HomeMy WebLinkAbout3986ORDINANCE NO . 3r lG
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, amending the Kent
Comprehensive PIan and its Capital Facilities
Element to include the Capital Facilities Plans of the
Kent, Federal Way, and Auburn School Districts
(cPA-2010-1).
RECITALS
A. The State of Washington Growth Management Act ("GMA")
requires internal consistency among comprehensive plan elements and the
plans from other jurisdictions,
B. To assure that comprehensive plans remain relevant and up
to date, the GMA allows amendments to the capital facilities element of
comprehensive plans concurrently with the adoption or amendment of a
city budget (RcW 36,70A.130(2)(a)(¡v)).
C. The City of Kent has established procedures for amending the
Comprehensive Plan in Chapter I2.OZ of the Kent City Code, allowing
amendment of the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan
concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the City budget and
allowing the City Council to hold the public hearing instead of the Land Use
and Planning Board.
D, The Kent, Federal Way, and Auburn School Districts have
submitted proposed amendments to their Capital Facilities Plans to be
7 Comprehensive PIan Amendment
2070 School Dist, Capital Facilities Plans
included in an amendment of the City's Capital Facilities Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
E. After providing appropriate public notice, the City Council of
the City of Kent considered the requested Comprehensive Plan
amendment and conducted a public hearing on the same on November 2,
2010.
F. On October 13, 20L0, the City provided the required sixty
(60) day notification under RCW 36.704.106 to the State of Washington of
the City's proposed amendment to the Capital Facilities Element of the
Comprehensive PIan and the sixty (60) day notice period has lapsed.
G. On December L4,20L0, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the Capital Facilities Element amendment CPA-2010-1 to include
the Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal Way, and Auburn School
Districts, as set forth in Exhibit "4" attached and incorporated by this
reference.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
SECTION 7, - Amendment, The Kent Comprehensive Plan, and its
Capital Facilities Element, are hereby amended to include the Capital
Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal Way, and Auburn School Districts, as
set forth in Exhibit "A" attached and incorporated by this reference (CPA-
2010-1).
2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2070 School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans
SECTION 2. - Severability. If any one or more sections,
subsections/ or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional
or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and
effect.
SECTION 3. - Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser, 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 4, - Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and
be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of passage as provided
by law
OOKE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER,CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BRUBAKER, C ATTORNEY
3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2070 School Dist, Capital Facilities Plans
PASSED I I ï" day of December , IOLO.
APPROVEa: lLf day of December,2OLO.
PUBLISHEO: / / day of December , }OLO.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.vt
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
BRENDA JACOBE CLERK
P:\Civ¡l\Ord¡nance\CompPlanAmend-SchoolD¡stcapita¡FacilitiesPlans-2010,docx
4 Comprehensive PIan Amendment
2070 School Dist, Capital Facilities Plans
EXHIBIT A
ô
å&
2.A\O -- 201 n 2A\6 : 20n 6
New Panther Lake Elementary School opened in Fall 2009
Kent Scfioof cDktrict Ttro. 415 proçiles elucøtionøf sentice to
fu si[ents of 'tJ nincorp orøte I King C ountl
øn[ fusilents of tñe Cities of
I(ent, Covtngton, fu6urn, funton
ßfacfrøiamonl, ful-øpfe Çofftj, an[ SeøÍac, 'Wasfüngton
Aprit 2o1o
EXffiIMET _I
&
øÞ
2ø\0: 20n n 2A\6:2ø\6
New Panther Lake Elemèntary School opened in Falf 2009
Kent ScñoofcDistrict Ttro, 415 provi[es e[ucøtionøf service to
fu:si[ents of lJnincorp orøte[ King C ounty
øn[ rysi[ents of tñe Cities of
I(ent, Covington, Au6urn, funton
ß fac frcDiømon[, ful øp fe Çn [[tj, øn[ S e aÍac,'l/y'øs füng ton
,Aprit 2010
EXHIBIT fi
Kent School District No.415
12033 SE 256th Street
Kent, Washington 98030-6643
(253) 373-7295
SIX . YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010-20t1 20ts-20t6
BOARD of DIREGTORS
Debbie Straus
Bill Boyce
Jim Berrios
Tim Clark
Karen DeBruler
ADMINISTRATION
Edward Lee Vargas, Ed.D. - Superintendent
Fred H. High - Assistant Superintendent for Business Services
John Knutson - Executive Director for Finance
Merri Rieger, Ed.D. - Assistant Superintendent, Learning & School lmprovement
Larry Miner - Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources
Linda Del Giudice - Chief Accountability Officer
ïhuan Nguyen - Chief lnformation Officer
Janis Bechtel- Executive Director, School lmprovement, Grades 7 - 12
Jeanette Ristau - Executive Director, School Improvement, Grades K - 6
David Staight - Executive Director, School lmprovement, Grades K - 6
Laura Madeo - Executive Director for lnstructional Services
Becky Hanks - Executive Director for Community Connections
Charles Lind - Executive Director, Labor Relations & Legal Services
April 2010
ê
#,&
KËNT
5,ül{txl!.*3t¡itf?
Kent School District Six-Year Gapital Facilities Plan
EX!.IBß¡T Ê
å
-ä^6.
SIX . YEAR GAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 - 2011 2015 - 2016
April 2010
For information on the Plan, please call the
Finance & Planning Department at (253) 373-7295
Capital Facilities Plan
Contributing Staff
Gwen n Escher-Derdowski
Enrollment & Planning Administrator
Fred Long, Supervisor of Facilities & Construction
Karla Wilkerson, Facilities Department
Don Walkup, Supervisor of Transportation Department
Kathy Fosjord, Transportation Manager
Maps by Jana Tucker, Printing Services
April 2010Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
EXhI!EIT Ê-
Section
St"t{eør Cdpitaf Facifities Q[an
tø6[e of Contents
Executive SummaryI
Page Number
l2
15
18
I9
31
32
Apr¡l 2010
2
4IISix-Year Enrollment Projection & History
III District Standard of Service
I V lnventory, Capacity & Maps of Existing Schools
V Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan
VI Relocatable Classrooms
V I I Prolected Classroom Capacity
V I I I Finance Plan, Cost Basis and lmpact Fee Schedules
I X Summary of Changes to Previous Plan
X Appendixes
9
24
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
EX!"{IBIT R
I Executive Summary
This Six-Year Capital Facilities PIan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent
School District (the "District") as the organization's facilities planning document,
in complíance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act,
King County Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton,
Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac. This annual Plan update was
prepared using data available in the spring of 2010 for the 2009-2010 school
year.
This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the
Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document
for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long
Range Capital Facilities Pfans consistent with Board Policies, taking into account
a longer or shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities,
and other needs of the District as may be required.
Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by
Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and
Renton and included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive
Plans of each jurisdiction. The first ordinance implementing impact fees for the
unincorporated areas of Kent School District was effective September 15, 1993.
ln order for impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of Kent
School District, the Metropolitan King County Council must adopt this Plan and a
fee-implementing ordinance for the District. For impact fees to be collected in the
incorporated portions of the District, the cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and
Renton must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances.
This Plan has also been submitted to cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and
SeaTac.
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes a standard of service in order to ascertain
current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public lnstruction
establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not
account for local program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act,
King County and City codes and ordinances authorize the District to make
adjustments to the standard of service based on specific needs for students of
the District.
This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District.
Program capacity is based on an average capacity and updated to reflect
changes to special programs served in each building. Relocatables in the
capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent
facilities.
(continued)
Page 2Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Apr¡l 2010
HK$=Ëf,ffiåT .A
I Executive Summary (continued)
The capacity of each school in the District is calculated based on the District
standard of service and the existing inventory, which includes some relocatable
classrooms. The District's program capacity of permanent facilities reflects
program changes and the reduction of class size to meet the standard of service
for Kent School District. Relocatables provide additional transitional capacity until
permanent facilities are completed.
Kent School District is the fourth largest district in the state. Enrollment is
electronically reported monthly to the Office of the Superintendent of Public
lnstruction (OSPI) on Form P-223. Although funding apportionment is based on
Annual Average Full Time Equivalent (AAFTE), Enrollment on October 1 is a
widely recognized "snapshot in time" that is used to report the District's
enrollment for the year.
P-223 Headcount for October 1, 2009 was 26,764. P-223 FTE (Full Time
Equívalent) enrollment was 25,777.90. (FTE reports Kindergarten at .5 and excfudes
Early Childhood Education [ECE] and college-only Running Start students.) The actual
number of individual students per the October 2009 full head count was 27,567.
(Full Headcount reports all enrolled students at 1.0 including Kindergarten, ECE and
college-only Running Start students.)
The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of
transitional facilities are reviewed in detail in various sections of this Plan. The
District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the
transitional use of relocatables.
A financing plan is included in Section V I I I which demonstrates the District's
ability to implement this Plan. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth
Management Act, this Plan will be updated annually with changes in the fee
schedules adjusted accordingly.
April 2010 Page 3Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
ffiX$'Ë!MIT A
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection
For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on cohort survival and
student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years.
(seeTabte e)The student generation factor, as defined on the next page, is the basis for
the growth projections from new developments.
King CounÇ live births and the District's relational percentage average were used to
determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see Tabte 1) 8.325% of
22,680 King County live births in 2005 is projected for 1,888 students expected in
Kindergarten for October 1,2010. Together with proportional growth from new
construction, 8.32o/o of King County births is equivalent to the number of students
projected to enter kindergarten in the district for the next six-year period. (seerabtez)
State-funded Full Day Kindergarten (.FDK") programs al20 schools require an
adjustment to the Kindergarten forecast for projecting FDK at 1.0 FTE for capital
facilities planning. At schools with half-day Kindergarten programs and the
optional Tuition-based FDK, Kindergarten is projected at .50 FTE. (seerâbte2A)
Early Childhood Education students (sometimes identified as "Preschool Special
Education [SE] or handicapped students") are forecast and reported separately.
Capacity is reserved to serve the ECE programs at seven elementary schools.
The first grade population is traditiona lly 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten population
due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens. Cohort survival
method uses historical enrollment data to forecast the number of students projected for
the followingyear.
Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset by
current local economic conditions. With notable exceptions, the expectation is that
enrollment increases will occur Districtwide in the long term. District projections are
based on historical growth patterns combined with continuing development of projects in
the pipeline dependent on markeUgrowth conditions.
The District will continue to track new development activity to determíne impact to
schools and monitor conditions to reflect adjustments in this assumption. The six-year
enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new development
currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district.
lnformation on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed
developments in all jurisdictions may be considered in the District's future analysis of
growth projections.
Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The
Kent School District serves seven permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County,
the cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and Renton and smaller portions of the cities of
SeaTac, Black Diamond, and Maple Valley. The west Lake Sawyer area of Kent School
District is in the city of Black Diamond.
(Conlinued)
Page 4Kent School Dístrict Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2010
HKF'åEffiIT h
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection (continued)
STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR
"Student Factor" is defined by King County code as "the number derived by a
school district to describe how many students of each grade span are expected
to be generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual
student generated rates for developments completed within the last five years.
Following these guidelines, the student generation rate for Kent School District is
as follows:
Single Family
Multi-Family
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total
.486
.130
.250
.331
.067
.124
.866
522
The student generation factor is based on a survey of 2,023 single family
dwelling units and 1,527 multi-family dwelling units with no adjustment for
occupancy rates. Please refer to Appendix E on Page 36 of the Capital Facilities
Plan for details of the Student Generation Factor survey.
The actual number of students in those resídential developments was
determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation
System.
Page 5Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2010
EXHËHIT Ê
KENT SCHOOL DISTR|CT No.41SOCTOBER P 223 F T E (Fult Time Equivatent) ENROLLMENT HISTORY ILB=LivaBirths LBinls8s LBin1986 LBin 1sg7 LBinlsg8 LB¡n ls8sLBinf99O LB¡n1991 LBinlæ2 L8¡n1993 LB¡o1994 LBinfsgs LBinlss6 LBinlssT LBin1998 L8¡n19sq LB¡n2000 LBin2001 Ls¡n2002 LBin2003 LB¡n200420092008200720062005200420032002200120001 9991S981 9971 996I 9951 9941 9931 9921 9911 990October FTE EnrollmenlKing County Live Birrhs 2 19,g25lncrease / Decrease BS1Kindergarten/Bifth%2 8.BB%21,289 2'541 23,104840 1,252 5639-07o/o 8.47o/o 8.54o/o23,002 23,18E-102 1868.44% 8.38%2,0852,1942,0582,0642,A232,0361,5821,9361_9311,9771,7971.50722,355-83322,t10-3458.27% 8.56%21,817 21 ,573 21 ,646-193 -244 738.23Ya 8.41Yo 8.06%19,999174g.4go/o20,4494509.40%22,212 22,@7 2?,4E7 2'1,778566 -205 480 -7098.05% 8.33% 8.41% 8.22%21,863 22,431 22,87485 568 4438.290/o 8.47% 8.320/"Kindergarten I '2' 3state Apportionmenlfunded Full Day Kindergarten 'l - 2 . 3 (P-223 ExÇluds Grânlfunded ÐK)Grade 1 1,a52 1,94s 2,029 2,017 1,962 1,97s 2,1s2Grade 2 1,773 1,944 1,9gA 2,048 i,937 2,011 1,979G¡ade 3 1,824 1,866 1,950 1,972 1,965 1,959 2,025Grade 4 f,793 1,91ô 1,900 1,939 1,942 2,012 1,966Grade 5 1,702 i,B6S l,glt 1,907 1,899 1,924 1,988Grade 6 1,629 1,1J3 1,885 1,951 1,915 1,895 1,s24Grade 7 1,624 1,720 1,812 1,915 1,946 1,925 1,g99Grade I 1,s4s 1,629 j,724 1,tgg 1,BBz 1,941 1,gz|Grade 9-JuniorH¡gh 1,483 1,612 1,689 1,716 i,800 1,894 1,963Gnade I - Senior HighGrade 10 1,4ôB 1,490 1,663 1,698 1,690 1,765 1,851Grade 11 1,360 1,400 1,409 1,s37 1,S2g 1,606 1,681Grade 12 1,202 1,255 1,ZgO 1,340 1,368 1.430 1.465880 949 962 96s ss5 s87 971 972 g25 542 900 907 873 894 s17 943 895 9062,0642,0952,2082,0452,1082,O452,0631,9701,925I,9531,8491.6321,9892,0782,1112,2222,O372,1192,0812,Ð152,1022,0451,7821.5372,0692,0152,0982,08ô2,2512,0562,2082,0332,2082,1131,7701.4321,9362,0672,0402,1662JAs2,2532,1272,1542,2462,064'1,8351,9221,9362,0552,0682,1492,1512,3802,O792,4042,0391,8231,8511,9651,9752,0722,672,2052,2092,3512,3092,2071,787r,9541,9352,4202,O572,1022,1392,2432,2212,7052,1241,9071,4461938198119ı220242090216422002293276721731 79S'147520031998202620152051210122052254277222121 8811451556,646187324452033204924202098213021842560247418821491-1 196,52776836519201916208120602044208121172't43¿Jtó22451366ls49836,6107583861 9581 962't976204420862070211521682467¿zt319561619-506,560.440.4.46675 1Total Enrollment 4 20,135 21,312 2z22z z2,Bo3 zz,7g4 2z,iz3 23,tg2 24,s6a 24,ga2 2s,o6o 25,23a zs,g44 :¿5,g54 zs,3s8 25,770 25,809 25,8u 25,74s zs,Bz| 25,778Yearly FTE lncrease s16 1,178 909 saz -to szg 469 768 322 17g 178 106 9 4 412 39cumulative lncrease 916 ?,o94 3,003 3,s8s 3,575 4,1Ð4 4,s74 s,ui 5,663 s,B4l 6,01s 6,f 26 6,195 6,140 6,s52 6,s91I4Fry""J-ffidKent Schoot Dislr¡cl six-yeâr capitat Fâcitit¡es ptan Table Ii - ' Apr¡12o10t>IIPage 6
KENT SCHOOL DISTR¡GT No.415
SIX.YEAR FT E ENROLLMENT PROJECT¡ON
State-fundedFDKat20Schools LBtn2oo4 LBtn2005 LB¡n2006 LB¡naoo7 LBin2oo8 LBEsLzoog LBÊst.2o1o
ACTUAL
2009 2010 2011 zo12 11 zo13 l'l zo14 H zoß
King County Live Births r
lncrease / Decrease
Kindergarten I Birth o/o 2
2/3 Kindergarten FTE @ .5
2/3 FD Kindergarten @ 1.0
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade I
Grade I
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
TotalFTE Enrollment
Yearly lncrease 3
Yearly lncrease/Decrease %
Cumulative lncrease
22,874
443
8.32o/Ã
22,690
-194
8.32o/o
25,222
323
8.32o/o
25,500
278
832%
25,600 1
100
8.32o/o
24,244 24,899
1,564 655
8.32o/o 8.32o/o
758
386
1958
1962
1976
2044
2086
2070
2115
2168
2467
2213
1956
1 619
25,778
Note:2 /3 / 4
-50
-0.19o/o
-50
230
1,428
1,966
1,990
2,011
1,939
2,069
2,112
2,095
2,165
295
1,428
1,982
2,019
2,462
1,985
1,974
2,106
323
1,428
2,106
2,036
2,092
2,035
2,021
2,010
2,150
2,220
2,495
2,163
1,804
1.465
336
1,428
2,153
2,162
2,109
2,464
2,071
2,057
2,052
2,214
348
1,428
2J7A
2,210
2,239
2,081
2,101
2,108
352
1,429
2,185
2,228
2,289
2,209
2,118
2,138
2,152
2,163
2,497
2,114
1,915
1,611
2,156
2,157
2,504
2,157
1,768
1,586
2,100
2,113
2,567
2,156
1,809
1,495
2,561
2,218
1,803
1,499
2,444
2,212
1,855
1.454
26,'t42
364
1.41o/o
314
26,179
37
Q.14o/o
351
26,348
169
0.65o/o
520
26,673
325
1.23%
845
26,979
306
1.15o/o
1,151
27,267
288
1.07o/o
1,439
FullTime Equivalent (FTE) 25,778 26,142 26,179 26.348 26.673 26,979 27.267
I Kindergarten enrollment projeclion is based on Kent SD percentage of live births in King County five years previous.
2 Kindergarten FTE projection ¡s calculäted by using the Diskict's previous year percentage of King County births five years
earlier compared to actual kindergarten enrollment in the previous yoar. (Êxcludes ECE - Early Childhood Education)
3 Kindergarten projectiôn is at 1.0 FTE for 20 schools qualifoing for State-Apportionment or Granlfunded Fult Day Kindergarten (FDK)
Schools wilh 1/2 Day Kindergarten and Optional Tuition-based Full Day Kindergarten programs are projected at .5 FTE.
a o"t. 2009 P223 FTE is 25,778 & Headcount is 26,764. Full Headcount with ECE Preschoot & Running start students = 27,567.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS for current economic factors
For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates conservative enrollment
growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district.
Kent School Distr¡ct Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Tablg 2 Aprit 2010 page 7
EX[1[B[T A
ffiþ<qE-d-ffi*lÞKENT SGHOOL DISTRICT No.415CAPACITY of ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS & KINDERGARTEN PROJECTIONS for October2010ABRELEMENTARY SCHOOL2009-2010ProgramCapacityGarriage Crest ElementaryCedar Valley ElementaryGovington Elementary ICrestwood ElementaryCCCVcocw452442498456East H¡lJ ElementaryEmerald Park IFain¡vood ElementaryGeorqe T. Daniel ElementarvEHEPFWDE464504408450Glenridge ElementaryGrass Lake ElementaryHorizon Elementary 1Jenkíns Creek ElementaryGRGLHEJC456452544398Kent ElementaryLake Youngs ËlementaryMartin Sortun ElementâryKELYMSMR464510474464Meadowl[eridian EIementaryMEMLNOPL524498440552Millenn¡um Elementary 1Neely-O'Brien ElementaryPanther Lake ElementervPark Orchard ElementaryP¡ne Tree Elementary 1Ridgewood ElemenlarySawyer Woods ElementaryPOPTRWsw480522504504Scen¡c H¡ll ElernentarySoos Creek ElementarySpringbrook ElementarySunr¡se ElementarySHSCSBSR464408398504Elementary TOTAL13,15128 Elenenlary Schools 2Note 1: KAI = KindergartenAcademic lntervention al ML& PTin 09-10 will become FDKfunded bygrantsin20l0-11.4 FDKw¡ll befunded by l-728 atCO-EP-HE-ME in 2010-11.Note 2: 20 schools have Slate Funded FDK projected at 1.0 FTE - 3 schools have only 1t2Day Kind. - 5 have Optional Tuitíon-based & l/2 Day Kindergarten all projected at .5 FTE.46014281888HdCntElemSchlAbrvCodeccCVcoCWËHEPFWDEGRGLHEJCKELYMSMRMEMLNOPLPOPTRWSWSHSCSBSROctJ0ProjectedK¡ndergartenStudentsFTE@.503303103101801700u310353807902581646614282302x@1.0607070645762644894ot806072941167866715258.5 FTEForecestfor0.50 FundedBasic Edl/2 Day K Only31311817êë3435.5 FTEForecastfor0.50 FundedOptionalTu¡t¡on-Based1/2 Day (& FDK).5 FTEForecastfor0.50 FundedCombinedK¡ndergerlenKAI & 1/2 Day1.0 FTEForecastfor1.0 Fundedbyl-728t rDK6070577064624864g480927294116OU78bo7152581.0 FTEForecastfor1.0 FundedTitle IARRA StimFDK1.0 FTEForecastfor1.0 FundedStateApport¡onmentFDK3504115Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities planTable 2 AApril 2010 Page I
I I I Current Kent School District "Standard of Service"
ln order to determine the capacity of facilities in a school district, King County
Code 21A.06 references a "standard of service" that each school district must
establish in order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service
identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students
and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the district which
would best serve the student population.
This PIan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District.
The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as
"impact" schools and the standard of service targets a lower class size at those
facilities. Relocatables included in the capacity calculation use the same
standard of service as the permanent facilities. (See Appendix A, B & C)
The standard of service defined herein may contínue to change in the future.
Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process
combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service. This
process will affect various aspects of the District's standard of service and future
changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans.
Current Standards of Service for Elementarv Students
Class size for Kindergaden is planned for an average of 24 or fewer students
Class size for grades 1 - 4 is planned for an average of 25 or fewer students.
Class size for grades 5 - 6 is planned for an average of 29 or fewer students.
Program capacity for general education elementary classrooms is calculated at
an average oÍ 24 students per classroom because of fluctuations between
primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e. third/fourth or fourth/fifth grade split
classes, etc.).
Most elementary schools meet the criteria required to provide full day
kindergarten programs (FDK = Full Day Kindergarten)with the second half of the
day funded by state apportionment, grants or tuition.
Students have scheduled time in a computer lab. Students may also be provided
music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility.
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program.
(continued)
Kent School Distriet Six-Year Capital Fac¡l¡ties Plan April 2010 Page g
Hy+*6ffi1T A
I I I Current Kent School Dist¡lict "Standard of Service'r (continued)
ldentified students wifl also be provided other educational opportunities in
classrooms for programs such as those designated as follows:
English Language Learners (E L L)
Self-contained Special Education Support Center Programs (SC)
lntegrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Early Childhood Education (ECE) (34 yr. old students with disabilities)
School Adjustment 1se¡ Program for severely behavior-disordered students
Speech & Language Therapy & Programs for Hearing lmpaired students
Adaptive Support Center for Mild, Moderate & Severe Disabilities (ASc-DD)
Occupational & Physical Therapy Programs (OT/PT)
Developmental Kindergarten in SC Programs
Kindergarten Academic I ntervention Progra m (KAl-Full Day Kindergarten )
Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I) - Federal Program
Learning Assisted Programs (LAP) - State Program
District Remediation Programs
Education for Highly Capabte Students (formerly "Gifted" Program)
Some of the above special programs require specialized classroom space, as
well as music. and physical education classrooms, computer labs, etc.; thus, the
permanent capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced.
Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of
time to receive instruction in these special programs and "pull-out" space must
be allocated to serve these programs.
Some newer buildings have been constructed to accommodate most of these
programs; some older buildings have been modified, and in some
circumstances, these modifications reduce the classroom capacity of the
buildings. when programs change, program capacity is updated to reflect the
change in program and capacity.
Current Standards of Service for Secondary Students_
The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and
educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect
the capacity of the school buildings.
Class size for grades 7 - 8 is planned for an average of 29 or fewer students.
Class size for grades I - 12 is planned for an average of 30 or fewer students
Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self-
contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program.
(continued)
April 20'10 Page t0Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
EXF{EMBT Þ
III Current Kent School District "Standard of Seryice"(continued)
educationalldentified secondary students will also be provided other
opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows:
Computer, Multi-media & Technology Labs & Programs - (Nova Net - Advanced Academics)
Technology Academy programs at Kent-Meridian High School & Mill Creek Middte School
Science Programs & Labs - Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Oceanography, Astronomy,
Meteorology, Marine Biology, General Science, etc.
English Language Learners (E L L)
lntegrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedialassistance)
Basic Skills Programs
Transition Outreach Program (TOP) for 18-21 year old Special Education students
Child Development Preschool and Daycare Programs
Music Programs - Band, Orchestra, Chorus, Jazz Band, etc.
Art Programs - Painting, Design, Drawing, Ceramics, Pottery, Photography, etc.
Theater Arts - Drama, Stage Tech, etc,
Journalism and Yearbook Classes
Highly Capable (Honors or Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs
lnternational Baccalaureate ("1 B") Program
Kent Phoenix Academy - Performance Learning Center, Gateway, Virtual High School &
Kent Success program with evening classes designed for credit retrìeval
Traffic Safety Education
JROTC - Junior Reserye Officers Training Corps
Variety of Career & Technical Education Programs (CTE-Vocational Education)
Family & Consumer Science - Culinary Arts, Sewing, Careers wlChildren/Educ., etc.
Health & Human Services - Sports Medicine, Sign Language, Gosmetology, etc.
Business Education - Word Processing, Accounting, Business Law & Math, DECA,
FBLA (Future Business Leaders), Sales & Marketing, Economics, Web Design
Technical & lndustry - Woodworkíng, Cabinet Making, Building Trades, Metals,
Automotive & Manufacturing Technology, Welding, Machine Shop, Drafting, Drawing,
CAD (Gomputer-aided Design), Electronics, Engineering & Design, Aviation, etc.
Graphic & CommercialArts, Media, Photography, Theater & Stage, Ag & Horticulture
Many of these programs and others require spec¡alized classroom space which
can reduce the permanent capacity of the school buildings. ln addition,
alternative home school assistance, choice and transition programs are prov¡ded
for students in grades 3 - 12 at Kent Mountain View Academy.
Space or Clasgloom U_tjlizatiorl
As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized
rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space
during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of
regular teaching stations at secondary schools. Based on the analysis of actual
utilÍzatíon of classrooms, the District has determined that the standard utilization
rate is 85% for secondary schools. Program capacity at elementary schools
reflects 100% utilization at the elementary level with adjustments for pull-out
programs served in relocatables. ln the future, the District will continue cfose
analys¡s of actual utilization.
April 2010 Page 11Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
ffiXq"gFBIT A
I V lnventory and Capacity of Existing Schools
Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 27,531students
and transitional (relocatable) capacity to house 1,459. This capacity is based on
the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section I I I. lncluded in this Plan
is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current capacity.
(See Table 3 on Page 13)
The ratio between permanent capacity and transitional capacity is g7o/o - 3o/o
The program capacity is periodically updated for changes in programs, additional
classrooms and new schools. Program capacity has been updated in this Plan to
reflect program changes and new capacity for the new Panther Lake Elementary
and building additions at the high schools.
Kent Mountain View Academy (formerly Kent Learning Center and Grandview
Elementary) serves Grades 3 - 12 with transition, choice and home school
assistance programs. lt is located in the former Grandview School in the western
part of the District in the city of SeaTac. This school was originally designed as
an elementary school and is included in the elementary capacity for this Plan.
Kent Phoenix Academy is a non-traditional high school which opened in Fall
2007 in the renovated site and building that formerly served Sequoia Middle
school. Kent Phoenix Academy has four special programs including the
Performance Learning Center, Gateway, Virtual High School and Kent Success.
Kent Success replaced the former Night Academy at Kent-Meridian High School
and provides afternoon and evening classes for credit retrieval.
Calculation of Elementary, Middle School and Senior High School capacities are
set forth in Appendices A, B and C. A map of existing schools is included on
Page 14.
Page 12Kent School Þistrict Six-Year Capital Facllities Plan April 2010
HX!.{[MIT +\
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
INVENTORY and CAPAGITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS
1 Changes to capacity reflect program changes and new building additions at high schools.
2 Mill Creek Middle School end Technology Academy replaced renovated Kent Junior High in 2005.
3 Kent Mountain Vlew Academy seNes grades 3-1 2. The school was formerly known ãs Kent Learning Cenfer & Grandview Elêmentary.
a Kent Phoenix Academy is a non-traditional high school which oæned ln Fall 2007 in the former Sequoiâ MS building.
April 2010 Page 13
SCHOOL
Year
Opened ABR ADDRESS
2009-2010
Program
Capacitv 1
East Hill Elementary
Emerald Park
Fairwood Elementary
Georqe T. Dan¡el Elementarv
r 953
ls99
1969
1992
EH 9825 S 240th Sireet, Keni 98031
EP 11800SE216thStreet, Kent 98031
FW 16600-148thAvenueSE, Renton 98058
DE f1310SE248thStreet, Kent 98030
464
504
408
450
Câr.iage Crest Elementary
Cedar Valley Elementary
Cov¡ngton Elementary
Creslwood Elementary
1990
1971
1 9ôl
1 980
CC 18235 - 140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
CV 26500 Timberlane Way SE, Covington 98042
CO 17070SEWaxRoad, Covington 98042
CW 25225-180thAvenueSE, Covington 98042
452
402
498
456
Glenridge Elementary
Grass Lake Elementâry
Horizon Elementary
Jenkins Creek Elementary
1S96
1971
{ oon
1987
GR 19405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
GL 28700 - 191st Place SE, Kent 98042
HE 27641 -144lhAvenueSE, Kent 98042
JC 26S15- lE6thAvenueSE, Covingtôn 98042
456
452
504
398
Kent Elementary
Lake Youngs Elementary
Martin Sortun Elementary
Meadow R¡dqe Elementarv
1999 / 1938
1965
'1987
1 994
KE
LY
MS
MR
464
510
474
464
24700 - 64th Avenue Soulh, Kent 98032
19660 - 142nd Avenue SÊ, Kênt 98042
127'11 SE 248th Strêet, Kent 98030
27710 - l08th Avenue SE, Kent 98030
Meridian Elementary
M¡llennium E¡ementary
Neely-O'Brien Elementary
Panther Lake Elementäry
1939 ME
2000 ML
1990/ 1955 NO
2009/1938 PL
25621 - l40th Avenue SE, Kent 98042
11919 SE 270th Strêet, Kent 98030
6300 South 236th Slreet, Kent 98032
20831 - 108th Avenue SE, Kenl 98031
498
524
440
552
Park Orchârd Elementary
Pine Tree Elementary
Ridgewood Elementary
Sawver Woods Elementarv
1963
I 967
1987
1994
PO 11010 SE 232nd Sheet, Kent 98031
PT 27825- 11glnAvenueSE, Kent 98030
RW 18030 - 162nd Place SE, Renton 98058
SW 31135 - 228th Ave SE, Black Diamond 98010
480
522
504
504
Scenic H¡ll Elementary
Soos Creek Elementâry
Springbrook Elementary
Sunr¡se Elementary
Elementary TOTAL
Cedâr Heights Míddle School
Mattson Middle School
Meeker M¡ddle School
Meridian Middle School
Mill Creek MS & Technology Academy 2
Northwood Middle School
Middle School TOTAL
Kent-Merídian HS & Tech Academy
Kentlake Sen¡or High School
Kentridge Senior High School
Kentwood Senior High School
Senior H¡gh TOTAL
Kent Mounlain View Academy 3
Kent Phoenix Academy 4
DISTRICT TOTAL
SH 26025 Woodland Way Sôuth, Kent 98030
SC 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031
SB 20035-100thAvenueSE, Kent 98031
SR 22300-132ndAvenueSE, Kent 98042
CH 19640 SE 272 Straet, Covington 98042
MA J6400SE251stStreet, Covington 98042
MK 12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058
MM 23480 - 120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031
MC 620NorthCentralAvênue, Kent 98032
NW 17007 SE 184th Street, Renton 98058
1 960
197 1
1 9ô9
1SS2
464
408
398
504
13,f54
1993
1981
1 970
1958
m05l 1952
1S96
923
793
890
790
828
s72
1951
'1397
1968
1981
KM 10020 SE 2561h Sfreet, Kent 98030
KL 21401 SE 300th Sireet, Kent 98042
KR 12430 SE 208th Street, Kent 98031
KW 25800 - 164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042
19e7 / 1e6s I'ltVlLÇ 22420 Military Road, Des Moines 98198
2007/1966 PH 11000SE264thStreet, Kent 98030
s,190
1,851
2,157
2,270
2,137
8,415
416
350
27,531
Kent School D¡str¡ct Six-Year Capitaf Facil¡ties Plan Table 3
EX84$ffiIT A
oU'oo9.Iı'=,oØi'*o0¡ioA¡=:0¡.rl!)9.*oo!rElementoryauû¡çvNAuø{)ËroHØs,¡FoirwoodRidoewoodEleñrentoryLokêKenl School District No. 4T5Serving residents ofUnincorporoted King CountyCity of KentCity of RentonCity of AuburnCity of Seq TocCily of CovinglonCity of Mople VolleyCity of Blqck DiomondaLokeEmerold PorkElemenl(¡ryaSoos CreekOÊlementaryOrchordSF!sunriseElemenlqryLokeYoungssr 240th stElemenloryaoRd*Cêdor HL(rkesE 2$6thCedor VolleyElemenlorvako$Ë 272nd Stcô¡(tLokeSowyerf'EitÞ€.ffffi"lloIÞ!=,ntect!ôt(oIDà2B Ëlementory Schoolsó Middle Schools4 Senior High SchoolsKent Mountoin View Acodemy (Grodes 3-12)Kent Phoenix Acodemy (9-12)Gross LokeKenl-Kongley RoodO CovingtonElemenloryElemenloryaMollsonMiddle Scho¡aOKênfwoodHigh School,(:./ cr,-/ ElemenLokeMorlonIiqtSESq\,vyer WoodsElementoryKentlokeaH¡gh Schoola MeridiqnS'Ë*,""Horizon OElementoryutttgIAoryCrgstaGlenr¡dgeElementoryO MeekerM¡ddleElementıryIAcodemyaP¡ne ïrêêaKêntDoniel¡ ElemenloryMorlin aSortunElsmenlqryMeodowoEost HillScenic Hill OElemenlqryElemenloryaoLokêüaSpringbrookElemenlorys 2¡zth srK€nlMountoin V¡eÌvAcodemy*Uo3aO'Br¡enKento
V Six-Year Planning and Gonstruction Plan
At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring of 2010, the following projects are
completed or in the planning phase in Kent School District:
Three new classrooms were added when the Auxiliary Gym project was recently
completed for KentMeridian High School. Planning for construction is in progress for the
next project that will also provide additional classroom capacity at Kent-Meridian in 2011.
ln February 2006, voters approved construction funding for replacement of Panther Lake
Elementary School. A new site was acquired nearby and the "Nev/' Panther Lake
Elementary opened in Fall 2009 with a 28% increase in capacity. The district has received
authorization from OSPI for "Old" Panther Lake Elementary School to be held in reserve
for utilization in the event of floodìng in the Kent Valley.
