring of 2009 seeking ideas and opinions
regarding the existing park system, deficiencies and priorities for the
coming years. A public workshop was held in September 2009 to further
refine the areas of focus in the update. Additional public comment was
solicited throughout the update process via email, the City's website, and
articles in the Kent Reporter.
E. On January 8, 2OI0, the City provided the State of
Washington with the required sixty (60) day notification under RCW
36.704.106 of the City's proposed amendments. No comments were
received.
F. On February 13, 2010, the City's SEPA responsible official
issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the proposed
amendments, The DNS explained that the proposal would not have
probable significant adverse impacts on the environment.
Com prehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space Plan
cPA 2009-78
2
G. The Land Use and Planning Board held workshops regarding
these amendments to the Comprehensive Plan on January 11,2010, and
a public hearing on March B, 2010, The amendments were also
considered by the City Council's Parks and Human Services Committee on
March 18, 2010, On May 4,20L0, the City Council approved incorporation
of the Park Plan into the Comprehensive Plan as an appendix as well as
corresponding amendments to the Park and Open Space Element and the
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. These amendments
were made in accord with Kent City Code L2.02,050.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
SECTION 7, - Incorporation of Recita[s. The preceding recitals are
incorporated herein.
SECTION 2, - Amendment. The Park and Open Space Plan is
incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan as an appendix, The Park and
Open Space Element and Capital Facilities Element of the City of Kent's
Comprehensive Plan are amended as attached and incorporated as
Exhibit "4" and Exhibit "8" respectively.
SECTION 3, - Severability, If any one or more sections, sub-
sections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or
invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion
of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect.
Com prehensive PIan Amendment
Park and Open Space PIan
cPA 2009-78
3
SECTION 4, - Corrections by City Clerk or Code RevÌser. Upon
approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws,
codes/ rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and
section/subsection numbering.
SECTION 5. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and
be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of passage as provided
by law.
MAYO "fEl"l
rceY
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER,CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M BRU ER, CITY ATÏORNEY
PASSED, 4
APPROVED: 4
PUBLISHED:
day of May, 2010.
day of May, 2010.
day of May, 2010.
4 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space Plan
cPA 2009-78
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
BRENDA JACOB CITY CLERK
P: \Civil\Ordinance\CompPlanAmendParkOpenSpacePlan20l0.docx
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Park and Open Space PIan
cPA 2009-78
3'/5 /
approved
5
#rh\Vrlk
CHAPTER TEN
PARK & OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
INTRODUCTION
ion
epen spaee;and reereatienal faeilities fe- the years 2004 2010' The eemprehensive Park and
new n#¿ing ef resêEree o
ion
frem \Yhieh thc eemprchens
Flemcnt-outtincs geals m
Ëcereatienal arncniti ion
@ive-a*eas
Kent's serviee arer go
f istriet, fne Pæ't<s an¿ neer
ien
n4thin Kent's serviee area has inereased the demand on existing park and reereatienal faeilities ard
in
the Kent Valley sheuld be eneeuragcd te ineerperate reereatioral elements inte new develepments,
variety ef nerv eornrnwriry parks; neighberheed parks; trails;Touth atliletie fields; md playgreunds
Park & Open Space t0-1
have bcen aequired ffi
Speeifie aeeemplislrnents inelude the development of \Vilsen Playfields; lr{enill Meadervs
Neighberheed Park; Gree-r Vierv Neighbedreod Park; the Ðise-GeF eetrse; renovatiens ef tinda
*{eights Neighberheed Park; Gærisen ereek Neighberheed Park; Russell Rord Park; *nd
Netghborheed Parb l32
i€e
partnerships, The peli
i
ewned an#er mæraged parks and reereatienal faeilities, Fer the 2000 update sf the es"nprehensive
izens
ii€
i€
updated amn*ally after the eapital trmprsvement Pla*r is adepted; and as the eiÞ eeuneil establishes
nevr-geats.
ree*'s par* system is ad
ing,
Park & Open Space l0-2
eeneeming thc a€tivitics m
The missien ef the l-ent Parks; Reereatien and eenrntxrits Serviees Ðepartrnent is te errieh the
eqieyable and meaningfol reereatien and eultural pregrarns; and supperts human sen'iees, This is
ins
Hffian serviees Pregr
Tl'ta DarV R ônan Çna na Elamanf rrrnrlzc in ¡nnnorf r¡vil-h tha ?fì1 DsrVc Q, fìnan Qna¡a
redevelooment of Da onen snaces and recreational faciliti for th e VE a rs 2O1O-
2030. Park Plans were prepared and updated in 1972. 1982, 1988, 1994. and 2000.
r
carrri¡a lra: racirla Tf ar ¡r r rrl-ac aviclinn ¡lamnnrrnhinc fa¡ililia¡ anrl can¡i¡a
needs, presents goals and policies, estimates park and recreation demand, outlines
provides long- and shoft-term capital recommendations for the next 20 years.
The 2010 Park Plan as been uodated to accommodate the i nacts of current and
n
the Growth Management Act. A variety of participatory outreach methods were used
in tsJra 2 n 1 n rrnrlafa nf iha D=rV R ô Qna¡a Dl=n {-n nrrnlrra ¡ifizanc in tha
¡nmnrahancirra nlann ina nrn¡acc llraca aFFnrFc in¡lrrr{a. nnlino ln¡l rrrri{-{-ah cr rFlrô\rc
displays with comment sheets at parks facilities, public workshops, email updates to
Park & Open Space 10-3
interested parties, utility mailers, newspaper articles, and public hearings through the
formal plan adoption process,
attractive, and that offer enjoyable and meaningful recreation and cultural programs.
maintenance of parks and facilities, plofessional programming, and the optimum
m
Kent's ability to maintain the current level of service and to improve on existing park
anrl ronroafinn nnnnrf¡ rnitíac r rnlacc nr rhtin rêcrrr rraêc nnl arêc ^n d fr rnrlc ^rê
rnnrrlinated âmônn thc Cifv Kinn Cnr rntr¡ Kenfrc cchnnl dicfricfc and nrirrate
partnerships.
Kant/c carrrire ârêâ ñrrêc harrnnd tha ril'rr lirn its and Þlanninn Àraa qerrrinn tha cnfira
Kent School District. The Parks and Community Services Department also serves
portions of the Highline School District and Federal Way School District that are within
increased the demand on existing park and recreational facilities and programs. City
residents are concerned about maintaining existing facilities as well as the provision of
n:rkq rìnên qnâaeq anrl nrôñrâmc fhat rna Va l1anl' r r{acirrlrla nlr¡a tn lirra rnrl urnrÞ
Kent's park system is administered by the Director of the Kent Parks. Recreation &
-m
City Council Parks Committee. An Arts Commission advises staff and approves public
art anrl ¡rrlfrrral nrnararnrninn Tha frn¡alrtê rylêm harc nf the Arl-c f'nrnrniqqinn aro
annninfpd hrr tho Marrnr rn¡ith fhc conqpnf nf thc Citrr Cnr rncil and qêr\/ê nne-fo-firrc
rrear l-arrnc rirlifhnr rf rnrnnanqatinn n cã â r\/Th n-m amhar ênlf Àrlr¡iennr Rnarr{r ô cô\t6
appointed by the Mayor with the consent of the City Council, advises staff concerning
fha :nfirritiac a n d im nr^\/êrnênl-c af fhe Pirrerhenrl Gnlf f-nmnlev
The Kent Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department provides a variety of
in the population. For example, the department: 1) manages recreational programs
and athletic leagues for youth, teen, adult. and seniors; 2) conducts educational
classes and workshops; 3) organizes special events like the Fourth of July Splash,
Canterbury Faire. and special arts programs; 4) suppofts resource programs for
special populations; 5) operates youth day camps and before- and after-school care;
Park & Open Space 10-4
ùeante- tâcoma (U
Airport to
(o t¡J
ot
Angle
Panther
Pa*
0)
6
fLJ o
ú.
Lak
You
Fuatrc SE 208
5 ul
ST
U)u Ø
lrJ
(o
¡.-
(o
Grana
cßek
í..
6,
Ø
ST
n
t!
U,
ul
!c
I tllaadows
ul(n
tJl
I rll
()
b
4o
0-f,P
I 'sT'¿c!ro
t;
CITY OF KENT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAI{
SCALE: 1" : 45,000'
LEGEND
,í'..j PoTENTTAL ANNEXATToN AREA
CITY LIMITS
E KENT PARK FACILITIES
I KING COUNTY PARKS
This map a graphic aid only and not
makes no wananty to the aæuracy of the contours,
property boundaries, or placement or location of any map features depicted
thereon. The City of Kent disclaìms and shall not be held liable for any and all
damâge, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirect, or ænsequential, which
anses 0r arise from use of this
KEHTs¡Ex¡ÍGfÞs
AND
REC
FACIL
FIGURE 10.1
ON
10-5
ù-
Lake
Youngs
!D
Park
*%
(n
ST
¡
sç 208 Sl
216
u
à
ST
Moniil
o
'4uo-
'4o
Park
søÉ
P¡nø
Park
D;q ì
s'I
281 Sl
U
sE 288 S1
Crêak
É
òo
FIGURE 10.1
PARI(S & RECREATION
FACILITIES
LEGEND
EXISTING CONDITIONS
f Natural Resource (open Space/Greenways/Trails)
i.æ Neighborhood Parks
I community Parks
Recreation Facilities
j,.','1,.'i.{ u ndeveloped
Other Public Parks and Open Space
,,,',¡,...$ Maintenance Facilities
------ Trails
CITY LIMITS
POTENTIAL AN NEXATION AREA
Downtown Detail:
City of Kent Planning Area
SCALE: 1" = 4,000'â
c
I
Nr
I ,1"
,IL
#2
Up Kên
Comm
Ir
a-r--rl
L
nl
rlcal
In
Fttât
Pla)
4¡
#
anses or arise from use of this product.
Source:of Kênt
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirect, or consequential, whìch
Seruices
Kent Comprehensive Plan
)eallle- lacoma tl
rnational Airport (l)
a coo
Lake
Your
t
ST
@
)
J
(
:
6o IU
U)
E
0-f,
(o1
ûf 6 oÉ
3
Lll
Panther
Ø
u.J
I
Tq+1
'ìät+
Ø
t¡J
(o
F-
River
1
ST
fi
34
Lower
Mlll Creek
I 47
MerldÍan
:ftl.,
L¡
F
=
CITY OF KENT
COMPREHEI\SIVE PLAN
N
SCALE: 1" = 45,000'
LEGEND
..ï POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA
CITY LIMITS
'lV^irrtsñ¡úd
l-l NETGHBORHOOD PARK
- SERVICE AREAS
I KENT PARK AND OPEN SPACE
I KING COUNTY PARKS
This map is a graphic aid only and is not a legal document. The City of Kent
makes no wananty to lhe accuracy of the labeling, dimensions, conlours,
property boundaries, or placement or location of any map features depicted
lhereon. The City of Kent disclaims and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirect, or consequential, which
arises or may arise from use of this product.
KENT
NEIGHBORIIOOD PARK
SERVICE AREAS
FIGURE 10.2 10-7
Seattle-Tacoma
)rnational Airport ro rf
(Õ
Õ
É.
uJ
1-.l
J
\,_Tl- LrrLkf
Angle
SE 208
S
o
É.
-!
ii
-l
I
U)
U)
uJ
üî|1ri
:i_-l@+ziF+0)
U)
LIJ
(o
N
f lii I
L-
ST
I
t-
ul
U)
tJl
-\
L_-:\
=u_r:
tll
6tô
a
t¡J
U)
UJ
ll
ttl
U)
Õ$SE I92
Lak
You
5
ST
@
n
)I
\./çr fIf
CITY OF KENT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 45,000'
LEGEND
N
lv
POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA
CITY LIMITS
LOCAL & REGIONAL TRAILS
EXISTING TRAILS
This mâp is a grâphìc aid only and is not a legal document. The City of Kent
makes no waranty to the accuracy of the labeling, dimensions, contours,
property boundaries, or placement or locåtion of âny map features depicted
thereon. The City of Kenl dìsclaims and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirect, or consequential, which
arises or mav arise from use ofthis Droduct,
KENT
FIGURE 10.3 10-9
Seattle-Tacoma
Itemational Airport
o
--i T
ST
(n
UJ
l
Il.t
T
\
I ,1-+
U)
t.
tt
=
F
t)
ST ra
\a'/I r lÌñ,/¡/7
lrll(rr+
- ---r¡l i,>ì/ -<l-- | -1\t l--
_r --Fj
(o
a
ù
Angle
si=
i>
.e
G
G 208
I
'\',ì,. 1(i
Panther
-+
Jù'
ã^!
--
(/)
l¡J
(o
l\
ìTr
ST
I
ul
tatla)
I
rl
L]
L
I
I 1./
_L_,/
o
É.
La
Yc
ul
U)
l¡l
I
I
--l
ltt--
t
l
CITY OF KENT
COMPREIMNSIVE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 45,000'
LEGEND
,tï POTENTTAL ANNEXATTON AREA
CITY LIMITS
I PARK AND OPEN SPACE
a PARK & RECREATION FACILITY. SCHOOL
map a graphic aid only and is not a legal document,
anses or ariæ from use of this
KENT
N
ìH^sÞ¡rn:Þr
RECREATION FACILITIES
A¡ID SCHOOLS
FIGURE 10.4 10-I 3
00t on tffid
ewned by the €ity and leased to a private eerperatien,
individuats ard greups
Figure l0,l illustrat
@
ANALYSIS OF PARK LAND AND FACILITY NEEDS
L€Y€l--€'f-€el5¿i€e
tn previeus eemprene
mea$rrcmeå+s:
The NRP4 ne lenger reeerrrrnends a standard fer faeilit'' a*rd partr land based en pepCatien r*ties,
develeped by the eerxnunit)'ard used as a guide in plaffring, Thc eity uses the previeus standsrd
Park & Open Space t0-t8
ff the €ity eh€eses te m
Ke*-weC#nee*
168å5 aeres based en a 2002 eiÉy pepulatien ef I l;275'
475,9 aeres based en a 2000 Kent PA¿\ pepulatien ef 23;797,
1;917,2 aeres based en a 2010 eiff pept*latien ef 95;860
525 aeres Lased en a 2010 Kent Pr\¿\pepulatien ef 26;247
tLt LttJt urrv vru v^vvvuvu r ilqrssu lJvr rtvvv
1 nrìn Lf^,-,^,,^- :- îArì2 +L^ ra:+-, L^,{ 1 < Õa ^^-^. -^- 1 fìrl^ -^^,,1^+:^- €-ll:-- 1-^l^-,, +1..^ 1OO2Itvvvt Irvvvvvvlt ttt LvvJ ulv v¡LJ rrqs rJ./v svrvs yvl rtvvv yvl/s
\lDD^ ^+^^Ã^-Ã L-,2?o ^^-^- '|-1:. ^^..^+^- +^ ^ 1^-. ^ç A'7A 1 fìnrt ^^^^l^ -|.L^ +:-.+ l^,,^lI ìIu / \ Dle¡uuu UJ JJv 4vrvJ! lluJ vYusLv rrvvv yvvl/rv.
LqvLv Lw. t ).
'r^Ll^ 1n l\
kbþ10.1
ies {nvestmentêapita $+slj2
ies In#estmen#eapita $ry#
+eres¡+Sgg+epulatien 2#
+eres¡+;g0g+epulatien +8=t9
GelÊCerxses }{e1e#4p0spepulafion 056
Table 10,2 she*'s a eemparise*ef levels-ef serviee (LOS); rvithin the eit)'limits; r"ith prqieeted
Park & Open Space 10- 19
+able-*S2
KtrNT LOS EVER TIME
+493 +496 1998 2900 æg?4+g
z.*{-58 #6 Æ l-13 l-00
eoffiffir{*ty+a#ks +8=t9 l€+t +4Ã +332 l4*5 l3=0+
ffi
ftele+lgg0)
e56 +60 H H w s30
ffies
(square{eetþersen)
H3 2J2 Æ Æ ++3 -H4
Pepca+ion 4+S0s 4s#ss +0+4 +eft4 sffi 951860
n4th 95;500 square feet ef faeility spaee ava:lable fer use; this ineludes 2;400 square feet ef the Par
the Ðriving RangePre Shep, The level ef serviee fer publie reereatien faeilities in 2002 rv+s l,l3
irnplieatiens ef fu ires
that meets eitizen needs, If tlre standard fer neighberheed parks is set at 1,13 aeres per 1;000 (the
is set at l4,S5 aeres
201+
tlre CiÞ' ef Kent beeause the existing park and epen spaee inventery in the Petential ¡\*urexatien
^*^^ ;- ¡n4 ^4 +L^ -^*^ r lìe ^. +L^ fr:+., r l\a ^f 4.,¡a¡f., //)n\ ^^*^- -^- 1 rìnn -^^-l^ I\f^.+ ^f +1"^Lrrv rqrrv lvu sr \2v/ svrvr l/vr r tvvv
Park & Open Space I 0-22
AS PEPUL {TIEN IN€R#A
A€EOMMEÐATE MORF', PA
W
The 2010 populatien fereeast indieates a need to aeqtrire all types of park la*rds to maintai* the
ing
S/ith tlre Petential ¡\*urexatien ¡\rea (PAr\) pepulatien ef 23;797 in 2000; and a prqieeted pept*latien
is
15,94 aeres and 0,38 LeS fer Neighberheed Park) aeres per l;000 pepulatien,* This tetal LOS is
iver
Park aereage and Sees Græ
Neighbo-heed Park LOS o
ion'
upen er etherrvise preelude the pnrehase and develepment eÊelose in; stritable lands fer athletie
ies'
Park & Open Space 10-23
r AS assures thet rs *re ee
net satist'the demarrd fer reere#
Park & Open Space l0-24
Level of Service (LOS)
established minimums (RCW 36,70A.020(12)). Measurinq the adequacv of our
DzrLc >n rl llnan Qnr¡ac raa¡ rirac ¡n actr licharl col- nf cfanrlardc I ar¡al nf carr¡i¡-a
f I OSI sta n darrls ere mêãqlrrêc ôf thp a rrnt nf a nrrhli¡ fanilil-rr r¡vhi¡h rnrrcf ha
Vi
ft in hin
needs and expectations
Over the past 30 years, the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) has
developed guidelines and standards for parks, recreation and open space. NRPA
first published guidelines in 1971 and revised them in 1983 through the Recreation
Park. and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, to serve as a basis for developinq
PAn n
li
mm
rth NRPA
that because every community is different, standards should be developed by the
.ôrnmrnifrr anrl rcerl ac a nuirlp in nlanninn
The former NRPA quidelines are used throuqhout the United States. and Kent's
1qq4 Cnmnrahenqirrp Þark anrl Rorreatinn Þlan lerrol nf qerrrice qfanrlerrlq r^rêrê
r whi
community should strive. The level of service standards established in the 1994
il ain an
annrnnriatc nridelino fnrlarl hnrruerror rnrifh tho channinn rlamnnranhirc nf Kenf fha
City mav want to consider establishing new standards or supplemental measures in
future years.
