HomeMy WebLinkAbout4023ORDINANCE 4o a3
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, amending the Kent
Comprehensive Plan and its Capital Facilities
Element to include the Capital Facilities Plans of the
Kent, Federal Way, and Auburn School Districts
(cPA-2011-1).
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 36.704,130(2)(a)(iv)).
C. The City of Kent has established procedures for amending the
Comprehensive Plan in Chapter L2.02 of the Kent City Code, allowing
amendment of the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan
concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the City budget and
allowing the City Council to hold the public hearing instead of the Land Use
and Planning Board,
D. The Kent, Federal Way, and Auburn School Districts have
submitted proposed amendments to their Capital Facilities Plans to be
L Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2O77 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 15,
2011.
F, On October 10, 20IL, the City provided the required sixty
(60) day notification under RCW 36.70A.106 to the State of Washington of
the City's proposed amendment to the Capital Facilities Element of the
Comprehensive Plan and the sixty (60) day notice period has lapsed,
G. On December 13, ZOLI, the City Council for the City of Kent
approved the Capital Facilities Element amendment CPA-2011-1 to include
the Capital Facilities PIans 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 L, - 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-
201 1- 1).
2 Comprehensive PIan Amendment
2O77 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/su bsection n u m bering.
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
oKE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
RENDA JACOBER,RK
APPROVED AS TO FORM
TO BRU BAKER, CITY ATTORN EY
- 3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
2077 School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans
S
PASSED: /3 day of December,?:OLL
APPROVED: /f day of December, IOIL.
PUBLISH eo: /b day of December , zoLL.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of ordinance No. hPaS
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
SEAL)
P:\C¡vil\Ordlnance\CompPldnAmend-SchoolD¡stcap¡ta¡Facil¡tiesPlans-2012-2017,doq
¿r--
BRENDA JAC CITY CLERK
4 Comprehensive PIan Amendment
2O77 School Dist, Capital Facilities Plans
A
ér&
-Ø11:2Ø1?^201 6 : 2ø17
New Panther Lake Elementary School opened in Fall 2009
Kmt Scfr.oof øistrict $ro. 415 pror¡iles elucation"øfsentice to
fu si"{mt s of 'ü nincorp orat el ftng Ç ounty
anlcpsi"lmts of tña Çities of
Kmt, Çwington, t4.u6urn, furtton
cBkc{rDí"a.nonl,Svf øpkloft"J,anlseatac,'lilasfr.ington
Aprif 2011
Kent School District No. 415
12033 SE 256th Street
Kent, Washington 98030-6643
(253) 373-7295
SIX - YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
20tl-2012 2016-2017
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Bill Boyce
Jim Berrios
Tim Clark
Karen DeBruler
Debbie Straus
ADMINISTRATION
Dr. Edward Lee Vargas - Superintendent
Dr. Richard A. Stedry - Chief Business Officer
Dr. Linda Del Giudice - Chief Accountability Officer
Dr. Merri Rieger - Chief Student Achievement Officer
Dr. Brent Jones - Chief Talent Officer
Thuan Nguyen - Chief lnformation & Automated Operations Officer
Chris Loftis - Executive Director, Communications & School Community Partnerships
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 201 I
SIX . YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
20ll - 2012 2016 - 2017
April 2011
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
Ralph Fortunato, CSBS- lnterim Directorfor Fiscal Services
Debbi Smith, Business Services Department
Fred Long, Supervisor of Facilities & Construction
Karla Wlkerson, Facilities Department
Don Walkup, Supervisor of Transportation Department
Maps by Jana Tucker, lT - Graphic Designer
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 201 I
Sr^\-{eør Capitaf çacifities 8[øn
Ía6fe of Contents
Section
I Executive Summary
I I Six-Year Enrollment Pro¡ection & History
I I I District Standard of Service
I V lnventory, Capacity & Maps of Existing Schools
V Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan
VI Relocatable Classrooms
V I I Projected Classroom Capacity
V I I I Finance Plan, Cost Basis and lmpact Fee Schedules
I X Summary of Changes to Previous Plan
X Appendixes
Page Number
2
4
9
T2
15
l8
19
31
32
24
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2011
I Executive Summary
This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent
School District (the "District") as the organization's facilities planning document,
in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act,
King County Code K.C.C, 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton,
Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac. This annual Plan update was
prepared using data available in the spring of 2011 for the 2010-2011 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 docurnent
for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long
Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies, taking into account
a longer or shorter tíme period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities,
and other needs of the District as may be required.
Prior Capital FacilÍties 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.
(Çontinued)
April 201 1 Pagø 2Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
I Executive Summary (continued)
The capaciÇ of each school in the District is calculated based on the District
standard of service and the existing inventory of permanent facilities. 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. Ënrollment 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 as reported to OSPI - the Office of the Superintendent of
Public lnstruction.
P-223 FTE reports Kindergarten at .5 for all elementary schools except those five
schools with Full Day Kindergarten funded by State Apportionment. P-223
Reports include all students in Grades K - 12 and excludes Early Childhood
Education [ECEI students and college-only Running Start students.
The Board of Directors has approved Full Day Kindergarten for all Elementary
Schools 'for 2O11-12 and those projections are continued in future years.
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 wílt be updated annually with changes in the fee
schedules adjusted accordingly.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2011 Pege 3
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection
For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on cohort survival
and student yield from documented residential construction projected over the
next six years. (see rable el The student generation factor, as defined on the next. ,
page, is the basis for the growth projections from new developments.
King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were
used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see raðle r)
8.134%o of 24,244 King County live births in 2006 is projected for 1 ,972 students
expected in Kindergarten for October 1, 2011. This is a significant increase of
1,564 live births in King County over the previous year, Together with
proportional growth from new construction, 8.134% of King County births is
equivalent to the number of students projected to enter kindergarten in the
district for the next six-year period. (see rable z)
Full Day Kindergarten ("FDK") programs at all 28 elementary schools require an
adjustment to the Kindergarten forecast for projecting FDK at 1.0 FTE for capital
facilities planning. P-223 Reports will continue to include FDK students at 1.0 for
five schools with FDK funded by state apportionment, and all other kindergarten
students will continue to be reported at .50 FTE. rs"" rabte2A)
Early Childhood Education students (also identified as "ECE", "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 traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten
population due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens.
Cohort survival method uses historical enrollment data to forecast the number of
students projected for the following year.
Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset
by current local economic conditions. With notable exceptions, the expectation is
that enrollment increases will occur District-wide in the long term. District
projections are based on historical growth patterns combined with continuing
development of projects in the pipeline dependent on market/growth conditions.
The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact
to schools and monitor conditions to reflect adjustments in this assumption. The
six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollrnent 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 anafysis of growth projections
(conunued)
Kent School District Six-Year Cap¡tel Facilities Plan April 2011 Page 4
I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection (continued)
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 smallei
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.
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
866
,331
.067
.124
522
The student generation factor is based on a survey o'f 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 residential developments was
determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation
System which provides an accurate count of enrolled students in identifiable new
development areas.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plân April 201 1 Page 5
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4I5OCTOBER P 223 F T E (Full Time Equivalent) ENROLLMENT H|STORY r2010200120022003zaa42005200620072008200919981 9992000f9971996199519941993199219911 990Oclober FTE EnrollmenlKingCountyLiveBirths2 i9.82gIncrease/ Decrease 8SlKindergarten / Birth o/o 2 8.88%19,999 20.449 21,289 22,541 23,104174 450 840 1,252 5639.49o/o 9.40o/o 9.O7o/o 8.47o/o 8.54o/o23,042 23,188 22,s55 22,010-102 1E6 -E33 -3458.44o/o 8.38o/o 8.27o/o 8.560/o21,8'17-1938.25o/o21,573-24421,6Æ732.,212 22p07 22,487 21,778 21,863 22,431 22,874 22,680566 -205 4a0 -7t9 E5 56E 443 -1948.41V" 8.06% 8.05% 8.33% 8.41o/o 8.22o/o 8.29o/o 8.47o/o 8.32o/o 8.13o/oKindergarten 1-2-3 g60 949 962 965 9s5 987 gt1 g7z g25 g4zState AppOftiOnment-funded Full Day Kindefgaften 1 -2 ' 3 (P-223 Repod Exdudes Tuiforbased & Gråôt-tundod Full Dav K)900 907 E73 894 917 '!A3 895 gffi1,8521,7731,8241,7931,7021,6291,6241,545I.4831.468I,3601,2021.9451,9441,8661,9t61,8651,7331,7201,6281,6122,O291,9981,9501,9001,91 I1,8851,8121,7241,6892,O172,M81,972I,9391,907I,9511,9151,7991,7161,6981,537'1,3401,9671,9371,9651,9421,8991,91sr,9461,8821,800'1,9752,0111.9592,4121,9241.8951,9251,94"11,8941.7651,6061.4302.1521,9792,0251,9661,98E1,924'1,8991,9271,9631,851I,6811.4652,0852,1942,0582,0642,0232,036't,9821,936r,9311,9771,7971.5072,0642,0952,2082,0452,1082,0452,0631,9701,925I,953f ,8491.6321,9892,0782;1112,2222,O372,1192,08't2,0152,1022,0692,0152,0982,0862,2512,0562,2482,0332,2082,1131,7701.432r,9362,0672,0402,1662,1092,2532,1272,1542,2462,0641,8351.4401,922r,9362.0552,0682,1492,1512,3802,O792,4042,0391,8231.475'f .8511,9651.9752,4722,0672,2052,2092,3512,3092,2071,7871_4661.gil1,9352.0202,0572,1022,1392,2432,2212,7052,'1241,9071Á461938198119622024209021æ22æ2293276721731 7991475200319982026201524512101220522541 87320452033204920202098213021842560247418821491-1 196,527768365192019r6206120602044208',121172143257322451966154975E386195819621976204420E62070211521687493431992r9392000195420822',t30209221512434223319491573-1576,403GradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGradeGrade1234567B9 - Junior Hþh9 - Senior High101112r,4801,4001,2551.663't,4091.2901,6901,5291.36E2,O451,7821-537246722131S561619rotatEnorlment4 20,135 21,312 22,222 22,803 22,794 23,32a zg,7g2 24,s6o z4,BBz 25,t6o zs,23} 25,u4 zs,s# zs,3sa zs,77o zl,Bos 2s,864 zs,74s zs,oz} 25,778 ?5,621277222121 881145155Yearv FTElnqease / Dec¡easeCumulativs lncreasa9169161,1762,0949093,0035823,585-10 529 469 7ı8 s22 17A 17A 106 9 4 412 393,575 4,104 4,574 s,341 5,6€3 5,U1 6,019 6,126 6,135 6,140 6,552 6,5s183 -506,610 6,560I236,646Kent School Dislrict Six-Year Capital Facilities P¡anTable IApril 2011 Page 6
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
SIX -YEAR F T E ENROLLMENT PROJECTION
State-funded FDK at 20 Schools LB in 2004 LB in 2005 LB in 2006 LB in 2007 LB in 2008 LB Est 20og LB Es¿2010
King County Live Births 1
lncrease / Decrease
Kindergarten/B¡rth% '?
2" Kìndergarten 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
Yearly lncrease/Decrease 3
Yea rly lncrease/Decrease 7o
Cumulative lncrease
22,680
"'t94
8.13"/o
24,244
1,564
E.1s%
25,057
.165
8.13%
25,100
43
8.13%
25,2A0 1
100
8.13%
24,899 25,222
655 323
8.13% 8.13%
749
343
1992
1939
2000
1954
2082
2130
2092
2151
2434
2233
1 949
1573
0
1,972
1,912
1,973
1,977
1,979
1,990
2,126
2,153
2,127
2,414
2,202
1,967
1,567
0
2,Q24
2,075
1,903
2,020
1,965
2,027
2,054
2,159
2,200
0
2,050
2,129
2,064
1,949
2,008
2,012
2,092
2,087
2,206
2,481
2,181
1,944
1,578
0
2,038
2,1 56
2,1 18
2,1 13
1,938
2,056
2,076
2j25
2,132
2,487
2,255
1,931
1,573
0
2,042
2,144
2,144
2,1 68
2,100
1,985
2,122
2,109
2,171
2,404
2,261
1,997
1,563
0
2,050
2,148
2,133
2,1 95
2,154
2,150
2,049
2,155
2,155
2,448
2,186
2,O02
1,616
2,399
2,195
1,950
1,591
Total FTE Enrollment 25,621
Notr:21314
-157
-0.610/o
-157
26,359
738
2.88%
581
26,562
203
0.77o/o
784
26,781
219
0.82o/o
1,003
26,998
217
0.81%
1,220
27,214
212
0.79%
1,432
27,441
231
0.85%
1,663
FullTime Eouivalent (FTE) 25.621 26.359 26,562 26,781 26.998 27.210 27,441
1 Kindergarten enrollment projection is based on Kent SD pêrcentage of live births in King County five years previous.
2 Kindergarten FTE projection is calculated by using the D¡strict's prev¡ous yeär percentage of K¡ng County births fìve years
earlier compared lo aclual kindergarten enrollmênl in lhe previous year. (Excludes ECE - Early Ch¡ldhood Education)
3 Kindergarlen projeclion is at 1.0 for Full Day Kindergarten (FDK) at all 28 Elementary schools. 2010 FDK funded at 5 schools by
stâte âpporlionment and second 1/2 of day funded by Federal & State Categorical Grants and Tuition.
o O.t. 2010 P223 FTE is 25,621 & Headcount is 26,630. Full Headcount with ECE Preschool & Running Start students = 27,34g.
G R O W T H P R O J E C T I O N S - Adiustmentsforcurrenteconomicfactors
For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrolfment projection anticipates conservative enrollment
growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Tablg 2 Aprit 2011 Page 7
AClUAL JE N
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 201 5 201 6
KENT SGHOOL DISTRICT No.415CAPACITY of ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS & KINDERGARTEN PROJECTIONS for October 20llABRELEMENTARY SCHOOL2010-2011ProgramCapacifyCaniage Crest ElementaryCedar Valþy ElementaryCov¡ngton Elementary2Crestwood Elemenl¿rvEast Hill ElementaryEmerald Park 2Faimood ElementaryGeorge T. Daniel Elementary IccCVcoCWÊt-lEPDEPOPTRWswSHscSBSR452l.56N)1456476504408456176524f3,364Glenridge Elementary cR 456Grass Lake Elemenlary cL 452Horizon Elementary 2 HE 5MJenk¡ns Creek El€mentary rc 404Lake Youngs Elementary Ly 51OMarlin Sortun Elemenlary r¡s .t801MeadowMer¡dian ElementaryMillennium Elernentary 2Neely-O'Brien ElementâryPenlher LakeParfi Orchard ElementaryPine Tree Elementary 2Ridgewood ElementaryWoodsScenic H¡ll EtementarySoos Creek ElementarySpringbrook ElementarySunrise ElementaryElementary TOTALMRMEMLNO5014525524865285U504176408452504@.5FIEx2P@j SF FDKHead@urfNote 1: 5 schools have Stale Apportionment-funded FDK included on P-223 Enrollment Reports ât 1.0 FTE and proJected at 1.0 FTE. (DE - KE . MR - PO . SH)Note 2: KAI = Kindergarten Academic lntervention at ML & PT in O9-lO became FDK tunded by grants in 2O1O-11.4 FDK wer6 funded ùy l-728 at CO - EP - HE - ME in 2010-1 1.Note 4: ln 2011-'12 AJ-L2A Elementary Schools wlll have Full tlay Kindergarten.28 Elementary Schools 'Æ15923E01972ElemSchlAbrvCodecccvcocwEHEPDEGRGLHEJCKELYM6MRMEi,LNOPLPOPTRWswSHscSBSROct-11Prôjected Full OayK¡ndergartenStudentsHeadcount / FTE@.5Ot 1.o3030324143333368551538?a762146773541oz4571313526882542313807902580164661972 11764@ 1.0ô06064a2E6bb6668ÞÞ3076567642s27770a21249071o¿7052885064o2.5 FTEForecastfor0.50 FundedBasic Ed1/2 Day K OnlyJJ313l1817e343135,5 FTEFor€æstfor0.50 FundedOptionalTuition-Based1l2Day (&FDKI.5 FTEFor€castîot0-50 FundedComb¡nedKindergarlenKAI & 112 DayI.O FTEForecastfor1.0 Fundedbyl-728t FDK60706E70646248647677927294116607166885258I.O FTEForscastfor1.0 FundedTitle IARRA St¡mFDKI.O FTEForêcastfor1.0 FundedStateApportionmentFDKKent School D¡str¡ct Six-Year CâF tal Fac¡lities PlanTable 2 AApril 2011 Page I
I I I Gurrent Kent School District "Standard of Service"
ln order to determine the capacity of facilities in a school district, King County
Code 214.06 references a "standard of service" that each school district must
establish in order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service
identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students
and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the district which
would best serve the student population.
This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District.
The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as
"impact" schools and the standard of service targets a lower class size at those
facilities. Relocatables included in the capacity calculation use the same
standard of service as the permanent facilities. gee Appendix A, B & c)
The standard of service defined herein may continue to change in the future.
Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process
combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service. This
process will affect various aspects of the District's standard of service and future
changes will be reflected in future capitalfacilities plans.
Current Standards of Service for Elementarv Students
Class size for Kindergarten 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 of 24 students per classroom because of fluctuations between
primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e. third/fourth or fourth/fifth grade split
classes, etc.).
ln 2010, most elementary schools meet the criteria required to provide full day
kindergarten programs (FDK = Full Day Kindergarten) wÍth the second half of the
day funded by state apportionment, Federal & State Categorical Grants or
tuition. For 20'11, five FDK Programs have state funding and the others will be
funded through Basic Ed and Educational Programs and Operations Levy.
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)
Page IKent School Distr¡ct Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2011
I I I Current Kent School District "Standard of Service't ¡continued¡
ldentified students will also be provided other educational opportunities in
classrooms for programs such as those designated as follows:
English Language Learners (E L L)
lnclusive Services / Tiered lntervention in SE Support Center Programs
Early Childhood Education (ECE) (3-4 yr, old students with disabilities)
Developmental Kindergarten in SC Programs
lntegrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Self-contained Special Education Support Center Programs (SC)
Adaptive Support Center for Mild, Moderate & Severe Disabilities Øsc-DD)
Speech & Language Therapy & Programs for Hearing lmpaired students
Occupational & Physical Therapy Programs (OT/PT)
Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I)- Federal Program
Learning Assisted Programs (l-AP) - State Program
District Remediation Programs
Education for Híghly Capable Students (formerly "Gifted" Program)
Some of the above special programs require specialized classroom space, as
well as music and physical education classrooms, computer labs, etc.; thus, the
permanent capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced.
Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of
time to receive instruction in these special programs and "pull-out" space must
be allocated to serve these programs.
Some newer buildings have been constructed to accommodate most of these
programs; some older buildings have been modified, and in some
circumstances, these modifications reduce the classroom capacity of the
buildings. When programs change, program capacity is updated to reflect the
change in program and capacity.
Current Standards of Service for Secondarv 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 - 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)
Kent School District Six-Yeer Cepitel Facilities Plan April 2011 Page 10
III Gurrent Kent School District "Standard of Service't @ontinued)
ldentified secondary students will also be provided other educational
opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows:
Computer, Multi-media & Technology Labs & Programs - (Nova Net - Advanced Academics)
Technology Academy programs at Kent-Meridian High School & Mill Creek Middle School
Science Programs & Labs - Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Oceanography, Astronomy,
Meteorology, Marine Biology, General Science, etc.
English Language Learners (E L L)
lntegrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance)
Basic Skills Programs
Transition Outreach Program (TOP)for 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 ('l B") Program
Kent Phoenix Academy - Performance Learning Center, Gateway, Virtual High School &
Kent Success program with evening classes designed for credit retrieval
Traffic Safety Education
JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Traíning Corps
Variety of Career & Technical Education Programs (GTE-Vocational Education)
Family & Consumer Science - Culinary Arts, Sewing, Careers w/Children/Educ., etc.
Health & Human Services - Sports Medicine, Sign Language, Cosmetology, etc.
Business Education - Word Processing, Accounting, Business Law & Math, DEGA,
FBLA (Future Business Leaders), Sales & Marketing, Economics, Web Design
Technical & lndustry - Woodworking, Cabinet Making, Building Trades, Metals,
Automotive & Manufacturing Technology, Welding, Machine Shop, Drafting, Drawing,
CAD (Computer-aided Design), Electronics, Ëngineering & Design, Aviation, ASL, etc.
Graphic & CommercialArts, Media, Photography, Theater & Stage, Ag & Horticulture
Many of these programs and others require special¡zed classroom space which
can reduce the permanent capacity of the school buildings. ln addition,
alternative home school assistance, choice and transition programs are provided
for students in grades 3 - 12 at Kent Mountain View Academy.
Space or Classroom Utilization
As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized
roorns 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 analys¡s of actual
utilization of classrooms, the District has determined that the standard utilization
rate ¡s 85% for secondary schools. Program capacity at elementary schools
reflects 100o/o utilization at the elementary level,
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Fac¡lities Plan April 201 1 Page 11
I V lnventory and Gapacity of Existing Schools
Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 27,741students
and transitional (relocatable) capacityto house 1,389. 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 97o/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
School and building additions at the high schools.
Kent Mountain View Academy (formerly Kent Learning Center and Grandview
Elementary) serves Grades 3 - 12 with transitíon, 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
20Q7 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.
Kent School Distric{ Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2011 Page 12
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
INVENTORY and GAPAGITY of EXISTING SGHOOLS
1 Changes ùc capacity reflect program changes and new building additions at high schools.
2 M¡ll Creek l,l¡ddle School ând Technology Acâdemy replåc€d renovâted Kent Junior High ¡n 2005.
3 Kent Mountain View Academy serves grades 3-12. The school was brrnerly known as Kent Leaming Center & Grandview Elementâry,I Kent Phoenix Academy is a non-trad¡tional high school which opened ¡n Fall 2007 in the flrmêr Sequo¡a MS building.
SCHOOL
Year
Opened ABR ADDRESS
2010-2011
Program
Capacitv 1
Carriage Crest Elementåry
CedarValley Elementary
Covingiton Elementary
Crêstuiood El€mentery
1 990
1 971
1 961
1S80
CC 18235 - 140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
CV 26500 Timberlane Way SE, Cov¡ngton 98042
CO 17070.SEWaxRoad, CovingÊon 98042
CW 25225-180thAvenueSE, Covington 98042
452
¡156
504
456
East H¡ll Elementâry
Emerald Park
Fairwood Elementary
George T. Daniel Elementary
1 953
'1999
1 969
1 992
EH 9825 S 240th Strëet, Kent 98031
EP 11800SE2I6thStreei, Kent 98031
FW 16600-148thAvenueSE, Renton 98058
DE 11310SE248thSh€et, Kent 98030
476
504
408
456
Glenridge Elementary
Grass Lake Elementary
Hor¡zon Elemenlary
Jenk¡ns Creek Elementary
I 996
197 1
1 990
1987
GR 19405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058
GL 28700-191stPlâceSÊ, Kent 98042
HE 2791 - 144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042
JC 26915 - l86thAvenue SE, Cov¡ngton 98042
456
452
504
fi4
Kent Elementary
Lake Youngs Elementary
Martin Sorlun Elementâry
Meadow Ridge Elementary
1999 / 1F8
1965
1 987
1 994
KE
LY
MS
MR
24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032
19660-142ndAvenue SE, Kent 98042
12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030
27710 - 108th Avenue SE, Kent 98030
476
510
480
476
Meridian Elementary
Millenn¡um Elementary
Neely-O'Brien Elementary
Penther Läke Elementarv
I 939
2000
1990 / 1955
2009 / 1938
ME
ML
NO
PL
25621 - 140ür Avenue SE, Kent 98042
11919 SE 270th Street, Kent 98030
6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032
20831 -108thAvenueSE, Kent 98031
524
504
452
552
Park Orchard Elementary
Pine Tree Elementåry
Ridgewood Elementary
Sawyer Woods Elementary
I 963
1367
1987
1994
PO 11010 SE 232nd Str€et, Kent 98031
PT 27825 - l lSth Avenue SE, K€nt 98030
RW 18030 - 162nd Plece SE, Renton 98058
SW 31135 - 228thAve SE, Black D¡amond 98010
486
528
504
504
Scenic Hill Elemenhry
Soos Creek Elementery
Springbrook Elementary
Sunrise Elementary
Kent-Merid¡an HS & Tech Acådemy
Kentlake Senior High School
Kentridge Sénior High School
Kentwood Senior High School
Senior High TOTAL
Kent Mountain View Academy 3
Kent Phoenix Academy 4
DISTRICT TOTAL
SH 26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98030
SC 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031
SB 20035-l00ülAvenueSE, Kent 98031
SR 22300-132ndAvenueSE, Kent 98(X2
1 960
1971
I 969
'1992
1951
1997
1968
1981
CH
MA
MK
MM
MC
NW
¡l76
408
452
504
Elementary TOTAL
Cedar Heights Middle School 1993
Mâttson Middle School 1981
Meeker Middle School 1970
Merid¡ân Middle School 1958
Mill Creek MS & ïechnology Academy 2 zoos t 1952
Northwood M¡ddle School 1996
M¡ddle School TOTAL
1 9640 SË 272 Street, Covington 98042
16400 SE 251st Sfeet, Cov¡ngton 98042
12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058
23480 - 120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031
620 North Centrel Avenue, Kent 98032
17007 SE 1841h Street, Renton 98058
13,364
793
790
972
5,196
1,85'l
2,157
2,270
2,137
8,415
416
350
27,741
923
E90
828
KM 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98030
KL 21401 SÉ,300th Streêt, Kent 98042
KR 12430 SE 208th Street, Kent 98031
KW 25800 - l64thAvenueSE, Covington 98042
1997 / 1965 MV/LC 22420 Military Road, Des Moines 98198
2007 / 1e66 PH 1 1 000 SF 264th Street, Kent 98030
Kent Scfiool D¡skict S¡x-Yeâr Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 .April 2011 Pâge 13
Ão5ano:'oosat,=.otnx*o0¡o0¡E.g'n¡9.+oo!n¡=NAFc¡irwoodElemenloryLokesE 208th stRidgewoodElemenloryoDesireJenkinsCreekoKenl School Dislrict No. 415Serving res¡dents ofUnincorporoted King CountyCily of KentCily of RentonCily of AuburnCily of Seo TocCity of CovingtonCity of Mople VolleyC¡ty of Block Diqmond\bElemenlcryO Meridiqn¡Middle SchoolEost HilluulC¡eek aSchool'1¡Nd)Kenl-MeridionHighsE 25óth st28 Elementory Schoolsó Middle Schools4 Senior High SchoolsKent Mounioin View Acodemy (Grodes 3-12)Kent Phoenix Acodemy (9-12)Emercrld PorkElemenloryoSoos CreekOElemenloryOrchordlDSunriseElemenloryMiddle SchoolYoungssE 240th stELokeoLıkêElemenloryauØottrOIokeS-cenic Hill IElémênloryo.crtoCedorVolleyElemenloryaCedorMiddle5E 272nd St[okeSowyerÞı=.No-It¡(oIDàGrcrss LokeKenl-Kongley RoodO CovinglonElemonloryElemenloryOIMoltsonMiddle SchoIOKenlwoodHigh SchoolLokeMorlonìSES<¡wyer WoodsElemenloryKenllokeOFl¡gtischoolorizon OlemenloryO Meridion$'#o,""Hishqtt,oCresloGlenridosElemenlãryO Meeke¡MiddleAdminislrolionCenlerElemenlcrryDoniel¡ElementoryMorlinfSortunOMiAc<¡demyIPine TreeElemenloryaKenlrço()SpringbrookElemenloryas 2t2th stKenlMounloin ViewAcqdomyoo3aKenl
V Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan
At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring of 2011, the following projects are
completed or ín the planning phase in Kent School District:
Three new classrooms were added when the Auxiliary Gym project was recently
completed for Kent-Meridian High School. Construction is in progress for the Main Gym
project that will also provide additional classroom capacity at Kent-Meridian in 2011-12.
ln February 2006, voters approved construction funding for replacement of Panther Lake
Elementary School. A new site was acquired nearby and the "New" Panther Lake
Elementary opened in Fall2009 with a 28% increase in capacity. The district has received
authorization from OSPI for "Old" Panther Lake Elementary Schoolto be held in reserve
for utilization in the event of flooding in the Kent Valley.
Planning is on hold for a replacement school for Covington Elementary School. The
project is 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 capacity at the elementary school
level. Future facility and site needs are reflected in this Plan.
Some funding for purchase of additional portables 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 reviewing applications and design plans for new roads and
developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety as well as bus
pull-outs and turn-arounds for school buses.
lncluded in this Plan is an inventory of potential projects and sites identified by
the District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future. (see
Table 4 on Page 16 & Sde map on Page 17)
Voter approved bond issues have included funding for the purchase of sites for
some of these and future schools, and the sites acquired to date are included in
this Plan. Some funding is secured for purchase of additional sites but some may
be funded with impact fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet
current school construct¡on requirements and some property may be traded or
sold to meet future facility needs.
2006 voter approval of $106M bond issue for capital improvernent included the
construct¡on funding for new Elementary School #31 (actual #29), replacement
of Panther Lake Elementary, and classroom additions to high schools. Some
impact fees have been or will 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.
I
a
a
a
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2011 Page 15
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No,415
Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity
ILITY /ITE LOCATION Status
Projecled
Complêtlon
Dale
Pro¡ected
Program
olo lo¡
new
Growth
on
Map ELEMENTARY
#on
Map 3 orHER strEs AcourRED
(Numbers ass,gned fo futura schools may not correlate with number of exrsiing schoors.J
5 Replacement for Covington Elementary ru)
Covington Elem - Capaclty to bê replåced
SE 256th Street & 1541h Ave SE
17070 SE Wax Roâd, Covington
Locâtion TBD - To be dotermined 2
To be determined 2
Elementary # 31 (Actual #29)
Slte for Elemôntary # 31
(F)
(Unfunded)1
Replacement
Elêmentary
El€m6ntâry
Plann¡ng
Plännlng
2014-15
2014-r 5
201 5-1 6
2014-1 5
Elementary
Elementary
Elementary
Elementary
Secondary
Elementary
TBD 2
TBD 2
600
-504
16%
600 100%
1 007o
City of Covington
King County
City of Covington
K¡ng County
King County
Kìng County
King County
King County
MIDDLE SCHOOL
No Projects required ât this l¡mê
SENIOR HIGH
Kent-Meridian HS - Classroom Adcl¡tions (F) 10020 SE 256th Sfreet, Kenl
TEMPORARY FACILITIËS
Relocatables For placement as noeded
Progress 2011-12 53 100%
Additional
Capacity
Nôw Planning 201 I + 24-31 Êåch 100%
Land Usg
06slgnation Tvoe
Land Use
Jurisdiction
New
Elementary
Site
Classroom
Additions
Planning
Planning
Urban
RuËl
Urban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urbân
ln
4 Covington area North (Near Mattson MS)
7 Covington area South (Scarsella)
5 Covington areâ West (Halleson-Wikstrom)
3 Ham Lake area (Pollard)
8 SE of Lake Morton area (West propèrty)
2 Shâdy Lk ârea (Sowers, Blalne, Drahota, Paroline)
1 So. King Co. Activity Center (formér Nike site)
12 South Central slte (Plômmons-Yeh-Wms)
Notås:
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, Kent 9E042
17,126 SE 192 Slreet, Renton 98058
SE 167 & 170 SE, Renton 98058
SE 286th St & r24th Ave SE, Aubum 98092
1 Unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future.
2 TBD - To be determined - Some sltes are acquired but placement, timing and/or configurat¡on have not been determined.
3 Numbers correspond to s¡tes on S¡te Bank Map on Page 17. Other Map s¡te locatlons are parcels identified in Table 7 on Pag6 27
Kenl School District Six-Year Capital Facilifies Plan Table 4 April 2011 Page 16
Ãoúto5oIoan=.oat,i'to!,o!,!qt_-nA¡go-'lnIt¡=coaEo:Kent School Dislrict No. 415Site Bonk&Properly AcquisiTionsSEE=l\)Õ!ù(oo..¡CedorMlddleoCedor VollevElementoryOKenf-Kongley RoodO covlngtonElemenforyLokeHlgh SchoolKentloke OHlgh SchoÕl*,..u'n,,Loke*RldoewoodEÞñrentoryOFolrwoodElementqryMeridionryHorlzon OElêmenioryUoIcIsE 25óth sÎMlddle SchoolsE 208th st*O sunlseElemenforyGlenrldoeElemêntöryKentrldoeHlgh SchioolaMeodow RldoeaEl€menfory-oKent PhoenkAcodemyEmerold PorkElemenloryoÊÊ?å.",{t""IooSil]loElementoryDonlelOElemenforyuØoÊooaSDrlnobrookËlem-enlorys 2tãh sÎgNeelv O'Brl€nElementoryOPlpe LokeSE 272 nd SfLokeSowyer
V I Relocatable Classrooms
For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively
accuiate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan, The Plan
also references use of portables or relocatables as interim or transitional
capacity and facilities.
Currently, the District utilizes relocatables to house students in excess of
permanent capacity, for program purposes at some school locations, and some
for other purposes. (See Áppendrces A B C D)
Based on enrollment projections, implementation of 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.
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 schoolfacilities to meet
that demand,
3, To meet unique program requirements.
Relocatables currently in the District's inventory are continually evaluated
resulting in some being improved and some replaced. Quality concerns will be
among those addressed by review of capital facilities needs for the next bond
issue.
The Plan projects that the District will use relocatables to accommodate interim
housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of relocatables, their
impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the
interrelationship between relocatables, emerging technologies and educational
restructuring will continue to be examined.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2011 Page 18
V I I Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacity
As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study is periodically updated for
changes in special programs and reflects class size fluctuations, grade level
splits, etc. 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 Tables 5 & 5 A-B-c on pases 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 2010 was 25,621.48.
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 Repoft excludes Early Childhood Education ("ECE' preschool)
students and College-only Running Start students. ¡see raôles s asA-B-conpases z0-zs)
ln October there were 681 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. 329 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 has the highest
Running Stad program enrollment in the state.
Kent School District continues to be the fourth largest district in the state of
Washington. P-223 Headcount for October 2010 was 26,630 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 2010 totals 27,349
which includes ECE and college-only Running Start students.
Based on the enrollment forecasts, permanent facility 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 yeafs. (see Tabtø 5 and Tabtøs 5 A-B-c on Pages 20 - 23)
This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There
may be a need for additional relocatables and/or new schools to accommodate
grov'rth within the District. New schools may be designed to accommodate
placement of future relocatables. Boundary changes, limited and costly
movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational
restructuring wíll all play a major role in addressing overcrowding and
underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 201 1 Pege 19
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
Permanent m 1
Chanqes to Permanent Capacity I
Kent-Meridian HS - 2011-lzAdditions (F) 2
2 Classrooms added ât KM
Replacement school wlth projected increase in capacity:
Covington Elementary 3 (untund*¿)
To Replace ôuÍrênt Covlngton Elementary capåcity
New Elementary # 31 (actuat#2e) (Funded)
TOTAL DISTRICT
27,741 27,741 27,794 27,794 27,794 27,890 28,430
53
-504
600
600
SCHOOL YEAR 201G.2011 201',t-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 201 5-201 6 2418-2417
Actual PROJECTED
Permanent Subtotal 27,741 27,794 27,794 27,794 27,890 28,490 28,490
lnterim Relocatable Capacitv
Elementary Relo€tãble Capacity Required
M¡ddle School Relocåtâþle Capâclty Requhed 4 I 7
S€nior High Relocalable Capaoity Required
0
0
0
0
0
312
0
0
168
0
0
408240624528
0
0
0
0
0
0
Relocatable
r /6red 0 168 312 528 624 240 408
TOTAL CAPACITY 1 27,741 27.962 28,1 06 28.322 28.514 28.730 28,898
TOTAL FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION 5 25.621 26.359 26.562 26.781 26,998 27,210 27,441
DISÍRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 7 2.120 1,603 1,544 1,s41 1,516 1,520 1,457
r Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and ìs updated periodically to reflect program changes.
' Classroom additions are under construction at Kent-Meridian HS and expected to be ava¡läble for 2011-12 school year.
3 Replacement school for Covington Elementary will increase capacity and will be built on a different exisling site.
o ln F"ll 2004, 9th grade moved to the hígh schools which increased capacity available at Middle School 7th - 8th grade levels.