Planning is nearly complete for a replacement school for Covington Elementary School.
The project is on hold pending satisfactory financial resources to fund the project.
ln February 2006, voters also approved construction funding for a future Elementary
School identified as Elementary #31 (actual #29) to accommodate new growth.
Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capaçity at the elementary school
level. Future facility and site needs are reflected in this Plan.
Some funding is secured for purchase of additional portables and some funding may be
provided by impact fees as needed. Sites are based on need for additional capacity.
As a critical component of capital facilities planning, county and city planners and
decision-makers are encouraged to consider safe walking conditions for all
students when rev¡ew¡ng applicat¡ons and design plans for new roads and
developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety as well as bus
pull-outs and turn-arounds for school buses.
lncluded in this Plan is an inventory of potential pro¡ects and sites identified by
the District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future. ¡see
Table 4 on Page 16 & Site map on Page 17)
Voter approved bond issues have included funding for the purchase of sites for
some of these and future schools, and the sites acquired to date are included in
this Plan. Some funding is secured for purchase of add¡tional sites but some may
be funded with impact fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet
current school construction requ¡rements and some property may be traded or
sold to meet future facility needs.
2006 voter approval of $106M bond issue for capital improvement included the
construction funding for a new elementary school, replacement of Panther Lake
Elementary, and classroom additions to high schools. Some impact fees will also
be applied to those projects. The Board will continue annual review of standard
of service and those decisions will be reflected in the each update of the Capital
Facilities Plan.
Page 15
a
a
a
a
a
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2010
EKF{$F9HT A
KENT SGHOOL DISTRIGT No.415
Slte Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity
April 2010 Page 16
SCHOOLiFACILITY/SITE LOCATION Status
ProJected
Completion
Projected
Program
o/o Íor
new
Growth
#on
Mäp ELEMENTARY
fon
Map ' orHER strEs AcourRED
13 RsplacementforPantherLake Elemenbry (F)
New Panther Lake Elementary Site (F)
Panther Lake Elementary - Replaced ¡n 2009
5 Replacement for Covington Elementary (U)
Covington Elem - To be replaced
Elementary # 31 (Actual#29\ (F)
Site for Elementary # 31 (Unfunded)1
(Numbers assigned to fufure schoo/s may not coffelate wilh number of exísfing schools.)
Replacsm6nt
10200 SE 216th St, Kent 98031 Elementary Utilized Fall 2009 SS2
Site
Replaced
Elementary
Replacement
Elementary Planning
Planning
Planning
Planning
Elementary
New
Elementary
Site
Classroom
Additlons Utilized 2009-10 T9 100%
SE 208 Street & 108th Ave SE
SE 256th Street & 154th Ave SE
17070 SE Wax Road, Covington
To be determined 2
To be determined 2
Emerg€ncy
Reserye
28To
28%
-396
600
-498
600
20%
1}OYo
lAOo/"
City of Covington
King County
City of Covington
King County
King County
King County
King County
King Counly
2009
2009
2014"15
2014.15
2014-15
2013-14
MIDDLE SCHOOL
No Projecis required at this time
SENIOR HIGH
Kent-Meridian HS - 3 Classroom Additions (F) 10020 SÊ 256th Street, Kent
KenþMerid¡an HS - 2 Classroom Additions (F) 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent
TEMPORARY FACILITIES
Relocatiables
SUPPORT FACILITIES
Bus Facility (Unfunded) I
4 covington arêâ North (Naar Mattson MS)
7 Covington area South (Scarsella)
5 Covington area West (Halleson-Wikstrom)
3 Ham Lake area (Pollard)
8 SE of Lake Morton area (West property)
2 Shady Lk arèâ (Sowêrs, Bläine, Drahotâ, Pâroline)
1 So. King Co. Activity Center (Nike s¡te)
12 South Central s¡te (Plemmons-Yeh-Wms)
Classroom ln
Additions Progress 2011-12 53 1A0o/ø
Additional
Capacity
For plâçement as needed New Planning 2010 + 24-31 each 100%
Near Kent-Mer¡dian High School New Utilized 2010 N / A
Tvoe
Land Use
Jurisdiction
SE 251 & 164 SE, Covington 98042
SE 290 & 156 SE, Kent 98042
SE 256 & '154 SE, Covington 98042
16820 SE 240, Kent 98042
SE 332 & 204 SE, Kênt 98042
17426 SE 192 Skeet, Renton 98058
SE 167 & 170 SE, Renton 98058
SE 286th Street & 124th Ave. SE, Auburn 98092
Elementary
Elementary
Elêmentary
Elementary
Secondary
Elementary
TBD 2
TBD 2
Notes:
1 Unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in thê future.
2 TBD - To be determined - Some sites are acquired but placement, timing and/or configuration have not been detêrmined.
3 Numbers conespond to s¡t€s on S¡te Bank Map on Page 17. Other site locations are parcels identified in Table 7 on pâge 27
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4
EXhIIBIT A
ãoøoog0tnf.ou,x'*oq¡Ioq)EgÌ!¡go-'o!d3.Nhú0)ìcoKent School District No. 415Sile Bonk&Property Acquisilionsøm><+-&ffi"4l-IÞ!:,l\¡oo'oA¡GIo\¡Cedor VolleyElemêntoryCedorMiddleaaKent-Kongley RoqdO coMnolonElemen-laryLoke33óth stoLokeMortonKentloke OH¡gh SchoolRidoewoodEleñrentoryaoaFoirwoodElementoryMeridionHorlzon OElementôryLoke YoungssE 208rh srosËLoke YounosI ElemenloiyO sunr¡seElemenloryuocosËGlenridoeElementóryKenlr¡doeHioh SchlooloaMeodow RidoeaElementqn¡aPlneoKenl PhoenixAcodemyEmêrold PorkElemenforyOSoos CreekOilemenrqryaMeridionMiddle SchoolOrchordoåå?iJl¡ËlementoryDonielOElementoryUoàc@IaSprinobrookËleméntoryaPonlher LokeReplocemenlH¡II(DElementqryscenic H¡[ OËlementorySE 192nd Sis 2l 2fh stÈgNeely O'BrienËlementoryaKentMountoÌn ViewAcodemyPìpe LokeSE 272 nd SlLokeSowyer
V I Relocatable Classrooms
For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively
accurate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan. The Plan
also references use of poÉables or relocatables as interim or transitional
capacity/facilities.
Currently, the District utilizes 121 relocatables to house students in excess of
permanent capacity, for program purposes at school locations, and several for
storage or other purposes. (See Appendices A B C D)
Based on enrollment projections, implementation of additional full day
kindergarten programs, program capacity and the need for additional permanent
capacity, the District anticipates the need to purchase some additional
relocatables during the next six-year period. The continually escalating cost of
rnoving relocatables will increasingly limit the choice between buying or building
new relocatables on site and relocating older ones.
During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that
all of the District's relocatables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During
the useful life of some of the relocatables, the school-age population may decline
in some communities and increase in others, and these relocatables provide the
flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community.
Portables, or relocatables, may be used as interim or transitional facilities:
1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school
facilities.
2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased
capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet
that demand.
3. To meet unique program requirements.
Relocatables currently in use are continually evaluated resulting in some being
improved and some replaced. Quality concerns will be among those addressed
by the next Community Facilities Planning Committee for review of capital
facilities needs for the next bond issue.
The Plan projects that the District will use relocatables to accommodate interim
housing needs for the next six years and beyond, The use of relocatables, their
impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the
interrelationship between relocatables, emerging technologies and educational
restructuring will continue to be examined.
April 2010 Page 18Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
EXþ$IffiIT A
V I I Projected Six-Year Glassroom Capacity
As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study is periodically updated for
changes in special programs and reflects class size fluctuations in Grades K - 4.
As shown in the lnventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 13, the
program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison
ChaftS. (See lables 5 & 5 A-B-C on pages 20 - 23)
Enrollment is electronically reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis
and funding apportionment is based on Annual Average FTE (AAFTE). The first
school day of October is widely recognized as the enrollment "snapshot in time"
to report enrollment for the year.
Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student enrollment for October 2009 was 25,777.9O.
Kindergarten students are reported at .5 although many schools provide full day
kindergarten ("FDK") with alternative funding for the second half of the day.
State Apportionment-funded Full Day Kindergarten programs will report and
project some Kindergarten students at 1.00 FTE at qualifying FDK schools. The
P-223 FTE Report excludes Early Childhood Education (preschool) students and
College-only Running Start students. (see Tabres s & 5 A-B-c on pases z0 - 23)
ln October there were 697 students in 11th and 12th grade participating in the
Running Start program at 10-20 different colleges and receiving credits toward
both high school and college graduation. 391 of these students attended classes
only at the college ("college-only") and are excluded from FTE and headcount for
capacity and enrollment comparisons.
Kent School District continues to be the fourth largest district in the state of
Washington. P-223 Headcount for October 2009 was 26,764 with kindergarten
students counted at 1.0 and excluding ECE and college-only Running Start
students. A full headcount of all students enrolled in October 2009 totals 27,567
which includes ECE and college-only Running Start students.
Based on the enrollment forecasts, current inventory and capacity, current
standard of service, relocatable capacity, and future planned additional
classroom space, the District anticipates having sufficient capacity to house
StUdentS OVef the neXt SiX years. (See Tabte S and rabtes s A-B-C on pases 20 - zs)
This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There
may be significant need for additional portables andlor new schools to
accommodate growth within the District. Some schools, by design, may be
opened with relocatables on site. Boundary changes, limited and costly
movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational
restructuring will all play a major role in addressing overcrowding and
underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District.
April 2010 Page 19Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facil¡ties Plân
HXh{Hffi5T A
KENT SGHOOL DISTRICT No.415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPAGITY
TOTAL DISTRICT
Permanent Program Capacity r 27,296 27,531 27,531 27,584 27 ,584 27,584 28,286
to Permanent I
Kent-Meridian HS - 2009-10 Additions (F)
Kent-Meridian HS - 2011-12 Additions {F)53
Replacsment schools with projected increase in capacity
Panther Lake Elementary2 lFundeo¡ 552
Replaced previous school capacity -396
79
Covington Elementary 3
lunfunded¡
To Replace current school capacity
New Elementary # 31 (Funded)
-498
600
600
SCHOOL YEAR 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-20'.t5 201 5-2016
Actual PROJECTED
27,531 27,531 27,584 27,584 27,584 28,286 28,286
lnterim Relocatable Capacitv
Elemenlary Relocatable Capacity Requ¡rêd
M¡ddle School Relocatâble capaslty R"quirud 4u
Sênior High Relocatable Capacity Requ¡red
0
0
0
696432¡oI504288921
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Permanent Subtotal
1&6Relocatable 0 192 288 504 816 432 696
TOTAL CAPACITY 1 27.s31 27,723 27,872 28,088 28,400 28,718 28,982
TOTAL FTE ENROLLMENTI PROJECTION 5 25,778 26.142 26.179 26,348 26,673 26,979 27,267
I Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes.
2 Replacement school for Panther Lake Elementary opened in Fall 2009 with 287o increased capacity for 156 students.
3 Replacement school for Covington Elementary w¡ll increase capacity and will be built on a different existing site.
o ln Fall 2004, gth grade moved to the high schools which increased capacit! available at Middle School 7th - 8th grade levets.
u FTE = Full Time Equivalent Enrollment/Projections 1i.e. 1/2 day Kindergarten student = .5 & Full Day Klndergarten student = 1.0 FTE)
u 20O9-ZOtO total classroom relocatable capacity is 1,459.
7 School capacity meets concurrency requiremenls and no impact fees are proposed for middle schools.
April 2010 Page 20
DISTRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 7
1 1 1,6931753 1 740 1 727 1 710 1 715
Kent School Disfrict Six-Year Capital Facìlities Plan Table 5
EXISIBIT A
Senior Permanent 1
lncludes Kent Phoenix Academy 2
Chan toH School
Kent-Meridian HS - 2009-10 Additions (F)
3 Classrooms added 1p 8s% ut¡lizatlon)
Kent-Meridian HS - 2011-12 Additions (F)
2 Classrooms added (@ 85% utitization)
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4l5
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
SENIOR HIGH Grades g - 12I
8,686 8,765 8,765 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818
79
53
Subtotal 8,765 8,765 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818
Relocatable Capacity Required 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCHOOL YEAR 2009-201 0 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016
Actual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 1 8,765 8,765 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818 8.818
FTE ËNRoLLMENT/ PRoJEcïoN t 8,256 8,137 8,0 1é 7,927 8,027 8,081 8,005
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 509 628 803 891 791 737 813
NumberofRelocatablesRequired 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
No Classroom Relocatables required at thìs time. Some Relocatables used for classroom and program purpo,ges.
1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes
2 Kent Phoenix Acâdemy opened in Fall 2007 serving grades 9 - 12 with four special programs.
t FTE = Approx¡mate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or projeciions, excluding College-only Running Start students.
April 2010 Page 21Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A
EXþ{!ßIT -â
Middle SchoolPermanent Capacity r
Chanqes to Middle School Capacitv
a M¡ll Creek MS & Kent Technology Academy
are open during Phase 2 of Renovation
(No new capacity added in renovation)
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPA,CITY
MIDDLE SCHOOL Grades 7 - 8
5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196
Subtotal 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196
Relocatable Capacity Required 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCHOOL YEAR 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-20't5 2015-2016
Actual PROJËCTED
TOTAL CAPACITY T&3 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5.196
FTE ENRoLLMENT/ PRoJEcroN 2 4,283 4,260 4,313 4,370 4,266 4,213 4,315
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 4 913 936 883 826 930 983 88r
NumberofRelocatablesRequired 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
No Classroom Relocaiables requ¡red at m¡ddle schools at this time. Some Reiocatables used for classroom and program purposes.
i Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodícally to reflect program changes.
' FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projections
3 Surplus capacity due to grade level reconfiguration - All 9th grade students moved to the high schools in Falt 2004.
' Middle School capacity meets concurrency requirements and no impact fees are collected for middle schools
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Faci¡it¡es Plan
April 2010 PagezzTable 5 B
HXF{lMff A
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICTNo. 415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
ELEMENTARY Grades K - 6
12,998 13,570 13,570 13,570 13,570 13,570 14,272Elementary Permanent Capacitv 1
Kent Mountain View Academy 2 416
Chanoes to Elementarv Capacitv
Replacement schools with projec{ed increase in capacity
PantherLakeElementarya lrunded) 552
Replacescurrentschoolcapacìty -396
Covington Elementary a (unfunded)
Will rêplace current Covington Elem. câpacity
600
-498
New Elementary #31 (Funded) 5 600
subtotar 13,570 13,570 13,570 13,570 13,570 14,272 14,272
Relocatable Capacity Required I 0 192 288 504 816 432 6S6
SCHOOL YEAR 2009-20f0 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-201ô
Actual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,570 13,762 13,858 14,074 14,386 14,704 14.968
FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 3 13,239 13,745 13,851 14,051 14,380 14,685 14.947
SU RPLUS (DEFICIÏ CAPACITY 331 17 7 23 Þ 19 21
NumberofRelocatables Requirêd 0 I 12 21 34 18 29
34 Classroom Relocatables required in 2013-14. Som6 additional Relocalables used for program purposes.
1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to rèflect program changes.
2 Kent Mountain View Academy is a special program at the former Grandview School serving students in Grades 3 - 12,
The school building (formerly Kent Learning Center & Grandview Elem.) was designed as an elementary school.
3 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or ProJections (Kindergartên @ .5 or 1.0 & excluding ECE)
Kindergartên projection is at .5 FTE for Half Day Kindergarten programs or optional Tuition-based Full Day Kindergarten.
Kindergarten projection ¡s at L0 FTE for 20 Full Day K¡ndergafien programs funded by state apportionmenl or grants.
4 Replacement school for Covington Elementary will increase capacity and will be built on different existing site.
5 Site selection and construction timing for Elementary #31 is pending review of location and capacity needs.
April 2010 Page 2eKent School District S¡x-Year Capitaf Facilities Plan Table 5 C
HXI"IIBIT A
VIII FinancePlan
The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to
finance improvements for the years 2010 - 2011 through 2015 - 2016. The financing
components include secured and unsecured funding and impact fees. The plan is based
on voter approval of future bond issues, collection of impact fees under the State
Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to State
Environmental Policy Act.
ln February 2002, voters approved a $69.5 million bond issue for capital construction
and improvements. The bond issue partially funded building additions at three high
schools which coincided with moving g'grade students from junior high to senior high
schools in September 2004. The District received some State Funding Assistance
(formerly known as "state matching funds") and has utilized impact fees for the senior
high additíons.
ln February 2006, voters approved a $106 million bond issue that included funds for
replacement of Panther Lake Elementary School with increased capacity, as well as
construction of an new elementary school to accommodate growth. The new Panther
Lake Elementary School opened in Fall 2009.
The bond issue also funded Phase tr of the renovation for Mill Creek Middle School and
renovation of Sequoia Middle School for reconfiguration as a new non-traditional high
school, Kent Phoenix Academy, which opened in September 2007.
2006 construction funding approval also provided for some additional classrooms at
Kentlake High School and two projects at Kent-Meridian High School. Some impact fees
will be utilized for the new construction that will increase capacity.
Due to a significant decrease in the district's 2010 real property assessed valuation, the
district deferred a $15 mìllion bond sale that was originally planned for 2009. The district
has applied for an equivalent allocation of Qualified School Construction Bonds (OSCB)
from OSPI for a potential sale in 2010. lf financing plans for bonds under this program
are successful, the district will be able to continue with construction projects specified in
the 2006 bond authorization.
The district has designated $16 million of the 2006 bond authorization for construction of
an additional elementary school (Elementary #31), currently scheduled for completion in
the fall of 2014, dependent on enrollment levels. Although the school is identified as
"Elementary School #31" it will actually be the 29th elementary school in the district.
Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the elementary level
and unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future.
Some funding is secured for additional portables and some will be funded from impact
fees.
For the Six-Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from
Kent School District Facilities Department. Please see pages 26-27 for a summary of
the cost basis.
April 2010 Page 24Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
ffiXF''HMF A
rffi>4EEøåffi-{ÞKENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415SIX.YEAR FINANCE PLANEsl¡matedÊstimatèd$2,500,000$2,500,000$7,000,000$500,000$5,080,000$2,000,000$r,920,000$7,000,000$26,700,000$26,700,000$31,840,000$31,840,000$3,500,000922,20ù,O00$4,500,000$5,400,000$8,900,000$3,500,000$31,840,000$26,440,000$31,840,000$16,000,000 $6,940,000$3,500,000$246,860 $2s9,200$506,060$79,000$427,0602 relocatables 2 relocatables$29,200,000 $246.860 $7,259.200 $3.s00,000 $63,680,000$0$'t03,886,060 $43,859,000 $33,380,000$26,647,060" F=Funded U=Unfunded1 Based on estimates of actual or future construction costs fromFacilit¡es Department. (See Page 25 for Cost Basis Summary)2 The District anticipates receiving some stale matching tunds for these proþcts.3 FaciliÇ needs are pending review. Some of these projects may be funded w¡th impact fees.4 Cost of Relocatiables based on current cost and adlsted for inflation for future years.5 Feesinthiscolumnarebasedonamountoffeescollectedtodateandestimatedfeesonfutureunits.FFFUFUFUPERMANENT FACILITIESKent-Mer¡d¡an HS - Addition #1 r - 2Kent-Meridian HS - Addition #2 1 - 2No lylidde SclroolPþjsls at this l¡rePanther Lake Elem Replacement I - 2Covington Elementary Replacement IElementary#31 1-2-3Elementary site 3TEMPORARY FACILITIESAdditional Relocatables 3 - 4OTHERN/ATotalsKent School District S¡x-Year Capital Facilities planTable 6April 2010Page 25
V I I I Finance Plan - Cost Basis Summary
For impact fee calculations, construction costs are based on cost of the last
elementary school, adjusted for inflation, and projected cost of the next
elementary school.
Elementary School Cost Projected Cost
Millennium Elementary #30
Opened in 2000 912,182,768
Cost of Panther Lake Elementary
Replacement (Opened in Fall2009)$26,700,000
Projected cost - Covington Elementary
Replacement (Projected to open in2AM)$31,940,000
Projected cost of Elementary #31 in 2Q14 $31,840,000
Average cost of Covington Elem
replacement & Elementary #31 $31,940,000
Construction cost of high school additions:
Senior High School Additions Projected Cost ïotal
KentMeridian HS - 2009-10 Addition #1 $2,500,000
Kent-Meridian HS -2011-12 Addition #2 $7,000,000
Construction cost of new HS capacity $9,500,000
Site Acquisition Cost
The site acquisition cost is based on an average cost of sites purchased or built
on within the last ten years. Please see Table 7 on page 27 'for a list of site
acquisition costs and averages.
District l\djustment
The impact fee calculations on pages 29 and 30 include a "District Adjustment"
which is equal to the amount of increase that the impact fee formulas drive out
for this year and adjusted for increase in the Consumer Price lndex.
April 2010 Page 26Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
HXþIIMHT A
fF¡þ{Tffi-{ÉKENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415Site Acquisitions & CostsAverage of Sites Purchased or Built on within last 15 YearsTotal Average Cost / AcreAvg cosl/acreCostAcreaoeLocalionYear Open /PurchasedSchool / Siteto 1996urchasedType &# on MapNote: All rural sites were purchased prior to adoption of Urban Growth Arêa.17Numbersonto locations on Site Bank &Elementary13 / Urban Panther Lake Elementary Replacement S¡te5 / Urban Elementary Site (Halleson & Wikstrom)Middle Schoolurban Northwood Middle School10 / Urban Mill Creek MS (Kent JH)i McMillan St. assembtage12 I Utbdd So Central Site - Un¡ncorp KC (plemmons, yeh, Wms)10200 SE 216 St, Kent 9803'l15435 SE 256 St, Covinglon 9804217007 SE 184 St, Renton 98058411-432 McMillan St., Kent 98032E of 124 SE bn¡r 2A6-28a Pl {UKc)Efementary Site Subtotal 19.40 $5,578,92320082004199620021 9999.4010.0024.421.2339.366.3140.003.83$4,485,013$1.093.910$655,1 38$844,866$1.936.020$3,310,000$537,534s3a2.117$477,129$109,391$26,828$686,883$4e,188$524,564$13,438$78,882$287,573Elem site avêraqe$52,854Middle Schl Site Avg.Middle School Site Subtotal 65.01 $3,436,024Senior High1'l / urban K-M High School Addition (Kent 6 & Britt smith) 2ooz & 2oo3 10002 sE 256rh streetsenior High Kentlake High School (Kombol Moris) 1gg7 21401 sE300 st, Kent 9s0426 / Urban Kentwood Sr Hi AddÍtion (sandhu) lss8 f æoz SE 256th SrreerSenior High S¡te subtoÌal 50.14 $4,149,651$82,761Sr Hí Síte AverageTotal Average Cost / Acre$97,842Total Acreage & Cost134.55 $13,164,59814 / Urban3 / Rural7 / RuralI / Rural2lU¡banISo. King County Act¡vity Center (Nike sile) purchased prior to 1996.Site - Covìngton area North (So of Mattson MS) 1984Site - Harn Lake sast (Pollard) 1992Site - South of Covinglon (Scarsella) 1993Site - SE of Lake Morton area (West) 1993Site - Shady Lake (Sowers-Blaine-Drahota-Paroline) 1995leased out-Old KentandKent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities planTable 7Apr¡l 2010 Pagê27
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FAGTORS FOR EST¡MATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Student Generation Factors - Single Family Student Generation Factors - Multi-Family
Elementary (GradesK-6)
Middle School (Grades 7 - 8)
Senior High (Grades 9 - 12)
Total
Projected lncreased Student Capaeity
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Required Site Acreage per Facility
Elementary (required)
Middle School (required)
Senior High (required)
New Facility Gonstruction Cost
Elementary "
Middle School
Senior High .
* See cost basis on Pg. 26
0.486
0.130
0.250
0.86ô
600
s00
132
11
21
32
$31,840,000
$o
$9,500,000
70,892
16,376
22,064
3%109,332:
1,470,543
667,829
.J,111,036_
3,249,408
1,541,435
667 829
1,133,100
3,342,364
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total
OSPI - Square Footage per Student
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Special Education
Average Site Cost / Acre
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
0.331
0.067
oj24
o.s22
90
117
130
144
287 573
$o
$o
Temporary Facility Square Footage
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Temporary Facility Gapacity & Cost
Elementary @ 24 $123,430
Middle School @ 29 $O
Senior High @ 31 $o
State FU n di n g ASSiStance Gredit (romerty,s:iare March,)
District Funding Assistance Percentage 56.06%
Gonstruction Cost Allowance CcA - costsq. Ft.
Area Cost Allowance (Effective July 09) $17 4.26
District Average Assessed Value
Single Family Residence $ztz 129
District Average Assessed Value
M ulti-Farníly Residence
Apartments 71To Qondos 29%
$t 09,125
Capital Levy Tax Rate/$1,000
Current / $1,000 Tax Rate (1 .7236)$1.72
Total
Permanent Facility Square Footage
Elementary (lncludesKMVA)
Middle School
Senior High
Total S7%
Total Facilities Square Footage
Elementary
Middle School
Senior Hígh
Total
Developer Provided Sites / Facilities
Value
Dwelling Units
General Obligation Bond lnterest Rate
Current Bond lnterest Rate
0
4.33Yo
April 2010 Page 28Kent School District Slx-Year Capital Facilities Plan
0
HKft't¡mT_È--
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAM¡LY RESIDENCE
Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence
Formula: ((A6res x Cost x Student Generation Factor
A 1 (Elementary)
A 2 (Middle School)
A 3 (Senior High)
Formula: ((Facility Cost /
B I (Elementary)
B 2 (Middle School)
B 3 (Senior High)
Formula: ((Facility Cost /
l¡
21
32
$31,840,000
$o
$9,500,000
s287,573
$0
$0
600
1,065
1,000
0.486
0,'130
0.250
0.866
0.5606
0
0.5606
0.486
0.130
0.250
0.866
AE)
$2,562.28
$o
$0
Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Síngle Family Resídence
x Student
Construction Côst Facillty Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio
x
$2,562.28
$25,016.69
$o
$17,452.65.} $42,469.34
$74.s8
$4,272.97
$0
$3,174.93+- $734790
600
900
132
0.97
0.97
0.97
B
0.486
0.130
0.250
D
/ Total
C 1 (Elementary) $123,430 24 0.486
C 2 (M¡ddle School) $0 29 0.130
C 3 (Senior High) $0 31 0.2s0
0.866
State Funding Assistance Gredit per S¡ngle Fäm¡ly Res¡dence (formerly "State Match")
Temporary Facility Gost per Single Family Residence
x Student x
Facility Cost Facility CÊpâcity Student Factor Footaqe Ratio
0.03
0.03
0.03 C+
D 1 (Elementary)
D 2 (Middle School)
D 3 (Senior High)
s174.26
9174.26
$174.26
$74.98
$0
$o
Formula: Area CostAllowance x SPI Feet student X Funding Assistance o/o x Student Factor
90
117
130
Tax Gredit per Single Family Residence
Average SF Residential Assessed Value
Cunent Capital Levy Rate / $1,000
Cunent Bond lnterest Rate
Years Amortized (10 Years)
Developer Provided Facility Credit
Fee Recap
A = Site Acqu¡sit¡on per SF Residence
B = Permanent Faoility Cost per Residence
C = Temporary Facility Cost per Res¡dence
Subtotal
D = State Match Credit per Residence
TC = Tax Credit per Residence
Subtotal
$277,129
$1.72
4.33a/o
10
$45,106.60
$1 '1,036.08
TC é $3,588.18
0 0 FC+0
$2,562.28
$42,469.34
$74.e8
$7,447.90
$3,588.18
Total Unfunded Need
50% Developer Fee Obligation
FC = Facllity Credit (if applicable)
District Adjustment (See Page 28 for explanation)
Net Fee Obligation per Residence - Single Family
$r7,035
0
Page 29
Site Acreege Site CosVAcre Studênt Factor
Area Cost Allowance Ft. / StudêntsPt Yo Student Factor
Facility / Site Value UnitsDwelli
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
$34,070.52
April 2010
H.X8{!BIT ft
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALGULATION for MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE
Slte Acquisition Cost per Multi-Family Resldence Unit
IF x Student Generat¡on Factor
Requlred Site Acreage Averaqe Site CosUAcre FaciliU Capacity Student Factor
Formula: ((Acres x Cost
A 1 (Elementary)
A 2 (Middle School)
A 3 (Senior High)
B 1 (Elementary)
B 2 (Middle School)
B 3 (Senior High)
Formula: ((Facility Cost /
D 1 (Elementary)
D 2 (Middle School)
D 3 (Senior High)
$287,s73
$0
$o
600
900
132
500
1,065
1,000
0.331
0.067
0.124
0.522
/ Total
0.5606
0
0.5606
$3f ,840,000
$0
$9,500,000
$174.26
$174,26
$174.26
11
21
aa
0.331
0.067
0.'t24
o.522
A
0.97
0.97
0.97
B
Ratio
0.03
0.03
0.03c+
0.331
0.067
0.124D.)
$10,971
0
+ $2,0e4.11
$17,038.11
$0
$8,656.52+ $2s,694.63
11094.$2,
$o
$0
Permanant Facillty Constructlon Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit
Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facil x Student x anent / Total
Temporary Facility Cost per Multi-Family Resldenca Unlt
x Student F
Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Fôotage Ratio
x
C 1 (Elementary) $123,430 24 0.331
C 2 (Middle School) $0 29 0.067
C 3 (Senior High) $0 31 0j24
0.522
State Fund¡ng Assistance Gradit per Multi.Family Residonce(formerly "State Match")
Formula: Area CostAllowance x SPI Feet student x Fund Assistance % x StudentFactor
$s1.07
$o
$0
90
117
130
$51.07
$2,910.19
$o
$1.574.77
$4,484-s6
Tax Credit per Multi-Family Residence Unit
Average MF Residential Assessed Value
Current Capital Levy Rate i $1 ,000
Current Bond lnterest Rate
Years Amortized (10 Years)
Developer Provlded Facillt¡t Gredit
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisit¡on per Multi-Family Unit
B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit
C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit
Subtotal
D = Slate Match Credit per MF Unit
TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit
Subtotal
0 0
$1 09,1 2s
s1 .72
433%
10
$27,839.81
$5,897.87
Tc + $1,412.92
Fc+0
$2,094.'11
$25,694.6s
$51.07
$4,484.96
$1,412.92
Total Unfunded Need
50% Developer Fee Obligation
FC = Facility Credit (if applicable)
Dishict Adjustment (See Page 26 for explanation)
Net Fee Obligation per Residential Unit - Multi.family
Page 30
Construction Cost Sh¡dent Factor Ratio
Area Cost Allowance Ft. / StudentsPt Studènt Fâctor
Facilitv / Site Value Dwel Units
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
$21 ,941.93
April 2010
ffiKB.ËEB!T À
IX Summary of Changes to April 2009 Gapital Facilities Plan
The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") is updated annually based on previous
Plans in effect since 1993. The primary changes from the April 2009 Plan are
summarized here.