Future demand for park and recreation facilities is based on comparing projected
populations with Kent's park and recreation standards. Park and recreation needs
are related directly to the characteristics of a city's population. The City's
population is projected to increase to 133,347 (or 133.B57including all potential
anner¿ation areasì hv vear 2O?1 Tahle 1 shows Kent's level of service from 1993-
r
m r
(developed/undeveloped/athletic facilities/natural resource), While the park and
open spaces are broken down differently in the two tables, the overall LOS numbers
n
and square feet per person as the population increases.
Park & Open Space I 0-25
1993 1996 1998 2000 2003
Population 41,000 45,000 70,L40 79,524 84,275
Neiqhborhood Parks 2.53 ac.1.58 ac.1.56 ac,1.45 ac.1.13 ac.
Communitv Parks 18.19 ac.18,4 ac.L4 ac.
L3.72
ac.14.85 ac.
Golf Course (holes/1000)0.56 0.6 0.38 0.38 o.32
Recreation Facilities (sq.
feet/person)2.33 2.L2 1.36 L.2 1.13
Overall LOS (acres/1000)20.72 19.98 15.56 L5.t7 15.98
Overall LOS (sq. ft./person)2.33 2.12 1.36 L.2 1.13
2009 2031
Population 88.380 L33.347
Natural Resource 9,2 ac 6.5 ac.
Neiqhborhood Parks
o.92
ac..68 ac.
Community Parks
L.27
ac.83 ac.
Recreation Facilities
Indoor (sq.
ft/person)1.86 1.13
Outdoor
(acres/1000)2.8 1.9
Undeveloped
1.05
ac.0.70 ac
Overall LOS {acres/1000)L5.24 10.81
Overall LOS
(ss.ft./person)1.86 1.13
ln aråar {-n m=in{-=in {-ha ¡r rrranf lar¡al af c rrri¡a nf 1\ )A â,^rôc nar 'l ñflô nannla fha
fnllnrrvinn ârnrrrrnfc nf erlrlitinnal narlz lanrl rnrnrrlrl naarl fn ha ar.n¡tiraÅ.
685 acres - 2O3L ÞoÞ of 133,347
693 acres - 2031 pop of 133,857 (includes potential annexation areas)
n n f
measurinq the size, amount or capacity of a facility. These standards represent
only one measure of a successful park system and do not address the qqality or
investment in each facility. Future LOS standards that include both qualitative and
quantitative measures may more fully capture how Kent's parks and open spaces
arp mcefinn tho .ôrrrmrnifr¡tc npadc
Park & Open Space I 0-26
Neiqhborhood Service Areas
Another tool used to determine what and where improvements need to be made is
with the use of our Neiohborhood Service Area Map. The City is divided into 48
neinhhnrhnnrl qenrirê ârêãq that are hnrrnrlerl hrr mainr artcrial qfreofq nennranhic
features (steep topography, rivers etc.), and other barriers that would make it
difficult for users to reach the designated park for each area. This method breaks
{-ha ¡i{-r¡ in{-n ¡mnllar cartti¡a ãFôã- r¡¡hara nrrlzc fanilifioc rn=r¡ aacil\/ côr\/À r cna¡ifin
neighborhood. Providing parks in each area allows residents to easily access a park
in their neighborhood.
While 24 of the areas are served by a neighborhood park, eight neighborhoods are
served by community parks (Three Friends, Van Doren's Landing Park, Russell
Woods, Kent Memorial Park, Russell Road, Clark Lake Park. Urban Center Parks and
Wilson Playfields) that have elements typically found in a neighborhood park. Four
neiqhborhoods have undeveloped or minimallv developed communitv parks (L32"d
Çfrael-P â l¿ \Â/acf 1-.li Faa a lraaV and \/allarr Flnnr l^nrnrnrrnifrr Darlz\ rnrhi¡h r,r¡illr
rvi n rh n W lt
ãrê n rim ^lr¡n ê al hnrhnnrl narlzc ârê nrrìnrrcarl in thaca ãrêãqriindr rcfria À n rl nn
Two service areas are low density residential with aqricultural or industrial land
n n n n h rh
h
h
of n will m n
needs. Four service areas have no park space (NSA #IL,2L,30, 41),
\Â/ifhin fhe Þanfher I ake erea fhraa qerrrico ãrêâq harra aifhor n o nâ rk land rì thar
nerV< qarrrinn tho erpeq ara rlafinianf ll\lÇ l+4 o 16 \ Tlra ra inin rvi â âmâãcô1ıFA
located entirely within the Panther Lake annexation area, is served by a community
parK.
Neighborhood parks are needed in seven Neighborhood Service Areas which
currently have no park space or are in need of additional amenities or
imnrnrrcmenfq fhreo nf rrrhirh aro lnraferl in fha Þanfhar I eVe Arae lNqA .#4 q 1 1
L6,2L,30, 41).
Demooraphics
Considerable qrowth and larqe annexations over the past 20 vears has siqnificantlv
increased Kent's population and the number of people our parks serve. Families
r min W n n
n in r
aqes and families qrow, the needs of the communitv in terms of parks and open
space, chanqe. Not only has the need for parks and open spaces increased with the
nnnr rlafinn fr rfr rre nerl¿ inrreqtrnanfc nead fn alcn nnncirlar fha innraacinnlrr rlirrarca
nnnr rlafinn and tho rrrô\^r¡nñ nl mlrarc nf caninrc rnrl ¡hil¡lran
Park Land Reouirements
Population forecasts indicate a need to acquire all types of park lands to maintain the
Citv's current LOS. Urban development may encroach upon or preclude the
a
Park & Open Space
a to m Vi m
10-27
ãhhÂãlihñ cifÃc I lrh¡n rfar¡alnnman{- m¡r¡âlcrr ênar¡îâah r rrìarn rìr ^fhêrl^rica nra¡lr rrlo
the purchase and development of close-in, suitable lands for athletic fields,
recreational centers, and other more land-intensive recreational facilities. Where
appropriate, funding must be identified for acquisition and development of land for
open space and recreational facilities, The 2010 Parks & Open Space Plan's short-
and long-term capital recommendations identify key acquisitions and capital projects
ac ri\rell ac nntpnfial fr rnrlinn qôrrrr-êc fhat rruill heln rnaintaln the rrrrrenf lôÇ The
Capital Improvement Plan adopted annually by the City Council identifies an action
plan and a balanced funding strategy.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
fn additien te the prlb
fer the 1995 eerrrprehcns
spring ef 2000 fer the W
te the pt+blie at eit) and regienal faeilities; an epen heuse; and publie hearings en the draft plan and
pfe
TELEPHO+\E SURVSYS
As ar+ integral eempenent im
telephene survey in the spring ef 2000, The survey targeted registered veters rvhe reside rvithin the
eity liffìit$and \¡dthin the
^î tl <O/^ T--,,+ ,,,^- ^1.^ ^L+^.:-^,{ ,,:^ +1^^ T,,1., lOOQ \. ^-+ D^-l-- ^-l D^^-^^+i^- Q+,,ã-, ^-l +L^¿ /v. LLryvv vYsJ ørov vvrgurvs Yrs rrrv JwLJ Lrt9 L\v\\v r 4rND 4¡¡u rwvrv4uv¡r uluuJ, 4r¡u rrrv
CeneratResul+s
Afpreximately 609á ef th
rne¿erately satis+ie¿
nelY s\Yinrning peol
Park & Open Space t0-28
Funding
srlvr rvrrvvr yrvÞr(Irro, r vrurur¡urÕt
rryl/rvl\urr4rvrJ rJ/v vL su rvoyvuuvrrls Lv rLw L//v rwrrl r rwvrvslrvrr urusJ osrvvJ
rr-ith tep prierities te atHetie fields and elæk Lake Park aeqtrisition and develepment, Herreveû
taxed tee heavily *lready' In the 2000 Telephone Swvef 689á ef respendents rvant te build a nerv
€hdlenge+
@
ever ene half (5996,) ef the respendents believe existing park and reereatienal faeilities are
i€s_€re
+nadequate te seft'e
i€€
fn 2000r disetays werc
R€seuree eenter; Senier ¡\e
ies
Park & Open Space 10-29
Park & Open Space 10-30
iens
i
pment,
o Nelv parks and faeilities aequisitien and develepment;
@
Park & Open Space 10-31
¡ Lighted athletie fields (baseball; softball; seeeer; and eerrts);
@
@
i€5'.
cqri
€€F{€LUISIEN
€ommÌrftitri and gencrally wil
faeiliticsr a"rd eregr
funds¡¡¡ill
Tabl++O-3
PAJU(S AÀTÐ EPEN SPAEE PRJERJT
Tì^-,^l^^ -^.:-1"1-^*1"^^,{ -^-l-. ^+ ñ^-+^-L,,*, 1?ø! vqrlvrvwJ) rJ
@7a*
. eentinue the replaeement sehedule fer play equipment and expErrd existing play areas;
¡ Ðevelep lighted athletie fields at the Serviee elub eenrnwrity Park;
. Ðevelep a yeuth and teen park en the East F{ill fer+kating; reek elimbing; BNGY bieyeling;
É}r@
Park & Open Space I 0-32
¡ z\equire wetlands and natural areas at elark Lake;
¡ €enduet a feasibility study fer a nerv slvirr"ning peel;
. eenduet a feasibility study fer a nerv eenter fer yotrth; teen; a*rd physieally ehallenged
pfegfaffis;
;
¡ eerxreelthe Sees ereek Trail te Lake N4eridiewr Park; ærd
..
r a
ongoing dialogue in order to gauge residents' parks and open space values. Over
the years we have relied upon surveys, workshops, questionnaires and consultation
with the Parks and Human Services Committee, Feedback has been valuable in
setting priorities and allocating resources. Opportunities to take part in each stage
of the planning process were advertised on the City's phone system and website, in
the Kent Reporter, within utility mailings. through targeted emails, and through
various postings at park facilities.
Park Plan Survey
ideas and opinions about the existing parks system, deficiencies, and priorities for
the future. The survev was made availab e online at the Citv's website. and written
W
survevs were available at oarks facilities and distributed to neiohborhood orouDs
A total of 631 resoonses were received,45 oercent of which noted that thev were
iz n
statistically valid survey. However, it does provide a sense of the community's
desires and needs. Respondents rated trails, open space and natural areas as
extremelv imoortant followed bv maior rks and small neiohborhood oarks. The
park and park security and maintenance.
Public Workshoo
In addition to the survey, a public workshop was held in September 2009 to further
refine the areas of focus in the Park Pla and suoolement the comments received
{-Jr.a¡ ¡aJr }!ra cr rF\rô\t Drrfi¡inentc l^rô air¡nn a ¡nmman{- c}raaË rr¡il-lr cna¡ifi¡
ar ¡ac{-innc rlrnr r t flra rliffaranl' alamanfc nf {-ha nlan {-Jra{- rÀrôFô nracanfarl ={' fha
P
and to make use of underutilized areas. They also expressed a desire for better
connectivity between parks and throughout the City.
Website
Tha l^ifrrtc raralrcifa l^/âc r Èiliza4 ac :¡ fnnl fnr nnaninñ î^ñ m ni nrfinn ranrrrlinn tha
status of the update process. Survey results were posted as well as the draft Parks
& Open Space Plan. Email notices were sent to interested survey participants at
Park & Open Space I 0-33
each milestone in the update process, inviting the public to participate and provide
additional input.
Tn order to addrecc the cômmunifv'c nark s and ooen soace needs- short- and lono-
Space Plan.
Oooortunities for Regional Coordination
Coordination with school districts, neighborinq jurisdictions, other public agencies
and private organizations is an important piece of Kent's strategy in providing a
high level of service to our residents and users. Regional coordination is identified
in the goals and policy section of the plan (P&OS Goals 20. 21).
There are some needs that warrant a regional approach to meetinq demand for
specific types of parks. The trail systems (Green River & Interurban) in Kent
require extensive coordination with King County and neighboring jurisdictions due
to our combined interest in providing an interconnected trail system that functions
2q rìnê narkq farilitrr fnr npnnlp thrnnnhnnt the reninn
The need for a dog park serving the east hill of Kent, Covington and unincorporated
Kinn Cnr rnfrr ic annfhcr arpa rruhpre a reninnal qnlrfion rrunrlrl hect qêr\/ê nerk lrqarc
A reqional dog park would allow resources to be pooled and prevent duplication in
services where one larger facility may more effectively meet the need of several
jurisdictions.
Urban forest restoration is another area that would benefit from intergovernmental
¡nnráin=línn Âa Vanl a'ml¡arlza nñ ârt r¡rhrn fnracl- mînîñômanf nl:n
coordination with other iurisdictions who are also implementing urban forestry
programs will provide us a greater understanding of how plans have functioned in
other areas.
PARK AND RECREATION GOALS AND POLICIES
rcsourees; aûd reereat
+
fl.,^--tl ¡-r^-1. I],^^^",,,^^- ^,^.1 ^,,^,,;.1^ ^^^^,"+",,:+;^- {^,. l^^^l -;+;-^a^d !^ ^^a.+:-:^^+^ :,^ l;{^,vØr ø6v øttq llt vvoøv vItIJvr ùØrtot09Ð Jvr ovwøú vçúLþwtLÐ Lv ltøt LLvLItøùv úrL LrJ9-
enriehmeftt aeti.vities vie t
Park & Open Space I0-34
envirenmefttelly sensi
eetca+1a+ftîit-resauree*
is_€
human-aetivi+ics"
GealP&t0$.k
llesisnãte eri'ieal w
Psl¿ey P&gS Lk ldentify atd
Poürey P&Og +,2* Aequire ãnd pres
urbanwildlife lwb;tat¡ inprioriry^ eeryiders an*twtffi'al areas with habítat value suelt as tlte
Green River eerridet: the Green River Natural Reseurees,4rea (GRN&9; North Meridian
Parlt Sees ereelc; *
seilsitive at eas by m
iee#
Ge*P&e$4
h eserue ãnd previde ae
eãase harrl" to tþe envi
PoIrey P&eS 2* Preseft ii+g
envireftmentalb' sen#itfu
wate{rorts; afi*otlrcrfeatLnes tJffit st,lyort wildlle and rqleet Kertb natural lrcrítãge,
PaI'W P&eS 2'2, /+eqai e;
e nv ire nmentally s erc itiv e ãre
the Green Rivet Soes eteek Garrison G'eelc and Miil erceh eorriders; tlrc Gteen River
Park & Open Space I 0-35
Nararal Resauree úreã (GN
W
ncveloement ef a high ry
Ge*+P&e$e
Fstaøtisl¡ att epen
rvr¡!J¡wvp_J.¡.U9JL,'9ç.l.Øvvl.Ðv,vvøJ)/ùL9Il.vJvy9l'ùyøw9wvII'Øvlw
sepãrãto"s te previde
ãf€€E
PaIrey P&OSåJ: Inereã itg-et"
Fenw¡eh eU* +al
#igt+iw
Pe,IW P&e5.3,3, Presetle ire
areas as nanrA are
41* street eorrider
Ge*+PdgO$4+
f d e nt ify eft d pr e t e et+iú e ant
Psttey P*o$-a,It eeeperãte
landowrct's topreteet land and reseurees near residential neigltberheedsfer lúgh qualiry,
letv intpaet parlc and reeteatienal faeilities befere tlæ nrcst suitable sites are lost to
Gt"een Rivet: Sees eteelî Garrisen ereelÇ and Mill ereeh eanren eerriders; and lands
Park & Open Space 10-36
¡e
¿
47/d&ee+-eerridets,
GeatP&tO$å
s¡
Ge*P&€)$6:
tent
Park & Open Space I0-37
eh earyon4arlc
@
Pshey P*gS-SAt Werte w¡tn
nevelepmenfef a ni"n
te signifieant envirerrnental features; publie faeilities; a*rd develeped neighborheeds and business
Geal P&OS 7:
ereate {, eenryrelrctßive srsîeffi ef neultiputpese effro td and efi road tt"ail srstenes that lh+le parlc
ãftd reereatienal re
ia*
PoIrey P&AS:7.Iz Were $pp"opt iã
road treil" asit'ìg ali
Poürey P&AS-7 3? ereãte a ee
P.ebrey P&gS 7& Previde eo
fseilities lilce lktú eentnrcns¡ the Sefüer ,4etivit' eetúet: Speeiat Pepulatierß Researce
eevitgton;King eoun* an*otlw etl¡prepriate jurisdietietæ to linlc ate*exlene{ Kew n'ails
rc e*er eetnmun¡+' sn+regl
ereek+rãils:
Park & Open Space 10-38
Peliry D&CS 7,52 l|'i#tprepesed vaeatien of riglxt of y'ay attd sfi'eet irnprevenrcntplans,
ftei@
Pshey P*gga,& Littlç trai
fiftd ether eemme"e
ehrk Lalce, L#lee Meridian and Pafürcr Lalæ in erder te p-evide a lúgh-qualiry r{iverse
sãmplinÊ ef the Kefttb e
Ge*fP&O$&
ifl+preìefl+enls:
D^li^-' D-Q,llC a l. D",,,, ;.1^ +*^;l ¡t¡¡îaø¡a ,,,;al^ ^^^,"^^,":^!^ h"^:ll^-^.1 ^^,^^^..+:.^-Ð)/ÐúertoÐ tyú&t. wltyrvltr tøúv rw
i
resn'eems;paøA ¡ee*
ie#
systern fer all abilities; ages an* interest
Ge*+Pdse$'*
ll'erle w'iflt etlter ageneìes teprcserve and inercase waturrt"ort aeeess andfaeilities,
Park & Open Space 10-39
PuIW PæeS g,k eeeeer#
I1;sfi iets; and et ine
fieeess fer waterfeú ies
ãftd oarsuits; espeeid
Pãntker+ske;
Peürey P&eS-g3¡ Ðevelep itlt
Riv er.Lsl ce F e wÈiek;-Cl ar I ç L d
Ge*lPdg0$4&
Il'orlc'¡vith orlrcrp"tblie ageneies andprivate et"ganizatietæ; ùrcluditæ but nol lin"ited le tlte Kent and
Federãl Wry Selrcel Ð ive
elry
Peliey P&85-l0,lz Ðevelop atltletiefaeilities tlwt nrcet ilæ ltithest qualit'standards and
reqairenrcftt" for e
ree"eâtionãl interes*
bãslætball; s€tball
€pãftieipents; ãnd d
PoliE'P&Q5-1.8,32 Ðevelop-;-where eT¡prepriate¡ a seleet nuntber effaeilities tltatprovide
ane{ Fede"al I'lay Seltoel Ðistriets; and etlßrpublie ageneies andprivate erganizatiotrs.