5 FTE = Full Time Equivalent EnrollmenUProject¡ons (i.e. 1/2 day K¡ndergarten studonl = .5 & Full Day Kindergarten student = 1.0 FTE).
6 2010-2011 total classroom relocatable capacity is 1,389.
7 School capacity meets concurrency requirements and no impact fees are proposed for middle schools.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 April 2011 Page 20
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
PROJECTËD ËNROLLMENT and CAPAGITY
SENIOR HIGH Grades g - 12
Senior High Permanent Gapacity 1 8,765 8,765 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818
lncludes Kent Phoenix Academy 2
toH School
Kent-Meridian HS - 201 1-12 Additions (F)
2 Classrooms added (@ s5% Utìtizalion)53
subtotal 8,765 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818 8,818
Relocatable C uired 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCHOOL YEAR 201A-2011 2u1-2A12 2012-2t13 2013-2014 2014-2015 201 5-201 6 2016-2017
Actual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 1 8,765 8,8 1 8 8,81 8 8,81 8 8,81 8 8,81 8 8,81 8
FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJÊCTIO¡,I 3 8.'t89 8,150 8.135 8,184 8.246 8.225 8,252
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 576 668 683 634 572 s93 566
NumberofRelocatablesRequired 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
No Classroom Relocatables required at this time, Some Relocatables used for classroom and program purposes.
1 Capacity is based on standard of seruice for programs provided and ¡s updated periodically to reflect program chänges.
2 Kent Phoenix Academy opened in Fall 2007 seruing grades I - 12 w¡th four special programs.
3 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or projections, excluding College-only Running Start students.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A April 2011 Page 21
Middle School Permanent Capacitv 1
Chanoes to Middle SchoolCaoacitv
a M¡ll Creek MS & Technology Academy
are open during Phase 2 of Renovation
(No new capacity added in renovation)
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4l5
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
MIDDLE SCHOOL Grades 7 - I
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 2010-201 1 201 1-201 2 2012-2013 201 3-20 14 201 4-201 5 2015-2016 2016-2017
Actual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 1&3 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,196 5,'196
FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJËCTION 2 4,243 4,284 4,359 4,293 4,257 4,280 4,310
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPAC]TY 1 953 916 837 903 939 916 886
NumberofRelocátablesRequired 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
No Classroom Relocatables required at middle schools at this time. Some Relocâtables used for classroom and program purposes.
1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes.
t FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projections
3 Surplus capacity due to grade level reconfiguration - All gth grade students moved to the high schools in Fall 2004.
o M¡ddle School capac¡ty meets concurrency requirements and no impact fees are collected for middle schools
Kent School Distr¡ct Six-Yêâr Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B April 201 1 Pagez2
Permanent
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY
ELEMENTARY - Grades K-6
13,364 13,780 13,780 13,780 13,780 13,876 '14,476
Kent Mountain View Academy ? 416
Chanqes to Elementary Capacitv
Replacement school wilh proiected increase in capacity:
Covington Elementary a
lunfunded¡
Will replacê current Covington Elementary capacity
600
-504
New Elementary # 3'1 {Funded)
5 600
subrotar 13,780 13,780 13,780 '13,780 13,876 14,476 14,476
Relocatable Capacity Required 1 0 168 312 528 624 240 408
SCHOOL YEAR 201 0-201 1 201 1-20r2 201 2-20 1 3 201 3-2014 2014-2015 201 5-201 6 2016-2017
Aclual PROJECTED
TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,780 13,948 14,092 14,308 14,500 14,716 14,884
FTE ENRoLLMENT1 PRoJEcroN 3 13,189 13,929 14,068 14,304 14,495 14,705 14,879
SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 591 19 24 4 5 11 5
NumberofRelocatables Required 0 7 13 22 26 10 17
26ClassroornRelocatablesrequiredin20l4-15. Someadditional Relocatablesusedforprograrnpurposes.
I Capacity ¡s based on standard of service for programs províded and is updated periodically to rellect program changes.
2 Kent Mountain ViewAcademy is a special program at the former Grandview School serving students in Grades 3 - '12.
The school building (formerly Kenl Learning Center & Grandview Elem.) was designed as an elementary school.
t FTE = Approximate Full Time Ëquivalent Enrollment or Projeclions (Kindergarten @ 1.0 & excluding ËCH)
ALL Elementary Schools w¡ll havo FULL Day Kindorgarten starting in 2011-12.
ln Fall 2011, Klndergarten projectlon changes to 1.0 FTE for Full Day Klnclergarten programs at ALL 28 Elementary Schools.
a Replacement school for Çovington Elementary will increase capacity and is planned for a different existing site.
s Site selection and construction timing for Elementary #31 is pending review of location and capacity needs.
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 C April 2011 Page 23
VIII FinancePlan
The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to
finance improvements for the years 2011 - 2012 through 2016 - 2017, 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 Managernent 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 coíncided with moving I'n grade students from junior high to senior high
schools in September 2004. The District received some State Funding Assistance
(formerly known äs "state matching funds") and has utilized impact fees for the senior
high additions.
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 new Elementary School #31 (actual #29) to accommodate growth. The
new Panther Lake Elementary School replaced the previous Panther Lake Elementary
in Fall of 2009.
The bond issue also funded Phase II of the renovation for Mill Creek Middle School and
renovation of Sequoia Middle School for reconfîguration as a non-traditional high school,
Kent Phoenix Academy, which opened in Septernber 2007.
2006 construction funding approval also provided for additional classrooms at Kentlake
High School and two projects at Kent-Meridian High School. The projects at Kent-
Meridian High School provide additional capacity with several new classrooms and
gymnasium space. The first project at K-M was completed and the second is currently
under construction. Some impact fees have been or will be utilized only for the new
construction that will increase capacity.
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 2015, dependent on enrollment levels. Although the school is identified as
"Elementary School#31" it will actually be the 291h elementary school in the distríct.
The Finance Plan includes a few new relocatables to provide additional capacity and
some rnay be funded from impact fees.
Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the elementary level
and unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future and reported in annual
updates of the Capital Facilities Plan,
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.
Kent School Dislr¡ct Six-Year Capital Facil¡ties Plan April 201 1 Page 24
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4l5SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLANEstimatedEstimated$1,500,000$l,500,000 s400,000$1,100,000$31,840,000$31,840,000$33,400,000$5,000,000$26,745,600$5,094,400$r0,460,000$5,000,000$33,400,000$16,000,000 $6,940,000$5,000,000$255,000 $264,000s277,O002 rolocatables$796,000$796,0002 relocetâbles 2 relocatables$255,000 $1,764,000 $277,000 $36,840,000 $33,400,000 $0$72,536,000$16,400,000 $33,685,600 $22,450,4OO'F=Funded U=UnfundedNOTES:1 Based on est¡mates of actual or future construct¡on costs from Facilities Department. (See Page 25 lor Cost Basis Summary)2 The District ant¡c¡pates receíving some State Funding Construction Assistance (fomerly known as "match¡ng funds") for these projects.3 Facility needs are pending revíeur¡. Some of these projects may be funded with impact fees.o Cost of Relocatables based on cunent cost and a-djusted for inflation for future years.5 Fees in this column are based on amount of fees collected to date and eslimated fees on future units.FFUPERMANENT FACILITIESKent-Meridian High SchoolClassroom Addit¡on" I - 2No Míddle School Projects at this timeCov¡ngton Elementary Replacement 1Elementary#31 1-2-3Êlemenlary Site 3TEMPORARY FACILITIESAcld¡tional Relocatables 3 - aOTHERN/ATotalsKent School D¡str¡ct Slx-Year Capital Facll¡l¡es PlanTable 6April 20llPage 25
V I I I Finance Plan - Gost Basis Summary
For impact fee calculatíons, construction costs are based on cost of the last
elementary school, adjusted for inflation, and projected cost of the next
elementary school,
Elementary School Cost Projected Cost
Millennium Elementary #30
Opened in 2000 $12,182,768
Cost of Panther Lake Elementary
Replacement (Opened in Fall 2009)$26,700,000
Projected cost - Covington Ëlementary
Replacement (Projected to open in 2014)$31,840,000
Projected cost of Elementary #31 in 2015 $33,400,000
Average cost of Covington Elementary
Replacement & Elementary #31 $32,620,000
Construction cost of high school addition:
Senior High School Additions Projected Çost Total
Kent-Meridian HS - 2011-12 Addition #2
Classroom Additions only
$1,500,000
Construction cost of new HS capacity $1,500,000
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 Adjustment
The impact fee calculations on pages 29 and 30 include a "District Adjustment"
to reduce the fees calculated by the impact fee formulas. Based on current
economic conditions, the District has adjusted the impact fees to keep the same
rates as those currently in place and made no adjustment for increase in the
Consumer Price lndex.
Kent School D¡slrict S¡x-Year Capital Fac¡l¡t¡es Plen April 2011 Page 26
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415Site Acquisitions & GostsAverage of Sites Purchased or Built on within last 15 YearsTotâl Averâqe Cost / AcreAvg cosVacreCostAcreageLocationYear Open /PurchasedSchool / Siteto 1996Type &# on MapNote: All rural sites were purchased prior to adopt¡on of Urban Growth Area.17Numbersonto locations on Site Bank &Elementary13 / Urban5 / UrbanPanther Lake Elementary Replacement SÍteElementary Site (Halleson & Wikstrom)K-M High School Addition (Kent6 & Brittsmith)Kentlake Hþh School (Kombot Monis)Kentwood Sr Hi Addition (sandhu)10200 SE 216 St, Kent 9803115435 SE 256 St, Covington 98042Elementary Site Subtotal$4,485,013s1.093.91019.40 $5,578,9232goa2004I 996204219999.4010.0024.421.2339.366.3140.003.83$3,310,000$537,s34s302.117$477,129$r09,391$26,828$686,883$49,1EE$524,564$13,43E$78,882Middle ScfroolU¡ban Northwood Middle School10 / Urban Mill Creek MS (Kent JH) / Mcntillan St. assembtãge121U(Mn So Central Site - Unincorp KC (Plemmons, Yeh, Wms)17007 SE 184 St, Renton 98058411-432 McMillan St, Kent 98032E ot 124 SE btw 286-288 Pl (UKC)Middle Schod Site Subtotal$655,138$844,866$1.936.02065.01 $3,436,024$287,573Elem site average$52,es4Mlddle Schl S¡te Avs.Senior High11 I UrbanSenior Highô / Urban2002 & 2003 10002 SE 255th Sheet1997 21401 SE 300 Sl Kent 980421998 16807 SE 256th SreetSenior High Site Subtotal 50.14 $4,149,651s82,761Sr H¡ S¡t€Total Average Coàt/ Acres97,842Total Acreage & Cost134.s5 $13,164,5981 / Rural4 / Urban3 / Rural7 / RuralI / Rural2 / Urban9 i UrbanSo. King County Activity Center (Nike site) purchased prior to 1996.Site-Coving,tonareaNorth (SoofMattsonMS) 1984Site - Ham Lake east (Pollard) 1992Site - South of Covington (Scarsella) 1993Site - SE of Lake Morton area (Wêst) 1993Site - Shady Lake (Sowers-Blaine-Drahota-Paroline) 1995Old Kent Elementary replaced and cunently leased out.Kent School Distric{ Six-Year Capital Facilities PlanTable 7Apnl2011 Pæe 27
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IIIIPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Student Generation Factors - Slngle Family
x Elementary (Grades K - 6) 0.486
x Middle School (Grades 7 - 8) 0.130
Stude¡t Generation Factors - Multi-Family
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Total
OSPI - Square Footage per Student
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
Special Education
90
General Obligation Bond lnterest Râte
Current Bond lnterest Rate
0,331
0.067
o.124x Senior High (Grades I - 12)
x Total
Projected lncreased Student Gapacity
x Elementary
x Middle School
x Senior High Addition
Required Site Acreage per Facillty
x Elementary (required)
x Middle School (required)
x Senior High (required)
New Facility Gonstruction Cost
x Elementary *
x Middle School
x Senior High *
'See cost basis on Pg. 26
Temporary Facility Square Footage
x Elementary
x Middle School
x Senior High
x Total 30/,
Permanent Facility Square Footagê
x Elementary (lncludes KMVA)
x Middle School
x Senior High
x Total 97%
Total Facilities Square Footage
x Elementary
x Middle School
x Senior High
x Total
Average Site Cost / Acre
Elementary
Middle School
Senior High
$287,573
$0
$o
Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost
Elementary @ 24 $127,500
Middle School @ 29
Senior High @ 31
$0
$0
$tate Funding Assistance Gredit (rormerry,srste rrar*ì)
District Funding Assistance Percenlage 56.65%
Constructlon Gost Allowance CCA - Gosr/Sq. FL
Area Cost Allowanæ (Effective July 09) $180, 1 7
District Average Assessed Value
Single Family Residence $268,279
District Average Assessed Value
Multi-Family Residence
Apartments 7 1o/o Condos 29o/o
$99,888
Capital Levy Tax Rate/$1,000
Cunent / $1,000 Tax Rate (1.7236)$1.84
0.250
0.866
600
900
53
11
21
32
s32.620,000
$o
$1,500,000
74,992
16,376
22,064
109,332
1,470,543
667 829
111 036
3,249,408
1,541,435
667,82s
133 100
__9Éggq1
0.522
117
130
144
1
1
Developer Provided Sites / Facilities
Value
Dwelling Units
0
4.910/o
Kent Sd¡ool D¡slricr Six-Yeâr Capital Fâcil¡lies Plån
0
April 2011 Page 28
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
¡MPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENGE
Site Acqulsitlon Cost per Single Family Residence
Formula: ((Acres x x Student Generation Factor
A 1 (Elementary)
A 2 (Middle School)
A 3 (Senior High)
B 1 (Elementary)
B 2 (Middle School)
B 3 (Senior High)
Formula: ((Fâcility Cost /
D I (Elementary)
D 2 (Middle School)
D 3 (Senior High)
11
21
32
$287,573
$0
$0
600
1,065
1,000
0.486
0.1 30
0.250
0.866
/ Total uare
0.5665
0
0.5665
0.486
0.130
0,250
0.866A+
$2,562.28
$0
$o
Pormanent Facility Const¡uction Cost per Single Family Resldence
Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facil
0,97
0.s7
0.97
B
0.03
0.03
0.03 c+
$2,562.28
$25,629,53
$0
$6,863.21E) $2,492.74
x Student X
Constiuction Cost Facilitv Caoacitv Stud6nt Fector Footaqe Retio
$32,620,000
$0
$f ,500,000
$180.17
$1 80.1 7
$180.17
0.486
0.1 30
0.250
DË)
600
900
53
Temporary Facllity Gost per Single Family Residence
x Student I EIII
Facility Cost Facility Capacity Sludenl Fãctor Footage Ral¡o
x
C 1 (Elementary) $127,500 24 0.486
C 2 (Middle School) $0 29 0.130
C 3 (Senior High) $0 31 0.250
0.866-
State Fundlng Assistance Cred¡t per Single Family Res¡dence (formerly "State Match")
Fomula: Area Cosl Allowance x SPI Feet student x
$77.46
$0
$0
90
117
130
Assistance % x StudentFactor
977.46
$4,464.38
$0
$3,317.15
$7,781,s4
ïC + $3,838.62
0
Tax Credit per S¡ngle Famlly Residence
Average SF Residential Assessed Value
Current Capital Levy Rate / $1 ,000
Current Bond Interest Rate
Years Amortized (10 Years)
Developer Provided Facility Credit
Fee Recap
A = Site Acqu¡sition per SF Residence
B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence
C = Têmporåry Facility Cost per Residence
Subtotal
D = State Match Credit per Residence
TC = Tax Credit per Residence
Subtotal
+FC0
$268,279
s1.84
4.91%
10
$35,1 32.47
$11,620.15
$2,562.28
$32,492.74
$77,46
$7,781.54
$3,838.62
Total Unfunijed Neêd
50% Developer Fee Obligation
FC = Facility Credit (¡f appl¡câble)
District Ad¡ustmenl (See Page 26 for explanalion)
Net Fee Obligation per Residence - Slngle Family
$11,756
S¡le Site CosvAcre Sludent
Area Cost Allowance Ft. / StudentsPt Student Factor
Facilitv / Site Value Units
Kent School Districl Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
$23,512.32
April 20|1 Pâge 29
KENT SGHOOL DISTRICT
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE
S¡të Acquisitlon Cost per Multl-Famlly Resldence Unlt
IF x Student Generation Factor
Reouired Sile Acreaoe AveregB Site CosuAcre Fec¡lity CapaciV Student Fãctor
Formula: ((Acres x Cost
A 1 (Elementary)
A 2 (Middle School)
A 3 (Senior High)
Permanent Facility Constructlon Cost per Multl-Family Residence Unit
Formula: ((Facility Cost /x Student x rmanent / Total
11
21
32
$287 11
$0
s0
094.$2573
600
900
53
500
1,065
1,000
0.331
0.067
0.1?4
0.622
I Total
0.331
0.0ô7
0.124
0.522
0.5665
0.5665
0.331
0.067
0.124
0.522
A4
$0
$0
B 1 (Elementary)
B 2 (Middle School)
B 3 (Senior High)
O 1 (Elementary)
Þ 2 (Middle School)
D 3 (Senior High)
$32,620,000
$0
$1,500,000
0.97
0.97
097 B+
0.03
0.03
0.03
CE)
0.331
0.067
0.124D+
$2,094.11
$17,455.51
$0
15
$20,859.66
Temporary Facility Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit
Formula: ((Facility Cost / Fa c
C 1 (Elementary)
C 2 (Middle School)
C 3 (Senior High)
x Student
Facility Cost Facility Capacitv Student Factor Foolaqe Ratio
x
$127,500
$0
$0
24
29
31
$52.75
$0
$0
State Funding Asslstance Credit per Multi.Family Residence (formerly "Stâte Metch")
Formula: Area Çost Allowance x SPI Feet studênt x Fundi Assistance % x StudentFactor
$52,7s
$3,040,56
$0
$1,645.31
$4,685.86
90
117
130
$2,094.11
$20,859.66
$52.75
$4,685.86
$1,429,23
Total Unfunded Need
50% Developer Feo Obligation
FC = Fecility Credit (if applicable)
District Adjustment (See Page 26 foi.explanstion)
Net Fee Obligation per Residential Unit - Multi-family
TC Ei $1,429.23
FC+0
$8,¡146
$180.1 7
$180,17
$180 17
0
Tax Credit per Multi-Famlly Resldence Unit
Average MF Residential Assessed Value
Current Capital Levy Rate / $1,000
Current Bond lnterest Rate
Years Amortized (r0 Yeaß)
Developer Províded Facflity Credit
Fee Recap
A = Site Acquisition per Multi-Family Unit
B = Permânent Facility Cost per MF Unit
c = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit
Subtotal
D = State Match Credit per MF Unit
TC = Tax Credit p€r MF Unit
Subtotal
$9S,888
$1.84
4.9t%
10
0 0
$23,006.52
$6,115.09
0
Construclion Cost Student Faclor Ratio
Area CostAllowânce sPt Ft. I Student %Student Factor
Facility / Site Value Units
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan
$16,8S1.42
April 20f 1 Pâge 30
IX Summary of Changes to April 2010 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 2010 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 flood emergency in the Kent Valley.