New Panther Lake Elementary School replaced "Old" Panther Lake Elementary
and opened in Fall 2009. "Old" Panther Lake Elementary is being held in reserve
for utilization in the event of ftood emergency in the Kent Valley.
Future projects include replacement and expansion of Covington Elementary
School, future new Elementary School #31, and two projects that increase
capacity at Kent-Meridian High Schoolto accommodate new growth.
Changes to capacity continue to reflect fluctuations in class size as weil as
program changes. Changes in relocatables or transitional capacity reflect use,
purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement between facilities.
The student enrollment forecast is updated annually. Six-year Kindergarten
projections were modified to meet the requirements for Full Day Kindergarten
programs funded by state apportionment and grants.
The district expects to receive some State Assistance (formerly "matching")
funding for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually.
Biennieal update of student generation rates was completed this year. Unfunded
site and facility needs will be reviewed in the future.
Changes to lmpact Fee Calculation Factors include:
April 2010 PaSe 31
ITEM Grade/Type FROM TO Comments
Student Generation Factor
Single Family (SF)
Student Generation Factor
Multi-Family (MF)
District Equalization Ratios lformer State Match)
Area Cost Allowance (former Boeckh lndex)
Average Assessed Valuation (AV)
AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts.
Debt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000
General Obligation Bond lnterest Rate
lmpact Fee - Single Family
lmpact Fee - Multi-Family
Biennial Update in 2010
+ .58
Biennial Update in 2010
+ .40
Per OSPI Webs¡te
Per OSPI Website
Per Puget Sound ESD
Per Puget Sound ESD
Per King Co. Assessor Report
Market Rate
Change to fee + $92
Change to fee + $56
Elem
MS
SH
Total
Elem
MS
SH
Total
0.445
0.'1 18
0.245
0.486
0.130
0.250
0.808
0.296
0.075
0.111
0.866
0.331
0.067
o.124
SF
MF
SF
MF
0.482
55,78o/o
$168.79
$348,876
s'121 ,557
$1.73
4.960/o
$5,394
$3,322
0.522
56.06%
&174.26
$277,125
$109,'125
$1.72
4.33%
$5,486
$3,378
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
ËHråüffiËT â
X
Appendixes
Appendix A: Galculations of Gapacities for Elementary Schools
Appendix B: Galculations of Capacities for Middle Schools
Appendix G: Galculations of Gapacities for Senior High Schools
Appendix D: Use of Relocatables
Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey
April 2010 Page 32Kent School Dishict Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
EXE.IIBNT fl
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415STANDARD of SERVICE - PROGRAM CAPAC].TY - INVENTORY of RELOCATABLES - FTE and HEADCOUNT ENROLLMENTCariage Crest CCCedar Valley CV/eCovington CO/eCresìwood CWEast H¡ll EHEmerald Park EPFairwood FWeGeorge T. Danief Elem DEGlenridgê cRGrass Lake GUhHor¡zon HEJenkins Creek JCKent Elem. KF-/ehLake Youngs Ly/hMartin Sortun MSMeadow R¡dge MR/eMer¡dianElementary ME/hMillenniumElemenlary MLNeely€'Brien NOPantherLake (New) PLPark Orchard POPine Tree PT/hRidgewood RwhSawyerWoods SWScenic Hill SHSoos Creek SC/eSpringbrook SBSunrise SRihKtrt Mln. Me A€derny fulV18162Q19172117't819l821l5172119172'l20l615182121211717l5211443238448045640850440843245643250436040850445640850448038436043250450450440840836050435620181805600180200385620185618563048180056038060452402498456484504408,t50¡1504525043984645104744645244984405524{r0522504504464408398504416TTTHHARHARTKARARAvTHTART0565272354427676335ó741265427.O2299.50528.50454.50482.0O503.49409.72439.11521.00423.O3496.00309.65551.00454.00512.03470.13482.11566.05547.54592.00466.06¡101.ô6527.68488.S503.00379.50360.53539.00104-84463330567486517s36M5MA55244252833't551471559472509617596652468428564520503406389574111TARHTARmXYffi*{IbIII1 Elementary classroom capacity is based on average of 24'. 18-22 in K€, 23 in Grade 4 & 29 in Grades 5€. lncludes ad¡ustrnents for class s¡ze reduction or program changes.2 Kent School D¡strict Standãrd of Service reserves some rooms for pull-oul programs. ie. 20 Totål = 17 Stândard + I Computer Lab + I Music + 1 Integrated Program classroom.3 Elemeniary schools have 100% spacë utilizãtion rate- 4 Elementary FTE reports Kind @ .5 FDK @ 1.0 - P223 Headcount reports Kindergarten @ 1.0. Excludes ECE preschoofe¡.s.sFDK=Full DayKindergarten T=Tuition-based AR=ARRA]"itlelFundedSchoolw¡de K=KAl.]jtlelFunded A=StateApporl¡onrn€ntFunded H=t-tatfDayK¡ndergartenontyKSDELEMENTARYscHooLNumber ofStd or H¡gh CâpClassroomsStd/High Cap2sE/¡P2 SpecialProgram200s-2010ProgramUseRelocatablesClassroomUseRelo€tablesReloætableCapacityat24 rysgge I10111200sP22gFrE4Enrollment10hl2oogP223 HdcountEnrollmentFCapacityÊLLProgramDat 24 avæge rK5e. ECËo13,235.18 14,0271214320001000000Iz000024720012010320I0J0542a1244A02496484205000.20012404803ó2J0024000U005822528TOTAL 35301122688Kent Sohool Districl Six-Year Cap¡tal Facìlities planAPPENDIX AApril 2010 Page 33
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415STANDARD Of SERVICE. PROGRAM CAPACITY. INVENTORY of RELOCATABLES. FTEandHEADCOUNTENRoLLMENTCedar Heights À,4iddle School CH 32 792 9 33 2Mattson Middle School MA 24 5BS 6 59 7Meeker Middle School MK 33 807 4 59 1Meridian Middle Schoot MJ 26 63i S 64 4Mill Creek Middle Schoot MC 30 725 5 51 2Northwood Middle School NW 33 807 4 46 sKent Mountain View Academy (Grades 3 - 12) M¡ddle Schoof Grade 7 - g EnrollmentKent-Mer¡dian Senior High KM 53 1,376 I 110 12Kentlake Senior High KL 58 f,S0B 12 145 14Kentridge Senior High KR 69 1,766 11 1ZZ 16Kêntwood Senior High KW 65 1,692 5 51 1tKent Mountain V¡ew Academy (crades 3 - 12) Senior Hígh Grade 9 - l2 EnrollmentKent Phoeníx Academy PH Non{raditional H¡gh SchoolRegional Justice Center RJ NiA48160249548119923702890790828s72See ElemAPPENDIX BKSDSENIOR HIGHscHooL#oÍStandardCapacityat 25-31SE/IPELLClsSpecia¡ ËdELLSpecPrgmClsrmsSpecial 1Program2009-2010ProgramClassroomUseRelocatablesRelocâtableCapac¡tyat 31 ea.10t1t200910t1t2009stdProgramUseP223 FTÊ.3HeadcountClsrms2RelocatablesEnrollmentEnrollment1,861.601,751 .602,146.502,010.19145.83303.0037.001,8971,7922,1892.067154378.255.72 8,447Excludes Running Slart &Earlv Childhood Ed students26,76425,777.9015443ts5124124930056164961,4595071SeníorTOTAL245 6.342 36 429 59'139476527,5311,888801,48919123,423953DISTRICT TOTAL28633338'l3S41,8512,1572,2702,137See Elem350NIAAPPENDIX CMT-å-ffi{åJqIÞI1 Special Program capacity inc¡udes classrooms requiring specialized use such as Special Education, Career & Techn¡cal Education Programs, Computer Labs, etc.2 Secondary school capacity is adjusted for 85% utilization rate and l-728 class size reduct¡on in 7th & 1oth grade English classes. gth grade moved to HS in 2004.3 Enrollment is reported on FTE & Headcount bas¡s. P223 Headcount excf udes ECE & College-only Running Starl students. Fuil headcount íncluding ECE & RS = 27 ,567 .Some totals may be sfighfly different due to rounding.Kentschoo¡ Districtsix-Yearcapitar Faciritiespran Total of Appendices A B & C Aprit 2010 pase 3410/1/2009HeadcountÍEnrollment10/1/2009P223 FTÉ.3Enro¡lment709.99679.87675.61672.01828.OO658.6258.9071268167767382865S604.283.00 4.290at29 ea.CapacityRêlocatâbleUseClassroomRelocatablesUseProgramRelocatables0403o000640145001741160435127SpecPrgmClsrmsSpecial 1Program2009-2010ProgramSpæialËdELLSE/IPELLClsStandardCapacity 2al25-29#oÍsrdClsrmsABRKSDMIDDLESCHOOL196178Middle School TOTAL341 33 372 21 494
m"{Lffi-{KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415USE of RELOCATABLES1 Use of additional relocalables for classrooms or special programs is based on need and fluctualions of enrollment at each scf¡ool.2 Full Day Kindergarten w¡ll ¡ncrease the need for relocatables at the elementary level until permanent c€pacity can be prov¡ded.3 Grade Level Reconfigurat¡on - ln 2004, gth grade students moved to high sc¡ools creating sufficient permanent capacity åt middle schools.4 Although relocatables are uti¡¡zed for a wide variety of puçoses, new construction end boundary adjustmenls are t¡med to m¡n¡mize th6 requirement for retocataþles.2009-20102410-20112011-20122012-2013N13-m142014-2015201 5-201 6StudentCaoacit!507150715071507150715071507100B192122882150¡f3481618432296960000000o000000000000000121121121'1211211211210019,21228821504348161843229696Plan for Allocation of Requíred Classroom Relocatable Facilities included in Finance Plan:Elementary 1t2 o I nMiddleSchool 3 o o oSeniorHigh o o o o21ut829000000Total0I122134l82SNo. ofRelocâtablesStudentCâDacitvNo. ofR€læatab¡esStudentCapacitrNo. ofReloæt¡ablesStuden(Capac¡ttNo. ofReloËtablesStudentCaoec¡hNo. ofRe¡o€tablesStudentCâpac¡hNo. ofReloæÞblesSUdentCâDacit!No. olReloætablsSchool YeatRelocatable Use IRelocatables for classroom useRelocatables for program usei (ie. Computer labs, music, etc.)Elementary Capacity Required @ 24 2Middle School Capacity Required @ 29 3Senior High Capacþ Requked @ 31# of Relocatables Utilized 4Classroom Relocatable/Capacity RequiredKent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities planAPPENDIX DApril 2010Page 35
r'¡nry;*,ffi*{ÞKENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415Student Generation Factor SurveyStudent Generation FactorHS0.9501.4620.3540.8950.8620.95'l1.087o.M31.0091.0000.459'1.o540.5450.8900.7840.8700.5750.6920,2530.5324.5770.4880.6690.3430.5280.6250.2430.4960.2910.3900.5330.¿181o.1280.3080,0400.1170.1460-2200.1340.0290.1 980.1250.108o-1570.0670.1 630.1û80.14s0.247o.4620.061o.2460.1380.2440.2830.0710.2830.2s00.'t080.4020.f870.3370.1440.2470.866 0.486 0.130 0.250Student Generation FactorHS0.3700.6520.8400.3401.7060.2190.3780.4410.6850.2840"215t.4M0.54i1o.2271.0980.'f 350.1620.3130.4620.0800.0350.0970.1480.0360.2160.0100.0680.0520.0720.0680.1 200.'l 110.1480.0770.3920.0730.1490.0760.1510.1360.522 0.331 0.067 0.124MSMSElemElemTotalTotalStudentsHS208ls35153112391383l10732173707315313113412628420199172214455I28182254664218l0Jb530I414125582438I25o1752085245620I17439þ/8974505StudentsHS741356866872156931722543924444561324oo1167720127tt110tt1862423121520722163812189MS264MS103Elem983Elêm505Total1,752Total797TotalUnits219t399171r304'l1277010632373511U1721671542,023TotalUnits200207811945196148211251881,527ElementiaryAreaEagle Crest - Park V¡ew - SouthridgeEastland Meadows - KentEastpointeFern Crest East - KentFern Crest West - KeniHighland & Rhododendron EstatesHEscMSSRSRMLSWHECWGRMLcoCWRWRWcwHighlandsRidgeParke Meãdows & Pa¡ke Meadows SouthMeadowsRose's Meadow/ The Reserve / Stonefield / Crofton HillsRidgeParks - Fairwood/Rentonrovitsky Park - RentonCreek - Cov¡ngtonTotalElementaryAreaApalments - CovingtoncoEHSHFWSHccNOSBPLGRApartments - KentApartrnenls - KentFa¡rwood Pond Apartments - RentonPark Place Apartments - KentRed M¡ll al Fairwood - RentonRiverview - The Parks - KentCreek Land¡ng - KentSprings Apartments - Kentat Benson Condos - KentTotãlSingle Family DevelopmentsM ulti-Family DevelopmentsEdu¡og*4191A7395,10041022A4313894221337a420179416417Edulog#418412t561ß414147337102413192Kent School D¡strict S¡x-Year Capital Facil¡t¡es planAPPENDIX EApril 2010 Page36
DFTFRI\I INATION OF NONSI GNIFICANCE
for
Kent School District No. 415
2010 Capital Facilities Plan
lssued with a 14-day comment and appeal period
Description of Proposal:
This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single
action:
1. The adoption of the Kent School District 2010 Six-Year Capital Facilities plan by
the Kent School District for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District.
2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Kent
School District 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities plan Element of the
King County Comprehensive Plan.
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent to include the
Kent School District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capitâl Facilities plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Kent.
4- The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Covington to ínclude
the Kent School District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Faciities plan
Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Covington.
5. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Auburn to include the
Kent School District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capitâl Facitities pfan Elernent
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Auburn.
6. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton to include the
Kent School District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capitãl Facilities Plan Elernent
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Renton.
7 - This proposal may also involve amendment of Comprehensive plans of the
Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and/or SeaTac to incorporate the Kent School District
2010 Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities element of that jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan.
Proponent: Kent School District No. 415
ffix,þs$ffiåT A
Location of the Proposal:
The Kent School District includes an area of approximately 72 square miles. The City of
Covington and portions of the cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple Valley,
and SeaTac fall within the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County.
LeaC,Agency:
Kent School District No. 415 is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926.
Ïhe lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not pose a
probable significant adverse impact to the environment. An environmental impact statement
(ElS) is not required under RcW 43.21C.030 (2) (c). This decision was made after a review of
the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This
information is available to the public upon request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 4:00 p.m., June 22,2010. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based
on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse irnpacts are likely,
withdraw the DNS. lf the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment
deadline.
Responsible Official
Fred H
Assistant Superintendent usiness Services
Kent School District No. 415
Telephone:(253) 373-72e5
Address 12033 SE 256th Street #A-600
Kent, Washington 98030-6643
Appeals of this determination are governed by Board Policy No. 9280 which can be obtained
from Fred High, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services, Kent School District No. 415,
12033 SE 256th Street #A-600, Kent, Washington 98030-6643 and pursuant to WAC 1gT-11-
680 and RCW 43.21C.075.
Date of lssue:June 8, 2010
June B, 2010
-Tf
Date Published
ËXþflEffiET A
ENVIRONMENT I\L CHECKLIST
WAC 1 97-1 1 -960 Environmental Checklist
Purpose of Checklist:
Ïhe State Environmental Poticy Act (SEPA), chapter 4g.21CRCW, requires allgovernmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making
decisions. An environmental impact statement (ElS) must be prepared for all proposals withprobable signíficant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this
checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your
proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be àone) and tó help the
agency decide whether an EIS is required.
I nstructions for Applicants:
This environmentalchecklist asks you to describe some basic information about yourproposal- Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmóntal
impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an Ef S. Answer the questions
briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge.
ln most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations orproject plans without the need to hire experts. lf you really do noi know the answer, or if aquestion does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete
answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, andlandmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. lf you have proÏlems, thegovernmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do themover a period of time or on different parcels of land, Atiach any additional-information that wil
help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit thischecklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additiınal informatioí reasonably
related to determíning if there may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may beanswered "does not apply" ln addition, complete the Supplementafsheet for nonprôject
actions (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant,"and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "prepares," and "affecteã geographic area,,,respectively.
1
EXFåðffi8T A
A.BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
The adoption of a six-year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District.ïhe comprehensive Plans of King county, city of Kent, city or covington, citv ãtRenton, City of Auburn and possibly Cities of Maple Valley,
-Black
Diañond anO Seatachave been and/or will be arnended to include the Kent School District ZOf O Cap¡.,a¡Facilities Plan in the capital Facilities plan Element of each jurisdiction's
comprehensive Plan. A copy of the District's Plan is available for review in the DistrictFinance & Planning Department.
2. Name of applicant:
Kent School District No. 415.
3. Address and phone number of appricant and contact person:
Kent School District No. 415
12033 SE 256th Street # A-600
Kent, WA 98030-6643
Contact Person: Fred H. High, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services
Telephone: (253) 373-7 295
4. Date checklist prepared: June 2,2010
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Kent School District No. 41S
6. Proposed timing or schedure (incruding phasing, if appricabre):
The 2010 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted in June,2010 and fon¡rarded to King county, cities of.Kent, covington, Auburn, Renïon, MapreValley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac for possible inclusion"in each jurisdiction,s
Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities. Plan will be updated annually. Site-specificprojects have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review.
7 " Do you have any plans for future additions, expansíon, or further activity relatedto or connected with this proposal? lf yes, explain.
The Capital Facilities Plan reviews additions to existing high schools and proposesconstruction of a new elementary school and a replacımeît of Covington'er"rãnt"rvSchool.
2
EHF'å$ffiåT A
B- List any environmental ínformation you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The above-referenced projects will undergo environmental review at the time of formatproposal.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of otherproposals directly affecting the property co'rered by ycur prcposat? '
lf yes, explain.
No.
10.
known
List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
King County and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn will review and approve theCapital Facilities Plan for the purposes of impact fee ordinances and wilíneed to adoptthe Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilíties Plan element of the Comprehensíve
Plans of King County and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn. Cities of MapleValley, Black Diamond, and seaTac may also rèview and approve the plan for thepurposes of any school impact fee ordinances and may adopt the plan as an
amendment to the Capital Facilities element of their comprehensive plans.
11. Gíve a brief, complete descríption of your proposal, including the proposed usesand the size of the project and site. There are several questions latér in t'his checklistthat ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to re eatthose answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include aoå¡tiona¡specifíc information on project description.)
This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Kent SchoolDistrict 2010 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planníng the facilities needs of theDistrict and for inclusion in the Capital Facilities Plan elementãnd possible amendmentof the comprehensive Plans for King county, city of covington, cíty or Kent, city ofRenton, City of Auburn, City of SeaTac, City of lVlaple Valley and Ciiy of Black Diamond.
A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the Kent School District BusinessServices Department office.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understandthe precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, andsection, township, and range, if known. lf a proposal would occur over a range of area,províde the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, siie plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available.-While you should rüUrtany plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detaitedplans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
The 2010 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Kent School District. The District includesan area of approximately 70 square miles. The City of Covington, and portions of thecities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple valle!, seaTac'and parts ofunincorporated King county fall within the District's boundari-es.
3
F}¿B"{qffiffi A
B ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
The Kent School District is comprísed of a variety of topographic land forms and
gradients, including all of those listed. Specific topographic characteristics wílf be
identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project.
b. what is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent sfope)?
Specific slope characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit process
for each capital project-
c. what general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? lf you know the classifícation of agricultural soils,-specify them
and note any prime farmland.
Specific soil types will be identified during the planning and permit process for each
capital project.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? lf so, describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Kent School District. Specific soil limitations on
individual project sites will be identified at the time of environmentat review.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or gradingproposed. lndicate source of fill.
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-
specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. ÞroposeOgrading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of fill materials
will be identified as appropriate to each project.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? lf so, generally
describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of construction projects curren¡yproposed in the Capital Facilitíes Plan. lndividual projects and their erosion ímpacts
will be evaluated on a site-specific basis. lndividual projects wíll be subject to
environmental review and local approval on the tíme of proposal.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces afterproject construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
Percentage of impervious cover will vary with each capital facílíties project and will beaddressed during project-specific environmental review.
4
ffiXh,ffflBIT A
h.
any:
Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
Erosion potential on individual project sites will be addressed during project-specific
environmental review. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be
met.
2. A.!r
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust,
automobile, odors, industrialwood smoke) during construction and when the project
is completed? lf any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from individual projects.
Air-quality impacts will be evaluated during project-specific environmental'reúiew.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? lf so, generally describe.
Off-site sources and necessary mitigation wilt be addressed during project-specific
environmental review.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emíssions or other impacts to air, if any:
Plans for individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or wiil be
subject to environmental review and relevant local approval processes, including
obtaining of any nec€ssary air quality permits, at the iime individual projects are
formally proposed. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonprojäct Actíons.
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) ls there any surface water body on or ín the immediate vicinity of the site(including year-round and seasonalstreams, saltwater, lakes, ponOs, we¡ands)?
lf yes, describe type and provide names. lf appropriate, state what stream or
river it flows into.
There is a network of surface water bodies within the Kent School District. The
surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched andincorporated in the desígn of each individual project.
2) Will the project rlQuire any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet)the described waters? lf yes, please describe and attách available plans.
some projects may require work near these described waters. lndividualprojects in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental review and
local approval requirements at the time the project is formally proposed.
5
ffiKg"$ËBST A
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected. lndicate the source of fillmaterial.
lnformation with respect to placement or remcval of fill or dredge material will be
addressed at the time of project-specific envíronmental review. Applicable local
regulations have been or will be satisfied.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give
generaldescription, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions have been or will be addressed
d u ring project-s pecific environ me ntal review.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 1O0-year floodplain? lf so, note location on
the site plan.
Each capital facilities project, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to
meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surfacewaters? lf so, describe the type of waste and antícipated volume of discharge.
specific information regarding discharges of waste materials, if any, wiil be
addressed during project-specific environmental review. please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actíons.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground
water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quãntities-if known.
lndÍvidual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact ground
water resources. Each project will be evaluated during project-specific
environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been orwill be satisfied
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Describe waste materialthat will be discharged into the ground from
septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic seviage; industrial,
containing the following chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describé the general
size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses lo be
served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are
expected to serve.
lmpacts of discharged waste material, if any, have been or will be addressed
during site-specific, project-level environmental review.
6
HHFåfiffiflT A
c.Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of
collection and dÍsposal, if any (include quantities, if known). where will this
water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? lf so, describe.
lndividua! projects includeC in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying storm
water runoff consequences. Each project will be subject to environmental review
and applicable local regulations
2) could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally
describe.
lndividual projects included in the capital Facilities plan will have varying
environmental irnpacts and will be subject to appropriate review ano locat
regulations prior to construction. lnformation regarding waste materials wilf be
presented at the time of such review. please see the supplemental sheet for
Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surlace, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts have been or will be developed
on a project-specific basis in cooperation with the appropriate jurisdiction.
4. Plants:
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
There are various vegetative zones within the Kent School District. An inventory of
species has been or will be produced as part of project-specific environmental
review.
b. what kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
7
ffiHþg$ffiIT A
lmpacts on vegetation will be determined at the time of projecfspecific environmental
review at the time the project is formally proposed. please see the Supplemental
Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Specific impacts to these species from individual projects has been or v¡ill be
determíned at the time of project proposal and will be addressed during site-specific,
project-level environmental review.
d' Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
lndividual projects included in the capital Facilities plan will be subject to
environmental review and local approval at the time of project proposal.
c. ls the síte part of a migration route? lf so, explain.
lmpacts on mígratÍon routes, if any, wíll be addressed during site-specific, project-
level environmental review.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the síte orare known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass , salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species observed on or near sites has been or will be developed
d u rin g project-specifíc environ menta I review.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Specific impacts to these species from individual projects will be determined at thetime of project proposal and will be reviewed in coopêration with the affectedjurisdictions.
I
HKHNffiET A
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlÍfe have been or will be
determined at the time of site-specific, project-level environmental review.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to
meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for
heating, manufacturing, etc.
The State Board of Education requires a life-cycle cost analysis of all heating,
lighting, and insulating systems prior to allowing specific projects to proceed. Energy
needs will be decided at the time of specific engineering and site design planning.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
propertÍes? lf so, generally describe:
lndividual projects of this Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated as to their impact on
the solar potential of adjacent projects during environmental review.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Energy conservation measures will be considered at the project-specific design
phase and environmental review.
7. EnvironmentalHealth
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a
result of this proposal? lf so, describe.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actíons.
2)
any:
Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if
Proposed projects will comply with all current codes, standards, and rules and
regulations. lndividual projects have been or will be subject to environmental
review and local approval at the time of formal submittal.
9
ffiKr'fiilffiËT A
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for
example: traffic. equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises exist within the Kent School District. Specific noise sources
have been or will þe identified during project-specífic environmental review.
2_) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with
the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? lndicate what hours noise would come from the
site.
Normal constructíon noises would exist on a short-term basis during school
construction. There could be an increase in traffic or operations-related noíse
which would be addressed during project specific environmental review. please
see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Project noise impacts have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during theprojeclspecific environmental review. Each project is or will be subject tı
applicable local regulations.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a. what is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Kent School District, including residential,commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, agricultural, forestry, open spãc",recreational, etc.
b. Has the síte been used for agriculture? lf so, descrÍbe.
This question will be addressed during site-specific, project-level environmental
review.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
structures located on proposed sites have been or will be identified and described
d u rin g project-specífic environmental review when a ppropriate.
d. Will any structures be demolished? lf so, what?
Structures to be demolished, if any, will be identified as part of the project-specific
environmental review process.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
10
ffiKF'sfrffiHT 4
There are a variety of zoning classifícations within the Kent School District. Site
specific zoning ínformation has been or will be identified during project-specific
environmental review.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
An inventory of comprehensive plan designations has been or will be completed
d u ri n g projeclspecif ic environ menta I review.
g. lf applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
Any shoreline master program designations have been or will be identified during
project-specific environ mental review.
I Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area?
lf so, specify.
Environmentally sensitive areas, íf any, will be identified during project-specific
environmental review.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
This information has been or will be provided at the time of project-specific
environmental review.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
It is not anticipated that proposed projects will displace any people. Dísplacement ofpeople, if any, will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce dispracement impacts, if any:
lndividual proiects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-
specific environmental review and local approval at the time the project is'formally
proposed.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing andprojected land uses and plans, if any:
Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have
been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planniñg process änd duringproject-specific environmental review.
9. Housing:
a' Approximately how many units would be provided , rf any? lndicate whether high,
middle, or lowincome housing.
No housing units would be provided.
l-1
Nii$"{HffiüT A
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? lndicate whether
high, middle, or low-income housing.
Any impact of project proposals on existing housing have been or would be evaluated
d u ring project-specific environmental review proced u res.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or cont¡"o! housing lmpacts, if any:
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts have been or will be addressed
during site-specific, project-level environmental review.
10. Aesthetics:
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas;
what is the principalexterior building material(s) proposed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or wíll be determined at the time of site-specific, project-
level environmental review.
b. what views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of síte-specific, projec!
level environmental review.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts have been or will be
determined at the time of project-specific environmentai review.
11. Light and Glare:
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific
environmental review.
b.' C^ould light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere withviews?
Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific
environmental review.
c. what existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposaf?
Off-slle sources of light or glare have been or will be evaluated at the time of project
specific environmental review.
L2
Fe{$"$8ffilT A
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Mitigation of light and glare impacts has been or will be addressed during project-
specific environmental review.
12. Reereation:
a. What designated and informal recreational opportuníties are in the immediate
vicinity?
There are a variety of formal and informal recreationalfacilities within the Kent
School District.
b Would the proposed project displace any existíng recreational uses? lf so,
describe.
Recreational impacts have been or will be addressed during project specific
environmental review. Projects in the capital Facilities plan may enhance
recreational opportunities and uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Any adverse effects on recreation stemming from individual project proposals have
been or will be subject to mitigation during the environmental review procedure. A
school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of
additional play fields and gymnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preseruation;
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or localpreservation registers known to be on or next to the site? lf so, generally describe.
The existence of historic and cultural resources will be determined at the tíme of
project-specific environmental review.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites has been or will be conducted as part of project
specific environmental review.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis.
l_3
HX$4$ffiHT A
14. Transportation
a. ldentify public streets and highways serving the síte, and describe proposed
access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
lmpact on public streets and highways has been or will be assessed during projech
specific environmental review.b. ls síte currently sen¡ed by public transit? lf not, what is the approximate distance
to the nearest transit stop?
The relationship between specific projects and public transit has been or will be
assessed d u ring project-specif i c environ mental review.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would
the project eliminate?
An inventory of parking spaces and the impacts of specific projects on parking
spaces has been or will be conducted during project-specific environmental review.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? lf so, generally describe (indicate whethèr
public or private).
The development of new schools may require new access roads or streets. This
issue wíll be fully addressed during project-specific environmental review.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? lf so, generally describe.
Use of water, rail or air transportation has been or will be addressed during site-
specific, project-level environmental review.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project?
lf known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Mitigation of Ímpacts on transportation has been or will be addressed during project-
specific environmental review.
15. Public Services:
a' Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example:
fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? lf so, gànerally
describe.
L4
ffiXFtgffi$T A
Ïhe District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities
Plan will substantially increase the need for other public services. lmpacts have been
or will be evaluated on a project-specific basis.
b. Proposed rneasures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
Schoofs are built with automatic securíty systems, fíre alarms, smoke alarms, heat
sensors and sprinkler systems.
16. Utilities:
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse
service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Utilities available at project sites have been or will be identified during project specific
environmental review.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the
service, and the general construction activíties on the site or in the immediatã vicinity
which might be needed.
Utility revisions and construction needs will be identified during project-specific
environmental review.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand
that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
t
Signature:
Date Submitted: June 8,2010
for Business Services
15
ffix&"å$ßtT A
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal or the types ofactivities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater iniensity or
at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and ingeneralterms.
1 How would the proposal be likely to íncrease discharge to water; emissions to air;production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous èubstances; or production ofnoise?
To the extent this Plan makes it more likely that schoolfacilities will be constructed,
and/or renovated or remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be morelikely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks,
access roads and playgrounds will increase storm water runoff, which could enîersurface or ground water. Emissions to air could result from heating systems,
emergency generators and other equipment, and from additional car and bus trips to
and from the school for students and faculty. Any emissions resulting from this þlan
should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazãrdous
substances, with the possible exception of storage of diesel fuel or gasoline foremergency generating equipment. Noíse may result from additional traffic and fromconcentrating several hundred children at a new facility, especially before and afterschool and duríng recesses.
To the extent this proposal allows additional residential development to occur, theseimpacts would also increase somewhat, but it is not possible to quantify thoseimpacts at thís time. The Ímpacts woutd depend on ihe type, location ãnd distributionof housing, for example, whether singte or multiple family and the location of the
school.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
Facilities implementing the Plan have been or will be evaluated at the project specificlevel and impacts will be mitigated accordingly. Storm water detention
"nO
run'otf *illmeet applicable County and/or City requirements and, depending on the date ofactualconstruction, may be subject to a National Pollutani Díschãrge Elíminatiãn
System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will-be minimal, andwill meet any applícable requirements of the Puget Sıund Air poflution ControiAuthority- Fuel oilwill be stored according to loðaland state requirements.
1"6
F\í$å$ffiüT A
2 How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. Depending
on the particular site, construction of facilities may require clearing sites of plants and
loss of animal habitat. To the extent residential development is allowed, additional
area may be cleared and eliminated as habitat for animals. There are not tikely to be
any impacts on fish or marine life, although some water quality degradation in
streams and rivers could occur due to increased residentlal Ce',,elcpment. These
impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail durÍng project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
lndividual projects will be evaluated and mitigated appropriately on a project-specific
basis, but specific mitigation proposals cannot be identified at this time.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Any actual projects resulting from this Plan would consume heating fuel and electrical
energy. lncreased traffic resulting from the constructíon of additional facilities would
consume petroleum based fuels. Reduced traffic resulting from construction of
another neighborhood school may also reduce amounts of fuel consumed, but it is
not possible to quantify such reduction in consumption at this time. These impacts
have been or will be addressed in more detaíl during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
Facilities would be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency
standards.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitíve areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as
parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Plan and facilities constructed pursuant to the Plan should have no impact on
these resources. lt is not possible to predict whether other developmenf made
possible by this Plan would affect sensitive areas.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures have
been or will be proposed during project-specífíc review. Annual updates of thís plan
will be coordinated with King county, cities of Kent, covington, Auburn, Renton,
SeaTac, Maple Valley and Black Diamond as part of the Growth Management Act
process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas.Ïo the extent the School District's facilities planning process is part of the overall
growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be
protected.