Ge*LP&e$.H-
pregffis fer the intere
eenilca+fl+it,
PoIrey P&AS If,+: Maintãift ãft
Pbiildhrg; tlffit p
ing
preseheel; yeuîh i#
Park & Open Space I0-40
i#
tlæ Kent¡
tùg; lrcalth and
epulatietîs and tlß
eetqenffi#i
AftnexsrienAreã:
Palrey P&ASJ+,at Ðevelo
ienee
&/têl pãrtieipatery 6
Get}P&e$.Ul*
lfhere apq-epriate; develop afi*operate speeializedparlc arîd reereatienal entet?rises tlwt neeet the
interest €popalatio
Pahey P&gS +2,f: WHe ûfpr
,levelep and opernte sp iee
@
ergaftizãtiens jei
ean+p¡n*efta+egiefis|+asi*
GeatP&eS-ß;
passÌve-reer e at ío n6l epp er tat ú
Psl¡.ey P*oS-+gJ ? lleqair
Park & Open Space I O-41
¡e
@ie+
Peltey D*gS ß& Ðevelep affie
pãssive ases; þþ'hile rry
whele-
Pottey P*gS ß,4t Efteewa
Ge*fP&e$44:
ieft
¡neene
@
Peltey P*gS +43t ,,Issist H
deeaftìetit ãnd dæelep ãwff
nevetepment en túgh inereasc
Park & Open Space I 0-42
GealPdíe$.l+
ll'et lc with tlrc arts eentnwtùt te utilize leeal reseurees and talents to inerease pltblie aeeess to
@
oels¡ at ts paÍretßj attd
ént;sts te aÊi ize ã! tis
erffinizatien* Wnere
eefiffiffir+W
Ge*lP&tO$4G
ities ffixd ether ã,'e inereãse
@ieh
Park & Open Space 10-43
Pt.liey P&QS-L6J+ ,4Euirepublie arf,vetlc itrcluditæpaitúittts¡ seulptures; exlúbits;and
idents snd te
nesign arr&devetepme
Geal-P&O$-l%
Ilesi gn perk-eft6{-"e ereæ
le te
ùdividaãls ãftd orgãftized
i
PaIW P&gS +7* Ðesign ind
parlçiltg lots; and ethe
individaals ãnd argãft
i
Ge*tP&O$.[&
I-tesign end develap pe"l
req+Éren+e#ls;
Palney P&gS +8,k Ðesign ãnd d
€apãeit' design te redaee
eosts.
Pehgy P*eS-+9år rl/here a,ltFro
value-engitæeritg eensideratietn tltat rct{uee eare and seearit' tequircntents; wlùle
retaining the natural e
Park & Open Space 10-44
PoIrey P&gS +83? Where poss
t1x€tiftt enane e fi ew er irc d
GealP&O$.l*
fdentify ãnd- ilnplement tfu
erime Preve',tien thro
I)^l:^,, D-A-¡.re I O I . f,^^^l^, ^^,^+ +l^^ ^-^,,;-:^,^^ ^,^Å ,.-^",;,.n,¡¡nøta ^{ +l^^ 1, ^^,,;^^,^rtttl/twttúvrLú or09 IJt v yrÐLvtN ørtø r va7Ø0r 9rtawroþÐ vJ Lrt9
f:,,:,^^^ D,,^-,^,^r:^,^ +l^-^",^l^ D,^-,;,,^,^,^^^,^+^l f\^-i*,^ /l1D't-Dl-l\ ^,^.1
r urrvJ r Þvu-r/.!.
^:-^L:l¿+:^-
/ ^+ /ÁI-\ l\UúJøVúrVt9D lLvL \/LUlL)rt vt &ItLv Lvv9toútvlú útLIvØótL ut0vLIvIttIovtLLøb Uwù06Io \vt
ether design snd devel
PeIrey P&gS +92, Ðevelep en
that will pt"evíde
PoIrey P&Ag-*93, Ðúne €tnd-eúr ies
ãftd operãtiens thatwil
Parrey P&At-+g,+ Wet e ryp
¡vatelrcs; and etlßr iwrcvaîive protranß tlnt will itrcrease safet and seeurit' stç'areness
anMi+
ifting
ef+h€€i+y,
Ge*+P&O$Ae
fwesfi#e iftnevãfi+'e rn&
ventut"es with etlæt'publie ageneies andprivate ettanizatietrc¡ andprivate denatiens,
Paltey P&gS ?0'J? It'ìt'estig
lãnd set a side-erfee i
in
.4naneialfiexibiLiry iees.
Park & Open Space r 0-45
PoUrey P&gS 29Jl' Were feasib
pablie ãgeneies ffi ire
ãnd develop reøe'd
Pel¡,ey PXoS-?g3r Initiate a
êlevelopmefit; ãeqú
Ge*tP&tO$+f,
eeerdinale publie ated private resowees to eteate aneettt ateneies a-bãlaneed leeal parlc attd
Pobtey P&OS-ZII: ereãte ã e
ifttegrafes f#úfãeili
Feaerat Way Seneet B¡
lafids andfseilities;ir a nta++raer tlwtwill best seft'e andprovidefor tlte itrterests of area
re*ident*
Ps[rey P&gS 2+2: eeaper ing
€ffeid dwlieatien; iry
M
Gea+P&C)$4*
et eãte ãnd instiÍúe ine
PalW P&0.S-ãå,I? In erder t
within the existiftg
prepesed lãnd ãndfu
i
neighberheed ãs 6pqo
Park & Open Space 10-46
Pùrey P&Ag-223:. ereate ffi ine
eeerãting; ãnd main
dis*tbate eests at# beft
slanM-s-
Pùrey P&gS n3= Ðevelep ãft
breedest nee* ۔ i1ry-a
iqe
PoIrey P&gS n,+ Wer e iee
slffititxg; fer those i
threugh userfeeü retíslrationfees¡ volut#eer €erts; e- oilrcr tneans and nrctlnd*
The following goals and policies express how the City's park and open space system
would best develop over the coming years and details measurable steps toward
achieving these goals.
Overall Goal: Encourage and provide opportunities for local residents to participate in
life- enrichment activities via the development of park land and recreational facilities,
preservation and enhancement of environmentally sensitive areas, professional
L Park & Recreation Facilities Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality. diversified recreational system for all abilities. ages and
interest groups.
Goal P&OS-l:
Work with other agencies to preserve and increase waterfront access and facilities,
Highline School Districts, and other public and private agencies to acquire and
n lsh ine rwa
and other related recreational activities and pursuits, especially on the Green
Riven Lake Fenwick. Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, and Panther Lake.
1
Park & Open Space 10-47
Daliar¡ De.alG-l t. ñar¡alnn r miv{-¡¡nf nnnnr*¡ rrritiôc fnr rrrrfar¡nfl- r¡¡acc
includinq canoe, kayak, sailboard, and other nonpower-boatinq activities,
especially on the Green River, Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, and
Panther Lake, where practicable.
Goal P&OS-2:
Work with other public agencies and private organizations, including but not limited to
fha Zan{- rnrl Farlarrl ìi\/ar¡ Q¡hnn ID icf ri¡fc fn rlarrolnn a hinh-nr relifrr crrcfarn nf rthlatin
facilities for competitive play.
Policy P&OS-2,1: Develop athletic facilities that meet the highest quality
standards and requirements for competitive playing for all abilities, age qroups,
skill levels, and recreational interests.
Dali¡rr Þa.alê-t t. Íìarralnn Fialy'.Å r-nt rrt r¡firritiac lilza cn¡¡ar fnnl'hall
hrcahrll hrclzafhrll cnfl-lrrll fannic llar hnnl¿arr anrl rrnllorrhall fhaf nrnrrida
fnr f lra rrnacf nr rmlrar af narFi¡ina anrl allar,v fnr rrrr rlfinla r rcô rrrharo
apDropriate.
Policy P&OS-2.3: Develop, where appropriate, a select number of facilities
h¡
conjunction with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other
public agencies and private organizations.
Goal P&OS-3:
ñarralnn m¡inl.ain anz'l anarr{-a a Jrialr-nt t lil-rr crrcfam nf inrlnnr fr¡ilifiac thrf n rovi ¡la
activities and programs for the interests of all physical and mental capabilities. age,
and interest groups in the community.
Policy P&OS-3.1: Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor community
centers, such as the Senior Activity Center and Kent Memorial Park Building,
facilities, eating and health care, dav care, and other spaces for all age groups,
including preschool. youth, teens, and seniors on a year-round basis.
Policv P&OS-3.2I Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor recreational
¡anfarc c¡ r¡lr ãô Vaal- l^a'mñ^hô an¡l l'ha llanf-Marirlirn Dnnl l-h=t nrnrrir{a
aquatic, phvsical conditioning, gymnasiums, recreational courts, and other
Park & Open Space 10-48
athletic spaces for all abilities, age groups, skill levels, and community interests
on a year-round basis,
Policy P&OS-3.3: Support the continued development and diversification by
Area.
Policy P&OS-3.4: Develop and operate special indoor and outdoor cultural
an¡l narFarmi nn rrl-c fr¡ililiac llr={- nnh rnr{ avnr n rl mr rci¡ Å ârtl^ô rlrrmr
Goal P&OS-4:
Where appropriate, develop and operate specialized park and recreational enterprises
that meet the interest of populations who are able and willing to finance them.
Policv P&OS-4.1:Where aooroor¡ate and economicallv feasible li.e.. self-
Policy P&OS-4.2I Where appropriate, initiate with other public agencies and
ni
nrnrrirla fnr cna¡irl a¡tirril-iac liLa aalF rr¡hanr ñt t f^nFF-larch ârôãcn
model airnlane flvi areas. frisbee oolf. mountain bikino and camDino on a
regional basis.
Goal P&OS-S:
h W
active and passive recreational opportunities throughout the City.
Elali¡r¡ EDQ-a¡C-E I . A¡ar rira rnrl r{at lnn nrrlzc fn maat fha l-nf-carrri¡a
naarlc sc Va n {-/c nnnr ¡lalinn a rnrllc rnrl ârôãc lra ¡nnava¡l
Policy P&OS-5.2: Identify neighborhoods bordered by arterial streets and
land within each neighborhood to meet the levels-of-service.
d
Pa¡k & Open Space I 0-49
Policv P&OS-S.3r Develop amenities in parks for individual and group use,
ntinn f ha lract inl-aracl-c nf f lraa¡$irra anÄ n=acir¡a r rôôê rrrlriln
neighborhood or community as a whole.
Policy P&OS-5.4: Encouraqe new single-family and multifamily residential.
m
II. Open Space and Greenwav Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality, diversified and interconnected park system that preserves and
sensitively enhances significant open spaces, greenways and urban forests. The
connectivity of Kent's open space system.
Goal P&OS-6:
Establish an open space pattern that will provide definitíon of and separation between
developed areas, and provide open space and greenway linkages among park and
recreationa I resou rces.
Policy P&OS-6.1: Define and conserve a system of open space and greenway
corridors as urban separators to provide definition between natural areas and
urban land uses within the Kent area,
Policy P&OS-6.2: Increase linkages of trails, in-street bikes lanes, or other
existino or olanned connections with reenwavs and open space, pafticularlv
along the Green River, Mill Creek, Garrison Creek, and Soos Creek corridors;
rrnrrn¡l I >lza Fanvti¡ù îl>rU I =Va I Va Morirli:n Danl-har I rlza rnrl I =Va
Youngs; and around significant wetland and floodways such as the Green River
Natural Resource Area (GRNRA).
Policy P&OS-6.3¡ Preserve and enhance, through acquisition as necessary.
anrrirnnmanlallr¡ can¡i{-ir¡a ãFôãc n\^râ\/ linlzrnac rnr{ r rrhrn canrrrtnrc
particularly along the steep hillsides that define both sides of the Green River
\/allarr anrl l-ho e,tr )-7-7tht)7?nd Ç,fraat ¡.nrrirlnr
Goal P&OS-7I
Identify and protect significant recreational lands before they are lost to development.
m
Park & Open Space I 0-50
Policy P&OS-7.1: Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with
private landowners to protect land and resources near residential
neighborhoods for high-quality, low impact park and recreational facilities
before the most suitable sites are lost to development. Suitable sites include
wooded, undeveloped, and sensitive lands along the Green River, Soos Creek,
/1=rri¡an l^eaalt an¡l f\/líll l^eaal' /^anr¡n n ¡arri¡f¡rc rnrl lrnrlc rrliananf tn fha
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) power líne rights-of-way.
Policy P&OS-7.2: In future land developments, preserve unique
anrrirnnmani¡l lFa¡{'¡ tqa- aF âF^âê an¡l in arêacê nr rhli¡ r ¡ca nf rn¡{ a¡¡acc fn tlraca
areas. Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with private
accessible resources, pafticularly along the Green River, Soos Creek, Garrison
III. Trail and Corridor Svstem Goals & Policies
Develop a high-quality system of multipurpose park trails and corridors that provide
access to significant environmental features, public facilities. and developed
neighborhoods and business districts.
Goal P&OS-8:
that link park and recreational resources with residential areas, public facilities,
Policy P&OS-8.1: Where appropriate, create a comprehensive system of
multipurpose off-road trails using alignments of the Puget Power rights-of-way,
Qnnc lraaV -Frril M¡lraalz -|.rril I eLa Fonr¡r¡inl¿ Traíl lìroan Þirrar -l-rail
nd
Tn{-nr¡ r¡lran T-ail Dzrlzai¡la \/\la}lan¡l¡il rnrl ôraan Þirrar l\lr{-rlrrl Þacnrrrca
Area IGRNRA).
Policy P&OS-8.2: Create a comprehensive system of on-road trails to
enthusiasts using scenic, collecton and local road rights-of-way and alignments.
Policy P&OS-8.3: Provide connections from residential neighborhoods to
comrnunity facilities like Kent Commons, the Senior Activity Center, the Kent-
Meridian Pool, schools, parks, and commercial districts.
Park & Open Space I0-s I
Policv P&OS-8,4: Work with Renton. Auburn, Tukwila. Federal Way, Des
Moines, Covington, King County, and other appropriate jurisdictions to link and
extend Kent trails to other community and regional trail facilities like the Green
Rivel Interurban, and Soos Creek Trails.
Policy P&OS-8.5: With proposed vacation of right-of-way and street
improvement plans,_consider potential connectivity with existing or proposed
trail corridors, parks. and neighborhoods.
D¿rliarr DP.|"¡G-A Ã. I inV trailc rrrífh alarnanferrr anrl rnirlrlla cnhnnlc l-ha
downtown core, and other commercial and retail activity centers on East and
West Hills.
Policy P&OS-8,7r Extend trails through natural area corridors like the Green
RiveL Mill Creek. Garrison Creek. and Soos Creek, and around natural features
like Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian and Panther Lake in order to
provide a high-quality, diverse sampling of Kent's environmental resources.
Policv P&OS 8.8: Revise development regulations so that key trail links, that
are identified within the corridor map. are provided to the City during the
development approval process.
Goal P&OS-9:
amenities and improvements.
Policy P&OS-9.1: Furnish trail systems with appropriate trailhead supporting
drinking fountains, restrooms, parking and loading areas. water, and other
services.
Policy P&OS-9.2: Where appropriate. locate trailheads at or in conjunction
with park sites. schools, and other community facilities to increase local area
improvements and amenities,
n
Park & Open Space I 0-52
Policy P&OS-9.3: Design and develop trail improvements which emphasize
safety for users and are easy to maintain and easy to access by maintenance.
security, and other appropriate personnel, equipment, and vehicles.
IV. Historic and Cultural Resources Goals & Policies
m in
significant historic and cultural resources, as well as programs to recognize the City's
multicu ltu ral heritage.
Goal P&OS-1O:
Preserve, enhance, and incorporate historic and cultural resources and multicultural
interests into the park and recreational system.
Policy P&OS-1O.1: Identify, preserve. and enhance Kent's multicultural
heritage, traditions, and cultural resources including historic sites, buildings.
aftwork. views, monuments and archaeological resources,
Policv P&OS-lO.2: Identify and incorporate significant historic and cultural
resource lands. sites, aftifacts, and facilities into the park system to preserve
these interests and to provide a balanced social experience. These areas
ri in ri rvi
Car{-l-la an¡l T=¡nm= {-Jra 'l=ma¡hicfnri¡rl rnr=l-arfrnni ci{'o =n11 fha
Downtown train depot, amonq others
Policy P&OS-1O.3: Work with the Kent Historical Society and other cultural
into the park and recreational program.