Future projects include potential replacement and expansion of Covington Elementary
School, future new Elementary School#31 (actual#29), and one project that increases
capacity at Kent-Meridian High Schoolto accommodate new growth.
Changes to capacity continue to reflect fluctuations in class size as well 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 at all
Elementary schools in 2011-12.
The district expects to receive some State Funding Assistance (formerly called "state
matching funds") for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually.
Biennial update of student generation rates was completed last year. Unfunded site and
facility needs will be reviewed in the future.
Based on current economic conditions, the District Adjustment results in no change to
the current impact fees.
Changes to lmpact Fee Calculation Factors include
ITEM Grade/Type FROM TO Comments
Student Generation Factor
Single Family (SF)
Student Generation Factor
Multi-Family (MF)
State Funding Assistance Ratios ('stata¡¡atc¡')
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
Elem
MS
SH
Total
Elem
MS
SH
Totel
0.445
0.118
o.245
0.486
0.1 30
0.250
Biennial Updâte ¡n 2010
+ .58
Biennial Update in 2010
+ .40
Per OSPI Website
Per OSPI Website
Per Puget Sound ESD
Per Puget Sound ESD
Per King Co. Assessor Report
Market Rate
No Change to fee
No Change lo fee
0.808
0.296
0.075
0.111
0.866
0.331
0.067
0.124
SF
MF
0.482
56.06%
$174.26
ï277,',129
$1 09,1 2s
$1,72
4-33ô/o
$s,486
$3,378
0.522
56.65%
$1 80.17
$268,279
$99,888
$1.84
4.91o/o
$5,486
$3,378
SF
MF
Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facil¡ties Plan April 2011 Page 31
x
Appendixes
Appendix A: Calculations of Gapacities for Elementary Schools
Appendix B: Calculations of Capacities for Middle Schools
Appendix C: Calculations of Capacities for Senior High Schools
Appendix D: Use of Relocatables
Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey
Kênt School District Six-Year Capital Fe6ilit¡es Plen April 201 1 Page 32
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4I5STANDARD Of SERVICE . PROGRAi,I CAPACITY . INVENTORY of RELOGATABLES . FTE and HEADCOUNT ENROLLII,IENTCaniage Crest CCCedar Valfey CV/eCov¡ngton COieCrestwood CWEest H¡ll EHEmerald Park EPFain¡rcod FwlêGeorge T. Daniel Elem DEGlenridge GRGrass Lake GL/hHorizon HEJenklns Creek JCKent Elem. KE/ehLakeYoungs LY/trMart¡n Sortun MSMeadow Ridge MR/eMeídian Elementary ME/hMillenniumElementary MLÀ¡eely-O'Brien NOPanthe¡ Lake (New) PLPark Orchard POPine Tree PÍlhRidgewood RW/hSawyerwoods SWScen¡c H¡ll SHSoos Creek SC/eSpringbrook SBSunrise sR/hKent tútn. ViewA€dfly MV18182019't821171819182115172119't72'l20l61518212121't7171721144324324804564325044084324564325043ô04085044584085044803843604325045045044084084085043564524565044564765044084564564525ø4U4765104AO476524504452552486528504504476408452504416TTHHTK0005652723544276736335374126452320242404400240200446820246820246836542468044o60432.14303.50439.50454.00475.08457.52413.72406.12489.s0406.5S465.50296.00555.(A441.89517.05520.10553.02487.45609.54531.5044s.03510.23525.48457.O4581_00328.50437.50512.0098.1246233246949351753044940752042250132355546s56052158552667057544654156148?58135347851'l99TARHTARTARAHARAARARKTHATART1 Elementary classroo{n capacity is based on averâge ol 24: 18-221n K-3, 23 ¡n Grade 4 & 29 in Grades 5€. lndudes adjustments frr class size reduction or Pþgram changes.2 Kent School District Standard of Serv¡ce rese¡ves some rooms for pull-out prograÍìs. ¡e. 20 Total = 17 Standard + I Computer Lab + I Mus¡c + I lntegrated Program classroom.3 Elementary schools have l00% spacê ut¡lization rate.4 Elementary FTE reports Kind @.5 FDK@ 1.0 -P22g Headcountreports Kindergarten @ 1.0. Excludes ECE preschoolers.t FDK = Full Day Kindergarten T = Tuit¡on-based AR = ARRA Title I Funded Schoolwide K = l(Al Title I Funded A = State Apporlionmenl Funded H = Half Day Kindergarten only189.17 11214323121332010305423103323000013000000120'l42050002030000000000000007224480249ô481200004824725762458TOTAL 3780535't22 naFoK510n12010P223 HdcountEn¡ollment1011t2010P22gF1E4Enrolln¡entRelocstablcCapacity4 24 avcr4c 1ClassroornUseRalffilabþsProgrâmUseRBlocatables201 0-20r rProgramCapacity 22 SpecialPrograrnCapaciV'sE I tPELLCRStd/High CapCapacitya124 avøagelNumber ofStd or H¡gh CapClassroomsABRKSDELEMENTARYscHooL.5 r 1.00EcË&Ko-ÊCE&ht.oKKent School District Six-Year Cap¡tal Facilities PlanAPPENDIX AApnl 20'11 Page 33
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4l5STANDARD of SERVICE - PROGRAM CAPACITY - INVENTORY of RELOCATABLES - FTE and HEADGOUI{T ENROLLMENTKSDMIDDLEscHooL#ofStandârdAE/lPELLClsSpsc¡al EdELLSpecPrgmSpecial 1Program2010-2011ProgramCapaaty2ProgramUseRelocatablesClagsroomUseRdætablesR€lGtable1U1nO1010t1no10ABREtdC+acity 2CapacityP223FfE3Headcount 3Clsrmsat25-2929EnrollmentEnrollment710.796,16.68633.21656.60854.00654.2488.00712ô48634657854655884.243.52 4.24804030o2145005145582o7Iu8Middle School TOTAL17833 372 21494Cedar Heights M¡ddle School CH 32 782 I 93 2Mâttson Middle School MA 24 585 6 59 7Meeker Middle School MK 33 807 4 59 1Meridian Middle School MJ 26 631 5 04 4Mill Creek M¡ddle School MC 30 729 5 51 2Northwood Middle School NW 33 807 4 46 sKent Mountain ViewAcademy (Grades 3 - 12) Middle School Grade 7 - 6 Enrottment48160249548119s23793890790828972See ElemAPPEND¡X BKSDSENIOR HIGHscHooL#ofStanderdCapac¡tyal25-31SE/ IPELLClsSpocial EdELLSpecPrgmClsrmsSpecial 1Program2010-2011. Progr.amProgramClassroomUseReloætab¡esRelocatableCapacityat31 ea.10t1t201010t1t2010stdUseP223 F1E3HeadcountCfsrms2RelocatablesEnrollment1,928.341,686.722,141.851,966.60153.88301.4010.00r,9831,7352,1872.031159315108,188.79 8,420Excludes Runníng Start &Eady Ch¡ldhood Ed students26.63025 621.4A3005624318662124938154651,3894873SeniorTOTAL24536 429 59 176527,7411,888801.579'19123.543958DISTRICT TOTALKent-Meridian Senior High KM 53 1,376 I 110 12 286Kentlake Senior High KL 58 '1,508 12 145 14 333Kentridge Senior High KR 69 1,766 11 123 16 381Kentwood Senior High KW 65 1,652 5 5'1 17 394Kent Mountain View Academy (Grades 3 - 12) Senior High Grade 9 - 12 EnrollmentKent Phoen¡x Academy PH Non-trad¡tional High SchoolRegional Justice Center a RJ N/AAPPENDIX C1,85'l2,1572,2742,137See Elem350N/A1 Special Program capac¡ty includes classrooms requ¡r¡ng spec¡alized use such as Spec¡al Education, Career & Technical Education Programs, Computer Labs, etc.2 Secondary schooi capacity is adjusted for 850/0 ut¡lizat¡on rate. gth grade moved to HS in 2004. Revised Fac¡lity Use Study is in progress for 201 1-12.3 Enrollment is reported on FTE & Headcount basis. P223 Headoount excludes ECE & College.onJy Running Start studenb. Full headcount including ECE & RS = 27,349,Some totals may be slighdy different due to rounding.a '19 Juveniles served at King County Reg¡onal Justice Center are reported separately for lnstitutional Funding on FormE-672. Total RJ count in October 2010 is 29.Kent School Disfict Six-Year Capital Fac¡l¡ties Ptan TOtal Of AppendiCes A B & C Apîil 2011 Pege 34
KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.4I5USE of RELOCATABLESI Use of additional relocatables for classrooms or spec¡al programs ¡s based on need and tluctuat¡ons of enrollment at each school.' Frll D"y Kindergarten will increese the need for relocatables at the elementáry level unlil permãnent capacity cân be provided.3 God" Leve¡ Reconf¡guralion - ln 2004, gth grade students moved to high schools creating suffident permanent capacity at mildle schools.4 Although relocatables are utilized for a wide variety of purposes, new construc-tion and boundary adjuslrnents are l¡med to m¡n¡m¡ze the requiæment for relocaiables.2010-20112011-20122012-20132013-20142011-20152015-20182016-2017StudentCaDacíR48734873487348 48 4A73 73 73312 22 528 26 624 l04A73170700t68l3244¡t08000000000000000000o000000121121121121121121121007t68t331222528266241026174APlan for Allocat¡on of Requ¡red Classroom Relocatable Facilities included in Finance Plan:Elementary 1t2 o z ßMíddfeSchool 3 o o oSeniorHigh o o o o2226loo01700000Tolal07t322261017No. ofRslo€lablesStrd€rìtCaæcitvNo. ofRelocatablesStudenlCaoacitvNo" ofRelocatablesStr¡dentCaoacítvNo. ofRebcafablesSü¡dènlCaDacitvNo. ofRelocalablesStudentCaÞac¡fuStudentNo. ofRelocâtablesNo- ofRelocâtablesSchool YearRelocatable Use 1Relocatables for classroom useRelocatables for program use(¡e. Computer labs, music, etc.)Elementary Capac¡ty Required @ 24 2M¡ldle School Capacity Required @ 29 3Senior High Capacity Reguired @ 3l# of Relocatables Utilized 4Classroom Relocatabl€/Capacity RequiredKent School D¡sh¡ct S¡x-Year Capital Facilities PlanAPPENDIX DApril 2011Page 35
Student Generation FactorHS0.9501.4620.33f0.8950.8620.95'l1.0870.4431.0091.0000.4591.O540.5450.8900.7u0.8700.5750.6920.2530.5320.5770.4880.6690.3430.s260.6250.2430.496o.29'l0.3900.5330.4810"1280.3080.0400.1170.1460.2200.1340.0290.1 980.1250.1 08o.1570.0670.1630.1080.143o.247o.4620.0610.2460.1 38o.244o.2830.o710.2830.2s00.1 0Eo.402o.'1870.3370.144o.2470.866 0.486 0.130 0.250Student Generatíon FactorHS0.3700.6520.8400.3401.7060.2190.378o.4410.6850.2E40.215o.M40.5430.227L0980.1350.1620.3130.4620.0800.0350.0970.1480.0360.2160.0100.0680.0520.0720.0680.1200.1110.1480.0770.3920.0730.1490.07€0.l5'r0.1360-522 0.331 0.067 0.124MSMSElemElemTotalTotalStudentsHS2081935153112391383110't321737073'153',l31134126284420t9ô17214455I281822546642t8t036530841412558?4389259175208524562017439678974505StudentsHS7413568bb872156ô2172254392444456l324661r6772012711110111862423121520722163812189MS2G4IMS103Elem983Elem505Total1,752Total797TotalUnits2191399171r3041127701063237351134172r671542,023TotalUn¡ts2AO2478t1945l96148211251E81,527ElernentaryAr-eaCrest - Pârk V¡ew - SouthridgeHESCMSSRSRMLSWHEcwGRMLcoCWRWCWMeadows - KentFern Crest East - KentFern Crest West - KentHighland & Rhododendron EstatesHighlandsRidgeNorth Parke Meadows & Parke Meadows SouthMeadowsMeadow/ The Reserve / Stonef¡eld / Croñon HillsRidgePerks - Fairwood/R€nlonPark - RentonWood Creek - CovingtonTotalElemênteryAreaApartments - CovingtoncoEHSHSHccNOSBPLGRApertmênts - KentApartments - KentFainvood Pond Apartments - RentonPark Place Apartments - KentRed Mill et Fâirwood - RenlonR¡vervi6/v- The Parks - KentRock Creek Landing - KentSprings Apartments - Kentat Benson Condos - KentTotâlSingle Family DevelopmentsMulti-Family DevelopmentsEdulog*,ll91gt3953S9&4'to22443138¡t422139781n17941ô117Edulog*41E1561,lti414'147337102413192KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415Student Generation Factor SurveyKent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities PlanAPPENDIX EApril 2o'l.1 Pege 36
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGN IFICANCE
for
Kent School District No. 415
2011 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 2011 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 2011 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the
King County Gomprehensive Plan.
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent to include the
Kent School Ðistrict's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element
of the Gomprehensive Plans of the City of Kent.
4. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Covington to include
the Kent School District's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan
Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Covington.
5. The amendmeni of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Auburn to include the
Kent School District's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of ihe City of Auburn.
6. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton to include the
Kent School District's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element
of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Renton.
7. This proposal may also involve amendment of Comprehensive Plans of the
Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and/or SeaTac to incorporate the Kent School District
201 1 Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities element of that jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan,
Proponent: Kent School District No.415
Location of the Proposal
The Kent School District includes an area of approximately 72 square miles. The City of
Covington and portions of the cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple Valley,
and SeaTac fall within the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County.
Lead Agency:
Kent School District No. 415 is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926.
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not pose a
probable significant adverse impact to the environment. An environmental impact statement
(ElS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2) (c). This decision was made after a review of
the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This
information is available to the public upon request.
This Ðeterrnination 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 þe
submitted by 4:00 p.m., June 21,2011. The responsible official wíll reconsider the DNS based
on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely,
withdraw the DNS. lf the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment
deadline.
Responsible Official:
Richard A. Stedry,
ief Business Officer for
Kent School District No. 415
Telephone (253) 373-7295
Address:12033 SE 256th Street #A-600
Kent, Washington 98030-6643
Appeals of this determination are govemed by Board Policy No. 9280 which can be obtained
from Dr. Richard A. Stedry, Chíef Business Officer, Kent School District No. 415,
12033 SE 256th Street #A-600, Kent, Washington 98030-6643 and pursuant to WAC 197-11-
680 and RCW 43.21C.075.
Date of lssue June7,2011
June 8, 201 1Date Published
ENVIRONMENTAL C HECKLIST
WAC 1 97-1 1-960 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 statemenl (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 checklíst 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 questíons from your own observations or
project plans without the need to hire experts. lf you really do not know the answer, or if a
question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete
answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and
landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. lf you have problems, the
governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them
over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will
help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this
checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably
related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete thís checklíst for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be
answered "does not apply". ln addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonprojeci
aciions (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant,"
and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "prepares," and "affected geographic area,"
respectively
L
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
The adoption of a six-year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District,
The Comprehensive Plans of King County, City of Kent, City of Covington, City of
Renton, City of Auburn and possibly Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond and SeaTac
have been and/or will be amended to include the Kent School District 2011 Capital
Facifities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element of each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan, A copy of the District's Plan is available for review in the District
Finance & Planning Depadment.
2. Name of applicant:
Kent School District No.415
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person
Kent School District No. 415
12033 SE 256th Street # A-600
Kent, WA 98030-6643
Contact Person: Dr. Richard A. Stedry, Chief Business Officer
Telephone: (253) 37 3-7 295
4. Ðate checklist prepared: May 27,2011
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Kent School District No. 415
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable)
The 2011 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted in June,
2011 and forwarded to King Gounty, Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton, Maple
Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac for possible inclusion in each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually. Site-specific
projects have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related
to or connected with this proposal? lf yes, explain.
The Capital Facilities Plan reviews classroom additions to one existing high school and
proposes construction of a new elementary school and a replacement of Covington
Elementary School.
a
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The above-referenced projects will undergo environmental review at the time of formal
proposal.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal?
10.
known
lf yes, explain.
No.
List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
King County and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn will review and approve the
Capital Facilities Plan for the purposes of impact fee ordinances and will need to adopt
the Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive
Plans of King County and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn. Cities of Maple
Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac may also review and approve the Plan for the
purposes of any school impact fee ordinances and may adopt the Plan as an
arnendment to the Capital Facilities element of their Comprehensive Plans.
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses
and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist
that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat
those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional
specifiç information on project description.)
This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Kent School
District 2011 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the facilities needs of the
District and for inclusion in the Capital Facilities Plan element and possible amendment
of the Comprehensive Plans for King County, City of Covington, City of Kent, City of
Renton, City of Auburn, City of SeaTac, City of Maple Valley and City of Black Diarnond.
A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the Kent School District Business
Services Department office.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand
the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and
section, township, and range, if known. lf a proposalwould occur over a range of area,
provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit
any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed
plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
The 2011 Capital Facilities PIan will affect the Kent School District. The District includes
an area of approximately 70 square miles. The City of Covington, and portions of the
Cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, SeaTac and parts of
unincorporated King County fallwithin the District's boundaries.
3
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Eadh
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
The Kent School Districi is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and
gradients, including all of those listed, Specific topographic characteristics will be
identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Specific slope characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit process
for each capital project.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? lf you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them
and note any prime farmland.