T7
HliF-#tffi8T A
5- How would the proposal be likety to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existíng-plans?
The Plan will not have any impact on land or shorelíne use that is incompatible with
existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
None are proposed at this time. Actual facilities constructed to implement the plan
will be sited and constructed to avoid or reduce tand use impacts.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
This proposal should not create substantial new demands for transportation. Theprojects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create an increase in traffic nearnew District facilities but also reduce traffic by creating the opportunity for morestudents to walk to a closer school. The construction ót tfre facilities iñduded in theCapital Facilities Plan may result in minor increases in the demand for public servicesand utilities, such as fire and police protection, and water, sewer, and electric utilities.None of these impacts are likely to be significant. The impacts on transportation andpublic services and utilities of the projects included in the Capital Facilities plan willbe addressed during project-level review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time.
7- ldentify, íf possíble, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal
laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws orrequirements for the protection of the environment.
1B
Ë}ffi{BffiHT fl
2O11 - 2016 Capital Improvement Program
Sources of Funding
Amounts in OOO's
Total zOlL 2OI2 2OL3 2OL4 2015 2016
Sources of Funds
Capital Improvement Fund
Utility Funds
Facilities Fund
General Fund
Grants
Other Sources
Total Sources of Funds
7,050
t6,760
7L5
800
7,736
1,395
3,695
19,34r
590
L,250
505
549
47,764
100,081
3,860
7,80O
70,210
Ll,862
2,574
11,350
0
2,000
289
2,588
15,625
14,895
725
1,25O
2,635
7,475
6,87O
19,5 10
790
t,250
2,740
4,495
5,950
18,225
L,040
1,25O
2,3O5
r,420
775,577 18,801 28,456 36,545 35,655 30,190 25,930
Other Sources
10/
General Fund
Ca pita I
lmprovement Fund
24%
racilities Éfhd
ao/¿to
ity Fun
57%
ffixFgsffigr t
ZOLL - 2OL6 Capital Improvement Program
Projects Forecast
Amounts in OOO's
Total zOlL 2OLZ 2013 2OL4 2015 2OL6
Proiects
General Government
Public Safety
Transportation
Parks, Rec & Comm Services
Utilities
Total Projects
3,996
195
2,000
L,260
11,350
1,991
7,295
1,300
6,360
!7,510
2,rLs
345
7,750
7,0o5
L8,975
L3,602
10,555
10,300
38,039
103,081
7,920
8,280
7,750
8,950
75,645
1,915
245
L,750
11,485
20,260
1,665
195
1,750
2,979
t9,347
175,577 18,801 28,456 36,545 35,655 30,190 25,930
2
Public Safety
6%
General
Government
8%
Transportation
6%
Rec & Comm
Services
2t%
s9%
ffix${$ffigT A
FEDFRAL WAY PUBL]C SCHOOLS
School District No. 210 - King County
31405 - l8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
RESOLUTION NO. 2O1O-28
A RESOLLIION of the Board of Education of the Federal Way School
District No. 210, to províde to the City of Kent the 2011 Gpital Facilities
Plan.
WHEREAS, the Federal Way School DÍstrict Board of Education hereby provides
to the City of Kent the District's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan, documenting present and
future school facility requirements of the District, and
WHEREAS, the Plan contains all elements required by the Growth Management
Act and City of Kent Ordinance No. 3260, which addresses concurrency, allows each
school district to establish their own standards of service, and provides for future school
impact fees.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Superintendent be authorized and
directed to submit the adopted 2011 Capital Facilities Plan to the City of Kent,
ADOPTED this 25th day of May, 2010
Board Di
Di
D¡
r
Director
Director
ry
ffiKffififfiËT A
Fgnen¿r 1Ã/'¿Y Punrtc ScsüüLs
-e,å f,-
2011
CAPITAT FACILITIES PLAN
Lakelatzd Elementary
tw
f:)i$'å$ffifi"'q'_L*
F'EDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
20tt
CAPITAL F'ACILITIES PLAN
BOARD OF EDUCATION
Tony Moore, President
Angela Griffin, Vice President
Ed Barney, Director
Amye Bronson-Doherty, Director
Suzanne Smith, Director
SUPERINTENDENT
Thomas R. Murphy
Prepared by: Sally D. Mclean
TanyaNascimento
E,qF!!B[T _â*
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
SECTION 1 TIIE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Introduction
Inventory of Educational Facilities
Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities
Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities
Needs Forecast - New Facilities
Six Year Finance Plan
SECTION 2 MAPS OF DISTRICT BOTINDARIES
Introduction
Map - Elementary Boundaries
Map - Middle School Boundaries
Map - High School Boundaries
SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Introduction
Building Capacities
Portable Locations
Student Forecast
Capacity Summaries
King County Impact Fee Calculations
SECTION 4
I
2-3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
l2
13
14
15
t6-t7
18-19
20-22
23-27
28-30
SUMMARY OF CFIANGES FROM T}IE 2O1O
PLAN
3r-33
l_
pi]"n':lBËT ff
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1i CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act
(SHB)2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee
Ordinances of King County Code 214, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249
effective December 21,1995 as amended, City of Kent Ordinance No.3260 effective
March 1996, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal Way
Public Schools has updated its 20i 1 Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2010.
This Plan is scheduled for adoption by King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal
Way and the City of Auburn and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each
jurisdiction by reference. This plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the
Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Des Moines has not
adopted a school impact fee ordinance. The City of Des Moines collects school impact
fees as part ofthe SEPA process.
The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas
within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning
Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area
Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the
Federal Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries.
King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to
meet the region's need for housing, jobs, services, culture, and recreation. This Plan's
estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption.
This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which
requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not
intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may
prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies or management need.
The District has prepared a multi-phase plan for the renovation and construction of
Federal Way Schools and support buildings. The Board authorized presenting the $149
million bond on May 15, 2007. The bond, passedat63.93%, will replace four
elementary schools, Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla and one middle
school, Lakota.
Plans to replace Federal Way High School and Decatur High School and to increase
capacity by approximately 400 students at each school are planned in later phases.
Federal Way High School was built in 1938. It has been added onto at least 10 times and
currently has an almost maze-like layout. Based on an annual 40á increase in
construction cost, the estimated cost to rebuild Federal Way High School is $ 122 million.
Estimated construction costs will be re-calculated prior to the next bond election. None
of the cost to replace Federal Way or Decatur High School is included in the Impact Fee
calculation in this Plan.
The non-instructional projects included in the plan will consolidate support services
operations at a single location. The current Transportaiion and Maintenance facility
cannot continue to meet the District needs in the future. Nutrition services and other
administrative functions will also relocate to this centralized location.
¿
ffi]{i-!qffiåT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Construction of Panther Lake & Valhalla has been completed and students began the
2009-10 school year in the new buildings. Lakota Middle School will be completed this
summer and students will begin the upcoming school year in the new school. The
District will be awarding bids for Sunnycrest & Lakeland in May & June and
construction for both sites will begin this summer. During the construction of
Sunnycrest, students will be served at an ofÊsite location.
In Fall 2010,the District will offer the Middle Years IB program at Totem & Kilo. The
Middle Years IB programs will require students to take a foreign language in addition to
the core subjects currently offered at the middle schools. In Fall 2011, the district will
implement a dual-language program at Sunnycrest. The dual-language program will
offer opportunities for students to engage in bilingual learning. The program will begin
with a K-l program adding a new grade level each year. Each grade level will require
three classrooms.
The District continues to monitor factors that may have an impact on enrollment and
capacity at our schools. One such factor isIIB 226I, which will phase in full-day
kindergarten for all students. The District will follow this bill as it progresses and assess
the possible facility impact this bill may create. Another factor would be the inclusion of
a Program of Early Learning for at risk children within the overall Program of Basic
Education. According to the projections provided by the Puget Sound Educational
Service District, Federal Way was projected to have 1,219 chlldren eligible for Head
Start, Early Head Start and ECEAP in2009. Funded capacity for these programs is only
32I leaving 898 children unserved. If a bill including Early Learning as a part of the
Program of Basic Education were to pass, there would be a signifrcant impact to the
capacity of our schools. We will also continue to study school boundaries as new
housing and fluctuating populations impact specific schools. Some shifts in boundaries
may be required in the coming years.
3
F1"q.!IBåT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 1 - THE CAPITAL F'ACILITIES PLAN
The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be
gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing
community.
This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and
expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. A Financial Plan
that shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed
follows this.
4
HHF{1MflT A
FEDERAL WAY PIIBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAI FACILITIES PLAN
INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Adelaide
Brigadoon
Camelot
Enterprise
Green Gables
Lake Dolloff
Lake Grove
Lakeland
Mark Twain
Meredith Hill
Mirror Lake
Nautilus (K-8)
Olympic View
Panther Lake
Rainier View
Sherwood Forest
Silver Lake
Star Lake
Sunnycrest*
Twin Lakes
Valhalla
Wildwood
Woodmont (K-8)
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
1635 SV/ 304th St
3601 sw 336ú St
4041 S 298û St
35101 5th Ave S\M
32607 47ú Ave SW
4200 s 308ü st
303 SW 308ú St
35827 32od Ave S
2450 S Star Lake Rd
5830 S 300ù St
625 S 314ú st
1000 s 289ù st
26265W 327úSt
34424l't Ave S
3015 s 368ü St
34600 12tr Ave SW
1310 sw 325thPl
4014 S 270ü Sr
24629 42nd Ave S
4400 sw 320'h st
27847 42nd Ave S
2405 S 300ú Sr
26454 16ú Ave S
34620 9th Ave S
36001 I't Ave S
4400 S 308ú Sr
1415 SW 3141h St
1101 S Dash Point Rd
33914 19ú Ave SW
3450 S 360ü'ST
26630 40ù Ave S
26630 40ú Ave S
2800 sw 320ú st
30611 16úAve S
4248 S 288ft St
35ggg 16ú Ave S
31455 28ú Ave S
Federal Way
Federal Way
Aubum
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Aubum
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Kent
Kent
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Des Moines
98023
98023
98001
98023
98023
98001
98023
98001
98003
98001
98003
98003
98023
98003
98003
98023
98023
98032
98032
98023
98001
98003
98198
98003
98003
98001
98023
98003
98023
98001
98032
98032
Federal V/ay Public Academy (6-10)
Illahee
Kilo
Lakota
Sacajawea
Saghalie
Sequoyah
Totem
TAF Academy (6-12)
HIGH SCHOOLS
Decatur
Federal Way
Thomas Jefferson
Todd Beamer
Career Academy at Truman
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS
Federal Way
Federal Way
Aubum
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Aubum
Kent
Kent
Federal Way
Federal V/ay
Auburn
Federal Way
Federal Way
98023
98003
98001
98003
98003
Merit School 36001 l't Ave S Federal Way
Internet Academy 31455 28ú Ave S Federal Way
Employment Transition Program 33250 21't Ave SW Federal Way
*During the construction ofthe new school, Sunnycrest will be relocated to 440 S I 86rb St, Burien 98148
5
98003
98003
98023
ffi){g{$ffi[T â
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CURRENT IT\TVENTORY NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES
Develoned Propertv
Administrative Building
MOT Site
Central Kitchen
Federal Way Memorial Field
Northwest Center
Leased Space
Community Resource Center
Student Support Annex
Notes:
31405 18ú Ave S
1066 S 320ü St
1344 S 308ü St
1300 s 308ú st
33330 8tr Ave S
1813 S Commons
320201't Ave S
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
98003
98003
98003
98003
98003
98003
98003
In July 20ll,the Administrative Building, Community Resource Center, and Student
Support Annex will be relocated to the Northwest Center. The leases for the Community
Resource Center and the Student Support Annex will end in August 20IL In 2010,
construction will begin on Site 81. The MOT Site &, Central Kitchen will be relocated to
this site when construction is complete. The Administration Building and MOT Site have
been surplussed and will be marketed for sale.
Undeveloped Propertv
Site
#
Location
75 SW 360th Street &,3rd Avenue SW- 9.2 Acres
S 351st Street &,S2ndAvenue S - 8.8 Acres
E of 10th Avenue SW - SW 334th &. SW 335th Streets - 10.04 Acres
N of SW 320ù andeast of 45ú PL SW -23.45 Acres
S 344th Street &.46thAvenue S - 17.47 Acres
l't Way S and S 342nd St - Minimal acreage
S 308ti' St and 14ú Ave S - .36 Acres
S 332nd St and 9ft Ave S - 20 Acres
6s
60
73
7T
82
96
81
Notes
Not all undeveloped properties arelarge enough to meet school construction
requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed
to house students in the District.
6
ffiHft{üffi8T A-
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF
FUNDS
Purchase and Relocate
Portables
Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is
Impact Fees.
Elementary Schools:
Lakeland, Panther Lake,
Sunnycrest and Valhalla
Replace Existing Buildings
Increase capacity at Lakeland,
Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and
Valhalla by a total of 200 seats
Voter approved bonds.
Lakota Middle School Replace Existine Bui ldins Voter approved bonds
Federal Way High School Replace Existing Building,
Increase Capacity
Future bond author ization
Decatur High School Replace Existing Building,
Increase Capacity
Future bond author ization.
NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES
The District is also planning the replacement of some non-instructional facilities. The
District has purchased 20 acres (Site #81) for construction of consolidated facilities for
support services functions. Transportation, Nutrition Services, Maintenance and other
non-instructional functions will be housed at this centralized location.
As part of the multi-phase plan, the District intends to increase capacity for high school
students with expansion at the Decatur High School site. Increased capacity at Federal
Way High and at Decatur High in later phases supplant the need for construction of a
fifth comprehensive high school.
7
'" "T iIffiüT Ê
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NEEDS F'ORECAST . ADDITIONAL FACILITIES
NEW FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOURCE
OFFUNDS
No current plans for additional facilities.
I
ffiHT*¡BNT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2O1I CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANSix Year Finance PlanSecured FundingProjected RevenueActual and Planned ExpendituresNOTES:1. These fees re cunently being held in a King Comty, City of Federal Way and City of Kent impact fee account, and will beavailable for use by the District for system improvements. This is year end balmce on 12l31/09.2. These funds come fron various sales ofland and are set aside for estimated expenditures. This is yea end balance on 12131/09.3. This is the 12/31/09 balnce ofbond funds. This figure includes interest eanings.This is the balance on 12/31109.md system improvements to existing buildings. These improvements ûrclude HVAC, and other structural improvements tre not related to capacity increase.6. These ile mticipated bond fimds. Voters have approved a bond for $149m, $45m ofthis bond is for non school consüuction. Ls of 12/31109, $127m has been sold.T.Projectedsaleofsurplusproperties. Theseñ¡ndswillbeusedtoretiredebtincunedfortheacquisitionofareplacmentEducationalSupportCenter.8. These ile projected fæs based upon knowr residential developments in the District ove¡ the lext six yeds. This figue assmes 525,000 per month for the next six yeas.This figue has been adjusted to reflect tlte mrent economy.9 These fees represflt the cost of purchasing and installing new portables. The portable expenditue in fture yeas may replace existing portables that a¡e not fnctional.These may not increase capacit¡r md re not included in the capacity sumary.rãffid¡IlÞII9s223.9t6$I.498.977s42.t02 7s1tsgl0 840's42.914.804SourcesImpact Fees l1)Land Sale Funds (2)Bond Funds (3)State Match (4)TOTALs 1.800.00c$s3,800,000SourcesState Match (5)Bond orImpact Fees (8)TOTALs96,714,804Secured Funding and Projected RevenueTotal Cost$l 8.500.001$ r 7.500.000$t 7.500.000s17.500.000$34,000,00(s800.00(s10s.800.00fTotal2010-2016$c$c$9.930.00c$9.930.00c$3,600,00c$800.00c$24.260.00020162016/l7$020ts207s/16$020142014/1s$020132013/t4$200.000s200.000z0t22012/13$200.000$200.00020tl20tt/t2$200.000s200.000Budget20t0nl$9.930.000$9.930.000$3.600.000$200 000$23,660,000Current andPrior Yearssl 8-s00.00($t 7-500.00f$7,570.00($7.570.00($30,400,00[s81.s40.000NEWSCHOOLSTION ANDEXPANSIONValhalla ElementarvPanther Lake ElementarvLakeland ElementarySunnycrest ElementaryLakota Middle SchoolTEMPORARY FACILITIESPortables (9)TOTAI,
HKHIBIT ft
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI1 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 2 - MAPS OF'DISTRICT BOLINDARIES
Federal way Public Schools has twenty-one elementary schools (grades K-5), two
schools with a K-8 grade configuration, seven middle school schools (grades 6-8), four
high schools (grades 9-12) and three small secondary schools. The Federal Way Public
Academy serves students in grades 6-10. The TAF Academy serves students in grades 6-
12 who reside in the Totem Middle School service area. The Career Academy at Truman
High School serves students in grades 9-12. The Internet Academy serves grades K-I2.
The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school, by school type.
(Career Academy at Truman High School, Merit School, Intemet Academy and Federal
Way Public Academy serve students from throughout the District). The identified
boundaries are reviewsd annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of
programs that affect school populations may necessitate achange in school service areas.
The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility
infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public
facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to
that development. School Districts are different. If the District does not have permanent
facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or
until boundaries can be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding
facilities.
Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken
lightly. It is recognizedthat there is a potential impact on students who are required to
change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole dishict, not just one school.
It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the
construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth
throughout the dishict and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the
district, not just around a single development.
11
ffiXF"$ßffiËT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
.-,.i-
6
5
{
-n
ä;
t ,
!¡e.r€ôtsy S*,{âls
l{11êffi r ¡¡*þ¡¡*
t;åå J uil8ðá00t
:::::+ 3 Cå¡rr*i*ô
4 Êlltrgíse
S (rèÈñ G¡t¡*
ð L¡ke Þól¡âä
I Sê ÞtSê
â kkxl¿nt
l:r,,::iri ç t$rr¡¿ tiry*n
ã.il..i$rlr $ ùãBrêdÊn i¡Ì{
S .l1 ïrx*or!:ke
l&m 12 råu¡16{KãJ
I € niî$¡¡qvka
f {4 F¡Dthe¡L*r
I $ R¡¡¡i¡rllm
m $ ã.8ew4{fÕrà*
: lf gike, LJ6etr æ åiïL*å
'& SurdrytrÈS
. i¡J lwn Lã{#
I n \¡ut!¿,t¿
r'. 2 lltlldsrÐd
iìl.T rr woa*mt4ury
Mddle 5cf*ds
'i.i H,!nþftúûg
åd{dûY{å!vå Êuild¡ü!,
llrid#dðpÁd $ìt6
Ìl-&
s
ãLt $ g$*r*mr" Hs H* #_ k ffi p *J H **ms"H*
L2
f:),{$ilffiüT L-
FEDERAL WAY PLIBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
i
L{ddl* grhùcls
llarË
'3Ê f ådttãl l8q Fub$cÁcader¡e
r.ï¡ài å¡ ¡ilðheê
i!ãf&,ä 31 Nils
g Lrkst¡
Øãi? x s¡cds**s
F *c saçr*iir
$7 *tqucy*
KS rfiS
Ëlåssntå¡y *ð¡ð*þ
, lj !l¡*h 9ol¡o+*
¡qdn,r,&tðliw å{ildiÞgY
Urds*l{féd Silö
li-&
Ë
m;* ätH #fitt"*fit H#_.lt ffi m**xr#
l-3
fjlrf;-äflt]ET A _
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 20i 1 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
HÏüH SCHOÚ BOUHnJLN.IES
ll
dgh *drsôlå
fiilß
ffi ¿t û*cats
ffi 4l F*derslotay
M €l Ttcm¿:JcllÈço¡
W * Tsd'i**m¡r
W 4;ü ç¿reer g*àdêr{, à1 Trumsr
;::::- Cl empXr¡rn*ût Trãrsi!ìsrì PrùÈr{lrt
glimiriôry $úoq&
idddle ${ì+¡ls
gd*lifìbàsåvå Suild¡&*Ë
Lhdwelv¡ed *itæ
-@
L4
ffi?i$-lF,BfrT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Building Capacities - The Education Program
Portable Locations
Student Forecast -2011 through 2017
Capacity Summaries
King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi-Family Units
1_5
EXI{IBqT A
FEDERAL WAY PIIBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Building Capacities
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to
ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public
Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capaci6', but these guidelines do not
take into consideration the education program needs.
In general, the District's current target class size provides that the average class size for a
standard classroom for grades K through 2 should be 20 students. In grades 3-5 the target
is 25 students. For grades 6 to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for
students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated
at l2 seats per classroom.
Using the OSPI square footage calculation as a base line, the District has calculated a
program capacity for all schools. A recent Study & Survey was the basis for changes to
the OSPI building report. The following list clarifies the adjustments to the OSPI
calculation.
Music Rooms:
Each elementary school requires a standard classroom for music instruction
All Day Kindergarten:
Every elementary school operates at least one all day Kindergarten program. These all
day Kindergarten program require additional capacity because the standard classroom is
available for one all day session rather than two half day sessions. The District will
operate 52 sections of all day Kindergarten in 20 10/1 I .
Special Education Resource Rooms:
Each elementary and middle school requires the use of a standard classroom(s) for
special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities.
English as a Second Language Programs:
Each elementary, middle school and high school requires the use of a standard classroom
for students learning English as a second language.
Middle School Computer Labs:
Each middle school has computer labs.
High School Career Development and Learning Center (Resource) Room:
Each high school provides special education resource room and career development
classrooms for students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities.
L6
ffiH[.ËfimBT ft
FEDERAL WAY PI.IBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
School Name Headcount
Adelaide 372
Brisadoon 344
Camelot 269
4s8
Green Gables 457
Lake Dolloff 433
Lake Grove 5¿J
Lakeland 392
Mark Twain 307
Meredith Hill 453
Mirror Lake 1?<
Nautilus (K-8)347
Olympic View 328
Panther Lake 383
Rainier View 432
423
Silver Lake 4t0
Star Lake 361
Sun¡ycrest 349
Twin Lakes 297
Valhalla 449
V/ildwood 317
Woodmont (K-8 346
2O1O TOTAL 8,575
BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES
BLEMENTARY BIIILDING
PROGRAM CAPACITY
MTDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING
PROGRÂM CAPACTTY
HIGH SCHOOL BUILDTNG
PROGRAM CAPÄ.CITY
Notes
* Federal Way Pubiic Academy, Career Academy at Truman High School, and Employment Transition Program
are non-boundary schools. These schools are not used in the calculated averages.
** Technology Access Foundation Academy is housed entirely in portables
on the Totem Middle School site.
School Name Headcount FTE
Illahee 85s 864
Kilo 827 835
Lakota 707 714
Sacajawea 655 662
Saehalie 804 8r2
Sequoyah 569 575
Totem 739 746
Federal Way Public Academy 209 2tL
Iechnology Access Foundation Academy**
2O1O TOTAL 5,365 5,4I9
*Middle School Averase 744
Elementarv Averase 373
School Nâme Headcount FTE
Decatur t239 1,325
Federal Way 1528 1.634
Thomas Jefferson r339 1.432
Todd Beamer 1133 1,212
Career Academy at Truman 130 139
Federal Way Public Academy 109 ll7
Employment Transition Program 48 51
I echnology Access ¡oundatlon Academy++
2O1O TOTAL 5,526 5,910
Ißiil
L7
ffiy$=flrm[T A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI1 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Portable Locations
The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic
education. It is not an efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity
for 500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates
throughout the year and from year to year.
Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students when
increasing population impacts a school attendance area. Portables may also be required
to house students when new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also
provide temporary housing for students until permanent facilities can be financed and
constructed. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s) is either used
for other purposes such as storage or child care programs, or moved to another school for
an interim classroom. Some portables may not be fit to move due to age or physical
condition. In these cases, the District may choose to buy new portables and surplus these
unfit portables. It is the practice and philosophy of Federal Way Public Schools that
portables are not acceptable as permanent facilities.
The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for
temporary educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools.
l_8
Hlitî:irT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NSRUtrIONÀL
NON
NSMUMONAL
Adelaide 1 2
Brigadoon I
Camelot I
Enterprise 2 1
Green Gables I
Lake Dolloff 1 I
Lake Grove I I
Lakeland I
Mark Twain .,
1
Meredith Hill I I
Mirror Lake 4
Nautilus I
Olympic View z
Panther Lake
Rainier View I 2
Sherwood Forest 3 1
Silver Lake 1 3
Star Lake 3 I
iunnycrest
Twin Lakes 3
Valhaìla
Wildwood 3 I
Woodmont 3
TOTAL 31 2t
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS
PORTABLE LOCATIONS
PORTABLES LOC.ATED
AT HIGH SCHOOLS
PORTABLES LOCATED
AT SUPPORT FACILITIES
MOT I
TDC 5
TOTAL 6
HEAD START PORTABLESAT DISTRICT SITES
Sherwood Forest t
l'otal I
INSTRUCTIONAL
NON
NSTRUflON&
Decatur 9
Federal Way 2 1
Thomas Jefferson 10
Todd Beamer 9
TAF Academy 8
TOTAL 38 1
INSTRUCTIONÄL
NON
INSTRUCTIONAI
Illahee 3
Kilo 7
Lakota
Sacaiawea 3
Sashalie 4
Sequoyah I
Iotem
Merit 1
TA-F Academy 6 1
23 4
79
FlfE FlflqT j_-
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Student Forecast
Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development.
Enrollment projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget
preparation. The majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the
forecasted number of students. Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are
also made on the basis of projected enrollment. Other expenditures and certain revenue
projections are directly related to enrollment projections.
Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department.
Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school-building totals, grade
level and program level to include vocational and special education students.
The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis
of a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time.
In a stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses
historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This
method does not trace individual students; it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each
grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted
factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out ofthe school system are
common, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases
survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The
district collects information on birth rates within the district's census tracts, and treats
these statistics as a cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years.
The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting
student enrollments. The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated below.
The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts. These
are forecast of enrollment for one year. The projections vary depending on the number of
years of historical information and how they are weighted.
A second method is a projection using an enrollment projection software package that
allows the user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these
projections for the district level. The Enrollment MasterrM software provides statistical
methods including trend line, standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of
these methods. This software produces a five-year projection of school enrollment.
In December 2006, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the
Federal Way School District. The report was complete in January 2007. The model used
to forecast next year's enrollment uses cohort survival rates to measure grade to grade
growth, assumes market share losses to private schools (consistent with county-wide
average), assumes growth from new housing or losses due to net losses from migration.
This forecast was provided as a range of three projections. The long-range forecast
provided with this report used a model with cohort survival rates and growth rates based
on projected changes in the 5-19 age group for King County. Most of the methods used
for long range enrollment reporting assume that enrollment is a constant percent of
20
ffiKft{fiffi$T A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
something else (e.g. population) or that enrollment will minor some projected trend'for
the school-age population over time. The report included 5 different calculations to
provide arange of possible projections for the District to the year 2017. This model
produces a projection that is between 23,A00 and24,000 when applied to the low,
medium and high range modes. This provides a reasonable range for long-range planning
and is consistent with estimates from various models.
Long-range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the
cohort survival method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther
out the projections are made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections
are studied annually. The study includes information from the jurisdictional
demographers as they project future housing and population in the region. The long-range
projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student
populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the
State of Washington.
Near term projections assume some growth from new housing, which is offset by current
local economic conditions. Current economic conditions do appear to be affecting
enrollment. This is reflected in the District's projections. The District tracks new
development from f,rve permitting jurisdictions. Long range planning assumes a student
yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth patterns.
Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The
Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions
comprising the school district geography. These projections create a vision of the school
district community in the future.
21-
HKþIgffiET A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 20 I 1 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections
Simplified FTE (K Headcount:.5 FTE; Middle Schooi FTE=.99 Headcount; High School FTE: .935Headcount)
Calendar Yr School Year Middle School Senior
Total K -12
F'TFJ,
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
20r5
2016
2017
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
82010-11
P201 1-1 2
P2012-13
P2013-14
P2014-15
P201 5-16
P2016-17
9,164
9,1 05
9,022
8,912
8,865
8,738
8,786
8,841
8,932
9,036
9,121
9,197
9,302
Elemenlary K-5
< L17
5,309
5,261
5,167
5,155
5,1 t9
5,1 05
5,070
5,022
4,997
5,040
5,115
5,1 60
Middle School 6-8
6,515
6,770
6,754
6,63',1
6,456
6,594
6,644
6,592
6,552
6,562
6,526
6,481
6,446
High School 9-12
21,152
21,184
21,037
20,716
20,476
20,451
20,53 5
20,503
20,506
20,s95
20,68'7
20,793
20,908
//o
1.s%
1.2%
1o/n
4%
-0.2%
0.0%
0.4%
0.4%
0.s%
0.6%
* New
Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast
oo
rúq,
f
o
o
(,,o
22,000
21,000
20,000
19,000
18,000
17,000
16,000
15,000
'=" "-^'-" "\ "% "\ U. q,þ %'. q"" *"" *E \^
E¡ FTE School Year
Fîtiç'¡¡*nt. S--
22
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Capacitv Summaries
All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools
The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student
Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled
facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim
measures.
The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summarizing the entire
District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle
school, and high school levels individually.
The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are
in place each year.
¿3
ffiKF'FfiffiBT A
FEDE,RAL WAY PIIBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY -ALL GRADES
CAPACITY
ENROLLMENT
Budget -- Pro.iected--
Calendar Year 20t1 2012 2013 20t4 2015 2016 2017
School Year 20t0l1t 2011112 2012/13 2013114 20t4lr5 2015n6 2016/17
BUILDING PROGRAM
IIE,ADCOUNT CAPACITY
FTÈ CAPACITY
19,466
19"9t4
19.466
1g.ga4
19.566
20,004
19.566
20.004
19,566
20.004
19.566
20.004
r 9.566
20.004
Add or subtract changes to capacity
Increase Capacity - Lakeland and Sunnycrest 100
Adj usted Program Headcount Capacity 19.466 19.s66 19.566 19.s66 t9,566 19,s66 t9.566
19.904 20.o04 20.8t4 7A$04 28,û04 20,004 20.004
Basic FTE Enrollment
Internet Academy Enrollment (AAFTE)
Basic FTE En¡ollment rvithout Internet Academv
20,535
(3r5)
2A,22t
20,s03
(315)
20.1 88
20,506
(315)
2A,r9r
20,59s
(3r5)
20.280
20,687
(3r5)
20,372
20,793
(315)
20,478
20,908
(3r5)
28,593
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM FTE CÄ?ACITY (31ó) L,ru,{216\{3ó8)(474)(ss9)
RELOCATABLE CAPACTTY
Cunent Portable Capacity
Deduct Portabl e Capacity
Add New Portable Capacity
2,300
(s0)
50
2,300
(2s)
) )11 ) )7\) 275 ) )'7<', )1<
Adi usted Portable Capacity 2,3û0 1 11\2.275 2,275 2,275
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY 1,984 'l ,.0n,19992,088 I r,686
24
i:ilij ;.ii'.ì,'ü' -4"--
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 20I1 CAPITAI FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
CAPACITY
ENROLLMENT
Budget -- Projected--
Calendar Year 20tl 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
School Year 2010/11 zQtt/t2 2012113 2013/14 20r411s 2015116 20t6/t7
BUILDING PROGRAM
FIEAD COLTNT CAPACITY
FTE CAPACITY
8.575
8.575
8,575
8.575
8,675
8.675
8,67s
8,675
8.675
8.675
8,67 5
8.675
8.67 5
8.ó75
1. Increase Capacity Lakeland
and Sunnycrest 100
Adjusted Program Headcount Capaci¡,8.575 8.67 5 8.675 8,675 8.67s 8.675 8.675
Adjusted Program FTË Capacity 8.575 8,67 5 8,675 8.675 8,675 8.67s 8,675
Basic FTE Enrollment
2. Internet Academy (AAFTE)
Basic FTE Enroliment without Intemet Academv
8,786
(36)
8,750
8,84 I
(36)
8,805
8,932
(36)
8,896
9,036
(36)
9.000
9,t2t
(36)
9,085
9,197
(36)
9.161
9,302
(36)
9,266
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPACITY (17si {130){221l i32s){410)(486)I
RELOCATABLECAPACTTY 3
Current Portabl e Capacity
Subtract porlables lrom Lakeland & Sunnycrest
Adi usted Portable Capacitl'
775
(50)
725
725
(25)
lAA
700 700
70a
700
7û0
700
70û
700
780
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY 550 570 l,,l 375 109
NOTES:
l. Increase Capacity at Lakeland, and Sunnycrest
2. Intemet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities.
3. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables availabie and other administrative techniques which
can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actuai number ofportables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasibility for continued instructional use.
i:i "i,' ri-;,'¡" "_A--,.-
25
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMARY - I\{IDDLE SCHOOLS
CÄPACITY
ENROLLMENT
Budget -- Projected--
Calendar Year 20tl 20t2 2013 2Qt4 2015 2016 2017
School Year 2010/12 20tU12 2012113 2013114 2014115 201s116 2015116
BUILDING PROGRAM
HEADCOLN.¡T CAPACITY
FTE CAPACITY
5.365
5.419
5 ^365
5.419
5.365
5.4t9
5.365
5-419
5.3 65
5.4t9
5.365
5,419
5,365
5,419
Add or subtract changes in capaciry
Adjusted Program Headcount Capacit,v i ?Át 5,365 5.365 5.365 5.365 s 165 5 1Á5
Adjusted Program FTE Capacity 5,419 5,419 5319 5.419 5.419 s,419 5,419
Basic FTE -EnroiÌment
1. InternetAcademy (AAFTE)
Basic FTE Enroll¡nent without Intemet Academv
5,1 05
(74)
s,031
s,070
(74)
4,996
4,997
(74)
4,923
5,040
(7 4)
4.966
5,1 60
(74)
5,û8ó
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAP.ÀCITY 388 423 47 I 453 333
RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2.