Goal P&OS-11:
r il
system.
Policy P&OS-11.1: Incorporate interesting, man-made environments.
structures, activities, and areas into the park system to preserve these features
an¡l {-n nrnrri¡.la a halan¡aA n;elt snA ra¡roatinnrl ar¿narian¡o Fr¿arnnlac in¡lr rda
the eafthworks in Mill Creek Canyon Park and aft in public places.
Park & Open Space I 0-53
Policy P&OS-11.2: Work with property and facility owners to increase public
access to and utilization of these special features.
V. Cultural Afts Programs and Resources Goals & Policies
ñarralnn hinh-nr rrlifrr rlirrareifiarl ¡¡ ¡lÈ¡ rr¡l arfc f=¡ilifiac enrl nr^rrrârnc l-hrf in¡roaca
community awareness, attendance, and other opportunities for participation.
Goal P&OS-12:
\/l/arlz rrrilh lhn arl-c mmr rnitr¡ fn r rÈiliza lnnrl racnr rF-ôc rnrl {-¡l nl-c fn inr.raaea nr rhli¡
access to artwork and programs.
Policy P&OS-12.1: Support successful collaborations among the Arts
S
c¡hnnlc rrtc nafrnnc ã n rl rrtic{-c fn r ¡{-i liza ar*icfi¡ rôcrìrrrnac rnd frlanl'c tn tha
optimum degree possible.
Policy P&OS-12.2: Develop strategies that will support and assist local artists
and aft organizations. Where appropriate, develop and support policies and
programs that encourage or provide incentives to attract and retain aftists and
erfr¡vnrl¿ rruifhin the Kanl- nnrn m n ifrr
Goal P&OS-13:
Acquire and display public artwork to furnish public facilities and other areas and
thereby increase public access and appreciation.
Policy P&OS-13.1¡ Acquire public artwork including paintings, sculptures,
ã.-ôcc hr¡ racirlanfc rn¡l {-n fr rrnicl.r n'hli¡' nlanoc in an .annrnnri=fia rrìârlrlÂr
Policy P&OS-13.2: Develop strategies that will suoport capital and operations
funding for public artwork within parks and facilities.
Vf. Wildlife and Natural Preservation Goals & Policies
Incoroorate and Dreserve unioue ecoloo I features and resources into the nark
orr¡#am in arâar {.a ^l-lrrarfanarl nlrnl-an rl rnim=l cna¡iac llrêcêr\/ê anr{ anhanna
fish and wildlife habitat, and retain migration corridors for local fish and wildlife. Such
incorporation is intended to limit habitat degradation associated with human activities,
Park & Open Space 10-5 4
Goal P&OS-14:
Designate critical fish and wildlife habitat resources and areas,
Policy P&OS-14.1: Identify and conserve critical fish and wildlife habitat
including nesting sites, foraging areas. and wildlife mitigation corridors within
or adjacent to natural areas, open spaces. and developed urban areas.
Policy P&OS-14.2: Acquire. enhance and preserve habitat sites that support
threatened species and urban wildlife habitat, in priority corridors and natural
areas with habitat value such as the Green River Corridor. the Green River
Natural Resources Area (GRNRA). North Meridian Park, Soos Creek, Mill Creek.
and Clark Lake Park.
Policy P&OS-14.3: Enhance fish and wildlife habitat within parks. open
space, and environmentally sensitive areas by maintaining a healthy urban
best management practices.
Goal P&OS-15:
Preserve and provide access to significant environmental features, where such access
does not cause harm to the environmental functions associated with the features.
Policy P&OS-15.1r Preserve and protect siglrificant environmental features
including environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, open spaces,
woodlands. shorelines, waterfronts, and other features that suppoft wildlife and
reflect Kent's natural heritage.
Þnli¡rr ÞRôS-lE ?r Annrrire anrl rrvhara annrnnri:Èa nrnrrida lirnifarl nrrhlin
ã-^ôcc {.n anr¡irnnmanlallrr canci{-irra =c anrl cifac l'hef âr Âênô.i:llrr r rninr ra
to the Kent area, such as the Green Riven Soos Creek, Garrison Creek and Mill
leaalt ¡arei{arc {-Jra âraan Dirrar l\l rral Þacnr tr¡a Lraa lfîÞNlÞ^\ rnrl fha
shorelines of Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, Lake Fenwick, and Clark Lake.
Goal P&OS-16: Develop and maintain an Urban Forestry Management Program.
Policy P&OS-16.1 Connect people to nature and improve the quality of life in
Kent by restoring urban forests and other urban open spaces.
Park & Open Space r0-55
Policy P&OS-16,2 Galvanize the community around urban forest restoration
and stewardship through a volunteer restoration program,
Policy P&OS-16.3 Improve urban forest health, and enhance urban forest
re in
functional native forest communities.
VII. Design and Access Goals & Policies
Design and develop facilities that are accessible, safe, and easy to maintain, with life-
cycle features that account for long-term costs and benefits.
Goal P&OS-17:
or facili
physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests.
Dnliarr Da.¡l.lG-17 I . ñacian n¡ r{-¡lnnr cnir ara:c fialrlc ¡n¡ rrlc nlrrrnrnr rnrlc
trails, parking lots, restrooms, and other active and supporting facilities to be
accessible to individuals and organized qroups of all physical capabilities. skill
levels. age groups, income levels. and activity interests.
Policy P&OS-17.2: Design indoor facility spaces, activity rooms, restrooms,
improvements to be accessible to individuals and organized groups of all
ES level
interests.
Goal P&OS-18:
ñaci¿rn =nrl r{arralnn n=rV anr{ ra¡raati ^fz¡i ifiac fn ha r¡f lnrnr-rnaintênãrrt^ô
mater¡als.
Policy P&OS-18.1: Design and develop facilities that are of low-maintenance
and high-capacity design to reduce overall facility maintenance and operation
requirements and costs.
Policy P&OS-18.2: Where appropriate, use low-maintenance materials,
settings. or other value-engineering considerations that reduce care and
security requirements, while retaining the natural conditions and environment.
Park & Open Space I 0-56
Policy P&OS-18.3: Where possÍble in landscaping parks. encourage the use
of low maintenance native plants.
Goal P&OS-19¡
Identify and implement the security and safety provisions of the American Disabilities
Act (ADA). Crime Prevention through Environmental Desiqn (CPTED), and other
standards.
EDali¡rr DQ.flG-l Cl I . Tmnlamanf nrnr¡icinnc anrl ranr rirorrT anl-c nf fha
American Disabilities Act (ADA), Crime Prevention through Environmental
improve park safety and security features for users, department personnel, and
the public at larqe,
Policy P&OS-19.2: Develop and implement safety standards, procedures,
and programs that will provide proper training and awareness for department
perso nnel
Policy P&OS-19.3: Define and enforce rules and regulations concerning park
a¡l-irrilia¡ an¡'{ nnara$inno {-ha} rrrill r rcêr nrrìr rnc rlanartrnonf narcnnnal
and the public at large.
Policy P&OS-19.4: Where appropriate, use adopt-a-park programs,
neighborhood park watches, and other innovative programs that will increase
safetv and security awareness and visibility.
VIII. Fiscal Coordination Goals & Policies
maintaining facilities and programs that distribute costs and benefits to public and
private interests.
Goal P&OS-2O:
including joint ventures with other public agencies and private organizations, and
private donations,
Policy P&OS-2O.1: Investigate innovative, available methods, such as growth
impact fees, land set-a-side or fee-in-lieu-of-donation ordinances, and
n
Park & Open Space I 0-57
interlocal agreements, to finance facility development, maintenance, and
operating needs in order to reduce costs. retain financial flexibility, match user
benefits and interests, and increase facility services.
Policy P&OS-2O.2: Where feasible and desirable. consider joint ventures with
King County, Kent, Highline, and Federal Way School Districts, regional, state.
federal, and other public agencies and private organizations, including for-profit
concessionaires to acquire and develop regional facilities (i.e., swimming pool,
off-leash park, etc.).
Daliarr Da.flG-îñ 2. MrínÈain ¡n¡l cr r nnnri > DarV Fnr rnrlafinn Èn inrracfia=l'a
grants and private funds, develop a planned giving program and solicit private
donations to finance facilitv development, acquisition, maintenance, programs,
services, and operating needs.
Goal P&OS-21I
Coordinate public and private resources to create among agencies a balanced local
park and recreational system.
Policy P&OS-21.1: Create a comprehensive, balanced park and recreational
system that integrates Kent facilities and services with resources available from
King County. Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other state. federal,
and private park and recreational lands and facilities, in a manner that will best
serve and provide for the interests of area residents.
Policy P&OS-21.2: Cooperate, via joint planning and development efforts.
with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other public and
private agencies to avoid duplication. improve facility quality and availability.
reduce costs. and represent interests of area residents.
Goal P&OS-22r
Create and institute a method of cost/benefit and performance measure assessment
to determine equitable park and recreation costs, levels of service, and provision of
facilities.
Policy P&OS-22.1: In order to effectivelv plan and program park and
recreational needs within the existing city limits and the potential annexation
area. define existing and proposed land and facility levels-of-service (LOS) that
Park & Open Space 10-s8
differentiate requirements due to the impacts of population growth as opposed
to improvements to existing facilities, neighborhood as opposed to community
Potential Annexation Area.
Policy P&OS-22.2: Create effective and efficient methods of acquiring,
developing, operating, and maintaining park and recreational facilities in
manners that accurately distribute costs and benefits to public and private user
interests. This includes the application of growth impact fees where new
developments impact level-of-service (LOS) standards.
Policy P&OS-22.3: Develop and operate lifetime recreational programs that
serve the broadest needs of the population and that recover program and
operating costs using a combination of registration fees, user fees, qrants.
sponsorships, donations, scholarships, volunteer efforts, and the use of general
funds.
Park & Open Space 10-s9
É*ñþìl- g
CHAPTER EIGHT
CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT
The Capital Facilities Element is a required element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, mandated
by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). This element contains goals and
policies related to the provision and maintenance of public services and capital facilities required to
adequately support anticipated growth during the next twenty (20) years. The goals and policies of
this element are consistent with the Land Use, Transportation, and Park & Open Space Elements.
Further, the Capital Facilities Element, in its incorporation of the Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) by reference and partial publication addresses the development activities undertaken by the
City to accommodate the demand for public services. The CIP is updated annually to coincide
with the Council budgeting process. The CIP lists adopted and funded capital and operating
projects with costs and revenues identified over a six (6) year period.
While the Capital Facilities Element includes swnmary information, inventories and levels-oÊ
service pertaining to parks, open space, md transportation facilities; more comprehensive
consideration of these policy areas are provided in the Park & Open Space and Transportation
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Other City-provided services and facilities are considered
more fully within this element. Some of these services and facilities are intemal to the effective
functioning of Kent City govemment, but most services and facilities considered in this element
serve the public directly.
The Capital Facilities Element contains goals and policies to guide the provision and maintenance
of public services and capital facilities with performance measures for assessing the adequacy of
public services and capital facilities to meet population and employment growth. The Capital
Facilities Element considers over the next twenty (20) years the performance of public services and
related capital needs in maintaining or elevating the provision of public services according to
adopted level-oÊservice (LOS) standards.
Capital Facilities 8-1
REQUIREMENTS OF THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENTACT
The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires the Comprehensive Plan to identifu existing and
future public facilities needed to be consistent with the Land Use Element. Updates of the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP), which contains a list of adopted capital projects including costs and
projected revenues, are incorporated into the Capital Facilities Element through the annual
budgeting process by City Council ordinance. The GMA requires that services and facilities
provided to residents and businesses by adjacent jurisdictions and public agencies must also be
considered. Several providers of public services and facilities serve Kent, and the operating plans
of these agencies are referenced in the Comprehensive Plan.
Concurrency and Levels-of-Service
One of the goals of the GMA is to have public services and capital facilities provided concurrent
with or prior to development. This concept is known as "concurrenc¡" also called "adequate
public facilities". In the City of Kent, concrxrency requires 1) services and facilities which serve
the development to be in place at the time of development (or for some types of facilities, a
financial commitment to be made to provide for services and facilities within a specified period of
time) and; 2) services and facilities which serve the development to have sufücient capacity to
serve the development without decreasing level-of-service (LOS) below minimum standards
adopted in the Capital Facilities Element. ln order to make use of the LOS method, the City selects
the way in which it will measure performance of each service or amount of each type of facility
(i.e., response time, acres, gallons, etc.). It also identifies the current and proposed LOS standard
for each measurement. The standards adopted should be considered to reflect the quality of life
against which performance of services or provision of facilities are measured for concurrency.
The GMA specifically requires concurrency for transportation facilities. The GMA, through the
Countywide Planning Policies (specifically LU-29) requires all other public services and facilities
to be "adequate" (see RCW 19.27.097,36.70A.020,36.70AÎ30, and 58.17.110). Concurrency
management will ensure that sufücient public service and facility capacity is available for each
proposed development.
Capital Facilities Planning and Finance
The GMA requires cities and counties to approve and maintain a six (6) year capital facilities plan
which includes requirements for specific types of capital facilities, measurable level-of-service
(LOS) standards, financial feasibility, and assurance that adequate facilities will be provided as
population and employment growth occurs. The Annual Budget Document and six-year Capital
Capital Facilities 8-2
Improvement Program (CIP) fulfill the GMA requirement for facilities planning; but, in addition,
these documents serve as a foundation for City fiscal management and eligibilþ for grants and
loans. These documents and the Capital Facilities Element provides coordination among the City's
many plans for capital improvements, including other elements of the Comprehensive Plan,
operating plans of departmental service providers, and facilities plans of the State, the region, and
adj acent local j urisdictions.
The CIP identifies the location and cost of needed facilities, and the sources of revenue that will be
used to fund the facilities. The CIR which is a component of this Element, is approved through the
annual budgeting process. Subsequently adopted amendments to the CIP and the Annual Budget
Documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this Element. The Capital Facilities Element
contains or refers to LOS standards for each public service and facility type, and requires that new
development be served by adequate services and facilities. Operating plans of the City and other
public services and facilities providers also contain information associated with levels-oÊservice.
The Annual Budget Document and Six-Year CIP contain broad goals and specific financial policies
that guide and implement the provision of adequate public services and facilities.
The CIP must be financially feasible; in other words, dependable revenue sources must equal or
exceed anticipated costs. If the costs exceed the revenue, the City must reduce its levels-oÊservice,
reduce costs, or modi$ the Land Use Element to bring development into balance with available or
affordable facilities.
The GMA mandates forecasts of future needs for capital facilities and the use of standards for
levels of service of facility capacity as the basis for public facilities contained in the CIP (see RCW
36.70A.020 [12]). As a result, requested public services and facilities detailed in the CIP must be
based on quantifiable, objective measures of service or facility capacity, such as traffrc-volume
capacity per mile of road and acres of park land per capita, or average emergency response times.
BACKGROUND
Population And Service Areas
The City of Kent population has grown through annexations, in-migration and births to 84,275 as
of 2002. Kent's Planning Area, which includes the Potential Annexation Area (PAA), has a 2000
population of 103,521. Based on estimates from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the
projected population for the Kent Planning Area in2020 is anticipated to number approximately
124,903. Some service agencies of the City and other public service providers have different
geographic boundaries and may therefore assume different service population figures. Operating
Cøpital Facilities 8-3
plans of these service providers should be referenced for more accurate population and service area
information. Maps provided in this Element indicate service areas for agencies servicing homes
and businesses within Kent, its PAA, and adjacent areas.
Setting the Standards for Levels-of-Service
Because the projected demand for public services and capital facilities will be largely influenced by
the appropriate level-oÊservice (LOS) measure adopted in the Capital Facilities Element, the key
to adequate and timely provision of public services and capital facilities is the establishment of
measurable and achievable LOS standards. LOS standards are measures of the qualrty of life of the
community. The standards should be based on the Community's vision of its future and its values.
The final legal authority to establish LOS standards rests with the City Council, because the City
Council enacts the LOS standards that reflect the Community's vision.
Selection of a specific LOS to be the "adopted standard" during the original Comprehensive Plan
Capital Facilities Element drafting was accomplished by a 12-step process. The process could be
described in brief as an assessment of inventoried City facilities and population, along with the
costs of funded capital projects, including oonon-capacity" projects that were under consideration at
that time. The LOS standards were reflective of strategic capital facilities programming in the
early 1990s. While capital improvement programs and capital facilities plans will continue to
reflect strategic needs for capital projects during six (6) year cycles, ffiffiy of the present levels-of-
service reflect robust performance measures. Such performance measures are oriented toward
assessing the quality of public services, and proposed capital projects would be expected to
maintain or improve the level-of-service.
Every year, as required by the Growth Management Act, department service providers reassess
land use issues, inventories of public services and facilities, level-of-service standards, and
projected revenues to determine what changes, if any are needed. The capital facility operating
plans of the City of Kent, and other providers of services and facilities to Kent homes and
businesses, contain technical information used in such reassessments, and are incorporated into the
Capital Facilities Element by reference.
Capital Facilities 8-4
DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES, INVENTORIES AND
LEVELS.OF.SERVICE BY SERVICE TYPE
Measuring performance of and citizen satisfaction with City services has provided important
indicators of achievements and needs for public services, and by extension, capital facilities.
Budget requests for service progr¿Ìms and facilities are responsive to performance measures, which
are impacted by growth. As will be frequently noted, many of the previously used measures for
establishing level-oÊservice standards were more reflective of existing capital facilities inventories
than of the performance of public services and provision of facilities that continue to directly
contribute to the quality of life in Kent. Services or facilities operating below the established
minimums for levels-of-service could be an indication that a need may exist for service
improvements, programmatic changes, new or improved facilities, or a re-evaluation of the level-
oÊservice standards. The current LOS for each service or facility may be found in the operating
documents referenced in this Element, and in the City of Kent Performance Measurement Report.