Specific soil types will be identified during the planning and permit process for each
capital project.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? lf so, describe.
Unstable soils may exist within the Kent School District. Specific soil limitations on
individual project sites will be identified at the time of environmental review.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. lndicate source of fill.
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subjeci to project-
specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. Proposed
grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of fill materials
will be identified as appropriate to each project.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? lf so, generally
describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of construction projects currenily
proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. lndividual projects and their erosion impacts
will be evaluated on a site-specific basis. lndividual projects will be subject to
environmental review and local approval on the time of proposal.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces afier
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)
Percentage of impervious cover will vary with each capital facilities project and will be
addressed during project-specific environmental review.
4
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
any
Erosion potential on individual project sites will be addressed during project-specific
environmental revíew. 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, industrialwood smoke) during construction and when the project
is completed? lf any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from individual projects.
Air-quality impacts will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? lf so, generally describe.
Off-site sources and necessary mitigation will be addressed during project-specific
environmental review.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any
Plans for individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
subject to environmental review and relevant local approval processes, including
obtaining of any necessary air quality permits, at the time individual projects are
formally proposed. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
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 Kent School District. The
surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and
incorporated in the design of each individual project.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet)
the described waters? lf yes, please describe and attach available plans.
Some projects may require work near these -described waters. lndividual
projects in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental review and
local approval requirements at the time the project is formally proposed.
5
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected. lndicate the source of fill material.
lnformation with respect to placement or removal of fill or dredge material will be
addressed at the time of project-specific environmental review. Applicable local
regulations have been or will be satisfied.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Any surface water withdrawals or diversions have been or will be addressed
d uri ng project-specific environ mental review.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? lf so, note location on
the site plan.
Each capitalfacilities project, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to
meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface
waters? lf so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
Specific information regarding discharges of waste materials, if any, will be
addressed during project-specific environmental review. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground
water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact ground
water resources. Each project will be evaluated during project-specific
environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
2l 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 anímals or hurnans the system(s) are
expected to serve.
lmpacts of discharged waste material, if any, have been or will be addressed
during site-specífic, project-level environmental review.
6
c. Water Runoff (including storm water)
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this
water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? lf so, describe.
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying storm
water runoff consequences. Each project will be subject to environmental review
and applicable local regulations.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? lf so, generally
describe.
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will have varying
environmental impacts and will be subject to appropriate review and local
regulations prior to construction. lnformation regarding waste materials will be
presented at the time of such review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for
Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, 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:
Check or circie 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 graìn
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 environrnental
review.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
lmpacts on vegetation will be determined at the time of project-specific environrnental
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 will be
determined at the time of project proposal and will be addressed during site-specific,
project-level environmental review.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetatíon on the site, if any:
lndividual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to
environmental review and local approval at the time of project proposal.
5. Animals.
a- Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or
are known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of specíes observed on or near sites has been or will be developed
d u rin g project-specific environm ental review.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Specific impacts to these species from individual projects will be determined at the
time of project proposal and will be reviewed in cooperation with the affected
jurisdictions.
ls the site part of a migration route? lf so, explain.c
lmpacts on migration routes, if any, will be addressed during site-specific, projech
level environmental review.'
8
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be
determined at the time of site-specific, project-level environmental review.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to
meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for
heating, manufacturing, etc.
The State Board of Education requires a life-cycle cost analysis of all heating,
lighting, and insulating systems prior to allowing specific projects to proceed. Energy
needs will be decided at the time of specific engineering and site design planning.
Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
propefties? 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. EnvironmenialHealth:
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)
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 wÍll be subject to environmental
review and local approval at the time of formal submittal.
9
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for
example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises exist within the Kent School District. Specific noise sources
have been or will be identified duríng project-specific environmental review.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with
the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? lndicate what hours noise would come from the
site.
Normal construction noises would exist on a short-term basis during school
construction. There could be an increase in traffic or operations-related noise
which would be addressed during project specific environmental review. Please
see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Project noise impacts have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during the
project-specific environmental review. Each project is or will be subject to
applicable local regulations.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Kent School District, including residential,
commercial, industrial, iñstitutional, utility, agricultural, forestry, open space,
recreational, etc.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? lf so, describe
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-specif i c environme ntal review when appropriate.
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
There are a variety of zoning classifications within the Kent School District. Site
specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project-specific
environmental review.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
An inventory of comprehensive plan designations has been or will be completed
d u ri n g p roject-specific environmental 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
projectspecific environmental review.
h, Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area?
lf so, specify.
Environmentally sensitive areas, if any, will be identified during project-specific
environmental review,
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
This information has been or will be provided at the tirne of project-specific
environmental review,
j. Approximately how many people would the completed projeci displace?
It is not anticipated that proposed projects willdisplace any people. Displacement of
people, if any, will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
lndívidual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-
specific environmental reviêw and local approval at the time the project is formally
proposed.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible wíth existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have
been or will be assessed as pad of the comprehensive planning process and during
project-specific environmental review.
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
t-1
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 has been or would be evaluated
d u ri n g project-s pecif ic envi ronmental review proced u res.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts have been or will be addressed
d u ri n g site-specifi c, project-level environ mental review.
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas;
what is the principal exterior building rnaterial(s) proposed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific, project-
level environmental review.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific, project-
level environmental review.
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 environmental review.
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific
environmental review.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific
environmental review.
c.What existing off-síte sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Off-site sources of light or glare have been or will be evaluated at the time of project
specific environmental review.
L2
d, Proposed measures to reduce or control líght and glare impacts, if any:
Mitigation of light and glare impact has been or will be addressed during project-
specific environmental review.
12. Recreation:
a. What designated and informal recreationalopportunities are in the immediate
vicinily?
There are a varíety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Kent
School District.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? lf so,
describe.
Recreational impacts have been or will be addressed during project specific
environmental review. Projects in the Capital Facilities Plan may enhance
recreational opportunities and uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the prolect 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 recreationalfacilities to the cornmunity in the form of
additional play fields and gymnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
The existence of historic and cultural resources will be determined at the time of
project-specific environmental review.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites has been or will be conducted as part of project
specific environmental review.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis
13
14. Transportation:
a. ldentify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed
access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
lmpact on public streets and highways has been or will be assessed during project-
specific environmental review.b. ls site currently served þy public transit? lf not, what is the approximate distance
to the nearest transit stop?
ïhe relationship between specific projects and public transit has been or will be
assessed during project-specific environmental review.
c, How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would
the project eliminate?
An inventory of parking spaces and the impacts of specific projects on parking
speces has been or will be conducted during project-specific environmental review
d. Willthe proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? lf so, generally describe (indicate whether
public or private).
The development of new schools may require new access roads or streets. This
issue will be fully addressed during project-specific environmental review.
e. Willthe project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity oQ water, rail, or air
transportatíon? 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 tratfic impacts,
g. Proposed measures to reduce or controltransportation impacts, if any:
Mitigation of impacts on transportation has been or will be addressed during project-
specific environmental review.
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example:
fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? lf so, generally
describe.
L4
The 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 measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any
Schools are built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat
sensors and sprinkler systems.
16. Utilities:
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse
service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other,
Utiliiies available at project sites have been or will be identified during project specific
environmental review.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the
service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity
which might be needed.
Utílity revisions and construction needs will be identífied during project-specific
environmental review.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand
that agency is relying on them to make its decision
Signature
Dr. Richard A. Stedry, Chief Officer
Date Submitted: June 7,2A11
l-5
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actíons)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpfulto 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
generalterms,
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, or production of
noise?
To the extent thÍs Plan makes it more likely that schoolfacilities will be constructed,
and/or renovated or remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more
likely. Additional impermeabie surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks,
access roads and playgrounds will increase storm water runoff, which could enter
surface or ground water. Emissions to air could result from heating systems,
emergency generators and other equipment, and from additional car and bus trips to
and from the school for students and faculty. Any emissions resulting from this Plan
should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous
substances, with the possible exception of storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for
emergency generatíng equipment. Noise may result from additional traffic and from
concentrating several hundred children at a new facility, especially before and after
school and during recesses.
To the extent this proposal allows additional residential development to occur, these
impacts would also increase somewhat, but it is not possible to quantify those
irnpacts at this time. The impacts would depend on the type, location and distributíon
of housing, for example, whether single or multiple family and the location of the
school.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
Facilities implementing the Plan have been or will be evaluated at the project specific
level and impacts will be rnitigated accordíngly. Storm water detention and runoff will
meet applicable County and/or City requirements and, depending on the date of
actual construction, may be subject to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will be minimal, and
will meet any applicable requirements of the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control
Authority. Fuel oilwill be stored according to local and state requirements.
16
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. Depending
on the particular site, construction of facilities may require clearing sites of plants and
loss of animal habitat. To the extent residential development is allowed, additional
area may be cleared and eliminated as habitat for animals. There are not likely to be
any impacts on fish or marine life, although some water quality degradatíon in
streams and rivers could occur due to increased residential development. These
impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are
lndividual projects will be evaluated and mitigated appropriately on a project-specific
basis, but specific mitigation proposals cannot be identified at this time.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Any actual projects resulting from this Plan would consume heating fuel and electrical
energy. lncreased traffic resulting from the construction of additionalfacilities 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 quaniify such reduction in consumption at this time. These impacts
have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are
Facilities would þe constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency
standards.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areâs or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as
parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Plan and facilities constructed pursuant to the Plan should have no impact on
these resources. lt is not possible to predict whether other development made
possible by this Plan would affect sensitive areas.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures have
been or will be proposed during project-specific review. Annual updates of this Plan
will be coordinated with King County, Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton,
SeaTac, Maple Valley and Black Diamond as part of the Growth Management Act
process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensilive areas.
To the extent the School Distríct's facilities planning process is part of the overall
growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be
protected.
L7
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
The Plan will not have any ímpact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with
existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
None are proposed at this time. Actual facilities constructed to implement the Plan
will be sited and constructed to avoid or reduce land use impacts.
6, How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
This proposal should not create substantial new demands for transportation. The
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create an increase in traffic near
new District facilities but also reduce traffic by creating the opportunity for more
students to walk to a closer school. The construction of the facilities included in the
Capital Facilities Plan may result in minor increases in the demand for public services
and utilities, such as fire and police protection, and water, sewer, and electric utilitíes.
None of these impacts are likely to be significant. The impacts on transportation and
public services and utilities of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will
be addressed during project-level review when appropriate.
Proposed meâsures 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 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
18
I
FENERAL \Y,{Y FUNTTC SCHOTLS& e&&&&&e&î1_-r I*:il- Il _I'¡ *;î-I--t_ î-r l-*{ r.-.{ r*--{ r***{
2ûL2
CA.PITAI FÂ.'CILTTTHS
pt.4'ïï
nü
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
2012
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BOARD OF'EDUCATION
Tony Moore
Amye Bronson-Doherty
Ed Bamey
Angela Griffin
Suzanne Smith
SUPERINTENDENT
Rob Neu
Prepared by: Sally D. Mclean
Tanya Nascimento
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
TABLE OF'CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
SECTION I TI{E CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Introduction
Inventory of Educational Facilities
Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities
Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities
Needs Forecast - New Facilities
Six Year Finance Plan
SECTION 2 MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
Introduction
Map - Elementary Boundaries
Map - Middle School Boundaries
Map - High School Boundaries
SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCI]MENTATION
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
ll
t2
l3
t4
l5
l6-17
l8-19
20-22
23-27
28-30
3 l-33SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM TITE 2OI1
PLAN
t_
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OT2 CAPTTAL FACILITMS PLAN
INTRODUCTION
In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act
(SIIB)2929 (1990) and ESIIB rc25 0991)), and under the School Impact Fee
Ordinances of King County Code 214, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249
effective December 2I,7995 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 2012 Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2011.
This Plan is scheduled for adoption by King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal
Way and the City of Aubum 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.
Currently, the District plans to replace Federal Way High School and to increase capacity
by approximately 200 students. 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. Basedon a
2006 bond estimated construction cost, the estimated cost to rebuild Federal Way High
School is $81 million. Final construction costs are under consideration by the Board for
the February 2012 bond election. Plans to replace Decatur High School and to increase
capacity by approximately 200 students are planned in a later phase. None of the cost to
replace 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 Transportation and Maintenance facility
cannot continue to meet the District needs in the future. Nutrition services and other
administrative functions will also relocate to this centralized location.
The District continues to monitor factors that may have an impact on enrollment and
capacity at our schools. One such factor is SIIB 2776, which will phase in full-day
kindergarten for all students and decrease K-3 class size from 20 to 17. This is proposed
to be fully funded by 2017-18. Using current enrollment, the decrease in class size would
create the need for an additional 69 classes for K-3 students. This number would
.)
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
significantly increase by 2017-18. The District will follow this bill as it progresses and
¿ßsess the facility impact this bill will create. Another factor would be the inclusion of a
Program of Early Leaming for at risk children within the overall Program of Basic
Education. The District will also continue to follow the changes in legislation
surrounding the Running Start program. Changes in availability and cost to parents of
this program could result in the return ofhigh school students to 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. We currently have three areas under review for boundary changes. The
maps included in this Plan reflect our current boundaries.
3
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 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 facjlities 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 modemization listed
follows this.
4
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
IIYVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL X'ACILITIES
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
RainierView
Sherwood Forest
Silver Lake
Star Lake
Sunnycrest
Twin Lakes
Valhalla
Wildwood
Woodmont (K-8)
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
Federal Way Public Academy (6-10)
Illahee
Kilo
Lakota
Sacajawea
Saghalie
Sequoyah
Totem
TAF Academy (6-12)
HIGH SCHOOLS
Decatur
Federal Way
Thomas Jefferson
Todd Beamer
Career Academy at Truman
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS
Merit School
Intemet Academy
Employment Transition Program
1635 SV/ 304th St
3601 SV/ 336th Sr
4041 S 298th St
35101 5ftAve SW
32607 47hAve SW
4200 s 308th st
303 SW 308û St
35827 32nd Ave S
2450 S Star Lake Rd
5830 S 300th St
625 S 314th Sr
1000 S 289th St
2626 SW 327ú St
34424l't Ave S
3015 S 368th St
34600 12ú Ave SW
1310 SW 325th Pl
4014 S 270th St
24629 42"dAve S
4400 sw 320th sr
27847 42"d Ave S
2405 S 300m Sr
26454 16ú Ave S
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Kent
Kent
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Des Moines
98023
98023
98001
98023
98023
98001
98023
98001
98003
98001
98003
98003
98023
98003
98003
98023
98023
98032
98032
98023
98001
98003
98198
346209ftAve S
36001 l'tAve S
4400 s 308th st
1415 SW 314th Sr
1101 S Dash Point Rd
33914 19h Ave SW
3450 S 360th ST
26630 40ú Ave S
26630 40ft Ave S
2800 sw 320th sr
30611 16üAve S
4248 S 288th St
35999 16ú Ave S
31455 28ü Ave S
36001 l't Ave S
31455 28thAve S
33250 21$Ave S'W
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal V/ay
Auburn
Kent
Kent
Federal Way
Federal Way
Auburn
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal Way
Federal V/ay
98003
98003
98001
98023
98003
98023
98001
98032
98032
98023
98003
98001
98003
98003
98003
98003
98023
5
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPTTAL FACILITIES PLAN
CURRENT IIWENTORY NON.INSTRUCTIONAL F'ACILITIE S
Developed Propertv
Administrative B uilding
MOT Site
Central Kitchen
Federal Way Memorial Field
Northwest Center
Leased Snace
Community Resource Center
Student Support Annex
Notes:
31405 18ft Ave S
1066 s 320th st
1344 S 308th St
1300 s 308û st
33330 8ú Ave S
l8l3 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 November 2011, the Administrative Building, Community Resource Center, and
Student Support Annex will be relocated to the Northwest Corporate Center. The leases
for the Community Resource Center and the Student Support Annex will end in
November 2011. In 2010, construction began on Site 81. The MOT Site & Central
Kitchen will be relocated to this site in late 2011. The Administration Building and MOT
Site have been surplussed and will be marketed for sale.
Undeveloped Propertv
Site
#
Location
75
65
60
73
7t
82
96
81
SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW - 9.2 Acres
S 35lst Street &,52nd Avenue S - 8.8 Acres
E of 10th Avenue SW - SW 334th & SW 335ù Streets - 10.04 Acres
N of SW 320ú and east of 45ft PL SW -23.45 Acres
S 344th Street &, 46th Avenue S - 17.47 Acres
I't Way S and S 342''t St - Minimal acreage
S 308th St and 14ú Ave S -.36 Acres
S 332"d St and 9tr Ave S - 20 Acres
Notes:
Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction
requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed
to house students in the District.
6
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
NEEDS F'ORECAST . EXISTING F'ACILITIES
The District is also replacing some non-instructional facilities. The District has
purchased 20 acres (Site #81) for construction ofconsolidated 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 Federal Way High School site. Increased capacity at
Federal Way High and Decatur High in later phases supplant the need for construction of
a fifth comprehensive high school.
EXISTING FACILITY FUTURENEEDS A-ITTICIPATED SOI]RCE OF
F'UNDS
Purchase and Relocate
Portables
Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is
Impact Fees.
Federal Way High School Replace Existing Building,
Increase Capacity
Future bond autho nzation
Decatur High School Replace Existing Building,
Increase Capacitv
Future bond autho t''zation.
7
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACIUTIES PLAN
NEEDS F'ORECAST . ADDITIONAL F'ACILITIES
NEWFACILITY LOCATION A¡TTICIPÀTED SOTJRCE
OFFT]NDS
No current plans for additional facilities.