NOTES:
l. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities.
2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which
can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number ofporlables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasibility for continued instructional use.
Current Portable Capacity
Add/Subtract pofiable capacity
Add new portable capacity TAF Academy
Adj usted Portable Capacity
s75
25
6û0
600
600
600
ó00
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
CAPACITY r,oz3l '0' I r.r*1,053 933
z6
[;i1!ii1',; ¡ A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 20 I I CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Budget -- Projected--
Calendar Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
School Year z010lt1 2011112 20t2lt3 20t3lt4 2014/15 20r5116 2016117
BUILDING PROGRAM
I]EADCOUNT CAPACIT\'
FTE CAPACITY
5.526
5,91û
5.526
5,910
5.526
5.910
5.526
5.910
5.526
5.910
5.526
5,9i0
5.526
5.910
Add or subtract changes in capacity
Adjusted Program Headcount Capaciry 5.526 s i?Á 5.526 5.526 5.526 5.526 5,s26
Adjusted Program FTE Capacify 5.910 5^910 5.910 5,910 5,9 r0 5,9r0
C,{PACITY
ENROLLMENT
Basic FTE Enrollment
1. Internet Academy (AAFTE)
Basic Ed u,ithout Internef Academv
6,644
Qas)
6,439
6,592
(205)
6,387
6,552
(20s)
6,347
6,s62
(205)
6"3s7
6,526
(20s)
6^32r
6,481
(205)
6,276
6,446
(20s)
6.241
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM CAPÀCITY (477\(437',(447\(411)13ó6)(331)
RELOCATABLE CAPACT"IY 2.
Current Porlab I e C ap acity
Add/Subtract portable capacify
Add porlable capacity at TAF Academy
Adj usted Porrable Capacity
950
25
975
975
975
97s 97s 975 975
975
975
97s
NOTES:
1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use olschool facilities.
2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which
can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number ofporlables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables from the inst¡uctional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasibility for continued instructional use.
3. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and
no planning time in some classrooms.
SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
3. CAPÀCITY 498 538 ó09
27
!'1":4i i,,r 'i'i" fl
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
King Countv. the Citv of Federal Wav. and the City of Kent Impact Fee Calculations
Single and Multi-Family Residences
Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees
to help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities.
To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was
established. This formula can be found in King County Code 214 and was substantially
adopted by the City of Federal Way and Kent. The formula requires the District to
establish a "Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be
added to a school district by each new single or multi-family unit and to gather some
standard construction costs, which are unique to that district.
- STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS
Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for
single-family units and multi-family units. The factors used in the 2011 Capital Facilities
Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single-family units that were
constructed in the last five (5) years.
- IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee
Calculation for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 214 and
the Growth Management Act.
months.
Plan Year 2011 Plan Year 2010
Single Family Units $4,014 83,832
Multi-Units $2 72 82 114
28
ffiÏ{hü[ffinT A
* Student Generation rate is based on totals.FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANSTUDENT GENERATIONNEV/ CONSTRUCTION IN PRIOR 5 YEARSSingle Family Student GenerationMulti-Family Student GenerationçJl>¿'Ï*iË*lIrÞI¡TotalStudentFactor0.64700.85710.54771.36360.68880.61910.9048o.62211.17240.8600Student Generation*0.35070.'t7010.23610.7569High SchoolStudentFactor0.17650.21430.14290.18180.22220.14290.2976o.24420.44830.2200Middle SchoolStudentFactor0.1176o28570.1 9050.27270.1 3330.09520.1 31 00.1 5700.34480.2000ElementaryStudentFactor0.35290.35710.21430.90910.33330.38100.47620.22090.37930.4400Number ofHigh SchoolStudentsJb642062542l311Total576020298136Number ofMiddle SchoolStudents2II612411271010Number ofElementaryStudentsb10I2030l640381122Number ofMulti-FamilyDwellinqs0000000000Number ofSingle FamilyDwellinqs172842229042u1722950DEVELOPMENT(10) Creekside Lane(10) GrandeVista(09) Lakota Crest(09) Tuscanv(08) Northlake Ridqe lV(08) Collinqtree Park(07) Colella Estates(0ð Woodbrook(06) Devonshire(06) Orchid LaneTotal0.1 550.2030.5220.244verage0.1650.0530.0M0.28'lHiqh School0.0310.0520.1240.u7Middle School0.0380.0490.0670.056EIementary0.0860.1020.331o.141AuburnlssaquahKentLake Washington29
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
School Site .4cquisition Cost:
Facility
Elementary
Middle School
High School
0.3507 0.1 6s0 $0 s0
0. I 701 0.0530 $0 $0
0.2361 0.0640 $0 $0
$0 $0TOT
Cost /
Acre
Facility
Cost
Facility
Cost
Sq. Ft.
Student
IMPACT FEE
Facility
Facility
Facility
Size
State
Match
Student
Factor
SFR
student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
TOTAL
Student
Factor
MFR
Student
Factor
MFR
Student
Factor
MFR
Student
Factor
MFR
Cost/
SFR
Cosl
SFR
Cosl
SFR
Cost/
SFR
SFR
Cost/
MFR
Cosl
MFR
Cost/
MFR
Cost/
MFR
MFR
School Construction Cost:
o/oPermFac./
Total Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Temporary Facility Cost:
YoTempFac.
Total Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
State Matching Credit Calculation:
Area Cost
Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Tax Payment Credit Calculation
Average Assessed Value (March 2010)
Capital Bond Interest Rate (March 2010)
Net Present Value of Average Dwelling
Years Amortized
Property Tax Levy Rate
Present Value of Revenue Stream
TOTAL
Total
SingleFamily Multi-Family
Residences Residences
Mitigation Fee Summary
Site Acquisition Cost
Permanent Facility Cost
Temporary Facility Cost
State Match Credit
Tax Payment Credit
Sub-Total
50% Local Share
15,199
25
(3,518)
(3.678)
7,151
8
(1,655)
(1,160)
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
8,028 $
4,014 $
4,343
2,172
95.25o/a $9.100,000 200 0.3507 0. 1 650 $r5.199 $7,1 5 1
0.1 70 I 0.0530 $o $o
0.2361 0.0640 $0 $0
$15,199 $7,151
0.3507 0.16501
1.98o/o $r 83,996 25 0. l 701 0.0s301 $25 $8
0.2361 0.06401
s25 $8
$r80.17 90 61.86%0.3507 0.1650 $3,51 8 $1,655
$180.17 0. l70l 0.0530 $o $0
$180.17 0.2361 0.0640 s0 $0
$3.s18 $r.655
s267.668 s84,429
433%4.33%
s2.13s.797 s673,682
t0 10
sl.72 st.72
$3,678 $r.160
lmpact Fee $ 4,014 s 2,172
30
FÌ"' l:aiT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 4
SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2O1O CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The 2011 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 2010 Capital
Facilities Plan. The changes between the 2010 Plan and the 2011 Plan are listed below.
SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN
The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 20lI/2017
SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCI.IMENTATION
CAPACITY
Elementary capacity includes space for All Day Kindergarten programs at every
elementary school. Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on
page 17.
PORTABLES
The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new
portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on page 19.
STUDENT FORECAST
The Student Forecast now covers 2011 through2}lT Enrollment history and projections
are found onpageL2.
CAPACITY SUMMARY
The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities
and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown
as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 24-27.
IMPACT F'EE CALCULATION - KING COLINTY CODE 21A
The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The
adjustment made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee
between the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan and the 20t1 Capital Facilities Plan can be
found on page 32 and33.
31_
FlrrygmqT A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAI FACILITIES PLAN
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CIIANGES FROM 2O1O TO 2011
STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS
Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a
period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation. The changes in
student Generation factors between the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan and the2011 Capital
Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age of
the developments and the year placed in the survey. The Student Generation worksheet
is found onpage29.
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
The anticipated costþr replacing Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla is
870,000,000. The replacement will add 50 new seats to the school capacity at each
building. The total capacity at thesefour elementary schools is currently 1505. Adding
200 additional seats will increase the capacity by l3%.
Totøl Cost .13 X 870,000,000: 89,700,000
The District will use the above formula created as a base from the 2008 Capital Facilities
Plan for the2011 Capital Facilities Plan. The capacity of the four elementary schools
may vary from year to year as programs are added or changed and construction cost may
increase over time. For instance, for each new all day Kindergarten program, the
building capacity will effectively be reduced by 20 headcount and the Board authorized
an increase in construction cost of $lm for Valhalla. These changes would increase the
construction cost. The District is using the base formula established in the 2008 plan in
the Impact Fee calculation.
32
HY$ÌISET A
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
IMPACT F'EE CALCULATION CIIANGES FROM 2O1O TO 2011
IMPACT FEE
Item From/To Comment
Percent of Permanent Facilities 95 .62% to 95.71o/o Report #3 OSPI
Percent Temporary Facilities 4.38%to 4.29o/o Updated portable inventory
$193,607 to $183,996Average Cost of Portable
Classroom
Area Cost Allowance
State Match
Average Assessed Value
Capital Bond Interest Rate
Property Tax Levy Rate
Single Family Student Yield
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Multi-Family Student Yield
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Updated av erage of portables
purchased and placed in2009
Change effective July 1,2010
$168.79 to $180.17
61.09%to 61.860/o Change effective July 2009
SFR_
8326,409 to $267,668
MFR_
586,497 to $84,429
4.96%to 4.33o/o
$1.48 to $1.72
.3317 to .3507
.1653 to .1701
.2224to.2361
.1520 to.165
.0520 to .053
.0590 to .064
Per Puget Sound Educational
Service District (ESD 121)
Market Rate
King County Treasury Division
Updated Housing Inventory
Updated Housing Inventory
33
ffiHç''i!B8T ft
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Issued with a 14 Day comment and appeals period
Description of Proposal:
This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single
action:
1. The adoption of the Federal Way Public Schools' 2011 Six Year Capital Facilities
Plan by the Federal Way Public Schools for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of
the District.
2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan by King County to
include the Federal Way Public Schools' 20Il Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital
Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan.
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the Cify of Federal Way, City of
Kent and the City of Auburn to include the Federal Way Public Schools' 20lL Capital Facilities
Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City of Federal Way's, City of Kent's
and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan.
This proposal may also involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans ofthe City
of Des Moines to incorporate the Federal Way Public Schools' 20lI Capital Facilities Plan into
the Capital Facilities Element of the City of Des Moines' Comprehensive Plan.
Proponent: Federal Way Public Schools
Location of the Proposal
The Federal Way Public Schools District includes anarea of approximately 35 square
miles. Areas of the cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines and Auburn fall within the
District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County.
Hlf+4!rBå-l' Ê
Lead Agency:
Federal Way Public Schools is the lead ageîcy pursuant to WAC 197-II-926.
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse environmental impact on the environment. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.2IC.030(2Xc). This decision was made
after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC I97-Il-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 5:00 p.m., April 21,2010. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based
on timely comments and may retain, modiS, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely,
withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment
deadline.
Responsible Official:Ms. TanyaNascimenot
Enrollment and Demographics
Federal Way Public Schools
(2s3) 94s-207r
31405 18th Avenue South
Federal Way WA 98003
You may appeal this determination in writing by 5:00 p.m., April 2I,2010 to Tanya
Nascimento, Federal Way Public Schools, 31405 18th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003
Date of Issue: April7,2010
Date Published: April7, 2010
Telephone
Address:
2
HXHFMHT Ê
EI\TVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
WAC I97 -l l-960 Environmental Checklist.
Purpose of Checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.2IC RCV/, requires all governmental
agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on
the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the
agency identifr impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be
done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Govemmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most
precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most
cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the
need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your
proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid
unnocessary delays later.
Some questions ask about govemmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark
designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can
assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a
period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe
your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be
significant adverse impact.
1
FilfF-çqffiËT Ê
EI{VIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIST
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does
not apply" In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject actions (part D).
For nonproject actionso the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicanl" and
"property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
2
EX'.I¡BIT A
EI\IVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable
The adoption of a Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan by the Federal Way School District No. 210 for
the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. The King County, City of Federal Way,
City of Kent and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan will be amended to include the
District's 20ll Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element. This project may also
involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the city of Des Moines to incorporate the
District's 20II Capital Facilities Plan.
2. Name of applicant:
Federal Way School DistrictNo.2l0
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person
Federal Way School District No. 210
31405 lSthAvenue South
Federal Way WA 98003
(2s3) e4s-2000
Contact Person:Ms. TanyaNascimento
Enrollment and Demographics
(2s3) 94s-2071Telephone:
4. Date checklist prepared:
April7,2010
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Federal Way School Dishict No. 210
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The Federal Way School District's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the
District in May 2010. The Capital Facilities Plan will be forwarded to King County, the City of
Federal Way, City of Kent and the City of Auburn for inclusion in each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan. It will also be forwarded to the city of Des Moines for possible inclusion in
this jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plans. The District will continue to update the Capital Facilities
Plan annually. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to
proj ect-specific environmental review.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
J
Fl"$íg,ffigT--û-
EI\IVIRONMENTAL CHE CI(LI ST
The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the District is currently
implementing. These include construction of four elementary schools, Lakeland, Panther Lake,
Sunnycrest and Valhalla. This plan also includes construction of Lakota Middle School.
Additionally the plan covers the purchase and siting of temporary facilities at various locations.
Non-instructional projects included in the plan will consolidate support services operations at a
single location. This will include the construction of new facilities to house the Transportation,
Maintenance and Nutrition Services departments. Cunent plans are for all the projects to be
complete by 2013.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will undergo additional environmental review,
when appropriate, as they are developed.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
Permits will be applied for with the appropriate jurisdiction for minor projects during the 20ll
calendar year.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
The District anticipates that King County, the City of Federal Way, the City of Kent and the city
of Auburn will adopt this Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plan. The city of Des
Moines may also adopt this Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities Elements of their
Comprehensive Plans (when issued).
1 1. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page.
(Lead agencies may modiff this form to include additional specific information on project
description.)
This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Federal Way School
District's 20lI Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District's facilities needs.
The District's Capital Facilities Plan will be incorporated into King County's, the City Federal
Way's, the City of Kent's and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plans. It may also be
incorporated into the Comprehensive Plans of the city of Des Moines. The projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project-specifrc environmental review.
A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the District's offices.
4
ffi)fillpgT A
EIWIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township,
and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or
boundaries of the site(s). Provide alegal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map,
if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this
checklist.
The Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Federal Way School District. The District includes an
area of approximately 35 square miles. The City of Federal Way, parts of the cities of Kent, Des
Moines and Auburn, parts of unincorporated King County, fall within the District's boundaries. A
detailed map of the District's boundaries can be viewed at the District's offices.
5
ffi)íF{[ffifiT ff
EN-VIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
B. ENVIRONMENTALELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
The Federal Way School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and
gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Specific slope characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan
have been or will be identified during project-level environmental review.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specifr them and note any prime
farmland.
Specific soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Federal Way School District. Specific soil limitations on
individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed.
Indicate source of fill.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when
appropriate, to project-specific environmental review and local approval at the time of
proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source ofany
fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result ofthe construction projects currently proposed
in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects have been or will
be evaluated on a site-specifìc basis at the time of project-specific environmental review when
appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be subject to local approval processes.
6
ffi,}{fi"$åffiü*r A_
EI\IVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
The proposed renovation projects will require the construction of impervious surfaces. The
extent of any impervious cover constructed will vary with each capital facilities project
included in the Capital Facilities Plan. This issue has been or will be addressed during project-
specifi c environmental review when appropriate.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and appropriate
control measures have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile,
odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any,
generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from the individual projects included
in the Capital Facilities Plan. The air-quality impacts of each project have been or will be
evaluated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
Any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to
project-specific environmental review when appropriate and relevant local approval processes.
The District will be required to comply with all applicable air regulations and air permit
requirements. Proposed measures specific to the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
7
HKTggffi$T A
EI\IVIRONMENTAL CHE CI(LIS T
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes,
describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
There is a network of surface water bodies within the Federal Way School District. The
surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate. When necessary, the surface water regimes and
flow pattems have been or will be researched and incorporated into the designs of the
individual projects.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require work near the surface
waters located within the Federal Way School District. Applicable local approval
requirements have been or will be satisfied.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material.
Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material as a
component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be
provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Applicable local
regulations have been or will be satisfied.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-
specific environmental review when appropriate.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site
plan.
Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplainarea, will be
required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If
so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
I
ffi)iE-ååffi$T Ê
ENIVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIST
Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a
result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided
during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Ground:
1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater
resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on
groundwater resources has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following
chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of
such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals
or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the projects
included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review.
Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water
flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have storm water runoff
consequences. Specific information regarding the storm water impacts of each project has
been or will be provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
Each project is or will be subject to applicable local storm water regulations.
c
9
ffiXFågffi$T ft
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of waste
materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of each project on ground
and surface waters have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to all applicable regulations
regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoffwater impacts, if any:
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site
deciduous hee: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Federal Way School District. Inventories
of the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Some of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or
alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
c.List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
10
Hxfi"$fiffi$T A
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capäal
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local landscaping
requirements.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to
be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects proposed in
the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Inventories ofthreatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites ofthe projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
c Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes have
been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined during
project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
11
ËX${8ffi$T A
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,
etc.
The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life cycle cost analysis of all
heating, lighting, and insulation systems before it will permit specific school projects to
proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site design planning when
appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,
generally describe:
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar potential of
adjacent projects have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List
other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
7. EnvironmentalHealth:
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of
fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so,
describe.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will comply with all current codes,
standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to
project-specific environmental review and local approval at the time they are developed
when appropriate.
l2
ffix$i!'3TTl_
ET\I\i IRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises from traffic, construbtion, residential, commercial and industrial areas
exists within the Federal Way School District. The specific noise sources that may affect
the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during
project-specifi c environmental review when appropriate.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project
on a short-teÍn or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
The District does not anticipate that the projects will create long-term increases in traffic-
related or operations-related noise levels.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a.rWhat is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Federal Way School District, including residential,
commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
The project sites covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have not been used recently for
agriculture.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The structures located on the proposed sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified and described during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
13
HX*"F'rTT _A_
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
The remodeling and renovation projects will require the demolishment of school structures.
The structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
e.What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning
classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site-specific zoning information has been or
will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be completed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
g. If applicable, what is the cument shoreline master program designation of the site?
Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specifu.
Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the Plan
have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
The Federal Way School District currently serves approximately 22,200 students. The student
population is expected to increase to 23,000 by the year 2016. This projection has been
adjusted to reflect the current economic conditions. The District employs approximately 3,200
people.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capifal Facilities Plan has
been or will be evaluated during project-specifrc environmental review when appropriate.
However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of the projects contained
therein, will displace any people.
l4
ffixe.flsffisT _a_
EI\IVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-specific
environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed mitigating measures will
be proposed atthat time, if necessary.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing
uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and
during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
9. Housing:
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle,
or low-income housing
No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects included
in the Capital Facilities Plan.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will eliminate any
housing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on existing
housing have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
10. Aesthetics:
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the
principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
15
ffixþ{[ffiüT _û_ _
EI\TVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIST
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
determined during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if anyc
Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project-specific basis when
appropriate.
11. Light and Glare:
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed during project-specific environmental review.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
c. What existing ofÊsite sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
OfËsite sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during
project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
12. Recreation:
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediatq vicinity?
There are avariety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Federal Way School
District.
16
H.H#{FBnr _À_
EI\IVIRONMENTAL CHE CI(LIS T
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe
The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will
be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. The projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed renovated school and support
facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be subject to mitigation during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. A
school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields
and gymnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for such registers on the sites of the
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and cultural resources
on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientifìc, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis when
appropriate.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the
existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The impact on public streets and highways of the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
t7 ffiKË{BffiET _À_
EI\IVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public
transit has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
An inventory of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability has been or will be
conducted during project-specifi c environmental review when appropriate.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or
streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private).
The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has been or
will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
Use of water, rail, or air transportation has been or will be addressed during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during project-specifi c environmental review when appropriate.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
15. Public Services:
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: f,rre
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? Ifso, generally describe.
The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will
substantially increase the need for other public services.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
18
ffiXF{fiffifrT A
EI\I\i IRONMENTAL CHE CI(LIS T
Remodeled/renovated school or facilities will be built with automatic security systems, fire
alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems.
16. Utilities:
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Electricity, natural gas, watero refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities are
available at the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The types of utilities
available at specifìc project sites have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-
specific environmental review when appropriate.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and
the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be
needed.
Utility revisions and construction needs have been or will be identified during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature
Date Submitted: April7,2010
l9
HKg"{8ffi$T A
EI{VIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SI{EET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the
list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities
likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the
proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;
production, storage, or release oftoxic or hazardous substances; or production ofnoise?
To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be
constructed andlor renovated and remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be
more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access
roads, and playgrounds could increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground
waters. Heating systems, emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed
pursuant to the Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or
hazardous substanoes, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for
emergency generating equipment. The District does not anticipate a significant increase in the
production of noise from its facilities, although the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan will increase the District's student capacities.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are
Proposed measures to mitigate any such'increases described above have been or will be
addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Storm water
detention and runoff will meet applicable County andlor City requirements and may be subject
to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements.
Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be
stored in accordance with local and state requirements.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment.
These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Plan are not likely to
generate severe impacts on fish or marine life.
20
ffi){Ffi$ffifiT"Â_
EI{VIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, f,rsh, or marine life are
Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be identified at this
time. Specific mitigation proposals have been or will be identified, however, during project-
specif,rc environmental review when appropriate.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the
consumption of energy.
Proposed msasures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance with
applicable energy efficiency standards.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas
designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness,
wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,
wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no impact on
these resources.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate. Updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County and the
cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines, and Auburn as part of the Growth Management Act
process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the
extent the District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management
planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected.
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is
incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management
plans. The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained
therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities Plan or
the projects contained therein are proposed at this time.
2I
ffi)íË{flffi$T A
EI\TVIRONMENTAL CHE CI(LIS T
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services
and utilities?
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary increases in the
District's need for public services and utilities. Upon the completion of the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan, however, the District does not anticipate that its need for public
services and utilities will increase substantially beyond existing levels.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time.
7 . Identifr, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of
the environment.
22
ffixs"ãåffiåT A _
z:\ impact fees \imp fees - kent - 3-97 to date.xlsby clayton betzau241AMonthCOLLECTEDFEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICTCAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDIMPACT FËES FROM CITY OF I{ENT (a)COLLECTED & EXPENDÉDCALENDAR YEAR2OOg€\þ4Jñ*aq,.#ffiJTransfersEndingAccountBal.EXPËNDEDJan-09Feb-09Mar{9Apr-09May-o9Jun-09Jul-09Aug-09Sep-09Oct-09Nov-09Dec-0913th Mo.Totals0.0074.930.000.000.00(a) per King co. Treas. Acct # 06-210-6241 'GL Activit¡/' reports - see Prime Acct 10100 plus c.p. sub-Fund Reconcite@ for age of impact fees collected still in Bal., see "imp fees - bals contain 6 yr old co[ections -as of mm-dd-yy-xls,,(d) to pay for student expanslon space - site costs, nev, construction, remodef¡ng, and equipment (but not computers or tedbooks) -^ per a 1-17-o2letter from Grace yuan & Denise stiffarm of preston Gates EflisrLL..þCollected8.758.107.697,866.935.355.385.735.395.174.733.85NetlnterqstËarnedlnOut3,9M.223,912.973,921.073,928.763,936.623,943.553,S48.S03,954.283,960.013,965.403,970.573,975.303,979.15979^15Date#AmountWarrantProjectVendoriÉExpenditureType
Auburn School District No. 408
GAPITAL FACILITIES
PLAN
201 0 through 201 6
Adopted by the Auburn School District Board of Directors
May 10, 2010
F=Ïifii[ri,ifiT â _
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408
915 Fourth Street NE
Auburn, Washington 98002
(253) e31-4e00
Serving Students in:
Unincorporated King County
City of Auburn
City of Algona
City of Kent
City of Pacific
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Ray Vefik
Carol Helgerson
Lisa Conners
Craig Schumaker
Janice Nelson
Dennis Kip Herren, Superintendent
Auburn School D¡strict
Engage Educate Empower
ffiK${sffi$T --À_
Table of Contents
Section I Executive Summary Page 1
Section ll Enrollment Projections Page 6
Section lll Standard of Service Page 8
Section lV lnventory of Facilities Page 15
Section V Pupil Capacity Page 18
Section Vl Capital Construction Plan Page 21
Section Vll lmpact Fees Page 25
Section Vlll Appendices. .. Page 29
Appendix 4.1 - Student Enrollment Projections Page 30
Appendix 4.2 - Capital Facilities Plan Projections Page 44
Appendix 4.3 - Student Generation Survey Page 49
ffix$"!fl,[+FT A
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
201 0 through 2016
Section I
Executive Summary
EH$gfiffiET _A__
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
l. Executive Summary
This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Auburn School District
(the "District") as the District's principal planning document, in compliance with the requirements
of Washington's Growth Management Act and the adopted ordinances of the counties and cities
served by the District. This plan was prepared using data available in the spring of 2010.
This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the District.
However, this Plan is not intended to be the sole plan for all of the District's needs. The District
may prepare interim and periodic long-range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board
Policies and actions, taking into account a longer or a shorter time period; other factors and
trends in the use of facilities; and other needs of the District as may be required. However, any
such plan or plans will be consistent with this Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan.
To enable the collection of impact fees in the unincorporated areas of King County and within the
City of Auburn and City of Kent, the King County Council, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent
will adopt this PIan by reference as part of each jurisdiction's respective comprehensive plan. To
enable the collection of impact fees in the Cities of Algona and Pacific, these municipalities must
also adopt this Plan and adopt school impact fee ordinances.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act and the local ordinances, the Plan
will be updated on an annual basis, and any changes in the fee schedule(s) adjusted accordingly
The Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current
and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public lnstruction establishes square
footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs of
the District. The Growth Management Act and the school impact fee ordinance authorize the
District to define its standard of service based on the District's specific needs. ln general, the
District's current standard provides that class size for grades K-2 should not exceed 25 students;
class size for grades 3-4 should not exceed 27 students; class size for grade 5 should not exceed
30 students. \Men averaged over the six elementary grades, this computes to 26.5 students per
classroom. Class size for grades 6-12 should not exceed 30 students, with some subject areas
restricted to lesser numbers. (See Section lll for more specific information.)
The capacity of the schools in the District is calculated based on this standard of service and the
existing inventory of facilities including transitional classrooms. The District's 2009-10 capacity
was 13,725 whereas Full Time Equivalent ('FTE) enrollment for this same period was I 3,91 9.60
(includes Full Day Kindergarten). The actual number of individual students was 14,559 as of
October 1; 2009. (See Section V for more specific information.)
The capital construction plan shown in Section Vl addresses the additions and proposed
modernization to the District's existing facilities. This provided for a new high school approved by
the voters in February 2003 and opened in September 2005; and the addition of two new
elementary schools approved by the voters in February 2005; with Lakeland Hills Elementary
opening in the Fall of 2006 and Arthur Jacobsen Elementary opening in the Fall of 2007. The
plan includes the construction of a new middle school and a new elementary school, as well as
the acquisition of future school sites to accommodate growth. The new facilities are required to
meet the projected student population increase to be generated from the large development
areas within the Auburn School District. Three areas that have significant impact on the school
2
ffiír;firiT A
district are the Lakeland South, the Lea Hill, and the north Auburn valley areas of the district.
There are other pockets of development that impact the District as well. The City of Kent has an
area of approximately 158 acres that was sold to developers in 2004. The economic downturn
has slowed development in these areas. The district completed a comprehensive review of all
district facilities and in October 2008 a Steering Committee made recommendations to the board
for capital improvements to existing facilities and replacement of seven schools over the next ten
years. These recommendations led to a capital improvements levy and a bond issue that was
placed on the ballot in March 2009. Both ballot measures were not successful in March. The
board determined to re-run only the capital improvements levy in November 2009, which the
voters approved.
The School lmpact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn and the City of
Kent provide for the assessment of impact fees to assist in meeting some of the fiscal impact
incurred by a District experiencing growth and development. Section Vll sets forth the proposed
school impact fees for single family and multi-family dwelling units. The student generation
factors have been generated using the students who actually attend school in the Auburn School
District from single family and multi-family developments constructed in the last five years. The
method of collecting the data is with the use of GIS mapping software, data from King County and
Pierce County GIS; and to integrate the mapping with student data from the district's student data
system. This method gives the District actual student generation numbers for each grade span
for identified developments. This data is contained in Appendix A.3.
-1
ffixg-üfiffi8T A
Auburn School District No. 408
CAP¡TAL FACILITIES PLAN
20'10 through 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CHANGES FROM 2OO9 TO 2OIO
Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes from the 2009 Capital
Facilities Plan that are a part of the 2010 Plan. The changes are noted by Section
for ease of reference.
Section I
Executive Summary
A. Updated to reflect new information within the Plan.
B. Summary level list of changes from previous year.
Section ll
En rollment Projections
Updated projections. See Appendices 4.1 & 4.2.
Section lll
Standard of Service
A. lncrease of I Full Day Kindergarten classroom at elementary level
B. lncrease of 2 resource rooms at middle school level
C. Reduction of 1 resource room at elementary level
Section lV
lnventory of Facilities
Updated to include TAP facility for students with special needs at Auburn High School
Section V
PupilGapacity
Updated to include TAP facility for students with special needs at Auburn High School
4
ffix${frffi#T _a_
Section Vll
lmpact Fees
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHANGES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2009 to 2010
Appendix 4.1 - Updated enrollment projections from October 1, 2009
Appendix 4.2 - Updated enrollment projections with anticipated buildout schedule.
Appendix 4.3 - Student Generation Survey March 2010
Section Vlll
Appendices
5
ffi){*Ëfil,lr-fl A
DATA ELEMENTS
CPF
2009
CPF
2010 EXPLANATION
0.3080
0.1470
0.1770
0.0860
0.0380
0.0310
$21,750,000
$42,500,000
$290,381
$1 80.1 7
60.23o/o
39.77o/o
$254,009
$76,573
$0.82
4.33o/o
Consistent with King County Ordinance 11621,
Student Generation Factors are calculated
by the school district based on district
records of average actual student generation
rates for new developments constructed
over the last five years.
Updated estimates on land costs
Updated to projected SPI schedule
Updated to current SPI schedule.
Computed
Updated from March 2010 King County
Dept of Assessments data.
Updated from March 2010 King County
Dept of Assessments data using weighted
average.
Current FiscalYear
Current Rate (Bond Buyers 20 lndex 3-10)
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2010 through 2016
Section ll
En rol lment Projections
Eli$'frfiffiE"ü' _,4
Auburn School Disirict No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS
The Auburn School District uses a modlfied cohort survival model to project future enrollment for all
of the District's operations. Table ll.1 is an extract from the comprehensive projection model found in
Appendix 4.2 titled'"CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections". This Table shows the
anticipated enrollment for the next six years based on the previous 6 year history of the District under the
assumptions set forth in the comprehensive projections, Appendix A.1 , and the projection for additional
students generated from new developments in the district as shown in Appendix 4.2.
1 069
I 088
1054
1021
1 036
1 109
I 106
1125
1110
1078
1064
1072
1147
1167
1152
1 138
1126
1 106
1190
1210
1194
1181
1187
I 168
1231
1252
1236
1222
1229
1228
1271
1292
1277
1263
127 1
1270
1040
1125
I 031
1047
1 064
1 153
1127
1072
I 093
1094
1157
1 105
1129
1125
1191
I 190
1 159
1 '159
1250
1220
1192
1244
1277
I 303
1410
127 1
1249
1240
1314
1 396
1276
1211
1250
1362
1357
1375
1259
1450
1372
1321
1387
1420
1460
1 335
1332
1344
1407
1244
1226
TABLE
lt.l
ASD ENROLLMENT
PROJECTIONS (March 201 0)
GRADE
2009-1 0
Actual
2010-11
Proiected
2011-12
Proiected
2012-13
Proiected
2013-14
Proiected
2014-15
Proiected
2015-'t6
Proiected
KDG
1
2
3
4
5
1032
1 033
998
993
1073
1 030
K-5 6159 6378 6555 6836 7130 7398 7644
o
7
I
6-8 31 96 3265 3291 3356 3446 3508 3662
o
10
11
12
9-12 5234 5074 51 33 5222 5352 5531 5548
TOTALS 14589 147 17 14979 15414 15928 1 6436 '16854
GRADES K-12 Actual Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected
K-5wlK@112
6_8
9-12
5643
31 96
5234
5844
3265
5074
6002
3291
51 33
6262
3356
5222
6535
3446
5352
6782
3508
5531
7008
3662
5548
R-12wlK@112 14073 14183 14426 14841 15333 15821 16218
Note: The district is currently operating Full Day Kindergarten in eight schools and includes two state
funded Full Day Kindergarten at two additional elementary schools.