Police and Corrections
The City of Kent Police Department provides a variety of patrol, investigative and community
education services to Kent and neighboring jurisdictions as appropriate. The Police Department
also provides correctional services, programs and facilities for the detention and rehabilitation of
criminal offenders. The City of Kent Police Department has been periodically re-accredited by the
nationally-recognized Commission onAccreditation for Law EnforcementAgencies (CALEA), for
the quality of its performance on several objectives relating to field and administrative police work,
and community involvement. This accreditation enables the Police Department to access gtant
funding, additional risk management training, and decreased operating insurance costs. The
Corrections Division is pursuing a separate accreditation from the American Corrections
Association that would entitle access to grant ñrnding.
Police Services and Facilities Inventory
The Police Department serves Kent residents and businesses through its Patrol, lnvestigations, and
Administrative Support Divisions. The Police Department contracts 911 emergency response
through Valley Communications. The Police Headquarters building is located on the City Hall
campus a1232 Fourth Avenue S. The City of Kent Corrections Facility is located at l20I South
Central. The PoliceÆire Training Center is located on the East Hill at 24611 116d'Avenue SE.
Figure 8.1 illustrates the location of police services areas and facilities. Police facilities are listed
in the Thble 8.1.
Capital Facilities 8-5
Table 8.1
POLICE FACILITIES
FacilityName Location Capacity
EvidenceArea - City Hall 22}FourthAvenue S I,250 s.f
Midway Substation 25440 Pacific Highway S 7s0 s.f
North Hill Substation 20676 - 72no Avenue S r32 s.fl
Police East Hill Substation 24611- ll6thAvenue SE 880 s.f.
Police Headquarters 232FourthAvenue S 18,000 s.f.
PolicelFire Training Center 24611- 116'nAvenue SE 8,000 s.f.
Firing Range 2461I - 116'nAvenue SE 3,670 s.f.
V/est Hill Substation 26512 Military Road S 910 s.f.
Springwood Substatron 27405 - 129* Place SE, #23 850 s.f.
* Panther Lake Substation 21006 - l32ndAvenue SE 3,850 s.f.
* Potential conversion of Fire Department Logistics Building.
Correctional Services and Facilities Inventory
The City of Kent Correctional Facility (CKCF) capacity is one hundred-thirty (130) beds. The
correctional facility has an intergovemmental contract with the Federal Marshal's Office. Due to
the opening of the Federal Correctional Facility in SeaTac, federal prisoners are housed at the
CKCF infrequently. The average length of stays at the CKCF increased from 14 days in 2001 to
15 days in 2002. The Kent Police Department has focused efforts to address the increasing
demands for jail capacity. The CKCF Programs Division added day reporting and work crew
programs in 2002 to the existing electronic home detention, work release and work time credit
programs. The CKCF is undertaking the challenge of becoming a fully-accredited correctional
facility through the American Corrections Association, with an audit planned for the third quarter
of 2003. Accreditation for the CKCF would provide increased access to grant funding and reduced
liability insurance costs. Correctional facilities are listed in Table 8.2 and their locations are
illustrated in Figure 8.1. Performance measures for Police LOS standards are found in Tâble 8.3.
Capital Facilities 8-6
@ó
uJ
U)
¿_t
T
onal Airport
ìT
!
P'\
(
to
92
Ø
Lrl
=4o
!GI I
-n
(o
I
I
Angle
Panther
1l
iTSE 208
I
È
qJ
(s
3
U)
TU
o
É.
uls
ST
SF
\
elark Lake
148 ST
Lake
I
ul
¿o|r)
E UJ
CITY OF KEI{T
COMPREHENSIVE PLAI{
SCALE: 1" = 45,000'
LEGLND
O FIRE/POLICE STATION
^ POLICE or JUSTICE FAC|Llry
CITY LIMITS
..Ti.J POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA
lV PoLlcE sERVtcE AREA
This map is a graphic aid only and is not a legal document. The City of Kent
makes no wananty to the accurâcy of the labeling, dimensions, contours,
property boundaries, or placement or loætion of any map features depicted
thereon. The City of Kent disclaims and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirect, or consequential, which
arises or may arise from use of this product.
KENT
llÀrH¡ff6rÞH
POLICE
SERVICES & FACILITIES
FIGURE 8.1 8-7
FacilityName Location Capacity
Correctional Facility 1230 South Central Avenue 130 beds
Corrections Annex 8309 South 259* Street 3,093 s.f.
Kent Municipal/Aukeen District Court 1 2 1 0 South Central Avenue 4,051 s.f.
Table 8.2
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
Table 8.3
POLICE LOS STANDARDS
Performance Measure LOS Standard
Responsive Police
Service
Average response times to Top
Prioritv Calls
6 minutes or less to scene from
receipt of emergency call
Community Sense
of Safety
Annual Citizen Satisfaction
Survey respondents' perceived
level of safety
85% of respondents indicate
feeling "somewhat safe" to
"very safe" in Kent
As of 2002, the Kent Police Department is satisfactorily meeting both of the LOS standards
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICES
The City of Kent Fire Department is responsible for delivering fire protection and emergency
medical services to the City, and to the geographic area within King County Fire District #37 that
includes the City of Covington. Fire Suppression & Emergency Medical Response units provide
the most directly recognizable services to homes and businesses in Kent and other service aÍea
jurisdictions. Other fire districts adjacent to Kent may provide response assistance as requested.
The Emergency Management Office and Fire Prevention Office carry out several objectives,
including assessment and reduction of potential fire and life hazard risks through educational
outreach programs and development plan inspections throughout the City. The Kent Fire
Department received accreditation offered jointly by the lntemational Association of Fire Chiefs
(IAFC), the Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI), and the lnternational
Cities/Counties Management Association (ICMA).
Capital Facilíties 8-9
Fire & Life Safety Services and Facilities Inventory
The City owns six (6) fire stations: Station 7l (in the southemportion of Downtown Kent); Station
72 (Lake Meridian area); Station 73 (West Hill); Station 74 (East Hill); Station 75 (east, near
Covington); and Station 76 (north, in the industrial area). A seventh station is located in Fire
District #37 and is owned by the Fire District. Each station is equipped with at least one fire
engine or ladder truck that carries emergency medical supplies and equipment. Each station is
staffed with a minimum of three (3) personnel 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. Each station
has future capacity for additional stafüng. Fire District #37's Capital Facilities Plan identifies two
(2) future stations that will serve the City. Station 78, which will open in January 2008, will be
located in the City of Covington and will serve the east_side of the City of Kent. There is also a
proposed station serving the North Benson/Panther Lake neighborhood. The North
Benson/Panther Lake station will be inside the potential ar¡rexation area for the Cþ of Kent. The
Fire District is cunently collecting level-of-service fees for the future construction and purchase of
land for these projects. In addition, Stations 75 andT6have a King County Medic One paramedic
unit housed in the station. Each unit is staffed with two (2) personnel. These units are part of the
countywide Advance Life Support (ALS) system. Tâble 8.4 lists each station, location, number
and type of units in service, total station capacit¡ and minimum staffing. Figure 8.2 illustrates
locations of fire and life safety services and facilities.
Current data collection for the level-of-service indicates that the Fire Department is not meeting the
standard. The Kent Fire Department is refining its data collection and analysis support functions in
order to identify areas in need of capital and operating improvements. Such improvements would
be pursued to meet the established levels-of-service. Performance measrües for fire and life safely
LOS standards are found in Tâble 8.5.
PoliceÆire Training Center
The PoliceÆire Training Center is located on East Hill at 24611 116ft Avenue Southeast at Station
74. The Center, housed in an 8,000 squæe foot building, provides audio and visual equipment and
other facilities for in-service training for City of Kent police officers and fire fighters. Instruction
is conducted by Kent Police and Fire Department personnel, and by nationally known instructors
from organizations such as the lntemational Association of Police Chiefs and the State Fire
Service. In addition to providing a facility for training City of Kent personnel, the training center
also accommodates a satellite training program sponsored by the Washington State Criminal
Justice Training Commission.
Capital Facilíties 8-10
Seattle-Tacoma
lnternat¡onal Airport
I
SE I92
Lake\. Youngs
ST
SE 22
(o
u)
as
o
o
€,obê
Õ
oa
€
6
d
N(ä
.ea
o
€
soa
our
l¡r'Foe
@
I
F l
@
U)
,,/ Angte Lqkq-.
Panther
sE 208
-e6
3
s uJ
t
#\l
U'
r-rJ
@Notr
..ri,.
ST
cþrk-
Lu
U)
trJ
=LL
tIJ
.!_ <
@o
a
Lake
I
I,
u¡
()o
à
t¡J
U)
uJ
rLr
çt-t
Lll\d\
CITY OF KEI\T
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
N
SCALE: 1" = 45,000'
LEGELLD
...'.1..i clTY LlMlrS
,r-..J POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREAo FIRE (POLTCE) STAT¡ON
FIRE STATION
KENT FIRE & DISTRICT 37
This map is a graphic aid only and is not a legal document. The City of Kent
makes no warranty to the aæuracy of the labeling, dimensions, contours,
property boundaries, or placement or location of any map features depicted
thereon. The City of Kent disclaims and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirect, or consequential, which
arises or may arise from use of this product.
KENT
ll¡¡*¡trçrðR
F'IRE & LIFE SAFETY
SERVICES & FACILITIES
FIGURE 8.2 8-1 I
Table 8.4
FIRE & LIF'E SAF'ETY F'ACILITIES
Facility
Name
Location Units
Service
ln Capacity Minimum Stafüng
Station 7l 504 West Crow Street Engine 7I and
Aid 7l
4 Bays s - (3) Engine (2) Aid
Station 72 25620 -l40th Avenue SE EngineT2 3 Bays 3 - Engine
Station 73 265l2Military Road S Engine 73 3 Bays 3 - Engine
Station 74 24611-ll6th Avenue SE Ladder 74; Aid
74;and
Battalion Chief
3 Bays 6 - (3) Ladder; (2) Aid
(l) Battalion Chief
Station 75 15635 SE 272"d Street Engine 75 3 Bays 3 - Engine
Station 76 20676 - T2"dAvenue S Engine 76 3 Bays 3 - Engine
Station 77 20717 - l32ndAvenue SE EngineTT 3 Bays 3 - Engine
Station 78
Corner of 180ü Avenue SE
and SE 256ft Street
Proposed
Engine 3 Bays Operational l/l/08
North
BensonÆanther
Lake Area
In area of 108ft Avenue SE
and SE 216ú Street
To Be
Determined
To Be
Determined To Be Determined
Capital Facilities 8- 13
Table 8.5
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY LOS STANDARDS
Performance Measure LOS Standard
Structure Fires - All Response Time by
percentage (fractile)
First due apparatus with a minimum of 3
fuefighters will arrive on scene within 7
minutes of initial dispatch on 80% of incidents.
Structure Fires - Single-family
residential and standard
commercial
Response Time by
percentage (fractile)
Effective Response Force of 16 firefighters
will arrive on scene within l0 minutes of initial
dispatch on 80% of incidents.
Structure Fires - Commercial
target hazards
Response Time by
percentage (fractile)
Effective Response Force of l8 firef,rghters
will arrive on scene within l0 minutes of initial
dispatch on 80% of incidents.
Structure Fires - High risk
target hazards
Response Time by
percentage (fractile)
Effective Response Force of 21 firefighters
will anive on scene within 10 minutes of initial
dispatch on 80% of incidents.
Advanced Life Support - Life
threatening
Response Time by
percentage (fractile)
Effective Response Force of 5 to 6 firefighters
will arrive on scene within l0 minutes of initial
dispatch on 80% ofincidents.
CITY ADMIII-ISTR.{TTVE OFFICES - GENIERAL GOVERNMENT
The City of Kent Operations Department manages several facilities and buildings necessary to the
administrative and maintenance functions of the City. These include City Hall and the Cþ
Council Chambers, and the Centennial Center; all located in the heart of Downtown Kent. Table
8.6 below lists the narne, location and capacity of each facilþ:
Table 8.6
CITY ADMINISTRÄTION OFF'ICES
NAME LOCATION CAPACITY
City Hall 220 - thAvenue South 35,230 s.f.
City Hall Annex 302 V/est Gowe Street 4,045 s.f.
Centennial Center 400 V/est Gowe Street 71,600 s.f.
Capital Facilities 8-14
PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMT]NITY SERVICES
The City of Kent Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department manages parks and open
space resources, as well as the Senior Activity Center, Kent Commons, Kent Resource Center, and
Riverbend Golf Complex; provides a wide range of recreational programs throughout the facilities;
and administers funding in support of a variety of community service activities. Details for
community service activities can be found in the Human Services Element, the Housing Element,
a¡rd the 2003-2007 Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development. The 2000
Park & Open Space Plan
and the Park & Open Space Element of the Comprehensive Plan provides greater detail about
facilities and LOS standards.
Parks and Recreation Facilities
The City of Kent owns and leases
ef eerr"nunit'' park land 1.434 acres of parkland within the current City limits. King County owns
0.5 acres located in Kent. Within Kent's PotentialAnnexationArea @AA), King County owns 734
acres of park land. The Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department manages a wide
variety of facilities located on park land, including the Senior Center, Kent Commons, Special
Populations Resource Center, play fields, and trails. The Park & Open Space Element contains a
current inventory of lands leased and owned by the City. Figure 10.1 and 10.2 of the Park & Open
Space Element illustrate locations of parks and recreation facilities.
Parks and Recreation Level-oÊService Standards
The City of Kent Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department generally pursues land
acquisitions to meet anticipated demand for open space based upon estimated population growth.
As suitable land becomes available for development, the Parks, Recreation and Community
Services Department considers purchases in balance with the anticipated population growth for the
entire City. More detailed levels-oÊservice for Parks and Recreation services and facilities are
provided in the Park & Open Space Element and
.
Capital Facilíties 8- I5
PT]BLIC UTILITY SERVICES
The City of Kent is one among several providers of public utility services, for water distribution
and storage, sewerage, and stormwater management. Other public providers adjacent to City of
Kent utilities franchise areas coordinate with the City of Kent Public Works Department through
interlocal service agreements. Privately-provided services such as energy distribution and storage,
cable television, and telephone services are discussed in the Utilities Element.
Sanitary Sewer Facilities
The service area of the City of Kent Sewer Utility encompasses twenty-three (23) square miles and
includes most of the incorporated City, as well as adjacent franchise areas within unincorporated
King County. Since the existing collection system already serves most of the City's service area,
expansion of this system will occur almost entirely by infill development, which will be
accomplished primarily through developer extensions and local improvement districts. ln general,
the existing sewer system is sized based on existing standards which will carry peak flows
generated by the service area for ultimate development. However, the City of Kent
Comprehensive Sewerage Plan has identified various undersized lines, as well as others that
require rehabilitation. King County-METRO has assumed the responsibility for interception,
treatment, and disposal of wastewater from the City of Kent and communities throughout south,
east and north King County at the South Treatment Plant located in Renton. Therefore, the City
does not incur any direct capacity-related capital facilities requirements or costs for sanitary sewer
treatment. METRO pump stations in Pacific, Black Diamond, and three (3) in the vicinity of the
South Treatment Plant (Interurban and New lnterurban) serve South King County.
King County will provide additional wastewater capacity to serve a growing population in the
Puget Sound area by constructing a new North Treatment Plant in the north service area (to be
located in the vicinity of the boundary of King and Snohomish counties) and by expanding the
South Treatment Plant to handle additional flow from south and east King County. The North
Tieatment Plant is anticipated to provide acapacity of thirty-six (36) million gallons per day (mgd)
when operational in 2010, and the expansion of the South Treatment Plant in the year 2029 will
increase system capacity from one hundred fifteen (115) mgd to one hundred thirty-five (135) mgd.
Two conveyãtce improverhents serving the South Treatment Plant are scheduled for completion
both in the near-term and long-term. The improvements of Sections l, 2, and 3 of the Parallel
Aubum Interceptor are anticipated to be completed by 2004, and the planned three (3) to five (5)
mgd expansion of effluent storage capacity is projected to be completed by 2029.
Adjacent sewer utilities providing service to Kent homes and businesses include Soos Creek Water
& Sewer, the City of Auburn, Lakehaven Utility District, Midway Sewer District, the City of
Tukwila and the City of Renton. Service connections exist between the City of Kent and these
service purveyors, and interlocal agreements ensure continuous service. A complete inventory of
sanitary sewer facilities and appropriate levels-oÊservice are found in the City of Kent
Comprehensive Sewerage Plan, and operating comprehensive plans of adjacent purveyors of sewer
service. These documents are on file with the City of Kent Public Works Department. Figure 8.3
illustrates the locations of the sanitary sewer service areas and facilities.
Capital Facilities 8-t6
tlSeattle-Tacoma
rternational Airport
ST
;'.
i, -.)
_-->
!
tå
Y(
\
u¡rD
ut
{
tl)
@
\ll-Ltî
'..)
Panther
sE 208
g
(ú
=
oÉ
tus
12
L.uE
g)
u)
t¡J
+t
I
!
I
ì
:
I+ --€i\,\vrtælts I
2
U)
ùJJ
(o¡-
J
+
u_I
t
H
\
(
\
uJ
coo
il
',1 3TLctöria
dge
ST
CITY OF KENT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAI\
LEOEND
,"'...i clry LlMlrs
:.r'.:i PoTENTTAL ANNEXATToN AREA'/v MErRO CoLLECToR. SEWER PUMP STATION
N
SCALE: 1" = 45,000'
KENT SEWER FRANCISE AREA
MIDWAY SEWER DISTRICT
TUKWILA SEWER DISTRICT
SEWER DISTRICT #23
SEWER DISTRICT #14
RENTON SEWER & WATER
LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT
SOOS CREEK SEWER & WATER
AUBURN SEWER
This map is a graphic aid only and is not a legal document. The City of Kent
makes no wanânty to the accuracy of the labeling, dimensions, contours,
property boundaries, or placement or location of any map features depicted
thereon. The City of Kent disclaims and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirecl, or consequential, which
arises or may arise from use of this product.