I
FEDERAL WAY PIJBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANSix Year Finance PlanSecured FundingProj ected RevenueActual and Planned Expenditures$357.360(86-s82.47',.$53,685,554$s,622,2t5$s3.082.702SourcesImoact Fees ll)Land Sale Funds (2)Bond Funds (3)State Match (4)TOTALs20-000.00cs103.000"00c$10"000.00cs800.00c$133,800,000SourcesState Match 15)Bond or Lew Fr¡rds 16)Land Fund Sales (7)Imoact Fees (8)TOTAL$186f8¿702Iotal Secured Funding and Projected RevenueTotal Costs81.000.0fl$1.650.00{$80û00{$83,450,0{IToúalmtL20t7s81-000-00c$1.460.00c$800.00c$83,260,000201720fi-tan5.000$22s,000201620tGt7220.æ0$220,00020152015-16$21 5,000$2r5,0002014201+15i 8_125-0m205.000$200.000$18,s30,0002013ml3-1436.250-m0200,000$200.000$366$,00020122012-1396.625.0N200,000$200.000$27,025,000Budget20tt-12$195,000$200.000$395,000Cu¡rent andPrior Years$190.000NEW SCHOOLSMODTRNIZATION AND EXPANSIONFederal Wav Hidr School (9)SITE ACQUISITION!{orman Center(Emplolment Transtion Program) ( l0)TEMPORARY FACILITIESPortables (l I )TOTALNOTES:1. ThesefeesarecurrentlybeingheldinaKingCormty,CityofFederalWayandCityofKentinpactfeeaccount,andwillbcavailableforusebytheDstrictforslst€mimprovements. Thisisyearendbalanceon l2l3lll0.2. These fi¡nds are expected to come from the sale ofthe current ESC and MOT sites. This is year end balance on 12ßL110.3. This is tll.e l2l3lll0balance of bond frmds. This figure includes inttrest æmings.This is the balance onl2l3lll0.and systrem improvements to existing buildings. These improvements include FIVAC, and other structural improvements are not related to capacity increase.6. These include $22m ofvoter approved, bú not issued and $81 m scheduled forvoter approval in February 20 12.7.Prcjætedsaleofsurplusproperties. ThesefrndswillbeusedtoretiredebtincurredforlheacquisilionofareplacemmtEducâtionalSuppofCenter.8. These are projected fees based upon known residenti¿l developments in the District over lhe next six years. This figure assrmres $25,000 per month for the nat six ¡,ears.This fgure has beør adjusæd to reflect the cwmt economy.9. Pending Board approval md voter ¿uthorizafion in Febuary 2012l0.NomanCenterwaspurchæedin2010fohousetheEmploymentTransitionPrograrn. The$2.lmpurchasehasbeenfinmcedthroughastateapprovedlocalprogramthrough2020.ll.Thesefeesrepresentthecostofpurchasingandinstallíngnewportables. Theportableexpenditureinfutureyearsmayreplaæeistingportablesthatrenotfi¡nctional.These may not increase capacity and ae not included in the capæity sunmrary.9
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2012 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 2. MAPS OF'DISTRICT BOT]NDARIES
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 Intemet Academy serves grades K-12.
The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school, by school type.
(Career Academy at Truman High School, Merit School, Intemet Academy and Federal
Way Public Academy serve students from throughout the District). The identifïed
boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of
progrÍrms that affect school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas.
The Growth Management Act requires that ajurisdiction 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 apotential impact on students who are requiredto
change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school.
We currently have 3 areas under consideration for boundary changes.
It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the
construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth
throughout the district and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the
district, not just around a single development.
t_ l_
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OT2 CAPTTAL FACILITIES PLAN
ELEMENTARY SCHOO L BOUNDARIES
._ì
f.
lr
i
L
Bemnlay Sclìools
NilE
I t Adet¡ide
I 2 Brig¡doon
W g c¡melot
:.::= 4 Enierprise
5 êrÊen G¡blE
Ê L¡ke Dollstf
:ii:,:., r L¡ke oræe
,8 Þkel¡nd
ffi e Mãrk Twã¡n
W 10 MerÊdith Hill
f 11 [linor !¡ke
I12 Nautil6(KÐ
I te ory.pi"vi*
J 14 Panlher Ld(e
I 15 R¡inierMew
: 16 SheHoqd Fqrest
"ffiá.ï. ç situe¡t*e
I 18 st¡rLd{e
¡&&Ai: 1U $unrycrest
lHffi# 2Ð T*¡n Ld.=
I et valn¿na
ffi$ ?2 w¡tdwood
=
!3 Woodmont(KÐ
Ir,f ddle Schaols
.$,ffi Hish sc¡ooç
¡dmin¡sù¡live Build¡rgs
' Undffeloped sitE
-Êt*=
L2
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OT2 CAPTTAL FACILITIES PLAN
I
TT'
1$
r'i:
, tll
T,
Mddlå SdìoolE
NilrE
.,''1,-] :n f roerat wåf Publ¡cArc¡dêtrïy
J 3t ttt¡hee
]:r xiro
@ t¡kst¡
f s sacajæea
I34 saghalie
37 Sequoyah
I ¡s rot"m
ffiffi Eleneri,ary SchooÉ
ffiffi Hish schoob
Administåtw Bu¡ld¡ngs
rr Undweloped S¡t6
H-+
IU|IDDLE SCHOOL BOU N DARIES
t3
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPTTAL FACILITIES PLAN
HIGH SCHOO BOUNDARIES
ï
r'J,...] "l.l tt;
' 'r!:'itl¡L
Hgh Sctìools
HilrE
I 4 Dec¡tur
I 41 FÊderãtwãf
I +t Thom¡sJeltuEon
f 6 Todd Beamer
I ¿tÐ tareer-Academy ðt Trumðn
ffi-,-ffw c r Emprolmem rrðElron Flogram
m# ElÊmenlåry schoob
Mddle S$ools
' Administative Bulldingr
Undwelaped Sitë
H-+
L4
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
SECTION 3. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Building Capacities - The Education Program
Portable Locations
Student Forecast - z}l2through 201 8
Capacity Summaries
King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi-Family Units
L5
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Building Capacities
This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to
ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public
Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not
take into consideration the education program needs.
In general, the District's current target class size provides that the average class size for a
standard classroom for grades K through 2 should be 20 students. In grades 3-5 the target
is 25 students. For grades 6 to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for
students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated
at 12 seats per classroom.
Using the OSPI square footage calculation as a base line, the District has calculated a
program capacity for âll 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 programS 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 2011-12.
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 leaming English as a second language.
Middle School Computer Labs:
Each middle school has computer labs, except Totem Middle School. Wireless access
has been installed at all secondary schools. Ifadditional classroom space is needed, these
computer labs may be converted to mobile carts.
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.
Preschool/ECEAPÆIeadstart:
Our district currently offers preschool programs for both special needs & typically
developing students at 8 elementary schools. We also have the ECEAP and Headstart
program at 6 schools (3 elementary & 3 high schools). These programs decrease capacity
at those sites.
1,6
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
BT]IIDING PROGRA}Í CAPACTTMS
TLTMTNTARYBT]ILDING
PROGRAMCAPACITY
MIDDI,E SCHOOL BI]trÐING
PROGRAMCAPACITY
HIGHSCHOOLBI]IDING
PROGRAMCAPÄCIY
Eenrentary Arerage 375
Notes
* Federal Way Public Academy, Career Academy at Truman High School and Employment Trans ition Program
arenon-boundaryschools. Theseschoolsarenotusedinthecalculatedaverages.
** Technology Access Foundation Academy is housed entireþ in portables
on the TotemMiddle Schoolsite.
SchoolName Headcounl
Adelaide 372
Brigadoon 319
Canelot 269
Entemrise 458
Creen Cables 431
I¿ke Dolloff 433
l¿ke Gove JZJ
t¿keland 406
MarkTwain 281
Meredith Hill 453
Minort¿ke 325
Nautilus (K-8)367
Olympic View 348
Panther I¿ke 434
Rainier View 432
Sherwood Forest 423
Silverl¿ke 410
Star l¿ke 361
Sunnycres t 382
Twin l¿kes 291
Valhalla 442
Wildwood 291
Woodmont K-8)346
2(lII TOTAL 8121
School Name Headcount FTE
Illahee 855 864
Kilo 829 837
Lakota 701 114
Sacajawea 0¡¡662
Saghalie 804 812
Sequoyah 569 37r
Totem 739 146
Federal Way Public Academy 209 2tl
Technology Access Foundation Academy* *
2OII TOTAL 5J67 5.421
xlVfidde School A,wrage 737 744
School Name Headcount FTE
Decatur 1249 1J36
FederalWay I 538 1.645
Thomas Jefenon 1349 1.443
Todd Beamer lt23 1"201
Career Academy at Truman 163 174
t'ederal Way Public Academy 109 tl7
Emp lovment Trans ition Pro sram 48 51
Technology Access Foundation Academy* *
2O1I TOTAL 5"579 5,967
*Hiph Schml .A.r¿rase 5
1,7
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 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 r¡¡hen new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also
provide temporary housing for students until permanent facilities can be fïnanced and
constructed. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s) is either used
for other purposes such as storage or child care progr¿rms, 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
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
INSTRUCNONAL
NON
INI¡IRUCNONAT
Adelaide I )
Brisadoon 1
Camelot I
Enterprise 2 1
Green Gables 1
Lake Dolloff I 1
Lake Grove I 1
Lakeland
Mark Tr¡ain 2 1
Meredith Hill I t
Mirror Lake 4
Narúilus 1
Olymprc Vlew I 1
Panther Lake
Rainier View 1 t
Sherwood Forest J 1
Silver Lake 1 3
Star Lake 4
Sunnycrest
Twin Lakes 3
Valhalla
Wildwood 4
Woodmont J
l'0'l'AL 3l ztl
PORTABLES LOCATEI)
ATELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
PORTABLES LOCATEI)
AT MIDDLE SCIIOOLS
PORTABLE LOCATIONS
PORTABLES LOCATEI)
AT HIGH SCHOOI-S
PORTABLES LOCATEI)
AT SUPPORT F'ACILITIES
MOT 1
TDC 5
TOTAL 6
HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES
¡iherwood ¡orest I
I otal I
IISTFJCTIONAL
IÐN
INSTRUCIIONAL
Decatrn 9
Federal Wav a 1
Thomas Jefferson 10
Todd Beamer 9
IAF Academy 8 1
TOTAL 38 ,
|NSIRUCIIONÂL
NON
INSTRUCIIONAL
Illahee 3
Kilo 7
Lakota
Sacajawea 7
Saghalie ,)
Sequoyah 1 1
Totem
Merit 3
IAF Academy I I
28 7
l-9
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OT2 CAP\TAL FACILITMS 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 concemed with aggregate numbers in each
grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of history arìd weighted
factors to study several proj ections. Because transfers in and out of the school system are
common, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases
survival rates. 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 me¿ìsure 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
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 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 a range of possible projections for the District to the year 2017. This model
produces a projection that is between 23,000 and 24,000 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 ¿Nsume 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 flrve permitting jurisdictions. Long range planning assumes a student
yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth pattems.
Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The
Federal Way School District is a parbrer 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.
2L
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections
Simplified FIE (K Headcount : .5 FTE; Middle School FTE:.99 Headcount; High School FTE : .93 5Headcount)
lVliddle Schod Sdrod
Total K -12
F'TE ChCalendar Yr
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2OI T
20r2
2013
2014
20r5
2016
2017
201 I
Schod Year
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
82011-12
P2012-13
P2013-14
P2 014-1 5
P2 01 5-16
P201û17
P2 017-18
9,105
9,022
8,912
8,865
8,738
8,753
8,75 9
8,848
8,948
9,03 4
9,111
9,21 5
9,310
Elementary K-5
5,309
5,261
5,167
5,1 55
5,1 19
5,r42
5,166
5,118
5,09 3
5,13 I
5,21 5
5,25I
5,28 6
Middle School 6-8
6,710
6,754
6,63',7
6,456
6,594
6,5M
6,425
6,395
6,396
6,363
6,320
6,284
6,294
High School 9-12
21,184
21,037
20,716
20,476
20,4s1
20,439
20,350
20,351
20,437
20,535
20,646
20,757
20,890
ao/
5%
to1
1%
l%o
4%
0.0%
0.4%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
22,OOO
Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast
21,000
æ,000
19,000
18,000
17,000
16,000
15,000
h n*. än E "uon \, %n Þ* Þ* u'* è,* u,o n*"
School Year
ÞFTE
z¿
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2012 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Capacity Summaries
All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools
The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student
Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled
facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim
measures.
The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summannng 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 facilitres are
in place each year.
23
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SIJ'fi,IN{ARY - AtL GRADES
CAPACITY
XNROTLN.TNTT
SURPLUS 0R(uNr{OrñÐ)
PROGR{ÙTFTECAPACITY 74 73 113)89 Q2\1133)Q66\
RXXOCATABLECAPACNY
Cunent Portable Capacrty
Dduct Portable Capacþ
Add New Portable Capacrty
23N
(2Ð
50
)T\2,325 2,325
(50)
1 11\) )1\1 11<
Adiusted Portable C¿p¿ch ? ?t{7?,\2325 zï',rs 1 11<2275 2215
suRPrus oR(rNHoraÐ)
PROGRAN,TAND RXTOCATABLD
C{PACÏIY 2;e9 2J98 23t2 2364 2As3 2,142 2,009
Budget -- Projected--
CalendarYear 2012 2Aß 2014 2015 nl6 z\n 2018
School Year 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 201+15 2015-16 2016-11 2017-18
BUIIDINGPROffiAM
HEADCOUNT CAPACITY
FTECAPACITY
19,567
20.0æ
19,ffi1
20,lW
19,ffi1
20.iæ
19,67
20,109
19,86'.1
2AW
19,867
n.w
19,867
20,w
Add or subtract changes to capacrty
Increase Capacity - I¿keland and Sunnycrest
Increase Capacity at FederalWay HS
100
200
Adiusted Pro gram Headcount Capacity t9,ffi1 19,61 19,661 19.867 19,867 19,867 19.867
Adiusted Proeram FTE C¿pacity 20.109 20.109 20"109 n3æ 203W 20,3æ 20,w
Basic FTEEnrollrnent
Intemet Academy Enrollment (AAFTE)
&sic FTE Brrolknent without Intemet Academv
20350
CI1Ð
20,035
203s1
2t.a:x
(31Ð
20,437
(31Ð
n)n
20,535
(31Ð
2Ap0
20,ffi
n$1
(31Ð
1^1<1
(31Ð
20142
20,890
(31Ð
20,575
24
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2072 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY ST]MI\4ARY - ELNVINruARY SCHOOI-S
CAPACITY
M.IROLLMET.{T
Budget hoiected
Calendar Year 2012 20t3 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
School Year 2011-12 2012-t3 2013-14 201+15 2015-16 201G17 2017-18
BUILDINGPROGRAM
HEADCOUNT CAPACITY
FTECAPACITY
8,621
8,621
8J21
8.721
8,721
8,721
8,721
8,721
8,721
8.721
8,721
8.721
8,721
8,72t
1. Increase Capacity I¿keland
and Sunnvcrest 100
Adiusted Program Headcount Capacity 8.721 8.721 8.721 8.721 8.721 8.721 8.721
Ad iusted hogram FTE Capacity 8,721 8,72t 8,72r 8,721 8,721 8,721 8,721
Basic FTEtr¡rollrnent
2. Intemet Academy (AAFTÐ
Basic FTEFnrolkrpnt without lntemet Academy
8,759
(36)
8323
8,848
8.812
(36)
8,948
8.912
(36)
9,034
8.998
(36)
9,111
(36)
9.075
9,215
(36)
9,179
9,310
(36)
9.274
SURPLIIS OR (UNIIOUSU))
PROGRT{.MCÀPACITY Q\f9l)t191)Q77\f354)t458)(ss3)
RU,OCATABLE CAPACITY 3.
NOTES:
1. Increase Capacity at l¿keland, 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 available and other administrative techniques rvhich
can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables fromthe instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasibility for continued ìnstructional use.
Current Portable Capacity
Subtract single portable from Mirror I¿ke
Add double portable to Mirrorl¿ke
Adius ted Portable Caoacitv
775
(2s)
50
800
800
800
800
800
800
8¡10
800
800
800
800
800
800
SIIRPLI.TS OR (UNTIOUS U))
PROGRAM AND RU]OCATABLE
CAPÄ.CIIY 798 709 609 523 446 342 247
25
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SUMMÀRY - MIDDLE S CHOOTS
CAPACITY
TNROLLMTNT
srjRPrus oRoNHousÐ)
PROGRAMCÀPACITY 329 311 402 357 280 237 209
RILOCATABLE CAPACITY 2.
Cunent Portable Capacity
Add/Subtract portable capacity
A diusted Po rtable Capacity
575
575
5'.75
575
575
575
575
575
575
575
5'75
575
575
575
srjRPrus oR (rJNHousED)
PROGRAM AND RH,OCATAB LE
CAPACITY 904 952 911 932 855 812 784
NOTES:
1. Intemet Academy students are included n projections but do not require fulltinr use of schoolfacilities.
2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which
can be used to tenporarily house students until penrnnent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number of portables that wrll be used wll be based on actual student population needs.
The Dstrict nny begin to pull portables fromthe instructionalinventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feas ibility for co ntinued in structional us e.
Budget -- Projected--
fülendar Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
School Year 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 201+15 2015-16 201Ç17 2017-18
BT]IIDINGPROGRAM
HEADCOUNT CAPACITY
FTECAPACITY
5.36',7
sA2t
5,36',1
5A21
5,361
s A)1
5.361
5A21
5,36',1
sA21
5,367
5A21
s,367
5421
Add or subtract changes in capacity
A dlusted Program Headcount (hpaciw 5,361 5,367 5,361 5,367 5,367 5367 5,367
,{ diusted Pro gram FTE Capacity 5A2r 5!21 s A)1 5421 5Azt 5121 st2t
Basic FTEEnrollnent
1. IntemetAcademy (AAFTÐ
Basic FTEEn¡ollnpnt without lntemet Acaderny
5,766
(74)
5,W2
5,1 18
(14)
5,044
5,093
Q4)
5,019
5,138
(74)
5,W
s21s
(74)
5,141
s2s8
(14)
5.184
s286
(74)
\)1)
26
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2012 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
CAPACITY SI]MMARY - HIGII S CHOOLS
CAPACITY
ENROLLMU.{T
Budget -- Proiected--
Calendar Year 2012 2013 201.4 2015 2016 2017 2018
School Year 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 201G17 2017-18
BUILDINGPROGRAM
HEADCOI]NT CAPACITY
FTE CAPACITY
5,579
5"967
5 57S
5.%7
5,579
5.967
i 57q
5.%7
5'7'7q
6.167
sJ79
6.167
5,779
6.167
Add or subtract changes in capacity
Add capacity to FederalWay IIS 200
Adiusted Pro gram Headcount Capacity i i7q 5.579 5 57A 5^179 5'7'7q { 77q 5.779
Adiusted ho g¡am FTE Capacity 5,%7 5,967 5,967 6,167 6,167 6,167 6,167
Basic FTE Enrollrnent
Intemet Academy (AAFTE)
Basic &i without Internet Acadenry
6,425
Q0s)
6220
6,385
(20s)
6.180
6,396
(205)
6.191
6,363
(205)
6,158
6,320
(20s)
6,115
628/
(20s)
6979
62%
(205)
6,089
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSÐ)
PROGRAMCÀPACITY (253)t213)o24\9 52 88 78
RH,OCATABLE CAPACITY 2.