7
ffi)ítiiFir _ ft__
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2010 through 2016
Section lll
Standard of Service
ffiï{['{tt]üT'_À_
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILIT]ES PLAN
2010 through 2016
STANDARD OF SERVICE
The School lmpact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent indicate
that each school district must establ¡sh a "Standard of Seruice" in order to asceñain the overall capacity to house
its projected student population. The Superintendent of Public lnstruction esfab/rshes square footage
"capacity" guidelines for computing sfafe funding suppotf. The fundamental purpose of the SPI guidetines
is to provide a vehicle to equitably distribute state matching funds for school construction projects. By defautt
these guidelines have been used to benchmark the district's capacity to house its student population. The SPI
guidelines do not make adequate provision for local district program needs, facility configurations, emerging
educational reform, or the dynamics of each student's educational program. The Auburn Schoo/ District Standard
of Service addresses those local considerations that require space in excess of the SPI guidelines. The effect
on the space requirements for both permanent and relocatable facilities is shown below for each grade añicutation
pattern. Conditions that may result in potentialspace needs are provided for information purposes without
acco m p any i n g co mp utati o n s.
OVERVIEW
The Auburn School District operates fourteen elementary schools housing 6,159 students in grades
K through 5. For Kindergarten students, 682 of the 1032 attend 112 days throughout the year; and 5127 students
grades 1 through 5, plus 350 kindergartners, attend on a full day basis. \Men converted to a full time
equivalent the K-5 enrollment is 5,741. The four middle schools house 3,198 students in grades 6 through 8.
The District operates three comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school housing 5,234
students in grades 9 through 12.
ctAss srzE
The number of pupils per classroom determines the number of classrooms required to house the
student population. Specialists create additional space needs, for class sizes are subject to collective
bargaining. Changes to class size agreements can have significant impact on available space.
The current pupil/teacher limit across all elementary programs is an average of 26.5 students per
teacher. Consistent with this staffing limit, room capacities are set at 26.5 students per room at grades
K - 5. At grades 6 - 12 the limit is set at 30 pupils per room. The SPI space allocation for each grade
articulation level, /ess the computed reduction for the Auburn School District Standard of Service,
determines the District's capacity to house projected pupil populations. These reductions are shown
below by grade articulation level.
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
STRUCTURED LEARNING FOR DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District operates a structured learning program for students with moderate to severe
disabilities at the elementary school level which currently uses ten classrooms to provide for 105 students.
The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of
capacity is expected unless population with disabilities grows at a disproportionate rate compared to
total elementary population.
ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR
The Auburn School District operates an adaptive behavior program for students with behavior
disabilities at the elementary school level. The program uses two classrooms to provide for 20 students.
The housing requirements for this program exceed the SPI space allocations by two classrooms.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(53)
0
o
(53)
ffi);$ËrqfT A
Auburn School District No.408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
STANDARD OF SERVICE
SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS
The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the elementary level for
special education students requiring instruction to address their specific disabilities. Fourteen standard
classrooms are required to house this program. The housing requirements for this program exceed
the SPI space guidelines by seven standard classrooms. The loss of capacity is expected as growth
in program is larger than the total elementary population.
(186)
0
(186)
N ATIV E AM ERICA'V RESOUR C E RO O M
The Auburn School District operates one resource room to support the education of Native American
students at the elementary level. One standard classroom is fully dedicated to serve these students.
Loss of Permanent Capacity'l room @ 26.5 each = (27)
Loss of Temporary Gapacity 0 rooms @26.5 each = 0
TotalCapacity Loss T
HEAD STÁRT
The Auburn School District operates a Head Start program for approximately 120 youngsters in six
sections of 112 day in length. The program is housed at three elementary schools and utilizes
three standard elementary classrooms and auxiliary office spaces. The housing requirements
for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
0
(80)
EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District operates a pre-school program for young children with disabilities below
age five. This program is housed at eight different elementary schools and currently uses eleven
standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI
space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 11 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss (2e2)
READING LABS
The Auburn School District operates a program for students needing remediation and additional
language arts instruction. These programs utilize non-standard classroom spaces if available in
each elementary school. Four elementary schools do not have non-standard rooms available, thus
they are housed in a standard classroom. The housing requirements for this program are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
TotalCapacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @26.5 each =
TotalCapacity Loss
(80)
(2e2)
0
(1 06)
0
10
(1 06)
ffiÌi[iqnrT _A
Auburn Schoot D¡sir¡ct No.40B
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
STANDARD OF SERVIGE
MUSIC ROOMS
The district elementary music programs require one acoustically modified classroom at each
elementary school for music instruction. The housing requirements are not provided for
in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 4 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity I rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @26.5 each =
TotalCapacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @26.5 each =
TotalCapacity Loss
(371)
0
(371)
ENGLISH ASA SECOND LANGUAGE PROGRAM
The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the elementary school level for students
learning English as a second language. This program requires fourteen standard classrooms that are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 4 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(371)
0
(371)
SECO/VD GRADE TOSA PROGRAM
The Auburn School District provides a TOSA reading specialist program for eight highly impacted
elementary schools. This pullout model provides direct instruction to students who are not at grade
level and do not receive other services. This program requires eight standard classrooms that are
not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
(212)
0
(212)
ELEMENTARY LEARNING SPEC'AL'ST PROGRAM
The Auburn School District provides a learning specialist program to increase literacy skills for
first and second graders. This program model has been created from the l-728 funds and currently
has the specialist going into existing teacher classrooms, as well as pulling out students into
designated classrooms. The district is utilizing classrooms at allfourteen elementary schools.
(371)
0
(371)
FULL DAY KINDERGARTEN
The Auburn School District provides Full-Day Kindergarten programs to increase academic skills for
kindergarten students. This program model has been created from tuition, ARRA funds and currently
has two schools receiving state funding for 2009-10 school year. The district is utilizing fourteen
classrooms at nine of the fourteen elementary schools. Housing requirements exceed the OSPI space
guidelines for this program by seven classrooms.
(1 86)
0
11
(1 86)
ffi)íFllr'¡Y å_
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
STANDARÞ OF SERVICE
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS
The Auburn School District operates a resource room program for each grade at the middle school level.
This is to accommodate special education students needing remedial instruction to address their specific
disabilities. Eleven classrooms are required at the middle school level to provide for approximately 350 students.
The housing requirements for this program are not entirely provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
ADAPTIVE BEH AVIO R S P ECIAL ED U CATI ON
The Auburn School District offers a self-contained program for students with moderate to severe behavior
diabilities. The program is housed at one of the middle schools and uses one classroom. The housing
requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space allocations.
STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District operates four structured learning classrooms at the middle school level for
students with moderate to severe disabilities and one developmentally disabled classroom for students with
profound disabilities. Two of the four classrooms for this program are provided for in the SPI space allocations.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(53)
0
(53)
MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPUTER T-ABS
The Auburn School District operates a minimum of one computer lab at each middle school. This program
utilizes a standard classroom per middle school. The housing requirements for this program
are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = Q
Total Capacity Loss -(@-
ENGLISH ASA SECOND LANGUAGE
The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the middle school level for students
learning English as a second language. This program requires four standard classrooms that are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = Q
TotalCapacity Loss
-(T
ROOM UTILIZATION
The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive middle school program that includes
elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are
not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available
teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 11120109 identifies 148 teaching stations available in the
mid-level facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately I teaching stations.
(240)
0
12
(240)
F;'f$:lT:lir --d_-
Auburn School District No.408
CAPITAL FACIL¡TIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
STANDARD OF SERVICE
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
SEN/OR HIGH COMPUTER LABS
The Auburn School District operates two computer labs at each of the senior high schools. This
program utilizes two standard classrooms at comprehensive high schools and one at West Auburn
The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
(210)
0
(210)
ENGLISH AS A SECO'VD LANGUAGE
The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at three comprehensive high schools for students
learning English as a second language. This program requires three standard classrooms that are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER PROGRAM
The Auburn School District operates six structured learning center classrooms for 53 students with
moderate to severe disabilities. This program requires two standard classrooms that are not provided
for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(e0)
0
(e0)
(60)
(60)
0
SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS
The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the senior high level for special
education students requiring instruction to address their specific learning disabilities. The current senior
high school program requires eleven classrooms to provide for approximately 370 students.
The SPI space guidelines provide for one of the eleven teaching stations.
(300)
0
(300)
P ER F O R M I NG AR TS CE'VIERS
Auburn High School includes 25,000 square feet used exclusively for a Performing Arts Center. The
SPI lnventory includes this space when computing unhoused student capacity. This space was
not intended for nor is it usable for classroom instruction. lt was constructed to provide a
community center for the performing arts. Using SPI capacity guidelines, 25,000 square feet
computes to 208 unhoused students or 8.33 classrooms.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 8.33 rooms @ 30 each =
13
(250)
f;Xü'flfiFlT j=
Auburn School D¡str¡ct No.408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
STANDARD OF SERVICE
ROOM UTILIZATION
The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive high school program that includes numerous
elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are
not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available
teaching stations. There are 185 teaching stations available in the senior high facilities. The utilization
pattern results in a loss of approximately 10 teaching stations.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(300)
(300)
STANDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS
ELEMENTARY
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (2,253)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (2,253)
MIDDLE SCHOOL
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (533)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (533)
SENIOR HIGH
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (1,210)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (1,210)
TOTAL
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (3,995)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (3,995)
0
14
ffi)ifi.flËFil-fl _a_
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2010 through 2016
Section lV
lnventory of Facilities
ffi)iß*uffi[î A
Auburn Schoof District No.408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
INVENTORY OF FACILITIES
Table IV.1 shows the current inventory of permanent district facilities and their OSPI rated capacities.
Table IV.2 shows the number and location of each portable unit by school. The district uses relocatable
facilities to:
1. provide interim housing in school attendance areas uniquely impacted by increasing school
populations that would otherwise require continual redistricting.2. make space available for changing program requirements and offerings determined by unique student
needs, and
3. provide housing to cover district needs until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed.
Relocatable facilities are deemed to be interim, stop gap measures that often place undesirable stress on existing
physical plants. Core facilities (i.e. gymnasiums, restrooms, kitchens, labs, lockers, Iibraries, etc.) are not of
sufficient size or quantity to handle the increased school population served by adding relocatable classrooms.
Table
IV.1
Permanent Facilities
@ OSPI Rated Capacity
(November 2009)
District Facilities
Buildine Capacify Acres Address
Elementary Schools'Washinston Elementarv 486 5.40 20 E Street Northeast. Auburn V/4. 98002
Terminal Park Elementarv 408 6.70 1101 D Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002
Dick Scobee Elementarv 477 10.50 1031 l4th SheetNortheast. Auburn V/4" 98002
Pioneer Elementarv 441 8.30 2301 M Sheet Southeast. Aubum WA. 98002
Chinook Elementarv 440 8.75 3502 Aubum Way South, Aubum WA, 98092
Lea Hill Elementarv 450 10.00 30908l24thAvenue Southeast, Aubum V/4, 98092
Gildo Rev Elementarv 551 10.00 1005 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002
Eversreen Heishts Elem.456 8.09 5602 South 3161h, Aubum W4,98001
Alpac Elementarv 497 10.60 310 Milwaukee Boulevard North, Pacific V/4, 98047
Lake View Elementary 5s9 16.40 16401 Southeast 318th Street, Auburn WA,98092
Haeelwood Elementary s80 12.67 ll815 Southeast 304th Street, Aubum V/4,98092
Ilalko Elementary 585 12.00 301 Oravetz Place Southeast, Aubum WA, 98092
Lakeland Hills Elementary s94 12.00 1020 Evergreen Way SE, Auburn WA,98092
Arthur Jacobsen Elementary 614 10.00 29205 ß2"d Street SE, Auburn, V/A 98092
ELEM CAPACITY 7 138
Middle Schools
Cascade Middle School 829 17.30 l0l5 24th Street Northeast. Auburn WA. 98002
Olvmoic Middle School 921 t7.40 1825 K Sheet Southeast, Aubum WA, 98002
Rainier Middle School 843 26.33 30620 llíthAvenue Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092
Mt. Baker Middle School 837 30.88 620 37th Street Southeast, Aubum V/4, 98002
MS CAPACITY 3.430
Senior High Schools
West Auburn Hieh School ¿JJ 5.10 401 'West Main Street. Aubum V/4.98001
Aubum Senior Hish 2,101 18.60 800 Fourth Street Northeast. Auburn WA. 98002
Aubum Riverside HS 1,387 33.00 501 Oravetz Road, Aubum V/4, 98092
Auburn Mountainview HS 1,443 40.00 289001241h Ave SE, Aubum, WA 98092
SH CAPACITY 5,164
16
ffii;f;i{ïliT A _
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2009 through 2015
INVENTORY OF FACILITIES
*TAP - Transition Assistance Program 18-21 year old students with special needs.
TABLE
lV.2
TEMPORARY/RELOCATABLE
FACILITIES INVENTORY
(March 2010)
Elementary Location 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Washington
Terminal Park
Dick Scobee
Pioneer
Chinook
Lea Hill
Gildo Rey
Evergreen Heights
Alpac
Lake View
Hazelwood
llaiko
Lakeland Hills Elementary
Arthur Jacobsen Elementary
0
2
3
e
5
5
6
0
2
2
0
2
2
0
0
2
ó
5
5
6
0
2
2
0
2
2
0
0
2
3
3
5
5
6
0
2
2
0
2
2
0
0
2
3
J
5
2
o
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
5
2
5
2
b
2
2
2
U
2
4
U
0
2
3
3
5
2
6
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
3
3
Ã
2
o
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
TOTAL UNITS
ÏOTAL CAPACITY
32
848
32
848
32
848
33
875
33
875
33
875
33
875
Middle School Location 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 201 5-1 6
Cascade
Olympic
Rainler
Mt. Baker
0
0
5
I
0
0
5
a
0
0
5
I
0
0
7
I
2
2
7
I
2
2
I
I
2
2
I
8
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL CAPACITY
l3
390
13
390
13
390
15
450
19
570
20
600
20
600
Sr. High School Location 2009-1 0 2010-1 1 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
West Auburn
Auburn High School
Auburn High School -.TAP
Auburn Riverside
Auburn Mountainview
0
12
I
13
0
0
12
1
13
0
0
12
1
13
0
0
12
1
13
0
1
12
1
tó
0
1
12
1
13
0
1
12
1
l3
0
TOTAL UNITS
ÏOTAL CAPACITY
26
780
26
780
¿ı
780
26
780
27
810
27
810
27
810
COMBINED TOTAL UNITS
COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY
71
2,018
71
2,018
71
2,018
74
2,105
79
2,255
80
2,285
80
2,285
17
ffi;iå.åfiffifiT A
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2010 through 2016
Section V
Pupil Capacity
ffiKF"å[ffi$T A
1!
Auburn School Distr¡ci No- 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
201 0 through 201 6
PUPIL CAPACITY
While the Auburn School District uses the SPI inventory of permanent facilities as the data from
which to determine space needs, the District's educational program requires more space than that
provided for under the formula. This additional square footage is converted to numbers of pupils in
Section lll, Standard of Service. The District's capacity is adjusted to reflect the need for additional
space to house its programs. Changes in the capacity of the district recognize new unfunded
facilities. The combined effect of these adjustments is shown on Line B in Tables V.1 and V.2 below.
Table V.1 shows the Distict's capacity with relocatable units included and Table V.2 without these units.
! New facilities shown in 2014-15 and 2015-16 are not funded under the current Capital Facilities Plan.
I The Standard of Service represents 25.39% of SPI capacity. When new facilities are added the Standard
of Service computations are decreased to 23.34% of SPI capacity.
3/ Students beyond the capacity are accomodated in other spaces (commons, library, theater, shared teaching space)
1!
Table V,1
Capacity
WITH relocatables 2009-r 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
15,732
(1,977\
15,732
(1,977\
15,732
(1,8e1)
15,732
(1,741\
15,732
800
(1 ,7 11)(1,711\
16,532
585
13,755
14,589
(834)
2,018
(3,ee5)
13,755
14,717
(e62)
2,018
(3,995)
'13,755
14,979
(1,224)
2,018
(3,9e5)
13,841
15,414
(1,573)
2,105
(3,ee5)
13,991
15,928
(1,937)
2,255
(3,995)
14,821
16,436
(1,615)
2,28s
(3,995)
15,406
16,854
(1,448)
2,285
(3,995)
Total Adjustments (1,977)
SPI Capacity-New Elem
SPI Capacity- New MS
CAPACIry ADJUSTMENTS
15,732
B
c
D
Exclude SOS 14
Enrollment
lnclude Relocatable
SPI Capacity
E.Surplus/Deficit
A.
4.1
4.2
Capacity Adjustments
Net Capacity
(1,977)(1,e77)(1 ,8e1)(1,741)(1,711)(1,711)
Table V.2
Capacity
WITHOUT relocatables 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
11,737
14,589
(2,852)
(3,ee5)
15,732
(3,ee5)
11,737
14,717
(2,e80)
(3,ee5)
15,732
(3,9e5)
11,737
14,979
(3,242)
(3,995)
15,732
(3,995)
11,737
15,414
(3,678)
(3,995)
15,732
(3,995)
11,737
15,928
(4,192)
(3,995)
15,732
800
(3,ee5)
12,537
16,436
(3,e00)
(3,ee5)
16,532
585
(3,995)
13,122
16,854
(3,732)
(3,ee5)
Total Adjustments (3,9e5)
SPI Capacity-New Elem
CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS
15,732
Exclude SOS 14
B.
c.
D.
SPI Capacity-New MS
Enrollment
SPI Capacity
E.D Surplus/Deficit
A.
A.l
4.2
Capacity Adjustments
Net Capacity
(3,ee5)(3,9e5)(3,ee5)(3,ee5)(3,995)(3,995)
19
ffiX$'[5niiT l_-
PERMANENT FACILITIES
@ SPI Rated Capacity
March 201
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
201 0 through 201 6
PUPIL CAPACITY
A.E Schools
Building 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Washington
Terminal Park
Dick Scobee
Pioneer
Chinook
Lea Hill
Gildo Rey
Evergreen Height
Alpac
Lake View
Hazelwood
llalko
Lakeland Hills
Arthur Jacobsen
Elementary #15
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
ÃÃ.o
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
45
497
5s9
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
45
497
ÃÃo
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
45
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
45
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
45
497
559
s80
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
585
ELEM CAPACITY 7.138 7,138 7,138 7,138 7,138 7,1 38 7,723
B. Middle Schools
C. Senior H h Schools
Buildinq 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 20'15-16
Cascade
Olympic
Rainier
Mt. Baker
Middle School #5
829
921
843
837
829
921
843
837
829
921
843
837
829
921
843
837
829
921
843
837
829
921
843
837
800
829
921
843
837
800
MS CAPACIry 3,430 3,430 3.430 3,430 3,430 4,230 4,230
Building 2009-1 0 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
West Auburn
Auburn
Auburn Riverside
Auburn Mountainview
233
2,101
1,387
1,443
233
2,101
1,387
1.443
233
2,101
1,387
1,443
233
2,101
1,387
1,443
233
2,101
1,387
1,443
233
2,101
1,387
1,443
233
2,101
1,387
1,443
SH CAPACIry 5,164 5,164 5,164 5,164 5,164 5,164 5.164
BINED CAPACITY 1 732 7321 t5 732 1 732 1 17 117
20
Eå){Ë!fi['ll"fl'-L-
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2010 through 2016
Section Vl
Capital Construction Plan
ffi){$rflffisr _û_
Auburn School District No.408
CAPITAL FACILIT¡ES PLAN
2010 through 2016
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
The formal process used by the Board to address current and future facility needs began in
1974 with the formation of a community wide citizens committee. The result of this committee's
work was published in the document titled 'Guidelines for Development; ln 1985 the Board
formed a second Ad Hoc citizens committee to pick up from the work of the first and address the
needs of the District for subsequent years. The work of this committee was published in the
document titled 'Directions for the Nineties.' ln 1995 the Board commissioned a third Ad Hoc
citizens committee to make recommendations for improvements to the District's programs and
physical facilities. The committee recommendations are published in the document titled
'Education lnto The Twenty-First Century - - A Community lnvolved.'
The 1995 Ad Hoc committee recommended the District develop plans for the implementation,
funding, and deployment of technology throughout the District's programs. The 1996 Bond
proposition provided funding to enhance the capacity of each facility to accommodate
technologicalapplications. The 1998 Capital Levy provided funding to further deploy technology
at a level sufficient to support program requirements in every classroom and department. ln
2005 a replacement technology levy was approved to continue to support technology across all
facets of the District's teaching, learning and operations.
ln addition to the technology needs of the District the Ad Hoc committee recognized the District
must prepare for continued student enrollment growth. As stated in their report, "the District
must pursue an appropriate high school site as soon as possible." The Ad Hoc
recommendation included commentary that the financing should be timed to maintain consistent
rates of assessment.
A proposition was approved by the voters on April 28, 1998 that provided $8,000,000 over six
years to address some of the technology needs of the District; and $5,000,000 to provide funds
to acquire school sites.
During the 1997-98 school year a Joint District Gitizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by
the Auburn and Dieringer School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the
school population from an area that includes a large development known as Lakeland South.
Lakeland South at that time was immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the Auburn
School District. On June 16, 1998 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a
joint meeting of the Auburn and Dieringer Boards of Directors. On June 22,1998 the Auburn
School Board adopted Resolution No. 933 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of
the boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On
June 23, 1998 the Dieringer School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 24-97-98
authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad
Hoc Committee's recommendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from
Dieringer to Auburn containing most of the Lakeland South development and certain other
undeveloped properties. Development in this area is progressing at an aggressive rate.
ln April of 2002, the Board formed a fifth citizen's Ad Hoc committee to address the following
two items and make recommendations to the board in the Fall of 2002:
a. A review of the conclusion and recommendations of 1985 and 1995 Ad Hoc Committees
related to accommodating high school enrollment growth. This included the review of
possible financing plans for new facilities.
b. Develop recommendations for accommodating high school enrollment growth for the
next 10 years if a new senior high school is not built.
22
ffix$i[ptT A
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2016
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
This committee recommended the board place the high school on the ballot for the fifth time in
February 2003. The February election approved the new high school at 68.71% yes votes. The
school opened in the Fall of 2005.
ln the Fallof 2003 the school board directed the administration to begin the planning and design
for Elementary #13 and Elementary #14. ln the Fall of 2004, the Auburn School Board passed
Resolution No. 1054 to place two elementary schools on the ballot in February 2005. The
voters approved the ballot measure in February of 2005 at64.72%. Lakeland Hills Elementary
(Elementary #13) opened in the Fall of 2006. Arthur Jacobsen Elementary (Elementary #14) is
located in the Lea Hillarea on a 10 acre site and opened in the Fall of 2007. These two
elementary schools were built to accommodate the housing growth in Lakeland Hills and Lea
Hill areas of the school district.
ln the 2004-05 school year, the Board convened a sixth Citizen's Ad Hoc committee to again
study and make recommendations about the future impacts in the District. One of the areas of
study was the need for New Facilities and Modernization. The committee made a number of
recommendations including school size, the need for a new middle school, and to begin a
capital improvements program to modernize or replace facilities based upon criterion.
During the 2005-06 school year, a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by
the Auburn and Kent School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the school
population that will come from an area that includes a number of projected developments in the
north Auburn valley. On May 17 ,2006 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at
a joint meeting of the Auburn and Kent Boards of Directors. On June 14, 2006 the Kent School
Board adopted Resolution No. 1225 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the
boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On
June 26, 2006 the Auburn School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 1073 authorizing
the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad Hoc
Committee's recommendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from the Kent
School District to the Auburn School District effective September 29,2006.
ln October of 2008, after two years of review and study, a Steering Committee made
recommendations to the school board regarding the capital improvements program to
modernize or replace facilities as recommended by the 2004-05 Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee.
These recommendations, based on specific criteria, led to the school board placing a school
improvement bond and capital improvements levy on the ballot in March 2009. Voters did not
approve either measures that would have updated 24 facilities and replaced three aging
schools. The board decided to place only a six-year Capital Levy on the ballot in November of
2009, which passed at 55.17o/o. Ihe levy willfund $46.4 million of needed improvement
projects at 24 sites over the next seven school years. Planning for the replacement of aging
schools has started with educational specifications and schematic design process beginning in
2010. A future bond issue will be necessary to fund these projects.
ïhe Special Education Transition Facility opened in February of 2010. This facility is designed
for students with disabilities that are 1B to 21 years old.
lN 2009, the school district acquired a site for a future middle school in 2009 and will need to
consider possibilities for a site for elementary school #15.
23
ffi)iüi[m[T â
1t
1l
tl
1l
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILIT¡ES PLAN
2010 through 2016
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
The District is projecting 2265 additional students within the six year period including the
Lakeland, Lea Hill, and north Auburn valley areas. This increase in student population will
require the acquisition of new middle school and new elementary school sites and construction
of a middle school and elementary school during the six year window.
Based upon the District's capacity data and enrollment projections, as well as the student
generation data included in Appendix 4.3, the District has determined that approximately eighty-
six percent of the capacity improvements are necessary to serve the students generated from
new development, with the remaining additional capacity required to address existing need.
The table below illustrates the current capital construction plan for the next six years. The exact
timelines are wholly dependent on the rate of growth in the school age population and passage
of bond issues and/or capital improvement levies.
1/ These funds may be secured through local bond issues, sale of real property, impact fees, and state matching funds.
The District currently is not eligible for state assistance at the elementary school level for new construct¡on. The district is eligible for
state matching funds for modern¡zat¡on.
201 0-16 Capital Construction Plan
(March 2010)
Proiect Funded
Projected
Cost
Fund
Source
Project Timelines
09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16
All Facilities -
Technology
Modernization
Yes $12,000,000
2006
6 Year
Cap Levy
XX XX XX
Portables Yes $1,200,000 lmpact
Fees XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
Property Purchase
New Elementary No $3,500,000
lmpact
Fees XX XX XX XX
Multiple Facility
lmprovements Yes $46,400,000 Capital
Levy XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
Middle School#5 No $42,500,000
Bond
lmpact Fee
XX
plan
XX
const
XX
open
Elementary #15 No $21,750,000
Bond
lmpact Fee
XX
plan
XX
const
XX
open
Replacement of
three aging
schools
No $239,000,000 Bond lssue XX XX XX XX XX XX XX
24
ffi:i$iiln[T È
Auburn School District No.408
Capital Facilities Plan
2010 through 2016
Section Vll
lmpact Fees
lìE$,s8 ilfiF,fq
ffiÀ\ij'ÈütrJü Ë
{\
Aubum School District No.408CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN2010 through 2016IMPACT FEE COMPUTATION (Spring 2010)Middle School #5 within 6 year periodElementary #15 within 6 year periodI. SITE COST PER RESIDENCE,Formula: ((Acres x Costx Student Factoril. PERMANENT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCEFormula:x Studentto TotalXil|. TEMPORARY FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCEFormula:Cost/Fx StudentXFamN, STATE MATCH CREDIT PER RESIDENCEFormula: (Boeckh lndex x SPIx District Match x Studêntto Totaluare¡f3*eË',¡*ÉlIl:pIIIMulti FamilyCosV$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00Cost/Sinole Familv$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.000"08600.03800.031 0Student Generatìon FactorSingle Family Multi Family0.30800.14700.1770FacilityCapacity5508001 500CosVAcre$0$o$0SiteAcreage122540r,lElem (K - 5)Middle Sch (6 -Sr High (9 - 12)CosVMulti Fam¡ly$3,287.99$l,951.72$0,00$5,239.71CosUSingle Family$1'l,775.59$7,550.08$0.00$19,325.670.08600.03800.0310Student Generation FactorSingle Family Multi Family0.30800.1470o.1770% Perm Sq FVTotal Sq Ft0.96680.96680.9668FacilitySize5508001 500CostFacility$2r,750,000$42,500,000$0EIem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr Hiqh (9 - l2)CosVMulti Family$14.01$5.47$o.oo$19.48CosVSingle Family$50.r 7$21 .15$0.00$71.320.08600.03800.0310Student Generation FactorSingle Family Multi Family0.30800.14700.1770% Temp Sq FVTotal Sq Ft0.03320.03320.0332FacilitySize26.53030CostFacility$'130,000$1 30,000$0Elem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr High (9 - 12)CosVMulti Family$839.92$445.35$437.32$1,722.59CosVSingle Family$3,008.07$1,722.81$2,496.96$7,227.840.08600.03800.031 0Student Generation FactorSingle Family Mult¡ Family0.30800.14700"1770DistrictMatch60.23o/o60.23o/o60.23%SPIFootage90108r30Boeckhlndex$180.17$ 180.17$ 180.17Elem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr Hiqh (9 - 12)26
FT¡sÉlffi.{fl*¡tI'IV. TAX CREDIT PER RESIDENCEFormula: Expressed as the presentvalue ofan annuityTC = Pv(¡nterest rate,d¡scount period,average assd value x tax rate)VI. DEVELOPER PROVIDED FACILITY CREDITFormula: (Value of Site or Facility/Number of dwelling units)Auburn School District No.408CAPITAL FACILIT¡ES PLAN2010 through 2016Tax CreditMulti$500.16Tax CreditNumb ofYearsBnd Byr lndxAnn lnt RateCurr Dbt ServTax RateAssd ValueAve4.33Yo4.330kFamilyMulti1010.82573$76$0.82$250,541Facil CreditNo. of UnitsValue$0.00$0.00Single FamilyMultiMultiFamily8.22PER UNIT IMPACT FEESSingleFamilyFEERECAPSUMMARYSite CostsPermanent Facility Const CostsTemporary Facility CostsState Match Cred¡tTax Credit$0.00$19,325.67$71.32($7,227.84)($1,636.49)$0.00$5,239.71$19.48($1,722.5s)($500.16)$3,036.44$1,518.22'10,532.65FEE (No Discount)FEE (50% D¡scount)Credit$5,266.33$0.00Net27
Siúe CosfAubum School Distr¡ct No.408CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN:liiI=*tMULTI FAMILYSr High9-120.0311 50030$1 30,00040$326,8271,695,82958,2401,754,06996.68%3.32%130$1 80.1 760.23%39.77%$76,573$0.824.330/0Mid Sch6-80.038800$42,500,00030$1 30,00025$326,8271,695,82S58,2401,754,06996.68%3.32o/o108$1 80.1 760.23%39.77%$76,573$0.824.33%ElemK50.086550$21,750,00026.5$1 30,00012$326,827'l,695,82958,2401,754,06996.68%3.32%90$180.1760.23%39.77%$76,573$0.824.33%SINGLE FAMILYSr HighI-120.177I 50030$130,00040$326,8271,695,82958,2401,754,06996.68%3.32%130$1 80.1 760.23%39.77o/o$250,541$0.824.33%Mid Sch6-80.147800$42,500,00030$130,000258326,8271,695,82958,2401,754,06996.68%3.32o/o108$1 80.1 760.23%39-770/o$250,541$0.824.33o/oElemK50.308550$21,750,00026.5$130,00012$326,8271,695,82958,2401,754,06996.68%3.32o/o90$1 80.1 760.23%39.77%$250,541$0.824.33o/oIMPACT FEE ELEMENTSSingle Family - Auburn actual count (3/10)ASD District StandardsElementary Cost Estimates Feb 2008Middle School Cost Estimate Feb 2008ASD District Standard of Serv¡ce.Grades K - 5 @ 26.5 and 6 - 12 @ 30.Relocatables, including site work, set up, and furnishingASD District Standard or SPI Min¡mumSee belowSPI Rpt#3 dated Nov 20,200970 portables at 832 sq. ft. eachSum of Permanent and Temporary abovePermanent Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. FootageTemporary Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. FootageFrom SPI RegulationsFrom SPI schedule for March 2010From SPI Webpage March 2010ComputedKing County Department of Assessments March 2009(multi family weighted average)Current Fiscal YearCurrent Rate - (Bond Buyer 20 lndex March 201 0)Student FactorNew Fac CapacityNew Facility Costemp Rm CapacityFacility Costite AcreageCosvAcreSq FootageTemp Sq FootageTotal Sq FootageTo - Perm FacilitiesYo - lemp FacilitiesSPI Sq FUStudentBoeckh IndexMatch % - StateMatch % - DistrictDist AverAVDebt Serv Tax RateG. O Bond lnt RateProjectedCosUAcre$326.827Latest Dateof Acquisition2014SitesRequ¡redElementaryProjected Annualnflation Factor3.00%AdjustedPresent Dav$3r 0,687$223,710$336,747$290,381PurchaseCosVAcre$225,087$217,194$336,747$262,095PurchasePrice$2,701,043$7,601,799$9,092, I 60$19,395,002PurchaseYear200220082009Acreage12.0035.0027.0074.00Recent PropertyAcquisitionsLakelandLabradorLakeland EastTotalÞ28
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2010 through 2016
Section Vlll
Appendix
Appendix 4.1 - Student Enrollment Projections
Appendix 4.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections
Appendix A.3 - Student Generation Survey
H){råfiffifiT â
Appendix 4.1 'Student Enrollment Projections
ffii;fi'ilm[-fr -A---
Auburn School District #408
Student Enrollment Proj ections
October 2009
Introduction
The projective techniques give some consideration to historical and current data as a basis for
forecasting the future. In addition, the 'projector' must make certain assumptions about the operant
variables within the data being used. These assumptions are 'Judgmental" by definition. Forecasting
can be definéd as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to the future, or from the known
to the unknown. The attached tabular data reviews the history of student enrollment, sets out some
quantitative assumptions, and provides projections based on these numerical factors.