KENT
SE\ilER SERVICE
AREAS & FACILITIES
FIGURE 8.3 8-1 7
Stormwater Management Facilities
The majority of the City of Kent is located within the Green River watershed, with stormwater
flowing either directly to the Green River or to the Green River via a tributary creek. A smaller
portion of the City, generally located west of I-5, flows either to Massey or McSorley Creeks,
which drain directly to Puget Sound. Significant creek systems draining to the Green River are:
Johnson Creek;
Midway Creek;
Mullen Slough;
Mill Creek (Auburn);
Mill Creek (Kent);
SpringbrooVGarrison Creek;
Soosette Creek;
Soos CreekÀ{eridian Valley Creek; and
The "Lake Meridian Outlet" Creek.
The last three creeks listed are tributary to Big Soos Creek, which in turn drains to the Green River
east ofAubum. Figure 8.4 illustrates the drainage basins of Kent's storm drainage service area.
The stormwater system is comprised of an extensive network of ditches, pipes, and stormwater
quantity and quality control facilities which connect individual parcels with the City's surface
water systems. The City also owns, operates and maintains several regional quantþ and quality
control facilities. These are the Green River Natural Resources Area (GRNRA), the Upper and
Lower Mill Creek Detention Facilities, the 98th Avenue Garrison Creek Detention Facility, the
Meridian Meadows Detention Facility, and the South 259th Street Detention Facility, the
Horseshoe Acres Pump Station and the constructed wetland at Lake Fenwick.
Using the City's GIS database records, the Drainage Master Plan (DMP) indicates a total of 17
City-wide drainage basins within the planning area (corporate limits) totaling approximately 28
square miles. In addition, the storm drainage system consists of approximately 285 miles of
pipeline along with an extensive system of open channels. The DMP was structured to first look at
the existing watersheds and drainage basins, determine the subbasins within the watershed, analyze
any open channel components (receiving water) for insuffrcient capacity, determine and prioritize
projects needed to reduce flood risks, improve water quality, enhance fïsh passage and
instream/riparian habitats, and efficientþ serve planned growth, determine altemative
solutions to alleviate potential flooding, and determine cost --effective solutions to the identified
needs. Each project within the DMP has been reviewed for multiple benefitsthenthen given
either a 'oHigh, Mediumo or Low" ranking. Further details on each project are located in
Chapter 7, Table 7-1 of the DMP. Total project costs range from $52 Million to $ 67 Million.
The City has operated a stormwater utility since 1981 as a means of financing the design,
construction, operation, and maintenance of the City's surface water system. Fees are collected
based on specific subbasin location, type of development, and percent impervious surface
coverage. Revenue is used for operation and maintenance activities and capital improvement
programs.
Specific requirements (level-oÊservice standards) for on-site stormwater management and stream
protection are contained in the City's 2002 Surface Water Design Manual, which is a modified
Capital Facilities 8-19
version of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Portions of the stormwater
system are improved to these standards as public and private development projects are constructed.
These standards will be adjusted as necessary to meet equivalency requirements of the V/ashington
State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for V/estern Washington (20015) in
the future.
The Drainage Master Plan (DMP) encompasses all Capital Improvement Program (CIP) related
projects for stormwater systems with the city limits. The 2008 DMP replaces the 1985 DMP and
the Capital Improvement Programs completed individually for the Mill, Garrison, Springbrook
Creek and Soos Creek Basin CIP. The 2008 DMP has incorporated elements of the CIR such as
flood conveyance needs for open channels, determination of replacement needs of the City's
stormwater pipe system, drainage facility requirements of the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP), and levee repair and replacement needs for flood protection along the Green River.
The DMP further recommends specific projects for enhancing critical areas and fish passage and
addresses engineering staffneeds to oversee such projects.
Program components of the DMP include compliance with the V/ashington State Department of
Ecology (DOE)-mandated Nation Pollutant Discharge Elimination System OIPDES) Phase II
Permit and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Programs. These unfunded federally mandated
programs were included in the DMP to determine if there were deficiencies in the City's current
operation and maintenance and monitoring programs and identiff subsequent additional workload
and staff requirements needed to fully meet the permit requirements. The DMP has included
recommendations to meet the required elements of the TMDL and NPDES Phase II Permit for
tracking, monitoring, maintenance, and operation elements including the necessary resources to
meet these needs.
Critical area habitat protection is an important aspect of water quality, habitat protection and flood
protection. To be successful in improving the water quality of the streams and open channel
systems within the City, there is a continuing priority of acquisition of buffers along the main
stream corridors. Section I of the DMP further discusses the needs of this program and
provides areas of potential expansion of habitat protection. As properties become available, the
City's environmental engineering section will continue to pursue grant funding and work
towards the protection of habitat and water qualrry
The existing storm drainage pipelines, approximately 285 miles, form a labyrinthian connection of
pipes, catch basins, and manholes under the public right of ways with the ability to alleviate the
surface flooding that would occur on the city streets. As these pipes age and reach their service life,
a replacement program has been established by the PW Operations and Maintenance staffto repair
or replace segments of the pipes each year. During the life of the pipe system, segments may be
targeted also for improvements before the end of the service life, usually due to inadequate
capacþ after years of development. An analysis was completed of the existing storm drainage
pipes within the City. A total length of 135,000 feet of 18" or larger diameter pipe was analyzed for
capacity and 55,350 feet or 4lo/o has failed to meet the minimum requirements for passing a 25-
year storm event. These systems are noted within the DMP for updating.
As a result of the 1998 listing of Chinook Salmon and Bull Trout listing under the Federal
Endangered Species Act, the City has been participating in various regional salmon restoration
efforts, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Green/Duwamish Ecosystem Restoration
Program and the steering committees for Watershed Resource lnventory Areas (WRIA) 8 and 9.
WRIA 8 includes the watersheds of the Cedar and Sammamish Rivers as well as Lake Washington.
Capital Facilities 8-20
uSeattle-Tacoma
rternational Airport
tIJ
o)
uta)
La
Yc
SE 192
ST
u)
@
....
t¡Ja
ut
{
z
!/
@
o)
E
3
o
TIJ
(o
F-
Õ
É.
PantherA
oÉ
S
sE 208
U)
tIJ
oÉ
I-l Ç
irt
ST
-tl
4r''l.vùç.
ç-tlT
Lake
lrl
@o
U)
ôn
c
tIl
()ri
I
t!
U)
t¡J
:LF-r(dtr
F
ST
¡t!l-
I
CITY OF KENT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
N
SCALE: 1" = 45,000'
LEGEND
...'..j POTENTIAL AN N EXATION AREA
CITY LIMITS
E DRAINAGE SUBBASINS
A Lower Mill Creek
B Lower Garrison Creek
C Direct lnto Green River
D,E,F
Johnson/Midway/Mill Creek (Auburn)/Mullen Slough
G Upper Mill Creek
H Soos CreekI Upper Garrison CreekJ Upper Garrison Creek
K,L,M,N
Johnson/Midway/Mill Creek (Auburn)/Mullen Stough
O Midway
P Johnson/Midway/Mill Creek (Auburn)/Mullen Slough
This map only and ts not a legal document. The City of Kent
of the labeling, dimensions, contours,makes n0 warranty lo the accuracy
property boundaries, or placement or location of any map features depicted
thereon. The City of Kent disclaims and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether dhect or indirect, or consequential, which
anses or arise fiom use of this
KENT
¡1
STORMDRAINAGE
SERVICE AREA
FIGURE 8.4 8-2 I
WRIA 9 includes the Green/Duwamish River Watershed as well as some nearshore area of Puget
Sound. The salmon recovery plans will require capital expenditures for various stream restoration
projects. There is a possibility of federal and state matching funds for these projects.
King County and its cities (including Kent) also participate in the King County Flood Control Zone
District. The District is funded by a property tax on parcels county-wide. The principal
responsibility of the District is the maintenance and repair of all levee systems within King County.
In addition, the City is involved in other regional programs to provide an expanded greenway along
the Green River. This involvement may require future capital expenditures.
The inventory of current stormwater management facilities is on file with the City of Kent Public
Works Department.
Stormwater Management Facilities Financing Options
The City has operated a stormwater utility since 1981 as a means of financing the design,
construction, operation, and maintenance of the City's surface water system. Fees are collected
based on specific subbasin location, type of development, and percent of impervious surface
coverage. Revenue is used for operation and maintenance activities and capital improvement
programs.
A number of funding options are available to the City to meet the needs of a fully functional
stormwater progam. The options typically used are street funds, general funds, special
assessments (Local Improvement Districts), special fees, general facility chargeso fees in lieu of
on-site detention, public - private partnerships, conventional debt, special grants and loans, and
stormwater utility charges. A further discussion of these types of funding follows:
A Street Fund sets aside a portion of the drainage infrastructure often constructed with streets, and
the street department tends to provide system maintenance in the right of way. However,
stormwater management is not the primary function of a street deparhnent, ffid competing
demands for these limited street funds may not be the most appropriate means to actively promote
the City's ongoing objectives in stormwater management. Therefore, securing funding for the
DMP through the street fund is not an option.
The General Fund, as with the street fund, is a non-dedicated funding source for stormwater
programs, is subject to competing demands on an annual basis, and therefore proves to be an
unreliable source for ongoing commitments. The City cunently döes not use the general fund as a
revenue source for the stormwater program and it is assumed this will not be a source of future
drainage program funding.
The third type of funding is special assessments, also known as Local Improvement Districts
(LID). LIDs are most appropriate for specific capital improvements that benefit identifiable
geographic service areas. By nature, these options are voluntary; that is, the property owners
choose through a vote whether or not to accept the assessment on themselves. This restriction
causes progrcm funding to be unreliable; furthermore, the assessed valuation basis of charging
provides only a loose nexus between the amount charged and the benefit received. The City
currently is assuming that no funding will be secured from the use of Special Assessments or Local
Improvement Districts for the DMP implementation.
Capital Facilities 8-23
A fourth funding option would involve the City charging special fees for operating activities such
as inspections. These fees are best applied when they are set to recover the costs, or a portion of
the costs, of the specific activity for which payment was received. Special fees are not generally
intended to fund an ongoing stormwater program in its entirety; however, they would be well
suited for the recovery of specific program-related costs. The DMP is currently not funded through
Special Fees, and using a conservative funding approach, these Special Fees are not included as a
funding source at this time.
General Facility Charges (GFC) are one time fees paid at the time of development and are intended
to recover an equitable share of the costs of existing and planned future facilities that provide
capacity for growth. They are an essential tool used to recover the cost of growth from growth.
Estimated future revenues from the GFC are expected to average $860,000 per year. Current
estimates are for a potential of approximately 13,000 additional ESUs within the City, and GFCs
for those could be a source of revenue in the next 10 years assuming that the development will
occur in that time period. A high estimate using the City's current GFC per ESU would generate
approximately $16 million over 10 years, assuming all development would occur within the next
10 years.
Creating a fee in lieu of on-site detention is another method of funding required capital projects.
The fees are most appropriately used to fund regional facilities through the payments of developing
properties. These fees are collected when a developing property decides not to construct facilities
to mitigate runoff on site. As such, fees in lieu must be used in concert with requirements for on-
site mitigation and a community's goals favoring regional facilities over on-site solutions. When a
property does construct such facilities, the fee is not charged. While effective in funding a part of
(regional) infrastructure construction, fees in lieu are not a reliable source for ongoing stormwater
progr¿Ìms. Due to the high cost of the purchase of buildings and real estate for additional new
regional detention facilities, and the potential for widening of stream channels and expansion of
existing regional detention facilities, additional regional detention facilities are not included in the
DMP.
Another funding option is a Public/Private Partnership for funding a portion of the DMP. This
partnership is a different approach to funding stormwater capital construction and results in joint or
private funding of specific improvements. This approach helps mitigate the direct impacts of new
development. While a popular idea, in practice it is difücult to persuade private development to
fund stormwater projects if other funding altematives are available to the City. Estimates of future
funding developed from publiclpnvate partnerships are not incorporated into the drainage fund as
there would be no guarantee of a level of funding able to fund the projects and programs included
within the DMP.
A Conventional Debt, such as revenue bonds and general obligation bonds, is available to fund
stormwater capital construction. While these mechanisms are well suited for funding large capital
construction projects, an ongoing revenue stream is required to support the annual debt service
owed on the amount borrowed. The low estimate for incurring conventional debt is $10 million
overthe next 10 years forthe DMP. The high estimate is a series of newrevenue bonds issued
every 2 to 3 years depending on the project need over the next 10 years. The high estimate would
be approximately $ 218 million generated in conventional debt to fund implementation of the
DMP.
Capital Facilities 8-24
Special Grants and Loans could be used as a supplement to conventional debt service. Special
grants and loans may be an important option for the City. Many state and federal programs are
available for applications, including the Centennial Clean Water Fund, the Public Works Trust
Fund, the State Revolving Fund, the Flood Control Assistance Account Program, and the Federal
319 Non-point Source Program. These progr¿lms draw more applications every year than there are
available funds, and they are highly competitive. Most of the assistance progrcms award aid in the
form of low interest loans that still require an ongoing revenue stream to support payback or a
percentage of matching contributions by the City. Although the DMP will continue to pursue
special grants and loans funding sources, it is risky to base future revenue funding on past success
of securing grants. A low estimate of grant availability is $50,000 per year, and a high estimate is
$500,000 per year.
The stormwater utility service charge provides a signihcant portion of the stormwater management
costs. The utility service charges are recovered through ongoing rates to utility customers. This
option is and could continue to be a financially independent entity free of reliance on the other City
funds, with all of its revenues dedicated to surface water management programs and capital
construction. Currentl¡ the Cþ receives approximately $8.6 million in stormwater utility services
charges per year, a low estimate assuming that the rate would not change. A high estimate,
including future growth as stated within the GMA, would include an assumed increase within the
utility rate to increase revenues collected to $12 million per year.
The City's existing rate structure features area- or basin-specific rates, a density multiplier, and an
impervious surface area basis. Details of the rate structure can be found in Section 10.5 of the
DMP. Under the existing rate structure, all customers pay a uniform base rate, 52.57 per month.
Additionally, a basin specific rate is charged ranging from $1.68 per month to $5.05 per month.
There are 17 basins and these basins are grouped into eight different basin specific rate categories.
Refer to Section 10.5 of the DMP and Kent City Code 7.05.090 for additional information.
The key assumptions used within the rate study are as follows: a customer base annual growth rate
of 0.58 percent, an annual inflation rate of 4 percent, personnel benefits costs escalation of 6
percent per year, construction cost escalation of 5 percent per year, and an annual fund eamings
rate of 2.5 percent. The Capital Improvement Projects for stormwater systems and the drainage
component of the street projects are assumed to be implemented over a 10-year period (2009 to
2018). Finally, system replacement funding will be equal to annual depreciation expense.
Water Suppl¡ Distribution, and Storage Facilities
The service area of the City of Kent V/ater Utility encompasses twenty-four (24) square miles and
serves most of the incorporated City. Some small areas of unincorporated King County and the
City of Aubum are also served by the City of Kent Water Utility. Adjacent franchise areas of
neighboring water puryeyors serve the remainder of Kent and the PAA. To the east, the service
area boundary coincides with the boundary of Water District No. 111 and the Soos Creek Sewer
and Water District. To the north, the service area boundary coincides with the mutual Kent/Renton
and KenVTukwila city limits. To the west, it coincides with Highline Water District's boundary,
and to the south, the City's service area boundary coincides with the City of Aubum, ffid
Lakehaven Utility District.
The principal sources of water supply for the City's proprietary water system are Kent Springs and
Clark Springs. During high demand periods, the capacity of these two sources is exceeded, and
supplemental well facilities are activated. These sources are adequate to meet current and near
Capital Facilities 8-25
rttle-Tacoma
rtional Airport
tl
192
ST
l
L
\:r
ST
U)
LJJ
t
¡i,t
I
ñülr ^
@
Ì
¡u-
q)
ı
=
0-f o
É.
uls
SE 208
l Õ
É.
@z
U)
¡.rJ
@t.-
i
rü.e4t
4(
_
iH¿{-
I
a
T L
SEI
a-
È
LL
w#3
i
Utj
I
f
ara
#l ¡
I
a
Lake !
, FenwrßK
ST
IU
U}
ut
wul
(r)(J
CITY OF KENT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
N
SCALE: 1" :45,000'
LEGEND
..-..^.jclTY LIMITS
:.-..1 PoTE NTTAL AN N EXATT oN AREA
E KENT WATER FRANCHISE
KENT FACILITIES
o Water Tank
Õ Water Tank/Pump Station
Well
o Pump Station
OUTSIDE FACILITIES
A Water Tank., Well
Pump Station
WATER DISTRICTS
District #111
District #111 (CWSP)
Lakehaven Water District
Soos Creek Water District
Tukwila Water District
Auburn Water District
Covington Water District
Highline Water District
Renton Water District
This mâp is a graphic aid only and is not a legal document. The City of Kent
makes no wananty to the accuracy of the labeling, dimensions, contours,
property boundarìes, or placement or location of any map features depicted
thereon, The City of Kent disclaims and shall not be held liable for any and all
damage, loss, or liability, whether direct or indirect, or consequential, which
arises or mav arise from use of th¡s product,
KENT
\ryATER SUPPLY SERVICE
AREAS & FACILITIES
FIGURE 8.5 8-25
future peak day demands, however, they are insuffrcient to meet long term peak day demands. In
2002, the City executed an agreement to participate as a partner along with Tâcoma Water Utility,
Covington Water District, and Lakehaven Utility District in the Green River Second Supply'Water
Project. Water from this source of supply, coupled with the City's existing sources, is sufücient to
meet the City's long-term peak day demand projections.
System wide, arurual water consumption is roughly 2.7 billion gallons, with average day demands
of 7 .5 million gallons per day and peak day usage of approxim ately 13 .7 5 million gallons per day.
Utilizing current larìd use and population projections for 2030, annual use would rise to 3.6 billion
gallons, or 9.9 million gallons per day. Existing water supply can produce roughly three times this
amount, or 30 million gallons per day; however, additional storage reservoirs will be needed to
deliver this water to customers.