Cunent Portable Capacþ
Add/Subtract portable capacity
Subtract portable capacity at FederalWay IIS
Adiusted Portable Capacity
950
950
950
950
950
950
9s0
(s0)
900
900
900
900
9m
900
900
SURPLUS OR(UNHOUSÐ)
PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE
3. CAPACITY 697 737 726 909 952 988 978
NOTES:
1. Intemet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full tirne use of school facilities.
2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques utrich
can be used to tenrporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only
The actual number of poÍables that will be used wìll be based on actual student population needs.
The District may begin to pull portables fromthe instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables
will determine feasfuiïty for continued instructional use.
3. Capacity forunhoused students willbe acconrnodated with traveling teachers and
no planning time in some classrooms.
27
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OT2 CAPTTAL FACILITIES PLAN
King Countv. the Citv of Federal Way. and the Citv 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 newhousing 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, r¡¡hich 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 2012 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 2lA and
the Growth Management Act.
months.
Plan Year 2012 Plan Year 201l
Single Family Units*$4,014 84,014
Multi-F Units $1 82 172
*Due to current economic conditions, Federal Way Public Schools has made the decision
to retain the impact fee for Single Family Units at the 201I rate instead of the updated
2012 rate of $4,461.
28
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2012 CAPTTAL FACILITIES PLANSruDENT GENERATIONNEW CONSTRUCTION IN PRIOR 5 YEARSSingle Family Student GenerationTotalStudentFacbr0.8666o.92310.61 760.9999o.51170.68190.6739o.w240.80460.fl,2æSh¡dent Generation*0.33150.16580.20950.7067High SchoolStudentFactor0.1333o.o769o.2353o.2*n0.06980.1 364o.2174o.1707o.2644o.2MMiddle SchoolStudent .Facbr0.13330.2308o.08820.33330.16280.1364o.1522o.21 950.16090.1543ElementaryStudentFactor0.6m00.6154o.2941o.44440.27910.40910.3043o.51220.3793o.2286Number ofHigh SchoolStudents21I633n7z342Total549018291115Number ofMiddle SchoolStudents233I7314I1427Number ofElementaryStudentsI8101212I282133&Number ofMulti-FamilyDwellinos000000000oNumber ofSingle FamilyD¡rellinqs1513u27432924187175DBriqhbn Park(11 ) The Green(10) Creekside LaneGrande Vidar ïuscany(08) Northlake Ridse lV, Collingtree ParkColella EstabsWoodbrook11100908* Student Generation rate is based on totalsMutti-Family Student GenerationTotalo.232o.140o.5220.097Averageo.'t480.0420.059o.248Hioh Schoolo.o52o.o42o.1240.016Middle School0.0560.0250.0670.019Bementaryo.1240.0730.3310.062AubumlssaquahKentLake Washington29
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2012 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
School Site Acquisition Cost:
Facility
Elementary
Middle School
High School
School Construction Cost:
%o Perm F ac./
Total S Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Temporary F acilìty Cost:
o/o Temp Fac
Total S Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
State Matching Credit Calculation:
Construction Cost
Allocation/S Ft
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Tax Pa¡rment Credit Calculation
Average Assessed Value (March 201l)
Capital Bond Interest Rate (March 201 l)
Net Present Value of Average Dwelling
Years Amortized
Property Tax Levy Rate
PresentValue of Revenue Stream
Cost /
Ac¡e
F acility
Cost
Facility
Cost
Sq. Ft.
S t¡-¡ d ent
IMPACT F'EE
Facility
Facility
Facility
Size
State
Match
Student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
Student
Factor
SFR
Single Family
Residences
S t¡ dent
F actor
MFR
TOTAL
Student
F acto r
MFR
TOTAL
Sûrdent
F actor
MFR
TOTAL
Student
F actor
MFR
Total
Multi-Family
Residences
12ts
2,999
49
(864)
(8e2)
Cost/
SFR
Cost/
SFR
Cost/
SFR
Cost/
SFR
SFR
Cost/
MFR
Cost/
MFR
Cost/
MFR
C ost/
MFR
MFR
Mitigation F ee Summary
Site Acquisition Cost
Perm anent Facility Cost
Temporary Facility Cost
State Match Credit
T ax Payment Credit
Sub-Total
50%o Local Share
s
s
s
$
$
4,313 $
10,647 s
109 S
(3,068) S
(3,07e) S
$
s
8,922 $
4,461 $
2,506
1253
0.33 l5 0.1480 s0 s0
0.1658 0.0420 s0 $0
4.85 s2 16,7 18 51 0 2095 0.0590 $4,3 I 3 s 1,215
$ 1.21s$4,313
s09 5.90o/o 0.3315 0.1480 $0
0.1 6 58 0.0420 s0 s09 4.7 60/o
96.53o/o s 10,530,000 200 0.2095 0.0590 $ 10,647 ï2,999
$2,999s 10,647
4.I0o/o $ 199.83 2 25 0.3315 0. 1480 s 109 s49
5.24o/o 0.1658 0.0420
3.47o/o 0.2095 0.05 90
$ 109 $49
s 180.17 0.3315 0.1480 s0 s0
s 180.17 0.1658 0.0420 $0 s0
s 180.17 130 6253Vo 0.2095 0.0590 s3,068 s864
$3.068 $864
s257,849
4.9lo/o
s7 4,692
4 .91o/o
st .999 .7 7 3 $579,281
l0 10
$ 1.54 $1.54
$3,079 $892
act F ee 4 1$1
012 Im t4 1Fee$4
30
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPTTAL FACIUTMS PLAN
SECTION 4
STJMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2011 CAPITAL F'ACILITIES PLAN
The 2012 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 201I Capital
Facilities Plan. The changes between the 2011 Plan and the 20l2Plan are listed below
F
SD(.YEAR FINANCE PLAI\
The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 2012-2Aß
SECTION Itr - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATON
CAPACITY
Elementary capacity includes space for All Day Kindergarten programs at every
elementary school. Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation a¡e 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 2012 through 2018 Enrollment history and projections
are found onpage22.
CAPACITY SUMMARY
The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities
and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown
as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 24-27.
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION. KING COTJNTY 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 2011 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2012 Capital Facilities Plan can be
found on page 32 and33.
I - TIIE
3l_
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OT2 CAPTTAL FACILITMS PLAN
IMPACT F'EE CALCULATION CHANGES F'ROM 2OLITO 2OI2
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 2011 Capital Facilities Plan and the2072 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 füneration worksheet
is found onpage 29.
SCHOOL CONSTRUCNON CO STS
The anticipated cost based on 2006 estimates þr replacing Federal Way High is
881,000,000. The replacementwill add 200 additional seats. The current capacity of
Federal Wøv High is 1538. The addition of 200 seats will increase capacity by 13%.
Total Cost 881,000,000 x.13 = $10,533,000
SCHOOL ACQUSITION COSTS
The district purchøsed the Norman Center to house the Employment Transition Program
and at a later date the ECEAP program. The purchase dnd use of this site increased our
high school capacity by 5l students.
Total Cost 82,100,000 / 2 = 81,050,000
The District will use the above formulas created as a base for the 2012 Capital Facilities
Plan. The capacity of Federal Way High may vary from year to year as programs are
added or changed and construction cost may increase over time.
32
FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2OI2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES F'ROM 2OIITO 2OI2
IMPACT FEE
Item From/To
95.7lYoto 95.167"
4.29Yoto 4.84Vo
Percent Temporary Facilities
Average Cost of Portable
Classroom
$183,996 to $199,832
Construction Cost Allocation $180.17 to $180.17
State Match 61.86%to 62.530/o
Average Assessed Value SFR_
$267,668 to $257,849
MFR_
$84,429 to$74,692
4.33Yoto 4.91V"Capital Bond Interest Rate
Property Tax Levy Rate $1.72 to $1.54
Comment
Report #3 OSPI
Updated portable inventory
Updated average of portables
purchased and placed in 2010
Change effective July 2010
Change effective July 201I
Per Puget Sound Educational
Service District (ESD 121)
Market Rate
King County Treasury Division
Updated Housing Inventory
Updated County-Wide Average
Due to curent economic conditions,
SFR retained at2}Il rcte.
MFR based on the updated
calculation
Perceni of Permanent
Facilities
Single Family Student Yield
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Multi-Family Student Yield
Elementary
Middle School
High School
Impact Fee
3507 to .3315
1701 to.1658
2236 to.2095
1650 to .148
0530 to .042
0640 to.059
SFR_
$4,014 to $4,014
(Calculated 2012 SFR $4,461)
MFR_
52,172 to $1",253
33
DETERMINATION OF' NONSIGNIF'ICANCE
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:
l. The adoption of the Federal Way Public Schools' 2012 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' 2072 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital
Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan.
3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Federal Way, City of
Kent and the City of Auburn to include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2012 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 Aubum's Comprehensive Plan.
This proposal may also involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plaris of the City
of Des Moines to incorporate the Federal Way Public Schools' 2012 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 an area of approximately 35 square
miles. Areas of the cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines and Aubum fall within the
District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County.
Lead Agency
Federal Way Public Schools is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-TI-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(ZXc). 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 Nonsignifïcance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-ll-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 5:00 p.m., May 7,2011. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on
timely comments and may retain, modifu, or, if signifïcant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw
the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline.
Responsible Offïcial Ms. Tanya Nascimenot
Enrollment and Demographics
Federal Way Public Schools
(2s3) e4s-2071
3140518th Avenue South
Federal Way WA 98003
You may appeal this determination in writing by 5:00 p.m., May 7,2011 to Tanya
Nascimento, Federal Way Public Schools, 31405 18th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003
Date of Issue: Apnl23,2017
DatePublished: Apnl23,20lI
Telephone:
Address:
)
EI\I\4RONMENTAL CHECKLIST
V/AC I97 -7 I -9 60 Environmental Checklist.
Purpose of Checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW requires all govemmental
agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on
the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the
agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be
done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
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 carefi.rlly, to the best of your knowledge. In most
cases, you should be able to answer the questions from you( 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 ans\,vers to the questions now may avoid
unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark
designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the govemmental 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
signifi cant adverse impact.
I
EI\I\.IRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does
not apply" In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject actions (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and
"properly or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic are4" respectrveþ.
2
EI\T\4RONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
l. 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 2011 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 2011 Capital Facilities Plan.
2. Name of applicant:
Federal Way School District No. 210.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Federal Way School District No. 210
31405 18th Avenue South
Federal Way WA 98003
(2s3) e4s-2000
Contact Person: I\ß. Tanya Nascimento
Enrollment and Demographics
Telephone: (253) 945-2071
4. Date checklist prepared:
Apnl23,207I
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Federal Way School District No. 210
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable)
The Federal Way School District's 20II Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the
District in May 2011. The Capital Facilities Plan will be forwarded to King County, the City of
Federal Way, City of Kent and the City of Aubum 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
EI\T\IIRONMENTAL CHE CKLI ST
The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the District is currentþ
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. Current plans are for all the projects to be
complete by 2013.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will undergo additional environmental review,
uzhen appropriate, as they are developed.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for govemmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
Permits will be applied for with the appropriate jurisdiction for minor projects during the 2012
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 Aubum 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).
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 modiSr 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 2012 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-specific environmental review.
A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the District's offices.
4
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township,
and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or
boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map,
if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this
checklist.
The 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
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. Specifïc topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identifïed 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 classifïcation 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 urhen 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, typ€, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed.
Indicate source of fïll.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when
appropriate, to project-specific environmental review and local approval at the time of
proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of any
fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
It is possible that erosion could occur as a result 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-specific environmental review when
appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be subject to local approval processes.
6
ENIVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
g. About rvtrat 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-
specifïc 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 reductron 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-specifïc environmental review 'aÁren 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 me¿ßures specifïc to the individual projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed dunng project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
7
EIMIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
3. Water
a. Surface
l) 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 v¡hat 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 identifïed 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-
sp e cifi c environmental review when appropriate.
Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site
Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area, will be
required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If
so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
5)
plan.
8
EII'VIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a
result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided
during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
b. Ground:
l) 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-specifïc environmental
review.
c.'Water Runoff (including storm water)
l) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if knor,vn). 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 rruhen appropriate.
Each project is or will be subject to applicable local storm water regulations.
9
EI¡-VIRONMENTAL 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 prqect on ground
and surface waters have been or will be identified during project-specifïc environmental
review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to all applicable regulations
regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the
Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any
Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in
the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-speciflrc environmental
review when appropriate.
4. Plants
a.Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fïr, 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
EN\{IRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local landscaping
requirements.
5. Animals:
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or neaÍ the site or are known to
be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fïsh: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other
An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the proj ects proposed in
the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental
review when appropriate.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site
Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
c Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes have
been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review uihen appropriate.
d. Proposed me¿Nures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined dunng
proj ect-sp ecifi c environmental review rnihen appropri ate.
l1
EI¡-VIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
6. Enerry 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 a¡e 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 haza¡dous 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.
72
EI\I\IIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T
b. Noise
l) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises from traffrc, construction, residential, commercial and industrial areas
exists within the Federal Way School District. The specifïc noise sources that may affect
the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identifïed during
proj ect-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-terrn or a long-term basis (for example: traffrc, 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 me¿ßures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have
been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
There are a variety of land uses within the Federal 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.
t3
EI\I\{IRONMENTAL CHE CKLIST
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
The remodeling and renovation projects will require the demolishment of school structues.
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 identiflred 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-specifïc environmental
review when appropriate.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have been or will be identifïed 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 identifïed during project-specific environmental review.
Approimately 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 cur¡ent economic conditions. The District employs approximately 3,200
people.
j Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has
been or will be evaluated during project-specifïc 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
EI{VIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-specific
environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed mitigating measures will
be proposed at that time, if necessary.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing
uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and
during proj ect-sp ecifi c environmental revi ew when appropri ate.
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 antenn¿ß; what is the
princip al exterior buil ding materi al (s) propo se d?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during proj ect- specific environmental revi ew uilren appropri ate.
15
EI¡'VIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plari have been or will be
determined during proj ect-specifi c environmental review when appropriate.
c.Proposed me¿Nures 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-specifïc 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.
What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
12.
c
a.
Off-site sorüces of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during
proj ect-sp ecific environmental review when appropri ate.
Recreation:
What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Federal Way School
District.
l6
EIMIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will
be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. The projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed renovated school and support
facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or
will be subject to mitigation during project-specific environmental review uÁren appropriate. A
school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields
and gymnasiums.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for such registers on the sites of the
projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and cultural resources
on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review
when appropriate.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any
Appropriate me¿ßures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis when
appropriate.
T4. 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-specifïc environmental review
when appropriate.
T7
EIMIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public
transit has been or will be addressed during project-specifïc environmental review when
appropriate.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
An inventory of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability has been or will be
conducted during proj ect- sp ecifïc environmental revi ew when appropri ate.
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 prqect? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be
addressed during proj ect-specific environmental revi ew uzhen appropri ate.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any
The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities
Plan has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when
appropriate.
15. Public Services:
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will
substantially increase the need for other public services.
b. Proposed meÍNures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any
t8
EN\¿IRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Remodeled/renovated school or facilities will be built with automatic security systems, fire
alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems.
16. Utilities:
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities are
available at the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The types of utilities
available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-
specific environmental review when appropriate.
b. Describe the utilities that a¡e 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:
DateSubmitted: Apnl23,20Il
19
EII-VIRONMENTAL CIIECKLIST
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SIIEET 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.
l. 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 and/or renovated and remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be
more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access
roads, and playgrounds could increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground
waters. Heating systems, emergency generators, and other 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 me¿ßriles to mitigate any such increases described above have been or will be
addressed during project-specifïc environmental review when appropriate. Storm water
detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and may be subject
to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements.
Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be
stored in accordance with local and state requirements.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fïsh, or marine life?
The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment.
These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific
environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Plan are not likely to
generate severe impacts on fish or marine life.
20
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Proposed me¿Nures 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. Specifïc mitigation proposals have been or will be identified, however, during project-
specific envi ronmental 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 me¿ßures 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 effi ciency standards.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas
designated (or eligible or under study) for govemmental protection; such as parks, wilderness,
wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,
wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no impact on
these resources.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project-specifïc environmental
review when appropriate. Updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County and the
cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines, and Aubum as part of the Growth Management Act
process, one of the purposes of r¡¡hich 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 Plari or the projects contained
therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District.
Proposed me¿Nures 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.
2t
ET\IWRONMENTAL CHECKLI ST
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 me¿ßures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are
No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time.
7. Identifu, 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
Auburn School District No. 408
GAPITAL FACILITIES
PLAN
2011 through 2017
Adopted by the Auburn School District Board of Directors
May 9,2011
SCHOOL DISTRICT
HNGAG.H . EÞUÕATH. EMFÛWHR
915 Fourth Street NE
Auburn, Washington 98002
(253) e31-4eoo
Serving Students in:
Unincorporated Ki ng County
City of Auburn
City of Algona
City of Kent
City of Pacific
City of Black Diamond
BOARD of DIRECTORS
Carol Helgerson
Lisa Conners
Craig Schumaker
Ray Veflk
Janice Nelson
Dr. Dennis Kip Herren, Superintendent
Table of Contents
Section I Executive Summary Page'1
Section ll Enrollment Projections Page 6
Section lll Standard of Service Page I
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
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2011 through 20'17
Section I
Executive Summary
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through2OlT
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 2O'l'1.
This Plan is consistentwith prior long-term capitalfacilities 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 Gity of Kent; the King CounÇ Council, the City of Auburn and the Gity of Kent
will adopt this Plan by reference as part of each jurisdiction's respective comprehensive plan. To
enable the collection of impact fees in the Gities of Algona, Pacific and Black Diamond, 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 orderto ascertain the District's current
and future capacity. \A/hile 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. \Mlen 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 2010-1 1 capacity
was 1 3,725 whereas Full Time Equivalent ("FTE) enrollment for this same period was 13,812.45
(includes Full Day Kindergarten). The actual number of individual students was '14,482 as of
October 1,2010. (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
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 softurare, data from King County and
Pierce County GIS; and to integrate the mapping with student data ftom the district's student data
system. This method gives the District actual student generation numbers for each grade span
for identified developments. This data is contained in Appendix 4.3.