The projection logic does not attempt to weigh the individual sociological, psychological, economic,
and political factors that are present in any demographic analysis and projection. The logic embraces
the assumptions that whatever these individual factors have been in the past are present today, and will
be in the future. It further moderates the impact of singular factors by averaging data over thirteen
years and six years respectively. The results provide a trend, which reflects a long (I3-year) and a short
(6-year) base from which to extrapolate.
Two methods of estimating the number of kindergarlen students have been used. The first uses the
average increase or decrease over the past l3 and 6-year time frame and adds it to each succeeding
year. The second derives what the average percentage Auburn kindergartners have been of live births
in King County for the past 5 years and uses this to project the subsequent four years.
The degree to which the actuals deviate from the projections can only be measured after the fact.
This deviation provides a point of departure to evaluate the effectiveness of the assumptions and logic
being used to calculate future projections. Monitoring deviation is critical to the viability and
credibility ofthe projections derived by these techniques.
Tables
Table I - Thirteen Year History qf October I Enrollments - page 3
The data shown in this table is the baseline information used to project future enrollment. This data
shows the past record of enrollment in the district on October 1 of each year.
Table 2 - Historical Factors Used ín Prqiections - page 4
This table shows the three basic factors derived from the data in Table 1. These factors have been
used in the subsequent projections. The three factors are:
1. Factor I - Average Pupil Change Between Grade Levels
This factor is sometimes referred to as the "holding power" or "cohort survival." It is a
measure of the number of pupils gained or lost as they move from one grade level to the
next.
2. Factor 2 - Average Pupil Change by Grade Level
This factor is the average change at each grade level over the 13 or 6-year period.
3. Factor 3 - Auburn School District Kindergarten Enrollment as a Function of King
Counfy Live Births.
This factor calculates what percent each kindergarten class was of the King County live
births in the 5 previous years. From this information has been extrapolated the
kindergarten pupils expected for the next 4 years.
I
ffi)ifi.åfrffilT _È
Tøble 3 - Pro-iection Models - pages 5-13
This set oftables utilizes the above mentioned variables and generates several projections. The
models are explained briefly below.
tr Table 3.13 (pg 5) - shows a projection based on the 13-year average gain in kindergarten
(Factor 2) andthe l3-year average change between grade levels (Factor 1). The data is
shown for the district as a whole.
D Table 3.6 (pg 5) - shows a projection using the same scheme as Table 3.13 except it
shortens the historical to only the most recent 6 years.
tr Table 3. l3A and 3.64 (pg 6) - uses the same factors above except Factor 3 is substituted
for Factor 2. The kindergarten rates are derived from the King County live births instead
ofthe average gain.
n Tables 3F.13,3E.6, 3E.l3A, 3E.64 (pg 7) - breaks out the K-5 grades from the district
projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade
articulation.
B Tables 3MS.13, 3MS.6, 3MS.l3A, 3MS.6A (pg 8) - breaks out rhe 6-8 grades from the
district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by
grade articulation.
tr Tables 3SH.13, 3SH.6, 3SH.134, 3SH.6A (pg 9) - breaks out the 9-12 grades from the
district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by
grade articulation.
B Table 4 (pg 10) - Collects the four projection models by grade group for ease of
comparison.
o Table 5 (pgs 1l-13) - shows how well each projection model performed when compared
with actual enrollments. Data is provided in both number and percent formats for the
past 13 years.
Summary
This year we had unprecedented decline in student enrollment of 114 students. The loss of those
students changes our historical average gain in students. Over the past 6 years the gain is now 1.06%
annually down from 1.53%; that equates to 148 students down from 213 inprior projections. Over
the past 13 years the average gain has dropped froml.4lo/ofo l.l2o/o and equates to 156 students
annually down from 189 students.
Using the cohort survival models, the data below is a summary of the range of variation between the
four models. This data can be used for planning for future needs of the district.
The models show changes in the next six years:. Elementary level shows increase ranging fuom 532 to 1042. (page 7). Middle School level shows increase ranging froml7g to232. (page 8). High School level shows decreases ranging from -161 to -63. (page 9)
The models show these changes looking forward thirteen years:r Elementary level shows increase ranging fromT2l to 2218. (page 7). Middle School level shows increase ranging from 405 to 876. (page 8). High School level shows increase ranging from295 to 664. (page 9)
This data does not factor new developments that a¡e currently under construction or in the planning
stages.
2
ffixË;fiHiåT L_
Actual09-1 01 0321 0339989931073I 030I 0401125I 03112441277I 30314101458908-0999810151024I 04810441 0691 0961 0341 0761 2561341I 35013521470307-08996ooÃ101999710571 078100710571 0331337I 368135212631 455906-07941101210021 03110499981 058101410721372'1400132211471441805-06oÃE96396310029391 0651 004102811371 3791 3831 182I 0881408804-05892960oo,918101695710201 1241130146112611 0558861367203-04922982ono996947101811111 13110521473124910109021370202-0390s90096194097310621104102110261441123492793313427o1-0284696894996610771 10810281017'10041 4051073I 0909301346100-01912905914I 031107 1101 I998o70I 00312221157I 0678651313599-001 3051849943r 0l510541012983981101597412021132I 03685585499510231 0099749829629399591 156I 1651007o4a1294297/98 98/999781 0311014980985958941oÃo91 11 1631012102681112769TABLE Thirteen1History of OctobelI Enrollments(Rev l0/09)GRADEKDG12J45b7o101112TOTALSPercent of GainPupil Gaini1 "l!?'" 4*=*ItÞIAUBURN scHooL DlsTRtcr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcTtoNS - october 20091032306361 5971 9930245127616731 962156340052343990TABLElA Grade Group CombinationsKDG978302359466887854287258376799849280758566837912273158446842846276359146942905ztoo57416845922281357746885892284457356755955288158876891941295560337091996301 061427 149998303761 987294K,rK-K.5J5630254968590930274983594530125007598828504932593028835068609628014836594028874852596328704843s863292849325936304550926't50301 1514661 533087520062966-87 -87 -928111870303328601 898305429701 98931 912980198232043049202134263151204734883294218336563274225437 1531 6921653544314420863458309720903427320621 1033669-1210-12401228494245308942253023431 13089449830934535309446343l 6l4663320250323653524138695320398352994043prj09-1 0Page 34t512010
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2009TABLE Factors Used2s12.2014.2033.2027.O07.6014.6018.40228.00(7.2t)(48.80)(0.20)6 YEAR BASE47.20Kto I1lo22to 33to44to55to66to77to8StogI to 1010to1111 lo 12total 346.2051.928.3316.6721.6718.0810.00I 4.5014.92297.58(68.92)(89.50)(73.00)GradeFactor Average Pupil Change1 Levels13 YEAR BASEKto 11to22to 33to44to55to66to77to8Stog9 to l010to1111 1o 12total 222.25the average gain or loss of pupils as theymove from one grade level to the next. Factor 1 usesFactor 1ORofAUBURN KINDERGARTENENROLLMENTAS A % OFADJUSTED LIVE BIRTHSYEAR IADJUSTEDoF lr-rve lxocENROLLI BIRTHS IexnoII.78n979t8080/8 1811828218383/8484/8s85i8686/8787/8888/8989/9090/9'191t92921939319494/9595/9696/9797/9898/9999/0000/0101lo202t0303l040410505/060610707t0808/0909/1 010t1111t121211313t1414t1513,53913,47813,52413,68714,37514,95816,04816,70817,00018,24118,62618,82719,51019,89321,85221,62424,06226,35824,11620,97321,57322,12924,01322,71721,62222,02322,07522,32722,01421,83522,24222,72622,74523,72324,6838,3018,397598618600588698666tzo792829769817871858909s20930927954963978854849912846905922892oÂÃ941996998tvól4.4170Â4.585o/o4.436%4.296%4.8560/o4.4520/04.524o/o4.740o/o4.876%4.216%4.386%4.626%4.398Vo4.5690/04.210o/o4.301%3.8s3%3.619%3.993%4.663%3.959%3.837%3.798o/o3.724o/o4.186%4.1860/o4.041o/onumber of DOHAverageAverageAverageAverageActual<-Prjctd<-Prjctd<-Prjctd<-Prjctdli3rdsBIRTHS2/3rdsBIRTHSTOTALLIVEBIRTHSG3FactorECTDILIVE BIRTH RATESAS FUNCTION OFSCCAL-ENDARYEAR19721973197419751 97619771 S781 9791 9801 e8ì1 982I 9831 9841 9851 9861 9871 9881 9891 990I 99119921 993I 9941 995I 9961 997I 9981 99920002001200220032004200520062007200813,71913,44913,4931 3,54013,76114,68215,09616,52416,80017,10018,81 118,53318,97419,77819,95122,80321,03425,57626,74922,79920,06022,33022,02925,00521,57321,64622,21222,00722,48721,77821,86322,43122,87422,68024,24424,90225,1 909,1 468,9668,995I,0279,1749,7881 0,06411,01611,20011,40012,54112,35512,6491 3,1 8513,30115,20214,02317,05117,8331 5,1 9913,37314,88714,68616,67014,38214,43114,80814,671I 4,99 114,51914,57514,9541s,24915,1201 6,1 6316,6011 6.7934,5734,4834,4984,5134,5874,8945,0325,5085,6005,7006,2706,1 786,32s6,5936,6507,6017,0118,5258,9167,6006,6877,4437,3438,3357,1917,2157,4047,3367,4967,2597,2887,4777,6257,5608,0818,301ö.óY /Factor Average Pupil Change By Grade Level26 YEAR BASE28.0014.601.2015.0011 .4014.604.000.20i1s,8g)(43 40)3.2049.60104.80Factor 2 is the average change in grade level sizefrom 94/95 OR 01/02.K12ó4(67o10111213 YEAR BASE4.500.17(1.33)1.087.336.008.254 a oâ10.006.7522.0823.0849.92K1234b78I101112li od.¡i:.;*¡IlС-ISource: Center for Health Statistics, Washington State Department of HealthprÌ09-1 0Page 441s12010
PROJ22t2316010PROJ21t221 5951PROJ20t21'15846PROJ19t201 5703PROJ1811515542PROJ17t1815444PROJ16t171 5289PROJ1511615139PROJ141151 5064PROJ13t1414884PROJ12t1314624PROJ11t121447 1PROJ10t1114438ACTUAL09/1 0I 4589TABLE DISTRICTPROJECTIONS3.13 Based on 13 Year H¡storyGRADE12J4567ÕI10321 0339989931073'10301 0401 1251 031124410371 084104110151015I 0911 0401 0551 1401329117 51 188123010411 08810921 0581 0361 0331 1011 0551 069143812601 0861115I 046I 09310971 1091 080I 05410431116I 06913671 3691 17010131 05010971 10111131 1311 0981 064105711311367129812791 0971 0551 1021 10611181 1491 1081 079107214281298120912061 0591 '106111011221 140r 153'1 1591 122I 0941370I 35912091 1361 0681115111911311 1491 1621 1681 1781 1881435I ãaa12111 19710771 1241 1281 140't 15811711 17711871 197I 49014171276I 16010821 1291145116211761 1811 19112021495142112031 0861 1331 13711491167I 1801 186I 19612061 499142613321254I 091I 1381 1421154117 1I 1851 19012001211150414301 33612591 064111111151 1271 1441 1581 1631 17311371 3911 3011270I t5b107311201 1241 1361 1531 16711721 182I 193I 4861 3661233I 1381530.375951Gain1551.01Percent of Gain (1.04)%TOTALS0.66%1050.92%1441.04%1610.640k980.99%1500.50%1.21%1801.78o/o2600,23%CJ'10 127711 130312 1410L\ IÉ,- II¡IlpIAUBURN scHool DlsrR¡cr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcÏoNs - october 2009PROJ22123KDG12J44o7Io101112TOTALS10321 03399899310731 0301 04011251 031124412771 30314101200121912031 190I 1951 194I t/J1142111313221 361124312451228124712311218122312221201I 1881 16013411315IJ IJ1242I 060I 0791 045101210261 1001 0381 0551 1431255123712281 303I 0881 107'10911 0591 0451 0531 10810521073137 112521 18812280.90%1311116I 1351119I 1061 0931072I 0611 122107 1I 301136412031 1881.59o/o2341 144I 163114711341 13911201 08010751 14112991294'131512032.020/o3021 1721 19111751 1621167ttoo1127I 0951094I 3691291124513152.07o/o315125612751259124612511250122912161206I 3881334126613122.23Vo3601284I 303128712741279127812571244123414341 381128512661.93o/o3181312I 3311315130213071 30612851272126214621427133212852.34o/o3931340I aËô1 343I 3301 335133413131 300129014901455137813322.33%401I 3681387137 1I 3581 363136213411328131815181483I 40613782.17%3821 396141513991 3861 3911 3901 369'13561 346I 5461511143414062.02%364Percent of Gain (0.03)%Pupil Gain 14)1.48%2.08o/o329PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18119PROJ17 118PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14TABLE DISTRICTPROJECTIONS3.6 Based on 6 Year HistoryPROJ12t13PROJ11t12PROJ10t11ACTUAL09/1 0GRADEprj09-1 0Page 541512010
PROJ22t23K12ó4567oo101112TOTALS10321 0339989931 073I 0301 0401 1251031124412771 30314101 0061 084104110151015I 0911 0401 0551140132911751 18812301 007'î 0581 0921 0581 0361 03311011 0551 069143812601 08611151 0511 05910671 1091 080I 054104311161 0691367I 3691 17010131 0931 10210671 08311311 0981 06410571 13113671 2981279109711451111I 0841 10511491 108107910721428129812091206I 15311271 10611231 1591 1221 09413701 3591209I tJb1 1701 14911241 1331 1731137I 3911 30112701 13611921 16711341 1481 18814351323121 14aoa12101 1771 1481 16214861 366I ZJıI 138122011921 1631 46014171276I 160123412071461I 391132712031249150413921302125415471 43513021229Percent of Gain (1.24)%Pupil Gain l'!ô1i(0.00)%i1)1.10%1582.08%303PROJ21t22PROJ20121PROJ19120PROJ18t19PROJ17 118PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14115PROJ13114TABLE3.1 34DISTRICT PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistoryPROJ12113PROJ11112PROJ10t11ACTUAL09/1 0GRADElæI u!ø'\ä,*l't*4¡tfÞI¡IAUBURN scHooL DlsrRlcr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcÏoNS - october 2009PROJ22123KDG12a4t67Iv101112TOTALS10321 03399899310731 030104011251 031124412771 30314101 0061 0791 04510121026I 1001 0381 0551143125912371228I 30310071054I 091I 0591 045I 053110810521073137 11252118812281 0511054I 0661 1061 09310721 0611 122107 1I 3011 3641203I 188I 0931 0981 067'1080I 1391120I 08010751141129912941315120311401110I 081I I IJttoo1127I 0951 094I 3691291124513151 152112411141 14011731142I ltJ1322I 361124312451 1671 1571 14111481 1881 1601341131513131242120011841 14911621206I 38813341266131212271192ttoJ1 18114341381128512661234120711821 40914271332128512491225141014021 3781332126714531402I 3531378149514461354I 353Percent of GainPuoil Gain(0.3e)%0.35%5l1.16%1691.70%251PROJ21122PROJ20t21PROJ19120PROJ18119PROJ17 118PROJ16t17PROJ15/16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14TABLE3.64DISTRICT PROJECTIONSBased on B¡rth Rates & 6 Year HistorvPROJ12113PROJ11t12PROJ10t11ACTUAL09i10GRADEprj09-1 0Page 641512010
f'-jIIrPt¡IAUBURN scHooL DlsrRlcr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcÏoNS - october 2009yearyearPf(UJ22t23KU(j1U321 03399899310731 030103 I1 0841041101510151 09110411 08810921 0581 0361 0331 0461 0931097'1 1091 08010541 050I 0971 10111131131I 098UJ51 UþVI 106111011221 140I 1531 Ub411111115112711441'1581 Ubð111511191 13111491 16210/31 12011241 1361 153tto/10771124112811401 1581171108211291 133114511621 1761 0861 13311371 14911671 1801 0911 1381142115411711 18512J4Ã1 102'1 1061118I 13511496880Gain12367129 11227272727272727Jts bBased6I-KUJ22123KUG1{.J321 0339989931073I 0301 0601079I 04510121026I 1001 08811071 091I 0s91 0451 05311161 13511191 1061 0931072I 144I 163114711341 1391 12011721 191117511621167I too1200121912031 1901 1951 1941228124712311218122312221256127512591246125112501284I 30312871274127912781312re1331 1359 1387 14151315 1343 1371 13991302 1330 1358 13861307 1335 1363 13911306 1334 1362 139012J458377HefCent 01 Galn 2-66'/o1.93%1223.05%1973.09%2052.72%1862.390/o1682.33"k1682.28e/o1682.23Yo1682.18%1682.13%1682.09%1682.05o/o168Pupil Gain 164PROJ22123K123414321 033998oo210731 0301 006I 084104110151 0151 09110071 0581092I 0581 0361 0331 051I 05910671 1091 08010541 0931 1021 0671 0831131I 0981145111110841 1051 1491'15311271 1061 1231 17011491 1241 1921 1671210Percent of GainPupil Gain1.51%930.52o/o2.14o/o1342.42"/o155JJt,KUJ21t226853I-KUJ21t22E209PROJ21t22I'KUJ201216826PROJ20t218041PROJ20121PROJ191206799PROJ191207473Pt(oJ19t20PRUJ18/196772PI-{UJ181197705PROJ18119PRUJ17 1186745I'KUJ17 t187537I'XUJ17 118I'KUJ16t1767 1AT'KUJ161177369t-t{uJ16117T'KUJ15t16669'1I-KUJ15t167201PROJ15t16PROJ14t156664PROJ14t157033PROJ14t15I'KUJ13t146590PI.(OJ13t146847PROJ131146575IAÉLE3E.1 3K - 5 PROJECTIONSBased on 1 3 Yèar Historyf,KUJ12t136478PKUJ121136641TABLE3E.1 3AK. 5 PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 13 Year H¡storvPt(oJ12t13641 IPROJ11t1263¿9},KUJ11t126445I'KUJ11t126285PI{OJ10t116242I-KUJ101116323PROJ10111AU I UAL09/l 061 59AÇ I UAL09/1 061 59ACIUAL09/1 06l 59GRADEGRADEGRADEK-5TOTyearPROJ22123PROJ21122PRUJ20t2119120I'KUJPROJ18t15PROJ17 t18PROJ16t17PROJ15/16PROJ14t15Pr-((JJ131146596644112113PT{UJPROJ11t12631 IPROJ10t11626CI 6159Aç I UAL09/l 0K - 5 PROJECTIONSBâsed on Birth Rates & 6 Yeâr HistoryIAtsLE3E.6AGRADE12J510321 03399810731 0301 0061 0791 04510121A261 10010071 05410911 05910451 05310511 054I 066I 1061 09310721 0931 09810671 0801 13911201 14011 101081I I tO11661152112411 1411401227KDG12001184I 16711571141K- 5 TOT15413141Gain 110pri09-1 0Page 741512010
1 3 year4056 year179360135873574356035475J55347433753259325232283225JZó4I\iIIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIoNSBased on 1 3 Year History3l 96TABLE3MS. I 367a1 0401 1251 0311040I 0551140I 101I 0551 06910431116I 069'10641 131I 1081 0791072I 1591 1221 094I toó1 173tlJ/1 1681178I 1881 1721 1821 1931 1771 18711971 181I 1911202I 't861 1961206I 1901200121 1GRADEPROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17 t18PROJ16t17PROJ15116PROJ14115PROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ11112PROJ10t11ACTUAL09/1 06-8TOT1.20o/o380.76%243.56%'1 l62.93%ooI-l¿-/o600.38%140.38%140.38%140.38%140.38%1470.20%JPercent of GainGain(0.29)o/o 0.09%g L ja.¡IlÞIIIAUBURN scHool DlsrRtcr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcÏoNS - october 20093 year8766 yearPROJ22t234072PROJ21t223988PROJ201213904PROJ19t203820PROJ18t193736PROJ17118óoalPROJ161173550PROJ15t163428PROJ14t15331 6PROJ13t143296PROJ12t133254PROJ11t123233PROJ10t113236MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on 6 Year HistorvACTUAL09/1 031 96TABLE3MS.6GRADEtt7I10401 125I 031I 0381 0551 1431 10810521 0611 122107 11 08010751 14111271 095I 0941 1731 1421113120111881 1601225121612061257124412341285127212621313I 3001290134113281318I 369I 356I 3466-8TOT1.24o/o40.64%211.30o/o423.40o/o1133.54%1212.88%1022.30%84225%842.15%842.11o/o84842.20o/o2059%-.O9o/"GainPercent1 0 year379year1aoPROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20121PROJ191203575PROJ18t193488PROJ17 1183470PROJ16t173443PROJ15t163375PROJ141153259PROJ13t143252PROJ121133228PROJ1 1t123225PROJ10t113234MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistoryACTUAL09/1 031 96TABLE3MS.r3AGRADE67810401125I 03110401 05511401 101I 0551 069104311161 0691 064I 0571 1311 108107910721 1591 1221094¡ IJJ¡ trJ1 13711341 1481 1881 1771 1481 16212201 1921 1631234120712496-81.20%óöO.76o/024O.2Ùo/o73.56%1162.03%690.76o/o260.53%4ô872.48o/o(0.29)yo 0.09%GainPuPercent of Gain1 0 year4276 yearl5zPROJ22123PROJ21122PROJ20t21PROJ191203623PROJ181193536PROJ17t183517PROJ161173496PROJ151163428PROJ14t15331 6PROJ13t14óIJÔPROJ121133254PROJ11112s233PROJ10t113236MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistoryACTUAL09/1 031 96TABLE3MS.6AGRADE67I10401125I 031I 0381 0551 1431 108105210731 0611122107 1I 08010751 1411 127I 09510941 17311421 11311481 188I 1601 1491 162120611921 1631 181123412071 1821249122512676-8TOT1 .24o/o400.64%211.30%423.40%1131.98%680.61210.53%19aa2.45%200.59%(0.0s)%Percent of GainGainprj09-1 0Page I41512010
Éì-:Júr" ìtr i;'j;...¡IlPIAUBURN SCHOOL DISTR¡CT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 20091 3 year?oÃ1 3 year6641 3 year2796 year616 yearyearÐtPROJ22t23I10111212441277I 30314101325117 5I 188123014381260I 086111513671 3691170101 3I 367129812791097142812981209120613701 35912091 1361 391I 30112701 1361 4351323121111971 4861 36612331 1381 49014171276I tou1 495142113271203I 499142613321254I 50414301 33612599-12 TOT523449214897491 I50415141507350985165522353435447551 15529Percent of Gain (5.98)% (0.49)o/oO.43o/o212.50o/o1231.970/ø100(1.32)o/o0.48%241.3s%681 .1 1o/o582.310/o1201.93%1031.18o/o640.33o/ol8PuGain1TABLE35H.6HIGH PROJECTIONSon6PROJ22123s101112124412771 30314101259123712281 3031371125211881228I 3011 36412031 1881 2991294I 31512031 369129112451315132213611243124513411315131312421 3881 334I ZbbtJ t¿1434tJo I12851 26614621427133212851 4901 4551378133215181483140613781546151 114341 4069-12 ïOT5234502750395056s1115220517 152115300bJbb5507565657865898Percent of Gain (3.96)% 0.25%0.33%171.08%2.14%110(0.e5)%0.77%401.72%901.24%662.62%1412.710/o1492.30%1301"94%112Gain12TABLE3SH.1 3AHfGHon B¡rth Rates & 13 YearPROJ22123o10111212441277I 30314101329117 51 188123014381260I 086111513671 363117010131 3671298127910971428129812091206I 3704 2<O1209¡ I.tb1 3911 30112701 't3614351323121 11 1971 4861 3661233IIJÕ1 460141712761 16014611 39113271203I 504laoa130212541547143513021229551 3Percent of Gain (5.98)% (0.49)%Pupil Gain 13131 l?4)0.43%212.50%1231.97%100(1.32)% 0.48%{68} 241.33%oo1,11%581.73o/o901.31%691.29%691j2%61PROJ21t22PROJ21t22PROJ21t225452PROJ20t21PROJ20t21PROJ20t215383PROJ19t20PROJ19120PROJ19120531 3PROJ18119PROJl8/19PROJ1ghg5223PROJ17118PROJ17 t18PROJ171185165PROJ16117PROJ16117PROJ16t175098PROJ15116PROJ15t16PROJ15t165073PROJ14115PROJ14t15PROJ1411ss141PROJ13114PROJ13t14PROJ131145041SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSBased on 1 3 Year HistoryPROJ12113PROJ12t13PROJ12t13491 8PROJ11t12PROJ11t12PROJ11t124897PROJ10t11PROJ10t11PROJ1U114521ACTUAL09/1 0ACTUAL09i10ACTUAL09/l 05234TABLE3SH.13GRADEGRADEGRADE9-12 TOT1 3 year4136 yearPROJ22t23oIU1112124412771 30314101259123712281 303137 112521 18812281 3011 3641203I 1881299129413151203I 3691291124513'151322I 3611243124513411315lJ ló1242I 38813341266131214341 3811285I ZbO14091427133212851410140213781332145314021 35313781 495144613541 3539-12 TOT52345027503950565111522051715211530053665453552255865647Percent of Gain (3.96)%0.25%120.33%tt1.08%552.140/o110(0.ss)%0.77%401.72%901.24%6611.26%691.17o/o651.09%61Gain87PROJ21122PROJ20t21PROJ19120PROJ'1 8/19PROJ17 118PROJ16117PROJ15t16PROJ14115PROJ13114SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Râtes & 6 Year HistoryPROJ12t13PROJ11t12PROJ10111ACTUAL09/1 0TABLE3SH.6AGRADEprj09-l 0Page I4t5t2010
rF--1t,1IIPIAUBURN scHool DlsrR¡cr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcÏoNs - october 20091 3 year<o3646 year27168PROJ22t23E.13E.6E.13AE,6A103210321032103210371 0601 006I 00610411 08810071 0071 04611161 0511 051I 0501144I 0931 0931 0551 1721 0591200'10641228I 06812561073128410771312108213401 0861 368I 091I 396PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19120PROJ18119PROJ17118PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUPPROJ12t13PROJ11112PROJ10t11KINDERGARTËNACTUAL09/1 0TABLE4GRADE1 3 year66218546 year505e74PROJ22t238.13E.6E.134E.6A5127512751275127524652635246526353085357527853035433552553695391554057035482550356095861563260015654614156776281569964215722656 1574467015767684157896981PROJ21122PROJ20121PROJ19t20PROJ18/19PROJ17118PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13114PROJ12t13PROJ11t12PROJ1U11GRD 1 -- GRD 5ACTUAL09/1 0GRADE1 3 year4058766 year179¿ó/PROJ22t23MS.13MS.6MS.13AMS.6A31 963l 9631 9631 9632343236323432363225323332253233322832543228325432523296325232963259331 63259331 6337534283375342834743550344334963533365234703517354737363488353635603820357536233574390435873988360'14072PROJ21t22PROJ20121PROJ19120PROJ18/19PROJ17118PROJ16t17PROJ15t16PROJ14115PROJ13114PROJ12t13PROJ1 1t12PROJ10t11GRD 6 -. GRD 8ACTUAL09/1 0GRADE1 3 year2956642794136 yeari161 )itsii'r61)PROJ22t23SH-13SH.6SH.13ASH.6A523452345234523449215027492150274897503948975039491 I5056491 850565041s1115041511151415220514152205073517 15073517 1s098s2115098521 151655300516553005223þJbb5223þJbb53435507531 354535447565653835522551 157865452558655295898551 35647PROJ21122PROJ20121PROJ19120PROJ18/1SPROJ17 118PROJ16117PROJ15t16PROJ14t15PROJ13114PROJ12t13PROJ1 1t12PROJ10t11GRD 9 -- GRD 12ACTUAL09/1 0GRADE1 3 year142137586 year550121 1PROJ22123J. IJJ-b3.1 3A3.641458914589145891 4589144381458s14408145321447 1147 17144071458214624149511 45651475114884152531486815002I 50641 55691 51391 58001528916129154441 6489155421 68071 5703141001 5846176011s9511 79831601018347PROJ21t22PROJ20121PROJ19120PROJ18t19PROJ17118PROJ16117PROJ15/16PROJ14115PROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ11112PROJ10111DISTRICT TOTALSACTUAL09/1 0GRADEprj09-1 0Page 104t5t2010
AUBURN scHooL DlsrRtcr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcÏoNS - october 2009PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUPTABLEÃTotal =Diff =October I Actual CountAND Projected CountsNumber Projection is unde(-) or over ActualPercent Project¡on is under(-) or over ActualPrj 3.1 3 - 13 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.134 13 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty B¡rth RatesPrj 3.64 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth Ratest ú"iÉri: :- ìùIlÞII2001-02DiffTotalYo59145827580258395831)o0((87)(112)(75)(83))00((1.47)%(1.8e)%(1.27)o/o(1.40\%2000-01Total Diffo/o5844581 15664591 S5895)0c((33)(1 80)7551)0c((0.56)%(3.08)%1-28%0"87%TotalYo1 999-00D¡ff585657785735s81 15785)00((78)(121)(4s)01\3.1 5o/o2.74%1.51%1.150/o1 998-99Total Diff%5837604960265936591 7)oo(2121899980(0.54)%(0.s6)%(2.64)o/o(2.93)YoI 997-98DiffTotalo/o59465928590457835768)c{((1 8)(42)(1 63)(1 78))oo((0.30)%(0.7 1)ok(2"74)o/o(2.99\o/oGradesK-5ACTUALPrj sE.l3Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri 3E.642001-02Diffo/oTotalþc((24)(38)(24)(38)(o.7e)%(1.25)o/o(0.79)o/o(1.25)Vo30493025301 13025301 12000-01Total Diff%29803023300930233009)00(1.44o/o0.97%1.44%0.97o/oþo(43294329Total1 999-00D¡ff29702927289529272895)oc((80)(75)(80)(75))o0((2.62)%(2.46)%(2.62)%(2.46\o/oTotalI 998-99Diff)co(501850182860291 0287829102878þo<(2.64)Vo(2.70)%(2.64)o/o(2.70)%I 997-98Diffo/oTotal281 12820278928202789)oo(I(22)I(22\)oo(0.32%(0.78)o/o0.32o/o(Q.78\o/oGrades6-8ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.13APri 3E.64Total2001-02Diffo/o(0.96)o/o(0.49)o/o(0.e6)%(0.49)%449844554476445s4476)0c((43)(22)(43)(22)Total2000-01D¡ffo/oÐ0(58835883þo(1.35%1 .93o/o1.35o/o1.93%431 14369439443694394TotalI 999-00D¡ffo/o7688768842254301431 343014313)o0((0.32)%(1.4e)%(0.32)o/o(1.49')YoTotalI 998-99Diffo/o)oo((1 35)(142)(1 3s)(142\)o0<2.74%1.51o/o2.74%1.51o/o424541 10410341 1041031 997-98Diffo/oTotal)oo(8057(2s)(42\401240924069338339701.99o/o1.42%(0.72)Yo(1.05)%Grades9-12ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri 3E.6ATotal2001-02Diff%134611 33071 328913319tJc to)oo((1 s4)(172)(142)(1 43))00((1 .1 4)o/o(1 -28)o/o(r.05)%(1.06)%2000-01Total Diff o/o)00(68(68)176163)oc(0.97o/o0.50%0.10%(0.33)%1313513203I 3067133111 3298Total1 999-00D¡ffo/o)00((45)(1 08)(12)(58))00((0.30)%(0.82)o/o(1.44)%(r.89)%1 30511 3006129431 30391 29931 998-99Total Diffo/o129421 30691 30071 29561 2898rco(0.98%0.50%0.11%(0.34\%)oo<1276514ø4)I 997-98Diff%Totalþc(tt(7)(1 83)(242)1276912840127621258612527)oo(0.56%(0.05)%(1.43)%(r.90)%AilGradesACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pr¡ 3E.6Aprj09-1 0Page 1 1415t2010
AUBURN scHooL DlsrRlcr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEcÏoNS - october 2009PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUP (Cont¡nued)TABLE5Total =Diff =o/o =October 1 Actual CountAND Projected CountsNumber Projection is underþ) or over ActualPerceni Projection is unde(-) or over ActualPrj 3.13 - 1 3 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.134 13 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth RatesPrj 3.64 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth Ratestrfi*.-4t-, >r..{*=rfIlæII2006-07Total Diff%6033587 1592158695912þc((1 62)(112)(1 64)(121)þc((2.69)0/o(r.86)%(2.72)%(2.01)%2005-06Total Diffo/o58875750579557505784(137)(s2)(137)(1 03))oo((2.33)o/o(1.56)%(2.33)o/o1.75\o/oTotal2004-05Diff%57355761582157095756xo(2686(26)21)0c(Q.45o/o1.50%(0.45)Vo0.37o/o2003-04Total Diffo/o57745655566256055631)co((11s)(112)(1 6e)(143)(0.4s)%(0.34)o/o(1.24)o/o(0.81\%2002-03Total Diffo/o57415723573557435776)00((1 8)(6)35þo((0.31)%(0. r 0)%0.03%0.61o/oKGrades5ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.13APrj 3E.6A2006-07Total DiffYo314431 3l314631 313146þ0((r 3))(1 3)2)oc((0.41)o/o0.06%(0.41)Vo0.06%2005-06Total Diff%31 6931323137o toz3137(37)(32)(37)(32]|)00((1.17)o/o(1.01)%(1.17)%(.01\o/o2003-04Total Diff32742toq331 I3295331 1þ0(21372137,o(0.64%1j3%0.64o/o1.13%2003-04Total Diffo/o32943214321632143216)o0((80)(78)(80)(78)(8.86)%(6.06)%(8.88)%16.06)%2002-03DiffTotalo/o31 5131 8531923l 853192)oo(413441)oc(1.08o/o1.30o/o1.O]Vo1 .3Qo/oGrades6IACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 38.134Pri 3E.642006-07Total Diff52415085508650855086)00((r 56)(1 55)(r 56)(1 55)(2.98)o/o(2.96)o/0(2.s8)%(2.96\o/.2005-06Total Diffo/o50324898488048984880)00((134)(152)(134)(152)þo((2.66)o/o(3.02)o/o(2.66)o/0(3.02),%2003-04DiffTotalok46634783476947834769120106120106)o0(2.57o/o2.27o/o2.57%2.27o/o2003-04Total Diff %46344630463946304639)oc((4)5(4)5)oc(5.90%3.69%5.90%3.69%2002-03Tolal Diff45354577459445774594)00(42Ão4259)00(0.93%1.30o/o0.93%1.30o/oGrades9-12ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri 3E.642006-07Total DiffVo144181 4087141531 408514144(331)(265)(333)(274\)00((2.30)%(1.84)%(2.31)%(1.90)o/o2005-06Total Diffo/o14088I 3780138121 378013801þc((308)(276)(308)(287))oo((2.19)o/o(1.e6)%(2.1e)%(2.04)%Total Diff o/o2003-04136721 3499135421344713510)00((1 73)(1 30)(22s)(162)(1 -27)o/o(0 e5)%(1.65)%(1.18)o/o2003-04Total Diffo/o13702'1349913517134451 3486þc((203)(r 85)(253)e16\þo((1.48)o/o(1.3s)%(1.85)%(1.58)%Total%2002-o3Diff13427r 3485135211 35051 3562)oo(589478135)oo(0.43%O.7Oo/o0.58%1.01o/oAilGradesACTUALPrj 3E.13Prl 3E.6Prj 3E.13APri 3E.6Aprj09-l 0Page 1241512010
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2009PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUP (Cont¡nued)TABLEÃTotal =Diff =October 1 Actual Count AND Projected CountsNumber Projection is under(-) or over ActualPercent Projection ¡s under!) or over ActualPrj 3.13 - 13 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.134 13 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth RatesPrj 3.64 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth RatesHistorical Data is grouped byK - 5, 6-8, 9-1 2 articulationpattern.Articulation pattern has nonumeric impact on efficacyof projection models.Average)oo((0.30)%(0.27)%(0.80)%(0.59)%AverageDiff(26)(2s)(46)(óo,2009-1 0DiffTotalo/o61 596254625462376264)o0(9513578105)00(1.54%2.19%1.27%1.70%2008-09Total D¡ffo/o61 986179623761296172(1 s)39(6s)(26))oc((0.31)%0.63%(1.11)%(0.42\o/o2007-o8Total Diff%6142608561 3860596094)00((57)(4)(83)(48))oo((0.s3)%(0.07)o/o(1.3s)%(0.78)o/oGradesK-5ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.13APrj 3E.64Average)o0((0.e5)%(0.74)o/o(0.e6)%(0.74')%AverageDiffþ0((4)(6)(4)(6)2009-1 0DiffTotalo/o31 963242324332423243)o0(46474647)00(1.44o/o1.47o/o1.44%1.47o/o2008-09Total Diff%3206317931 9531 793l 95)o0<(27)(11)(27)(1r))o0((0.84)%(0.34)o/o(0.84)o/o(0.34\o/o2007-08DiffTotalo/o3097310731 16310731 16)00(l01910l90.32%Q.61o/o0.32%0.61%Grades6IACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.64Averageo/o0.18%(0.04)%(0.03)%(0.23\%AverageDiff)0c((33)(25)(41)(32'lTotal2009-l 0Diff%)0c(1 60)I 06)1 60)1 05))00((3.06)%(2.o3)%(3.06)%(2.01\Yo523450745128507451292008-09Total Diffo/oþ0((3.21)%(2.72)%(3.21)o/o(2-72)o/os299512951 55512951 55)0c((170)(144)(170)(144)Total2007-08Diffþo((2.44)o/o(2.41)%(2-44)%(2.41)%532051 9051 9251905192)oo((1 30)(128)(1 30)(1 28)Gradesg-12ACTUALPû 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 38.64Averageo/o)oc((0.s6)%(0.52)%(1.01)o/o(0.93)%AverageDiff)oo<(87)(84)(r1s)(97)Total2009-l 0Diff%14589145701 4665145531 4636)oo((0.13)%o.52%(0.25)o/oU.ó ¿"/o)oc((1 s)AA(36)472008-09Total Diffo/o1470314487145871443714522)oo((216)(r16)(266)(181)þc((1.47)o/o(0.7e)%(1.81)o/o(1.23)o/o2007-08Total Diff%I 455914382144461435614402)00((177)(113)(203)(1 s7))00((1.22)o/o(0.78)%(1.3e)%(r.08)%AilGradesACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.64mF:ijl:.¡*4Þpû09-1 0Page 1341512010
Appendix A.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Enrollment Projections
H)íü ;t3;T A__
Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2010BASE DATA - BUILDOIJT SCHEDIJLEASSUMPTIONS:Student Generation FactorsUses Build Out Estimates receÍved from developers.Student Generation Factor are updated Auburn data for 2010 as allowed per King County OrdinanceTakes area labeled Lakeland East slated for 2007 @50% and divides across 2o1o-1gTakes area laheled Kersey Project slated for 2005 and divides across 2010-201sTakes area labeled Bridges (Kent lmpoundment) and projects across 2o10-2015Includes knowninN.ALea Hill and Non-LakelandPuils:123456f,s"iF: JJít' :ari*jMulti-Family0.08600.03800,0310SingleFamily2010 AuburnFactorsElementaryMiddle School0.3080Q.14700.17700. I 550hSenior H0.6320TotalTotal235695746516167624629714591316317644't12553118528025330210872016l651790000511607v2015-163253125330210872015912954352000029591043522014-15186s16246tôâ10542014943054554000009430545542013-1419342520224186820131033354S590000335103049Ão2012-1321233115718767520123109546555321134259847562011-12201228't0812846320111956029354482124376430361312010-111296172262201057185273389643281156531362009-1 01326531361321TablelAuburn School DisttlDevetopmentLakeland Single Family UnitsLea Hill AreaOther Single Familv Units557060608550601001506012515016014515514051Total SiUnitsK-5lePuElemeMid School Pupils 6-8Sr. High Pupils 9-1200'186001930021200196032123117U48K-12Lakeland Multi Family UnitsUnitsOther Multi F1383UnitsK-5Total Multi FamiElementaMid School Pupils 6-8Sr. High Pupíls 9-12Total Housing UnitsElementary Pupils K-5Total K-12Mid School Pupils 6-8Sr. High Pupils 9-12Cumulative ProjectionTotal R-12Elementary-GradesK-5MidSchool -Grades6-8Senior High - Grades 9 - 12TotalBuildouts March 10 + ND3.6 ave projeciions45
b,,ití1% of changechange +/-Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2010*-.ì:P2016-17ooooIo101010121212111818181819191919202525¿ó223l323232333334343543434138464747474849495051636359565960616062636364658181767271/ó7473t676767B7999989388737576767878798182102101969010872015-1610542014-158682013-146752012-13463New Projects - Annual New PupÍls Added & Distributedbv Grade Level201 1-122622010-111322009-1 010321 03399899310731 0301 04011251 031124412771 303141014589Percent of averagePupils by Grade& Level6.76%6.9s%6.97%6.96%7.18%7 -20o/o42.03o/o7.24o/o7.42%7.53o/o22.19%9.36%9.33%8.79o/o8.310/o35.79%100.00% Total6 YearAverageEnroll.969996I 0009981 03010331 0381 0641 08013421 3381261119114338TABLE2GRADEKDG1234Ã67II101112Totals/o6.76%6.95%6.97o/o6.96%7j8%7.20%7.24%7A2%7.53%9.360/o9.33%8.79%8.31%100.00%6yr Ave969.00996.33999.67998.1 71029.671032.831037.501063.671079.831341.501338.331260.671191.0014338.176 year Historical DataAverage Enrollment and Percentage Dístributed by Grade Level09-1 010321 0339989931 073r 030I 04011251 031124412771 303141014589-0.78%-11408-0999810151024I 0481044I 0691096I 034I 07612561341r 3501352147030.99%14407-08996995101999710571078I 0071 057I 0331337136813521263145590.98%14106-07941101210021 03110499981 058101410721372140013221147144182-34o/o33005-069559639631002939106510041028113713791 38311821088140883.O4o/o41604-05892960992918101 6957102011241 130146112611 05588613672TABLE3GradeKDG1234567I9101112TotalsBuildouts March l0 + ND3.6 ave projections46
ffiN.,,'11:.1-.iPBuildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2010% of change2018-19Projected13161 33813221 3081316131513311 3531337132313311 33080041295128312561 3091298127038771459143214241348147614481440'136357271 76091.14%1982017-18Proiected791438345663174111 .13o/o1952016-17Proiected1 0451 0931 0511024102411011 05911071 11110761 0551052107711251129114111131 0881 096114411481 16011791146111311621 166117811971211I '1301 18011841196121512291137I 1861191120312221236717 41 050'10641150112010741 0891 0761 1501104111311071 181117 111431 138123512001 173124212541219371513411187I 1991241146212841 1091 13614101412121 1I 05114301 3611 338I 153r 5091 3791285127814681458'13011223149314021 365122654861 63751.13o/o1822016-17Proiectedr 0691 08810541021103611091 1061125111Q10781 0641072114711671152I 13811261 1061 19012101194118111871 168123112521236122212291228127 1129212771263127112701 301132313071293I 3011 300782510471 0641153112710721 0931 09411571 10s11291 125119111901 1591 159125012201192128012691242379112711249124013141 396127612111250134414071244122613621357137512591450137213211387142Q14601 33513321443141614081 3335599172162.15o/o3622015-16Proiected7 13436095450161931 .640/o2622015-16Proiected7644366255481 68542.54%4172014-15Proiected7029345154511 59312.39o/o3722014-15Proiected73983508553'1164363.19%5082013-14Proiected6874340252831 55593j2%4712013-14Proiected713034465352159283.34o/o5142012-13Projected6673333150841 50882.40o/o3542012-13Proiected683633565222154142.90o/o4352011-12Proiected645932834991147331 .13o/o1642011-12Proiected655532915133149791.78%262New Projects - Pupil Projection Cumulativeby Grade LevelUpdated March 20102010-11Proiected63383264496814570-0.13%-19TABLE 5New- Pupil Projection CND 3.6Grade LevelUMarch 20102010-11Proiected637832655074147 170.88%1282009-1 0Actual10321 03399899310731 03061 591 04011251 03131 96124412771 30314105234145892009-1 0Actual10321 033998ooz107310306l 59I 0401125'r03131 9612441277'1303141052341 4589% of changechange +/-GRADEKDG1234ÃK-567IGR 6-8o101112GR 9-12TotalGRADEKDGI2345K-567IGR 6-8Õ101112GR 9-12TotalUses a 'cohort survival'modelassaming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nertgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesprevious years number plusCurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort survival.Uses a 'cohort survival'modelassuming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesprevious years number plusCurrent generation based on% of totalenrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort survival.TABLE 4ND 3.13Buildouts March 10 + ND3.6 ave projections47
Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2010TABLE 6ND3.13ANew Developments - Pupil Projection GumulativeGrade Level UMarch 2010% of changechange +/-Ëi- IÈ. .-,i"ì1a ." .l*i2016-17Proiected3675368442172015-16Projected4808360942422014-15Proiected5900345142432013-14Proiected6858340218872291322.49o/o70E2012-13Projected6614333118479284241 .55o/o4332011-12Proiected6395328318313279910.83%2312010-11Proiected10151 0931 051102410241101102510771 11110761 05510521 1391149111511301179114612051171114511671211122712011181119910821 0911 099114111131 08812461227120263071 0501 0641 150107611501104111311071181117 11143't 138123512001173121212541219112010741 08932641 509137912827213411187124214419146212841 1381442914101412I 0531460414681458122888149314021231901430I 3611 15714924181882776090.28%131712009-1 0Actual10321 033998ooe1073103061 591 04011251 03131 96124412771 3031410523414589GRADEKDG1234Ã678o101112TotalUses a 'cohort suruival'modelassuming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesbirth rate average plusCurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort survival.2016-17Proiected101 51088105410211 036110910251072111010781 064107210821 0871 098't '13811261 106I 1391145111411271187I 168120111701141117612281226'1 1981 190121612421235121910471064I 153112710721 093109411571 10511291125119111901 '159I 1591250122011921226126912423737127 11249124013141 3961276121112501344140712441226tóo¿1357137512591450137213211387142014601 33513321443141614081 33355992015-16Proiected366255482014-15Proiected350855312013-14Proiected687934465352156773.O4%4b32012-13Proiected663633565222152142.49'/oJIU2011-12Projected6420329151 33148451.24"k'Iu1New Projects - Pupil Projection CumulativebyGrade Level Updated March 20102010-11Proiected632532655074146630.51%t42009-1 0Actual10321 03399899310731 03061 591 0401125103131 9612441277I 3031410523414589GRADEKDGI245o7Io101112TotalUses a 'cohort suruival'model assuming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesbirth rate average plusCurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otheruse 100% cohort survival.Based on 6 year historyTABLE 7ND 3.6A:Þ Buildouts March 10 + ND3.6 ave project¡onschange +/-48
Appendix 4.3 Student Generation Survey
Ë-ili[;iå;-rf A
!. "i*-jIl:pIISINGLE FAM¡LYDeveloents Under ConstructionAuburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1/1/04March,2010To BeOccupied000000000000000000çurrentOccupancy302114615I5680400181883781I1133421084Un¡ts/Parcels302114b15I568040018188378181133421084Development NameAlder MeadowsAspen MeadowsAuburn PlaceDawson HillsHazel ParkKelli MeadowsKinqsley MeadowsLakeland: The ReserveLakeland: Verona SouthLakeland: Verona NorthLittle FieldsMarchini MeadowsPacific View-MeadowsRiver Park EstatesRiver RimSera MonteWashington National, Div 1ration Factorsm0.4671.0951.0003.0003.2670.6251.2140.5500.5200.4310.6250.7350.6150.3331.1820.3940.4290.6320.2000.2380.1431.3330.8670.1250.4460.1380.1 650.0830.3750.1570.1540.0560.1820.0300.1 90o.1770.1 670.4760.1430.5000.8670.1250.3210.1130.0930.1050.0000.1450.2180.0560.3640.0910.1 190.1470.1 000.3810.7141.1671.5330.3750.4460.3000.2630.2430.2500.4340.2440.2220.6360.2730.1 190.308Total1423141I49568442087856148613131I685HS652I1312511661531312121I192Middle5102313118o371I012171435159Elem3I1072332524105442t'b1o47I5334To BeOccupied41343213563197CurrentOccupancyo1233311383106377Units/Parcels602676125118169574RiverpointeDevelopment NameBeaver MeadowsCambridqe PointeLakeland: Pinnacle EstatesLakeland: Vista HeiqhtsTrail RunStudent Generation FactorsTotal26227I2240124249HS71I26113570Middle60b25o2958Elem131134111961121Total131611425926167HS442721745Middle732I13I42Elem2972625118050Totals
!îli-,, .IlÞII2010 and ucted with Plats Submitte1927Auburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1/1/04March,2010To BeOccupied131475578386I1992483161I222010637313034014929I13292518b11927CurrentOccupancy0000000000000000000000000000Units/Parcels134175578386819924II361I222010637313034014I29I312925I161Development NameAlicia GlennAnderson AcresBackbone RidqeBrandon MeadowsBrandon PlaceBridgesBridle EstatesCam-WestCarrington Pointeit Dhaliwal PlatDaEstes ParkGlenviewHarpreet KanoHazel HeiqhtsHazelViewKendall RidgeKersey 3 ProiectLakeland: East Phase 1Lakeland: East Phase 2/3Lawson PlaceMeqan's MeadowsMountain View EstatesNew Hope Lutheran PlatSpencer PlaceStipps PlatVintaqe PlaceWillow PlaceYates PIatStudent Generation FactorsTotal20I4354924411631552010514136723682215Ib1I5I1816111012181467HS5211014683I841531441I662360225125433341411Middle521I1157315415213316551950214124432283340Elem1042172411963172105276331154010543I24IIb5594715Grand Total of Students Anticipated51
Auburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 'l11/04March,2010MULTI FAMILY2010 and bTotal Units to be Occupied112T--L -ft): \l-To BeOccupied00000000000CurrentOccupancy29I16817070362101791I3321429Units/Parcels29I16817070362101791o3321465Development NameButte EstatesCoxA/r/oodward THLakeland: CapriLakeland: CarraraLakeland: MaderaLakeland: Palermo AptsLakeland: SienaLakeland: SoranoPasa Fino llSeasons at Lea HillVillaqeStudent Generation FactorsTotal0.4480.7500.0300.1000.0290.1350.0590.0250.2110.3370.155HS0.0340.1250.0120.0180.0140.0470.0200.0000.1 050.0450.031Middle0.1 030.3750.0060.0290.0000.0220.0100.0130.0530.0900.038Elem0.3100.2500.0120.0530.0140.0660.0300.0130.0530.2020.086Total136517249624112222HS11231172021544M¡d33150I1113055Elem922912431167123To BeOccupied432GurrentOccupancy883Units/Parcels12115Development NamePacific Ave DuplexesTrail Run TownhomesStudent Generation FactorsTotal35HS11Middle11Elem13Total51HS00M¡d20Elem31Total5720HS115Middle125Elem3411Grand Totals32488000324880"D" Street PlatSundallen Condos52
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICAI\CE
Issued with a l4-day comment and appeals period
Description of Proposal:
This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single course
of action:
1. The adoption of the Auburn School District's 2010-2016 Capital Facilities Plan by
the Auburn School District No. 408 for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the
Distriót;and
2. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of King County and the cities of
Auburn and Kent to include the Auburn School District's 2010-2016 Capital Facilities Plan as
part of the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The cities of
Algona and Pacific may also amend their Comprehensive Plans to include the Auburn School
District's Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan.
Proponent: Aubum School District No. 408
Location of the Proposal
The Auburn School District includes an aÍea of approximately 57 square miles. The
Cities of Aubum, Algona, Kent, and Pacifìc and parts of unincorporated King and Pierce
Counties fall within the District's boundaries.
Lead Agency:
Auburn School District No. 408
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse environmental impact on the environment. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2Xc). This decision was made
after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request.
[:]:tl:;,;'t" ô
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC I97-11-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 4:00 p.m., May 10, 2010. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based
on timely comments and may retain, modifu, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely,
withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment
deadline.
Responsible Official:Mike Newman
Depufy Superintendent, Business and Operations
Aubum School District No. 408
Telephone (2s3) 931-4930
Address:Aubum School District
gl5 4th Sheet N.E.
Auburn, WA 98002
You may appeal this determination in writing by 4:00 p.m., May 10, 2010, to
Mike Newman, Deputy Superintendent, Aubum School District No. 408, gl5 4th Street N.8.,
Auburn, WA 98002.
Date of Issue:
Date Published:
April23,2010
April23,2010
ffi)itii;;:f _ Ê
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
WAC 197 -11 -960 Environmental Checklist
Purpose of Checklist
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all
governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before
making decisions. An environmental impact statement (ElS) must be prepared for all
proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment.
The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency
identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if
it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
I nstructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about
your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the
environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an ElS.
Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best
description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your
knowledge. ln most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own
observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. lf you really do not know
the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or
"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary
delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline,
and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. lf you have problems,
the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do
them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional
information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The
agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or
provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be
significant adverse impact.
H;.i :i:,;'t F
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be
answered "does not apply". ln addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for non-
project actions (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project,"
"applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and
"affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable
The adoption of the Aubum School District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan ("Capital
Facilities Plan") for the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. The cities
of Auburn and Kent and the King County Comprehensive Plans will be amended to
include the Aubum School District 2010 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities
Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Cities of Algona and Pacific
Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Auburn School District 2010
Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan. A copy of the District's Capital Facilities Plan is available for
review in the District's offices.
2. Name of applicant:
Auburn School District No. 408.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person
Aubum School District No. 408
gr5 4th sr. N.E.
Auburn, WA 98002
Contact Person Mike Newman, Deputy Superintendent, Business/Operations
(2s3) 93r-4930Telephone:
2
4. Date checklist prepared April6,2010
tii.i;[Ð: r ft
Agency requesting checklist. Aubum School District No. 408.
Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the District on May 10, 2010.
After adoption, the District will forward the Capital Facilities Plan to the cities of
Auburn, Algon4 Kent, and Pacific, and to King County for inclusion in each
jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually.
Site-specific projects will be subject to project-level environmental review.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? lf yes, explain.
The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the District
plans to implement over the next six years. The District plans to purchase property for
and construct a new middle school and a new elementary school over the next six years to
meet projected student population increases. The District may also add portable facilities
at existing school sites. The District will also conduct facility improvements at existing
school sites throughout the District.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or w¡ll be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have undergone or will undergo
additional environmental review, when appropriate, as they are developed.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental
approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? lf
yes, expla¡n.
None known.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your
proposal, if known.
The cities of Aubum and Kent will review and adopt the Capital Facilities Plan for the
purposes of updating the cities' school impact fees and incorporating the updated Plan as
a part of the Capital Facilities Elements of both the Auburn and Kent Comprehensive
Plans. King County will review the Plan for the purposes of implementing the County's
impact fee ordinance and incorporating the Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Element
of the King County Comprehensive Plan.
5
6
3
t];[:b;; il A
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed
uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to
repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include
additional specific information on project description.)
This is a nonproject action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Aubum School
District's 2010 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District's facilities
needs. This proposal also involves the amendment of the cities of Auburn and Kent
Comprehensive Plans and the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Auburn
School District 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as a pwt of each jurisdiction's Capital
Facilities Element of their Comprehensive Plans.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to
understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if
any, and section, township, and range, if known. lf a proposal would occur over a range
of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site
plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should
submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or
detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
The 2010 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Auburn School District. The District
includes an area of approximaiely 57 square miles. The Cities of Auburn, Algona, Kent,
and Pacific, and parts of unincorporated King County fall within the District's
boundaries.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
The Aubum School District is comprised of a variety of topographic landforms and
gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
4
t);[.:ii:T h*
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Specific slope characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level environmental
review.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? lf you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify
them and note any prime farmland.
Specif,rc soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? lf so, describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Aubum School District. Specific soil limitations
on individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or
grading proposed. lndicate source of fill.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject,
when appropriate, to project-level environmental review and local approval at the time
of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and
source of any fill materials to be used have been or will be identihed at that time.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? lf so,
generally describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result ofthe construction projects currently
proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects
have been or will be evaluated on a site-specific basis at the time of project-level
environmental review when appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be
subject to local approval processes.
5
ffi)iHiHiT 3
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces
after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have required or will
require the construction of impervious surfaces. The extent of any impervious'cover
constructed will vary with each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan. This
issue has been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control eros¡on, or other impacts to the
earth, if any.
The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and
appropriate control measures have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate. Relevant erosion reduction and control
requirements have been or will be met.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.,
dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when
the project is completed? lf any, generally describe and give approximate
quantities if known.
Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from the individual projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The air-quality impacts of each project have
been or will be evaluated during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? lf so, generally describe.
Any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air,
if any:
The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
subject to project-level environmental review and relevant local approval processes
when appropriate. The District has been or will be required to comply with all
6
ffi)if ;t:ri f A
applicable air regulations and air permit requirements. Proposed measures specific to
the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) ls there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of
the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes,
ponds, wetlands)? lf yes, describe type and provide names. lf
appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
There is a network of surface water bodies within the Auburn School District.
The surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during
project-level environmental review when appropriate. When necessary, the
surface water regimes and flow pattems have been or will be researched and
incorporated into the designs of the individual projects.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200
feet) the described waters? lf yes, please describe and attach available
plans.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require work near the
surface waters located within the Aubum School District. Applicable local
approval requirements have been or will be satisfied.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be
placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area
of the site that would be affected. lndicate the source of fill material.
Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material
as a component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or
will be provided during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied.
7
Hiiü :1l,:'tr -A-
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the
projects included in the Capital Facilities PIan have been or will be addressed
during proj ect-level environmental review when appropriate.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? lf so, note
location on the site plan.
Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area,
has been or will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to
surface waters? lf so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume
of discharge.
Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be
required as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been
or will be provided during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Ground
1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to
groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate
quantities if known.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact
groundwater resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan on groundwater resources has been or will be addressed
during þroject-level environmental review when appropriate. Each project has
been or will be subject to applicable local regulations. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground
from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;
industrial, containing the following chemicals .; agricultural; etc.).
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the
number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or
humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
8
ftrr\ "ii 'l: . "n
8-r..'ll u""..:; U
The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the
projects included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review.
c Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will
this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? lf so, describe.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have stormwater
runoff consequences. Specihc information regarding the stormwater impacts of
each project has been or will be provided during project-level environmental
review when appropriate. Each project has been or will be subject to applicable
local stormwater regulations.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? lf so,
generally describe.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of
waste materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of each
project on ground and surface waters have been or will be identified during
project-level environmental review when appropriate. Each project has been or
will be subject to all applicable regulations regarding the discharge of waste
materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for
Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during
project-level environmental review when appropriate.
9
f;:;fr;ilil;"t'_R _
4 Plants:
Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:a
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Aubum School District.
Inventories of the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Some of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or
alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve
or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to
applicable local landscaping requirements.
10
Hlif ;15 jT h
5. Animals:
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other.
mammals. deer, bear, elk, beaver, other.
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects
proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the
site
Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during
proj ect-level environmental rev iew when appro priate.
c. ls the site part of a migration route? lf so, explain
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes
have been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be
used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will
be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life-cycle cost analysis of
all heating, lighting, and insulation systems before it will permit specific school
projects to proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site
11
ffixü;i:;i'r Ê
design planning when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject
Actions.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? lf so, generally describe:
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar
potential of adjacent projects have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of
this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy
impacts, if any:
Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
7. EnvironmentalHealth
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could
occur as a result of this proposal? lf so, describe.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health
hazards, if any:
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan comply or will comply with all
current codes, standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or
will be subject to project-level environmental review and local approval at fhe
time they are developed, when appropriate.
12
U):il[;'r'il A
8.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project
(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises from traffic, construction, residential, commercial, and
industrial areas exists within the Auburn School District. The specific noise
sources that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated
with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? lndicate what hours noise would come
from the site.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create normal
construction noises that will exist on short-term bases only. The construction
projects could increase traffrc around the construction sites on a short-term basis.
Because the construction of additional school capacity will increase the capacity
of the District's school facilities, this project may create a slight increase in
traffic-related or operations-related noise on a long-term basis. Similarly, the
placement of portables at school sites will increase the capacity of school facilities
and may create a slight increase in traffic-related or operations-related noise.
Neither of these potential increases is expected to be significant. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan
have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project-level environmental
review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local
regulations.
Land and Shoreline Use:
What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?a
There are a variety of land uses within the Auburn School District, including
residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utiliry open space, recreational, etc.
13
ii lli.,; I' R -
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? lf so, describe
The known sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have not been
used recently for agriculture.
c. Describe any structures on the site
The structures located on the sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be identified and described during project-level environmental
review when appropriate.
d. Will any structures be demolished? lf so, what?
The structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan, if any, have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning
classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site-specific zoning information has
been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be completed during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
g. lf applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of
the site?
Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identifïed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
14
i-:);ilii",i'tr A
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"
area? lf so, specify.
Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level
environmental review.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
The Auburn School District currently serves approximately 14,073 full-time
equivalent ("FTE") students. Enrollment is expected to increase to approximately
16,218 FTE students by the 2015-2016 school year.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan has been or will be evaluated during project-level environmental review when
appropriate. However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of
the projects contained therein, will displace any people.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject
to project-level environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed
mitigating measures have been or will be developed at that time, when necessary.
L Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capítal Facilities Plan with
existing uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive
planning process and during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? lndicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan.
15
H)'lli;,..i't" ]t_
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? lndicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will
eliminate any housing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan on existing housing have been or will be evaluated during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
c Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including
antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been
or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
b. What v¡ews in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been
or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
c Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project-
level basis when appropriate.
16
[ii{å;ì:,;'i" -â_
11. Light and Glare:
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur?
The light or glare impacts of the projects included inthe Capital Facilities Planhave
been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review, when
appropriate.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere
with views?
The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
OfÊsite sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated during project-level environmental
review when appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any.
Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity?
There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Auburn
School District.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? lf so,
describe.
The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
17
H];t;ilH; d A
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed new school
facilities, may enhance recreational opporfunities and uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunit¡es to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be subject to mitigation during project-level environmental review when
appropriate. School facilities usually provide recreational facilities to the community
in the form of play fields and gymnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state,
or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? lf so,
generally describe.
There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for, such registers for the
project sites included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and
cultural resources on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in detail during
project-level environmental review when appropriate.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures will be proposed on a project-level basis when appropriate.
14. Transportation
a. ldentify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The impact on public streets and highways of the individual projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
18
ii).lii;'-i'l A
b. ls site currently served by public transit? lf not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan
and public transit has been or will be addressed during project-level environmental
review when appropriate.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate?
Inventories of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability have been or
will be conducted during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
d. will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to
existing roads or streets, not including driveways? lf so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private).
The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has
been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? lf so, generally describe.
Use of water, rail, or air transportation has been or will be addressed during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project? lf known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project-level environmental
review when appropriate.
19
Ëiïi :r;i't A
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for
example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? lf so,
generally describe.
The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities
Plan will significantly increase the need for public services.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services,
if any.
New school facilities have been or will be built with automatic security systems, fire
alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems.
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water,
refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities
are available at the known sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan.
The types of utilities available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed
in more detail during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing
the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the
immediate vicinity which might be needed.
Utility revisions and construction needs have been or will be identified during project-
level environmental review when appropriate.
20
ffi)Ï:[[iiT A
C. SIGNATURË
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge
I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature
Date Submitted:
21
EXhiIB[T A
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in
conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the
types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater
intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly
and in general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;
emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or
production of noise?
To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities,
including new high school, middle school and elementary school capacity, will be
constructed, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional
impermeable surfaces, such as rooß, access roads, and sidewalks could increase
stormwater runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters. Heating systems,
emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed pursuant to the
Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or
hazardous substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or
gasoline for emergency generating equipment. The District does not anticipate a
significant increase in the production of noise from its facilities, although the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan will increase the District's student capacities.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are
Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above have been or will
be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
Stormwater detention and runoff will meet applicable County andlor City
requirements and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will meet applicable air
pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be stored in accordance with local and
state requirements.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine
life?
The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the
environment. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require clearing
plants off of the project sites and a loss to animal habitat. These impacts have been or
22
[:].N,lii,;.r l+
will be addressed in more detail during project-level environmental review when
appropriate. The projects included in the Plan are not likely to generate significant
impacts on fish or marine life.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life
are
Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be
identified at this time. Specific mitigation proposals will be identified, however,
during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the
consumption of energy.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance
with applicable energy efficiency standards.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive
areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such
as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no
impact on these resources.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are
No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures would be
proposed during project-specific review. Annual updates of this Plan will be
coordinated with the Cities of Aubum, Algona, Kent, and Pacific, and King County as
part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to
protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the School District's facilities
planning process is part of the overall Growth Management planning process, these
resources are more likely to be protected.
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use,
including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with
existing plans?
The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is
incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline
23
Ë)lf'lili:T -R-
management plans. The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or
the projects contained therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area
served by the District.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are
No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities
Plan or the projects contained therein are proposed at this time.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation
or public services and utilities?
The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary
increases in the District's need for public services and utilities. The new school
facilities will increase the District's demands on transportation and utilities. These
increases are not expected to be significant.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time
7. ldentify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or
federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the
protection of the environment.
24
ffi)ffíürT5T A