Water system interties are presently available with the Highline V/ater District, the City of Tukwila,
the City of Renton, the Soos Creek Sewer and Water District, Water District No. 111, the Cþ of
Auburn, and the City of Tâcoma. Howevero based on water use projections developed for the
Water System Plano these interties would only be required to serve as emergency back-up if
problems with existing sources were to arise.
The water distribution system exists throughout the City's service area. Expansion will take place
almost entirely through infill development, which will be accomplished primarily through
developer extensions. Most of the remaining projects identified in the City's Comprehensive'Water System Plan would be constructed to provide water service at existing levels of service.
However, several key improvements to the system have been identified. Proposed projects
include construction of a new maintenance facility on Kent's East Hillo development of a new
640 pressure zone on the East Hill to improve water prèssures at high elevations, a new
reservoir on the \ilest Hill to meet increasing storage demandsn and water main replacements,
including upsizing older portions of the distribution system to improve capacity.
The Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) list developed for the Comprehensive Water System Plan
was based on identiffing: 1) system deficiencies via a hydraulic modeling analysis, 2) long-term
maintenance and operations needs, and 3) projects that are required to meet local, state and federal
requirements. The existing water system has and continues to provide clean, safe, and reliable
water; however, improvements to the system are needed to improve it for future development and
meet existing requirements. The costs of improvements to the water system range from $150-
million to $160 million in 2008 dollars, and funding of these projects will be accomplished through
a combination of water rate increases and bonding.
A Comprehensive'Water System Plan update is required by the Washington State Department of
Health (DOH) every six (6) years. The City's most recent Water System Plan was submitted to
DOH in 20O2completed in 2008. Adjacent water utilities providing service to Kent homes and
businesses include Soos Creek Water & Sewer, the City of Auburn, Lakehaven Utility District,
Highline Water District, King County Water District #111 and the City of Renton. Service
connections exist between the City of Kent and these service purveyors, and interlocal agreements
ensure continuous service. Water supply service area and facilities serving Kent's Planning Area
are illustrated on Figure 8.5. A detailed inventory of current water system facilities, and City water
rights records, and operating plans of adjacent service agencies are on file with the City of Kent
Public Works Department. As noted previously, the purchase of additional water rights from the
Capital Facilities 8-26
xØfoosYos{-'oÞi3dSE-)ùN140-<roa)U)-{1Sú.1cooØ{116oTs¡foW Valley76 AVE SUPRDEØN€II'ìRDnNÕ@AVE Soao0)a-0)xo1AVE SËFWY.rl.L.108IAVEa55AVEô^\J?-FËÔlt'AJ:ìFi-H<ftqOZa12^FJZHÊYFzzU)ot-gr=il+J¡Ool.';l;l lEÞ8;S9 ltþðfì:lzØo74=',\)-{r<=s7 >=q Fs,ØzzmX-lozÐm>f,lr.l:fX5- g 8.,ı- I-+ñr+ì 9 ¡ Tø'-:A Oaa< -^=eeñä8o o< ? -qqøt 9qq9;4444ãillíliUı'*rr(/trÀÀ+: (Jr88R 3, _\O^=- r3 aÈ ı øë 5åâË--f o= l.oÃoeø-3 ó5 ñ.:ò:?< o; ôiøR'+(9=J@ Ë-v'< ='ä.== g-: 1á3 = 9Éı eE ãä3 P-¿o 4P.f Þ o=.ã - ô E -E:ı={o3:re oÈ ø-o o: lo == o -ô noãqlPd-o ='-g o,qO o! - oX-='90 0 =; -e aE,E Þäi Sã =*ã-ıqQ'g.r€o=H=åiqËË- < o =ô5 oç I -i- o = Ã='è*d oJs o =tmz{!!tqII. IÞvi-d>iIJ \-¿(nE!R"O4zÔFE(nLH- \aafE ',^¿-¿1ÞrÈcnÒt!'rl(rll-rl90o\Oo\)\
Tacoma P5 Pipeline project will provide a sufficient supply of water for future peak demand for the
next twenty years.
TRANSPORTATION EACILITIES
Within the City there are city, state, county, and private roads totaling 273.38 centerline miles. Of
those that the City maintains, there are 48.02lane miles of Principle Arterials; 116.51 lane miles of
MinorArtenals;129.84 lane miles of Collectors; and24l.9l lane miles of Residential roads. There
are also nine (9) bridges in Kent. A complete assessment of transportation facilities is considered
in the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan
anticipated in 2004. Figure 9.1 and 9.3 found in the Transportation Element illustrates Kent's
transportation facilities.
PUBLIC EDUCATION EACILITTES AND LEVEL.OF-SERVICE
Most of Kent's residential areas are served by the Kent School District No. 415. The Renton
School District serves students from an area of Kent near the north city limits, and Kent students
residing along the westem city limits attend Federal V/ay Schools or Highline Schools. Kent
students residing along the southern city limits might attend Auburn Schools. Most school districts
also have historically considered acceptance of transfer requests or waivers for students residing in
households located outside of district boundaries. Detailed inventories of school district capital
facilities and levels-of-service are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) of each school
district. The CFPs of the Kent, Aubum and Federal V/ay School Districts have been adopted as
part of the City's Capital Facilities Element. Updates of the CFPs of these three (3) districts reflect
changes in their CIPs, and school impact fees assessed on residential development within Kent are
adopted annually. CFPs for other school districts serving Kent households are incorporated by
reference, although no school impact fees are collected by these school districts for residential
development within Kent. Estimated total student enrollment figures of Kent's Planning Area
households for each school district are provided in the Tâble 8.7 below.
Locations of schools within the Kent School District and the boundaries of other school districts
serving Kent's Planning Area are illustrated in Figure 8.6.
Table 8.7
ESTIMÄTE,D STUDENT ENROLLMENT
Kent
School
District
Auburn
School
District
Federal
way
School
District
Highline
School
District
Renton
School
District
Estimated Total Kent
Planning Area Resident
Student Enrollment
16,909 108 1,912 314 56
Capital Facilities 8-29
PUBLIC LIBRARY EACILITIES AND LEVEL.OF'-SERVICE
The City of Kent is served by the King County Library System in the 22,500 square foot Kent
Library building at 2I2 2nd Avenue West, which was built in 1992. Replacement of a portion of
the roofing for the Kent Library is anticipated to occur during the next ten years. The King County
Library System is planning to develop 10,000 square feet of library space in the East Hill area,
pending prissage of a bond measure scheduled tentatively for March 2004. The Covington Library
facility, which serves many Kent East Hill residents, would also become the largest library in South
King County after a planned 15,000 square foot expansion. Detailed information regarding the
King County Library System is available on the internet at www.kcls.org.
Location of the Kent Library building and King County libraries located in proximþ to Kent's
PlanningArea are illustrated in Figure 8.6.
Capital Facilities 8-30
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN COSTS & REVENUES
The following section outlines the capital costs and financing for the public facilities which are
provided by the City of Kent per the most recent Capital Improvement Program (CIP) (see Figure
8.7 and Table 8.8). This type of information for the Kent, Aubum and Federal Way School districts
is available in the districts' capital facilities plans, which have been adopted by reference as part of
the Capital Facilities Element.
Figure 8.7
2OO4 - 2OO9 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
PROJECT COST STÄTISTICS
(In 000's)
Transportation
18o/o
Utility Fund Projects
35o/o Public Safety
8o/o
General Go\,ernment
21o/o
Parks, Recreation &
Commun¡ty Services
18o/o
Table 8.8
2OO4 _ 2OO9 CAPITALF'ACILITIES PROJECTS
Projects 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
Transportation
Public Safety
Parks, Recreation
& Community Services
General Government
Utility Fund Projects
1,010
1,737
8,047
4,229
11,220
80
3,891
2,804
240
2,789
1,521
9,745
5,595
2,599
200
3,568
1,853
200
3,796
2,768
200
3,323
22,765
10,665
22,962
26,726
46,392
985
10,063
954
6,722
r 1,093
21,593
4,637
2,647
Total Projects
Not included in this plan:
Estimated $40,000,000 voted bond issue for Public Safety
17,938 16,881 29,137 13,443 38,977 13,133 129,510
Capital Facilities 8-33
FINANCING
The revenue sources that are available to the City of Kent for capital facilities include taxes, fees
and charges, and grants. Title 3 of the Kent City Code, Revenue & Finance, specifies the
collection and allocation of revenue sources. Some sources of revenue for capital facilities can also
be used for operating costs. A comprehensive list of revenue sources and a discussion of
limitations on the use of each revenue source is contained in the Capital Improvement Program
(CIP). Existing City revenues are not forecast, nor are they diverted to capital expenditures from
maintenance and operations.
The financing plan for these capital improvements includes the revenues listed in the pie chart
below (see Figure 8.8 and Table 8.9). The chart lists the major categories of Capital Improvement
Projects (CIP) revenue sources and the amount contibuted by each source.
Detailed project lists and financing plans are contained in the Capital Improvements Program
(CIP). As noted earlier, annual updates to the CIP and City Budget Document are incorporated by
reference into this Capital Facilities Element.
Figure 8.8
2OO4 _ 2OO9 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SOURCES OF FUNDS
(In 000's)
PW Trust
Fund Loan
8o/o
Capital
lmprowment Fund
Grants
Street Fund
7o/o
Other
2o/o
Sources
Utility Funds
180/o
Bond Proceeds
410/o lntemal Service
Funds
4Yo
Capital Facilities
6To
8-34
Sources ofFunds
Table 8.9
SOURCES OF CIP FUNDS
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
Capital Improvement Fund
Street Fund
Utility Funds
Internal Service Funds
Grants
Bond Proceeds
PW Trust Fund Loan
Other Funding Sources
2,19t
1,320
1,737
745
1,225
2,280
1,521
2,979
940
2,440
18,737
2,293
7,399
6,122
734
r,555
2,353
1,468
2,593
873
1,050
29,000
2,219
1,804
8,563
765
470
1,927
1,203
t,397
667
1,200
5,000
13,263
8,715
23,392
4,724
7,940
52,737
11,000
7,739
9,000
1,720
1,500
1,5ó0 240
500
840 r,640 1,739
17,938 16,881 29,137 13,443 39,977 13,133 l2g,5l0Total Sources ofFunds
Not included in this plan:
Estimated $40,000,000 voted bond issue for Public Safety
Capital Facilíties 8-35
PUBLIC SERVICES & CAPITAL FACILITIES GOALS AND POLICIES
GENERAL GOALS & POLICIES
Goal CF-l.'
As the City of Kent continues to grow and develop, ensure that an adequate supply and range of
public services and capital facilities are available to provide satisfactory standards of public
health, safety, ønd quality oflfe
Policy CF-1.1: Assess impacts of residential, commercial and employment growth on
public services andfacilities in a manner consistent with adopted levels-of-service.
Policy CF-1.2: Ensure thøt public services and capital facilities needs are addressed in
updøtes to Capitøl Facilities Plans and Capital Improvement Programs, and development
re gulations as appropriate.
Policy CF-1.3: Tb ensurefinancialfeasibility, provide neededpublic services andfacilities
that the City has the ability to fund, or that the City has the authority to require others to
provide.
Policy CF-1.4: Periodicølly review the Land Use Element to ensure that public services
and capital facilities needs, financing and levels-of-service of the Capital Facilities
Element are consistent and adequate to serve growthwhere it is desired.
Policy CF-1.5: Coordinate the review of non-City managed capital facilities pløns to
ensure consistency with the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan.
Goal CF-2:
Base standards for levels-of-service upon the appropriate provision of public services andfacilities
as outlined in the operating comprehensive plans of the City and other providers of services and
facilities to Kent and its Potential Annexation Area.
Policy CF-2.1: Establish levels-of-service appropriste to the core mission of City
departments in their provision of services and access offacilities to the public.
Policy CI-2.2: When appropriate and beneficial to the City, its citizens, businesses, and
cttstomers, pursue nationql organizationøl accreditatíon þr all City of Kent agencies
providing public services and facilities. Such accreditation should be linked with
perþrmance standards øpplied by City agencies.
Capital Facilities 8-36
Policy CF-2.3: Coordinate with other jurisdictions and providers of services andfacilitíes
to ensure thøt the provision of services and facilities ore generally consistent for all Kent
residents, businesses, ønd others enjoying City services andfacilities.
Goal CF-3.'
Encourage ffictive non-capital alternatives to maintain or improve adopted levels-of-service.
Such alternatives could include programs þr communi,ty education and ctwareness, energ/
conservation, or integration of methods and technologies to improve service delivery.
Goal CF-4.'
Ensure that appropriate funding sources are available to acquire or bond for the provision of
needed public s ervices and facilities.
POLICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES GOALS & POLICIES
Goal CF-5:
Ensure that residents, visitors and businesses in Kent continue to feel safe throughout our
community.
Policy CF-5.1: Establish, maintøin, and monitor ffictive services and programs with the
goal of increasing the sense of safety throughout our community. Such services and
programs should be consistent with other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies.
Goal CF-6:
Establish, maintsin and strengthen community relationships through direct contact opportunities,
communíty awarenesg education and volunteer programs.
Policy CF-6.1: Establish and maintain direct contact between representøtives of the Police
Department and concerned citizens, community groups, schools, business operators, local
media, and human services providers.
Policy Cß-6.22 Establish and maintain community education progroms that promote the
awareness of public safety, community-based crime prevention, domestic violence
prevention, alcohol and substance abuse, and available human services for impacted
populations.
Policy CF-6.3: Establish and maintain volunteer programs that meet the Políce
Department objectives of increasing community aworeness, involvement, public safety, and
crime prevention.
Capital Facilities 8-37
Goal CF-7.'
Maintain responsive, quality patrol service throughout Kent's service area and other areas
requiring respons e capability as sistance.
Policy CF-7.1: Consider average response times as a level-of-service measure in
as s e s s in g ne e ds for p atro I s ery i c e improv ement s.
Policy Cß-7.22 Maintain or improve annually-calculøted average response times to
emergency calls, where potential loss of life or confirmed hazards exist.
Policy CF-7.3: Maintain or improve annually-calculated averqge response times to non-
emergency calls, where no immediqte danger or potential loss of life is indicated.
Policy CF-7.4: Coordinate with the City Inþrmation Technolog,, Department and the
Valley Communications Center to improve response times.
Policy CF-7.5: Periodically evaluate the ffictíveness of existing patrol practices, and
research best practices as appropriate.
Policy CF-7.62 Provide staf training as needed to incorporate best practices that will
improve responsiveness of patrol services.
Policy CF-7.7: Tb improve longlerm patrol service ffictiveness, work with various
members of the community to improve staff awareness of localized issues and community
resources.
Goal CF-8:
Provide ffictive and professionøl investigation services.
Policy CF-8.1: Consider annually-colculated crime clearance røtes as a level-of-service
measure in assessing needs for patrol service improvements.
Policy CF-8.2: Maintain or improve annually-calculated Part I crime clearance rates,
which is a measure of the rate of arrests or clearancesfor reported crimes.
Policy CF-8.3: Periodically evoluqte the ffictiveness of existing investigations practices,
and research best practices as appropriate.
Policy CF-8.4: Provide staf training as needed to incorporate best practices that will
improv e re sp ons iv ene s s of inv e s ti gat io n s s er-tt i c e s.
Capital Facilities B-38
Policy CF-8.5: To improve long-term investigations service ffictiveness, work with
various members of the community to improve staff awareness of locølized issues and
community resources.
Goal CX'-9:
Provide effective corrections services that protect the community and reduce repeat ffinses omong
corrections clients.
Policy CF-9.1: Coordinate with the Kent Municipal Court to ensure appropriate
corre cti onal pro c e s s e s and facilitie s are availabl e þr cr iminal offender s.
Policy CF-9.2: Maintain or improve facilities available þr the incarceration of criminal
ffinders. If additional facilities capacity is necessary, coordinate with other agencies to
locate and provide appropriate facilities for the purposes ofincarceration.
Policy CF-9.3: Establish and maíntain ffictive alternative s to incarceration for lesser
criminal ofenses.
Policy CF-9.4: Periodically evaluqte the ffictiveness of existing coruections practices,
and research best practices as appropriate.
Policy CF-9.5: Provide staff training as needed to incorporate best prøctìces thøt will
improve responsiveness of corrections services.
Policy CF-9.6: Acquire and maintain accreditation through the American Corrections
Association.
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICES GOALS & POLICIES
Goal CF-10:
Ensure that residents, visitors and businesses in Kent continue to feel safe and prepared for
emergency response throughout our community.
Policy CF-10.1: Establish, maintøin, and monitor ffictive services and programs with the
goøl of increasing the sense of ltfe safety and emergency preparedness throughout our
community. Such services and programs should be consistent with other Comprehensive
Plan goals and policies.
Capital Facilities 8-39
GoaI CF-11: Establish, maintain and strengthen community relationships through direct contact
opp ortunit i e s, c o mmttnity atv ør ene s s, e du c at i o n and v ol unt e e r pro gr ams
Policy CF-11.1: Establish and maintain direct contact between representatives of the Fire
Depørtment and concerned citizens, community gtoupg schools, business operators,
developers and building contractors, local media, and human services providers.
Policy CF-11.2: Establish and maintqin community education programs that promote the
oworeness of ltfe safety, fire prevention, hazardous materials, and availøble human services
for impacted populations of emergency events.
Goal CF-12.'
Promote an understanding that preventative measures and appropriate responses to emergency
events are a criticalfactor in limiting the extent of impacts resultingfrom an initial event.
Goal CF-13.'
Establish and maintøin responsive, quality fire and life hazard prevention services throughout
Kent's service area and other areas.
Policy CF-13.1: Maintain or improve the level of confidence citizens have in their ability
to respond to personal or household emergencies.
Policy CF-13.2: Maintain or improve the level of confidence citizens have in their ability
to respond to natural or man-made disasters that could impact their community.
Policy CF-13.3: Periodically evaluate the ffictiveness of existing Jìre and life hazørd
prevention practices, and res earch best practices øs appropriate.
Policy CF-13.4: Provide staf training as needed to incorporate best practices that will
improve responsiveness offire and life hazardprevention services.
Policy CF-13.5: To improve long-termfire and life hazard prevention service ffictiveness,
workwíthvarious members of the community to improve staf atvareness of localized issues
and c ommunity re s ourc e s.
Goal CF-14:
Provide ffictive, fficient, equitable and professional fire suppression and emergency medical
response services throughout the City of Kent Fire Department service area.
Capítal Facilities 8-40
Policy CF-14.1: Consider the response time percentøge as the primary level-of-service
measure in assessing needs for fire suppression and emergency medical response service
improvements.
Policy CF-14.2: Maintain or improve the level-of-service to emergency calls, where /ìre or
other community safety hazards are reported to exist.
Policy CF-14.3: Maintain or improve the level-of-service to personal emergency medical
calls, where no immediate danger exists to the community-at-large.
Policy CF-14.42 Periodically evaluate the ffictiveness of exßting /ìre suppression and
emergency medical response service practices, and research best practices as appropriate.
Policy CF-14.5: Provide stuf naining as needed to incorporate best practices that will
improve responsiveness offire suppression and emergency medical response services.
Policy CF-14.6: To improve longlerm fire suppression and emergency medical response
service ffictiveness, work with various members of the community to improve staff
owareness of localized issues and community resources.
PARKS, RECREATION & COMMTJNITY SERVICES
GOALS & POLICM,S
The goals, policies and levels-oÊservice (LOS) appropriate to the services provided by the Parks,
Recreation and Community Services Department are contained in the Park & Open Space;
Housing; and Human Services Elements of this Comprehensive Plan.
PT]BLIC UTILITMS SERVICES GOALSAND POLICTES
Goal CF-15:
Ensure that public utílities services throughout the City, its Potentiøl Annexation Area (PAA) and
other areas receiving such services are adequate to accommodate anticipated growth without
significanþ degrading the levels-of-service þr existing customers.
Policy CF-15.1: Establish, maintaín, qnd monitor ffictive provision of public utilities
s ervi ce s and facil itie s.
Policy CF-15.2: Coordinate the planning and provision of public utilities services and
facilities with other agencies providing such services to Kent and PAA homes and
businesses.
Capital Facílíties 8-41
Policy CF-15.3: Consider existing demand units in assessing levels-of-service for future
prov ision of s ervi c e s and facilitie s.
Goal CF-16:
Foster recognition of the signiJìcant role played by natural feøtures ønd systems in the appropriate
siting, design andprovision of public utility services.
Policy CF-16.1: Educate City staff, developers, and other citizens on the interqction
between natural features and systems, such as wetlands, streams, and geologically
hazardous ereas, and the provision ofpublìc utility servíces.
Goal CF-17:
Coordinate with individuals and organizations to create a long-term, sustainable strategy for local
and regional natural resource protection.
Policy CF-17.1: Continue to evaluate operating plans, programs, regulations, and public
facility designs to determine their ffictiveness in contributing to the conservation and
recovery of species listed under the Endangered Species Act.
Policy CF-17.22 Continue to participate in regional and Water Resource Inventory Area
planning efforts to support the conservation oflisted species.
Policy CF 17.3: Continue to participate in local and county wide flood control ffirts to
support the repair and maintenance offlood controlfacilities.
Goal CF-18:
Support environmental quality in capital improvement programs, ímplementation programs, and
public føcility designs to ensure that local land use management and public service provision is
consistent with the City's overall natural resource goals.
Policy CF-18.1: Protect and enhance environmental quølity via maintenance of accurate
and uplo-date environmental data associatedwithpublic services andfocilities.
Policy CF-18.2: Provide public service agencies with generol and site-specffic
environmental information to identify possible on and offsite constraints and special
development procedures as early in thefacility planning process as is possible.
Capital Facilíties 8-42
Policy CF-18.3: Indemnify the Cityfrom damages resultingfrom development in naturally
constrained areos. Tb the extent possible or feasible, require accurate and valid
environmental information.
Policy CF-18.4: Continue a periodic storm drainage/environmental inspection program to
ensure constant maintenance and upkeep of storm systems and on-going compliønce with
gener al environment al pro c e s s e s.
Policy CF-18.5: Ensure that decísions regarding fundamental site design are made prior
to the initiation of lønd surface modifications. Grade andfill permits, which do not include
site development plans, may be issued by the City where such activities do not disturb
sensitive orees, such as wetlands.
Policy CF-18.6: Require site restoration if land surface modification vìolates adopted
policy or if development does not ensue within a reasonable period of time.
Policy CF-18.7: As additional land is annexed to the City, assign zoning designations,
planfor appropriate public facilities locations and capacities in a manner that will protect
natural resources and environmentally sensitive areas.
Policy CF-18.8: Continue to support waste reduction and recycling programs in City
facilities, and in the City at large, to meet State and County waste reduction and recycling
goals.
Policy CF-18.9: Work cooperotìvely with tribal, federal, state and local jurisdictions, as
well as møjor stakeholders, to conserve qnd work towqrds recovery of ESA listed
threatened and endangered spe cie s.
Goal CF-19:
Protect and enhance natural resources þr multiple beneJìts, including recreation, Jìsh and wildlife
resources and habitat, flood protection, water supply, and open space.
Policy CF-19.1: Maintain the quantity and quality of wetlands via current land use
regulation and review, and increase the quality and quantity of the City's wetlands resource
bøse via incentives and qdvance planning.
Capital Facilities 8-43
Policy CF-19.2: Protect wetlands not as isolated units, but as ecosystems, and essentìql
elements ofwotersheds. Base protection measures onwetlandfunctions andvalues, impact
onwater supply quality and quantity, and the fficts of on-site and off-s¡s activities.
Policy CF-19.2: Wen jurisdictional boundaries are involved coordinate wetland
protection and enhqncement plans and actions with adjacent jurisdictions and the
Muckl e sho ot Indi an Trib e.
Policy CF-19.3: Maintain rivers and streams in their natural state. Rehabilitate degraded
channels and bank via public programs and in conjunction with proposed new
development.
Policy CF-19.4: On a regular basis, evaluate the adequocy of the existing public facilities
operating plans, regulations and maintenance practices in relation to goals for water
resource and fisheries and wildlife resource protection. When necessary, modify these
plans, regulations andpractices to achieve resource protection goals.
Policy CF-19.5: Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater usedfor water supply.
Policy CF-19.6: Update the City of Kent Critical Areas Maps as new inþrmation about
aquifer recharge oreas and wellhead protection areas becomes available.
Policy CF-19.7: In accordønce with GMA regulations, update public facilities operating
plans and regulations to identify, protect, and preserve wildlife species and areas of local
significance.
Policy CF-19.8: Protect the habitat of native and migratory wíldlife by encouraging open
space conservation of beneficial hqbitat through public capital improvement projects.
Goal CF-20:
Ensure thøt publicføcilities development on lands adjacent to the shorelines of the Green River are
compatible with shoreline uses and resource values, and support the goals and policies of the City
of Kent's Shoreline Master Program.
Policy CF-20.1: Minimize the loss of vegetationwith development and operation of new
pubticfacilities. Continue to recognize the value of nees and other vegetation in protecting
water quality.
Capital Facilities 8-44
Policy CF-20.22 Promote and support a systematic approach to enhancing the City-owned
facilities through carefully planned plantings and ongoing maintenance of street trees,
public landscaping, and greenbelts. Require the use of native and low water use
vegetation.
Policy CF-20.3: Require protection of ecologically valuable vegetation, when possible,
during all phases ofpublicfacilities development. In cases where development necessitates
the removal of vegetøtion, require an appropriate amount of native or low water use
landscaping to replace trees, shrubs, and ground coveti which were removed during
development.
Policy CF-20.42 Record and protect established greenbelts associated with public facilities
to preserve existing natural vegetation in geologically hazordous areas, along stream
banlrs, wetlands, and other habitat areos, and where visual buffers between uses or
activities are desirable.
Goal CF-21:
Regulate development of public facilities in environmentølly critical areas to prevent harm, to
protect public health and safety, to preserve remaining critical oreas, and enhance degraded
critical areas in the'City.
Policy CF-21.1: Encourage appropriate enhancement of existing environmentøl features
such as rivers, streoms, creeks, andwetlands.
Goal CF-22:
Implement and maintain a stormwater management program that assures compliance with the
requirements of the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit which is part of
the National Pollutant Dischørge Elimination Program administered by the Washington State
Department of Ecologt.
Policy CF-22.1: Reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable.
Policy CF-22.22 Use all known, available, ønd reasonable methods of prevention, control
and treatment to prevent and control pollution ofwaters of the state ofWashington.
Policy CF-22.3t Implement an education program aimed at residents, businesses,
industries, elected fficials, policy makers, planning staf and other employees of the City.
The goal of the education program is to reduce or eliminate behqviors and practices that
cause or contribute to ødverse stormwater impacts.
Capital Facilities 8-45
Policy CF-22.4: Provide ongoing opportunities þr public involvement through advisory
councils, watershed committees, participation in developing rate-strLtctures, stewardship
programg environmental activities or other similar activities.
Policy Cß-22.52 Implement an ongoing program to detect and remove illicit connections,
discharges, and improper disposal, including any spills not under the purview of another
responding authority, into the municipal separate storm sewers owned or operated by the
City.
Policy CF-22.62 Develop, implement, pnd enþrce a program to reduce pollutants in
stormwater runofffrom new development, redevelopment and construction site activities.
Policy Cß-22,72 Develop and implement an operations and maintenance program that
includes a training component and has the ultimate goal of preventing or reducing
pollutant runofffrom municipal operations.
Policy CF-22.8: Develop a comprehensive long-term stormwater monitoring program.
The monitoríng program will include two components: stormwater monitoríng ønd
t ar ge t e d St or mw at er Mana ge m ent P ro gr am ffi c t iv en e s s m onit or ing.
Policy CF-22.9: Produce an annual report which includes the cityb detailed Stormwater
Management Plan, tracking elements, and documentation of compliance with the Phase II
permit.
Goal CF-23:
Encourage environmental sensitivity and low-impact development principles in the design and
construction of øll projects.
Policy CF-23.1: Encourage participation in low-impact development and environmentally
s ens itiv e buil der pro grams.
Policy Cß-23.2: Adopt development standards that minimize environmental impacts of
development through an appropriate balance of regulations and incentives. Incentives
could be tied to compliance with criteriq øpplied throughout the development process.
Policy CF-23.3: Set public facility projects of the City as an example by incorporating
techniques of low-impact development desígn, construction, operation and maintenance.
Goal CF-242
Capítal Facilities 8-46
Promote Low-Impact Development and limited disturbance of natural hydrological systems, so that
water quantity and quality are protected throughout the development process and occupation of the
sile.
Policy CF-242 Establish site design criteria þr allowing natural lrydrological systems to
functionwith minimum or no modfficøtion.
Policy CF-24.22 Promote the use of roin gardens, open ditches or swales, and pervious
driveways and parking areas in site design to maximize inJiltration of stormwater and
minimiz e runoff into environment ally criti c al are as.
Policy CF-24.32 Promote inclusion of passive rainwater collection systems in site and
architectural design for non-potable water (gray-water) storage and use, thereby saving
potable (drinking) w øter for ingestion.
Goal CF-25:
Provide water to the Cityb existing customers andþr future development consistent with the short
and long range goals of the City.
Policy CF-25.1: Maintain a constant supply of municipal water for existing and future
customers andfuture development consistent with the short and long range planning goals
of the City.
Policy Cß-25.2: Identify capital improvement projects needed to meet the potable water
supply and fire protection needs of current customers and the þrecast for future demand
within the qreas served by the City of Kent Water System.
Policy CF-25.3: Identifu and implement funding mechanisms necessary to construct
capital improvement projects to meet existing andfuture system requirements and projected
growth.
Policy CF-25.4: Implement a maintenance program to ensure the system is operated as
fficiently as possible. Utilize the Cityb Infrastructure Management System to I) track
system component inventory, 2) record maintenance history and 3) produce preventative
maintenance work schedules þr the water system infrastructure.
Policy CF-25.5: Ensure system capacity (i.e. sources, pump stations transmission mains,
etc.) is sfficient to meet current and projected peak day demand andfireflow
conditions.
Capital Facilities 8-47
Policy CF-25.6: Seek to meet future supply needs with existing and new sources of supply
under the City's ownership or partnering.
Policy CF-25.7: Maintain an fficient wøter supply system through the identiJìcation and
repair of distribution leaknge and other water system losses, and reducing other system
water uses os they are proven cost ffictive.
Goal CF-26:
Protect public health and safety by providing an adequate supply of high quality water to the Cityb
customers. The City will pursue steps to ensure that it will continue to meet or exceed all water
qualíty laws and standards.
Policy Cß-26.1: Maintain a stringent woter quality monitoring and cross-connection
control program consistent with currentfederal and state drinkingwater regulations.
Policy CF-26.22 Maintain ødequate water supply and infrasnucture to meet water system
needs andfireflow demands throughout the areas served by the City.
Policy CF-26.3: Utilize reasonable measures to protect the water system and the wøter
quality and quantity provided to customers. Give priority to those security improvements
identified as being the most critical or those providing the most cost ffictive benefit to the
water system.
Policy CF-26.42 Develop and maintain an emergency response plan to eliminate or reduce
the significant impacts to customers and the water system in the event of an emergency.
Policy CF-26.5: Ensure staff are continuously available to respond to water system issues
and emergencìes.
Goal CF-27:
The City of Kent recognizes a clean water supply as ø critical and Jìnite resource and will secure
the health and safety of the customers through protection of existing and future groundtuater
re s ourc e s from contamination.
Policy CF-27.12 Participate in regional ffirts to protect groundwater resources including
but not limited to the South King County Grounú,vater Committee.
Policy Cß-27.22 Establish a groundwater monitoring network þr early detection of
potentiøl contamination in aquifers.
Capital Facilitíes 8-48
Policy Cß-27.32 Notifu all applicable regulatory and emergency response agencies of the
City's Wellhead Protection Areas.
Policy CF-27.42 TTack and provide comments on land use applications within wellhead
protection areas. Follow up on all of those identified as creating potential risk to the wqter
supply until protections are in place or are determined to not alect the wøter system.
Policy CF-27.52 ldentify and track parcels of land identiJìed as potential contaminant
sources in the Wellhead Protection Program. Provide comments to applicable regulatory
agencies related to the protection and sustainability of the Cityb groundtvater resources.
Policy CF-27.62 Educate residents, businesses and the owners of identified potential
contaminant sources in wellhead protectíon areas about aquifer protection.
Policy Cß-27.7: Encourage the use of Best Management Practices in land manogement
activities to reduce the use of pesticides andfertilizers
Policy CF-27.8: Promote the use of native landscaping to reduce the need for pesticide
and fer tiliz er appli cation.
Goal CF-28: Maintain the economic vitality of the City by ensuring adequate water supply is
available to meet existing andfuture customer needs, andfuture development as projected to meet
the short and long range goals of the City.
Goal CF-29: Meet Water Use Efficiency Goals and implement additional water conservstion
measures to ensure the fficient use ofwater resources.
Policy CF-29.1: Implement, evaluate and monitor measures to meet the City's adopted
l4/ater Use Efficiency Goals.
Policy CF-29.2: Develop and implement on-going educational activities regarding
woter conservation as identified ín the Wøter System Plan. This includes but is not
limited to the annual Water Festival, speaking at public forums and classrooms, booths
atfairs and theme shows, utility billing inserts, natural yard care programs and utilizing
the City's websíte.
Policy CF-29.3.' Provide rebates for low wøter use toilets and washing machines as
they apply to the Water Use Efficiency Goals.
Policy CF-29.4: Promote the use of native and drought resistant plants in landscaping
ín public and private projects to reduce the needfor irrigation.
Policy CF-29.5.' Include consumptive water use data on customer bills to encourage
water conservation.
Capital Facilities 8-49
Policy Cß-29.6: Develop and implement a water rate structure that promotes the
fficient use ofwater.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES & EACILITIES
GOALS & POLICIES
The goals, policies and levels-of-service (LOS) related to the provision of transportation services
and facilities are contained in the Transportation Element of this Comprehensive Plan and the
future Comprehensive Transportation Plan to be completedn2}}4.
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES GOALS & POLICIES
The City of Kent has established siting criteria for essential public facilities, which are defined by
the State in RCW 36.70A.200(1) to "include those facilities that are typically difücult to site, such
as airports, state education facilities and state or regional transportation facilities as defined in
RCW 47.06.140, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient
facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure
community transition facilities as defined in RCV/ 71.09.020." The following goals and policies
reaffirm Kent's commitment to a fairprocess for locating such facilities.
Goal CF-30:
The City shall porticipøte in a cooperative inter-jurisdictional process to determine siting of
essential publicfacilities of a county-wíde, regional, or state-wide nature.
Policy CF-30.1: Proposals for siting essential public facilities within the City of Kent or
within the City's growth boundary shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's
Comprehensive Plan during the initial stages of the proposal process.
Policy CF-30.2: lï/hen wøruanted by the special character of the essential facility, the City
shall apply the regulations and criteria of Kent Zoning Code Section 15.04.150, Special use
combining district, to applications for siting such facilities to insure adequate review,
including public participation. Conditions of approval, including design conditions,
conditions, sholl be imposed upon such uses in the interest of the welfare of the City and the
protection of the environment.
Capital Facilities 8-50
Policy CF-30.3: In the principally permitted or conditional use sections of the zoning
code, the City shall establish, as appropriate, locations and development standards for
essential public facilities which do not warrant consideration through the special use
combining district regulations. Such facilities shall include but not be limited to small
inpatient facilitie s and group homes.
Goal CF-31:
The City shall participate in a cooperative inter-jurisdictional process to resolve issues of
mitigation for any disproportionate financial burden which may fall on the jurisdiction which
becomes the site of afacílity of a state-wide, regional or county.wide nature.
Capital Facilities 8-5 I