J
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CHANGES FROM 2O1O TO 2011
Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes ftom the 2010 Capital
Facilities Plan that are a part of the 201 1 PIan. 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 rol lment Projections
Updated projections. See Appendices 4.1 & 4.2
Section lll
Standard of Service
A. lncrease of 1 adaptive behavior classroom at high school level
B. Reduction of 1 adaptive behavior room at elementary level
Section lV
lnventory of Facilities
No change ftom 2010-11 to 201'l-12
Section V
PupilGapacity
No change ftom 2010-11 to 2011-12
4
Section Vll
lmpact Fees
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHAIVGES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2010 to 2011
Appendix 4.1 - Updated enrollment projections from October 1,2010
Appendix 4.2 - Updated enrollment projections with anticipated buildout schedule.
Appendix 4.3 - Student Generation Survey March 2011
Section Mll
Appendices
5
DATA ELEMENTS
CPF
2010
CPF
2011 EXPLANATION
Student Generation Factorc
Single Family
Elementary
Mid School
Sr. High
Multi-Family
Elementary
Mid School
Sr. High
School Gonstruction Gosts
Elementary
Middle School
Site Acquisition Gosts
Cost per acre
Area Cost Allowance aoeckh tndex
Match % - State
Match % - District
District Average AV
Single Family
Multi-Family
Debt Serv Tax Rate
GO Bond lnt Rate
0.0860
0.0380
0.0310
$21,750,000
$42,500,000
0.3080
0.1470
0.1770
$290,381
$180.17
60.23%
39.77%
$254,009
$76,573
$0.82
4.33%
0.3130
0.1540
0.1650
0.1240
0.0560
0.5190
$21,750,000
$42,500,000
$290,381
$180.17
58.67%
41.33%
$248,795
$67,821
$0.93
4s1%
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 2011 King County
Dept of Assessments data.
Updated ftom March 2011 King County
Dept of Assessments data using weighted
average.
Current Fiscal Year
Current Rate (Bond Buyers 20 lndex 3-1 1)
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2011 through2AlT
Section ll
En rol lment Project¡ons
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FAC¡LITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS
The Auburn School District uses a modified cohort survival model to project future enrollment for all
of the District's operations. Table ll.1 is an extract ftom the comprehensive projection modelfound in
Appendix 4.2 titled .CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections". This Table shows the
anticipated enrollment for the next six years based on the previous 6 year history of the District under the
assumptions set forth in the comprehensive projections, Appendix 4.1, and the projection for additional
students generated ftom new developments in the district as shown in Appendix 4.2.
The district is currently operating Full Day Kindergarten in eight schools and includes two state
funded Full Day Kindergartens at two additional elementary schools.
7
TABLE
il_l
ASD ENROLLMENT
PROJECTIONS lMarch 201 0l
GRADE
2010-11
Actual
2011-12
Proiected
2012-13
Proiected
2013-14
Proiected
2014-15
Proiected
2015-16
Proiected
2016-17
Proiected
KDG
1
2
3
4
5
1010
1 066
1 016
1013
1024
1079
1027
1 056
1 081
1 038
1 055
1 049
1047
1077
1074
1 105
1082
1 083
1 069
1 099
1 095
1 100
1152
1113
I 095
1125
1122
1127
1152
1 187
1123
1 153
1 150
1 155
1 180
1 189
1148
1179
1176
1 180
1206
1215
K-5 6208 6305 6468 6627 6809 6949 7104
6
7
I
1041
1 060
1112
I 086
1 065
I 080
1 059
11 13
1 088
1 094
1 088
1 138
1129
1128
1118
1204
1164
1 160
1243
1238
1194
6-8 3213 3231 3260 3320 3375 3529 3635
I
10
11
12
1221
1238
1258
1344
1 336
1237
1209
1267
1310
I 356
1212
1222
1322
1332
1 333
1226
1 380
1 351
1314
1 353
1 366
1411
1 334
I 336
1409
1 394
1 391
1352
9-12 506 1 5050 51 00 5213 5398 5446 5546
TOTALS 14,482 14,586 14,828 1 5,1 60 15.582 15.924 16,286
GRADES K-12 Actual Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected Proiected
5703
3213
5061
5792
3231
5050
5945
3260
51 00
6093
3320
5213
6261
3375
5398
6388
3529
5446
6530
3635
5546
K-5 w/K @ 112
6-8
9-'12
K-12 wlK @.112 13,577 14,072 14,304 14,626 15,034 15.362 15,711
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2011 through2017
Section lll
Standard of Service
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
STANDARD OF SERVICE
The School lmpact Fee Ordinances adopted by Kng County, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent indicate
that each school district must estab/rsh a "standard of Service" in order to ascertain the overall capacity to house
its projected student population. The Superintendent of Public lnstruction esfab/ishes square footage
"capacity" guidelines for computing sfafe funding support. The fundamental purpose of the SPI guidelines
is to provide a vehicle to equitably distribute state matching funds for school construction projects. By default
these guidelines have been used to benchmark the district's capacity to house rfs sfudenf p opulation. The SPI
guidelines do not make adequate provision for local district program needs, facility configurations, emerging
educational reform, or the dynamics of each sfudenf's educational program. The Auburn Schoo/ District Standard
of Service addresses those local considerations that require space rn excess of the SPI guidelines. The effect
on the space requirements for both permanent and relocatable facilities is shown below for each grade articulation
pattern. Conditions that may result in potentialspace needs are provided for information purposes without
accom pan yi ng co m p utati on s.
OVERVIEW
The Auburn School District operates fourteen elementary schools housing 6,208 students in grades
K through 5. For Kindergarten students; 665 of the 1 ,010 attend 112 days throughout the year and 5,198 students,
grades 1 through 5, plus 345 kindergartners, attend on a full day basis. When converted to full time
equivalents, the K-5 enrollment is 5,797. The four middle schools house 3,213 students in grades 6 through 8.
The District operates three comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school, housing 5,061
students in grades 9 through 12.
ctÁss stzE
The number of pupils per classroom determines the number of classrooms required to house the
student population. Specialists create additional space needs. Class sizes are subjectto collective
bargaining. Ghanges 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 at26.5 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, fess 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 cu.rrently 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 15 students
The housing requirements for this program exceed the SPI space allocations by two classrooms.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 room @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(27)
0
9
(27)
Aubum School District No.408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
STANDARD OF SERVICE
S PECIAL EÐ UCATI O N 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.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(1 86)
0
(1 86)
NATIVE AM ERICAIV RESOURCE RO OM
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 1 room @ 26.5 each = (27)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @26.5 each = 0
TotalCapacity Loss T
HEAD START
The Auburn School District operates a Head Start program for approximately 120 youngsters in six
sections of 112 day in length. The program is housed at three elementary schools and utilizes
three standard elementary classrooms and auxiliary office spaces. The housing requirements
for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
(80)
0
EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION
The Auburn School District operates a pre-school program for young children with disabilities below
age five. This program is housed at seven different elementary schools and currently uses ten
standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI
space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Gapacity 0 rooms @26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(265)
(26s)
READING ¿ABS
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.
(80)
0
(1 06)
0
10
(1 06)
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
STANDARD OF SERVICE
MUSIC ROOMS
The district elementary mus¡c programs require one acoustically modified classroom at each
elementary schoolfor 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
(371)
0
(371)
ENGLISH AS A SECOA'D LANGUAGE PROGRAM
The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the elementary school level for students
learning English as a second language. This program requires fourteen standard classrooms that are not
provided for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @26.5 each =
Total Capacity 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 @265 each =
TotalGapacity 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 SPECIALIST PROGR,AM
The Auburn School District provides a learning specialist program to increase literacy skills for
first and second graders. This program model has been created from the l-728 funds and currently
has the specialist going into existing teacher classrooms, as well as pulling out students into
designated classrooms. The district is utilizing classrooms at all fourteen elementary schools.
(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 fiom tuition, ARRA funds and currently
there are two schools receiving state funding for2010-11 schoolyear. The district is utilizing fourteen
classrooms at eight of the fourteen elementary schools. Housing requirements exceed the OSPI space
guidelines for this program by seven classrooms.
(186)
0
11
(1 86)
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
STANDARD OF SERVICE
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
S PECIAL E D UCATI O N 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.
ADAPT IVE BEHAVI O R S P ECIAL ED U CATI O N
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 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 forthis program are provided for in the SPI space allocations
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 26,5 each =
Loss of Temporary Gapacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(53)
0
(53)
MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPUTER LABS
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.
(120)
0
(120)
ENGLISH AS Á SECO'VD 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.
(120)
0
(120)
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 g5% utilization of all available
teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 'l1l23l10 identifies 148 teaching stations available in the
mid-level facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 8 teaching stations.
Loss of Permanent Capacity I rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(240)
0
't2
(240)
Aubum School District No. 408
GAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
STANDARD OF SERVICE
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
SEV'OR HIGH COMPUTER I.ABS
The Auburn School District operates two computer labs at each of the sen¡or 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.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 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 Gapacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
(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 Gapacity Loss
(e0)
0
(e0)
ADAPTIVE B E HAVI O R S P ECIAL EDU C ATI O N
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 high schools and uses one classroom. The housing
requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space allocations.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 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 students with
moderate to severe disabilities. This program requires two standard classrooms that are not provided
for in the SPI space guidelines.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
S P ECIAL E D UCATI O'V 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
high school program requires eleven classrooms to provide program to meet educational needs of
the students. The SPI space guidelines provide for one of the eleven teaching stations.
(30)
0
(30)
(60)
0
(60)
(300)
0
13
(3oo)
Aubum School District No.408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
STANDARD OF SERVICE
PE RF O RM I NG ARTS CE VTERS
Auburn High School includes 25,000 square feet used exclusively for a Performing Arts Genter. The
SPI lnventory includes this space when computing unhoused student capacity. This space was
not intended for nor is it usable for classroom instruction. lt was constructed to provide a
community center for the performing arts. Using SPI capacity guidelines, 25,000 square feet
computes to 208 unhoused students or 8.33 classrooms.
Loss of Permanent Capacity 8.33 rooms @ 30 each =(250)
ROOM UTILIZATION
The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive high school program that includes numerous
elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are
not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 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 Gapacity 10 rooms @ 30 each =
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each =
Total Capacity Loss
STA'VDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS
ELEMENTARY
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (2,200)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (2,200)
MIDDLE SCHOOL
Loss of Permanent Gapacity = (533)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (533)
SENIOR HIGH
Loss of Permanent Gapacity = (1,240)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Gapacity Loss ('l,240)
TOTAL
Loss of Permanent Capacity = (3,972)
Loss of Temporary Capacity 0
Total Capacity Loss (3,972)
(300)
0
(300)
'14
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
201 1 through 20'17
Section lV
lnventory of Facilities
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
INVENTORY OF FACILITIES
Table IV. I shows the current inventory of pennanent 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 undesiable stress on existing
physical plants. Core facilities (i.e. gymnasiums, restrooms, kitchens, labs, lockers, libraries, etc.) are not of
sufficient size or quantity to handle the increased school population served by adding relocatable classrooms.
Table
IV.l
Permanent Facilities
@ OSPI Rated Capacity
(l.Iovember 2010)
District School Facilities
Buildine Canacity Acres Address
Elementary Schools
Washington Elementary 486 5.40 20 E Street Northeast. Aubum WA. 98002
Terminal Park Elementarv 408 6.70 1101 D Street Southeast, Aubum WA, 98002
Dick Scobee Elementarv 477 10.50 l03l l4th StreetNortheast. Aubum WA" 98002
Pioneer Elementary 441 8.30 2301 M Street Southeast, Aubum W4.98002
Chinook Elementary 444 8.75 3502 Auburn Way South, Auburn WA, 98092
Lea Hill Element¿ry 450 10.00 30908 l24th Avenue Southeast, Auburn WA 98092
Gildo Rev Elementarv 551 10.00 1005 37th Sheet Southeast. Auburn WA" 98002
Evergreen Heishts Elem.456 8.09 5602 South 316th. Aubum W4.98001
Alpac Elementary 497 10.60 310 Milwaukee Boulevard North, Pacific WA. 98047
Lake View Elementarv 559 16.40 16401 Southeast 318th Street. Auburn WA. 98092
Hazelwood Elementary 580 12.67 11815 Southeast 304th Street. Auburn WA" 98092
Ilalko Elementary 585 12.00 301 Oravetz Place Southeast, Aubum WA, 98092
Lakeland Hills Elementarv 594 12.00 1020 Evergreen Way SE, Aubum WA, 98092
Arthur Jacobsen Elementary 6t4 10.00 29205 132"" St¡eet SE, Auburn WAe 98092
ELEMCAPACITY 7,138
Middle Schools
Cascade Middle School 829 17.30 1015 24t'h Street Northeast, Auburn WA. 98002
Olympic Middle School 921 17.40 1825 K Street Southeast. Aubum WA. 98002
Rainier Middle School 843 26.33 30620 116th Avenue Southeast. Auburn WA 98092
Mt. Baker Middle School 837 30.88 620 37th Street Southeast. Auburn WA. 98002
MS CAPACITY 3.430
Senior Hieh Schools
West Aubum Hieh School 233 5. 10 401 West Marn Street. Auburn WA. 98001
Auburn Senior Hieh 2.101 18.60 800 Fourth Street Northeast, Aubum WA. 98002
AubumRiverside HS 1.381 33.00 501 Oravetz Road, Aubum WÀ 98092
Aubum Morurtainview HS 1.443 40.00 28900 I24th Ave SE. Auburn WA" 98092
SH CAPACITY 5-164
16
*TAP - Transition Assistance Program for 1 year
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2010 through 2017
INVENTORY OF FACILITIES
students with special needs
TABLE
tv.2
TEM PORARY/RELOCATABLE
FACILITIES INVENTORY
(March 2011)
Elementary Location 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
Washington
Terminal Park
Dick Scobee
Pioneer
Chinook
Lea Hill
Gildo Rey
Evergreen Heights
Alpac
Lake View
Hazelwood
llalko
Lakeland Hills Elementary
Arthur Jacobsen Elementary
0
2
3
5
5
o
0
2
2
0
a
2
0
0
2
3
3
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
3
5
2
o
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
3
3
5
2
6
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
3
e
5
2
6
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
0
2
3
3
5
2
6
2
2
2
0
2
4
0
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL CAPACITY
32
848
32
848
32
848
33
875
33
875
33
875
33
875
Middle School Location 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
Cascade
Olympic
Rainier
Mt. Baker
0
0
5
I
0
0
5
I
0
0
5
I
0
0
7
I
2
2
7
I
2
2
I
8
a
2
I
I
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL CAPACITY
13
390
13
390
13
390
15
450
19
570
20
600
2A
600
Sr. Hiqh School Location 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
West Auburn
Auburn High School
Auburn High School - *TAP
Auburn Riverside
Auburn Mountainview
0
12
1
13
0
0
12
1
13
0
U
12
I
13
0
0
12
1
13
0
1
12
1
13
0
1
12
1
13
0
1
12
1
'13
0
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL CAPACITY
26
780
26
780
26
780
26
780
27
810
27
810
27
810
COMBINED TOTAL UNITS
COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY
71
2,018
71
2,O18
71
2,018
74
2.105
79
2,255
80
2,285
80
2,285
17
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2011 through2017
Section V
Pupil Capacity
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
201 1 through 201 7
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
3t
1t
1/ New facilities shown in 2015-16 and 2016-17 are not funded under the current Capital Facilities Plan.
4 Ïhe Standard of Service represents 25.38o/o of SPI capacity. When new facilities are added the Standard
of Service computations are decreased to 23.35% of SPI capacity.
3/ Students beyond the capaciÇ are accomodated in other spaces (commons, library, theater, shared teaching space).
3t
Gapacity
W|TH rclocatables
Table V.1
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-'t5 201 5-16 2016-17
15,732
(1.954)
15,732
(1,e54)
15,732
(1 ,954)
15,732
(1,868)
15,732
(1 ,718)
'15,732
800
(1,688)(1.688)
16,532
585
13,778
14,492
(704)
2,018
(3.972)
13,778
14,586
(808)
2,0't8
ß.972\
13,778
14,828
(1 ,050)
2,018
ß.972
13,864
15,160
(1,2s6)
2,105
(3.972)
14,014
15,582
(1,568)
2,255
(3.972\
14,844
15,924
(1,080)
2,285
ß.972\
15,429
16,286
(857)
2,285
(3,972)
SPI Capacity
SPI Capacity-New Elem
SPI Capacity- New MS
Capacity Adjustments
Net Capacity
CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS
lnclude Relocatable
"14
B.
c.
D.
E.
D Enrollment
Exclude SOS
Surplus/Deficit
A.
4.1
4.2
(1,e54)(1,954)(1,e54)(1,868)(1 ,718)(1,688)(1,688)
Gapacity
WTHOUT rclocatables
Table V.2
2010-11 2011-'t2 2012-',13 2013-14 2014-15 201 5-16 2016-17
15,732
(3,972\
't5,732
ß.972\
15,732
ß.972\
15,732
(3.972\
15,732
(3.972\
15,732
800
(3.972\(3,972)
16,532
585
(3.972\
11,760
14,482
(2,722)
ß.972\
11,760
14,586
(2,826)
ß.972\
11,760
14,828
(3,068)
(3,e72)
11,760
1 5,160
(3,400)
(3,s72)
11,760
15,582
(3,822)
(3,972)
12,560
15,924
(3,364)
(3,972)
13,145
16,286
(3,141)
Total Adjustments
SPI Capacity
SPI Capacity-New Elem
SPI Gapacity- New MS
Capacity Adjustments
Net Capacity
ASD Surplus/Deficit
CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS
Exclude SOS 14
B
c
D
E.
ASD Enrollment
A.
4.1
4.2
(3,972)(3,972)(3,972)(3,s72)(3,972)(3,e72)(3,972)
l9
Aubum School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 lhrough2OlT
PUPIL CAPACIryPERMANENT FACILITIES
@ SPI Rated Capacity
(March 2011)
A.Schools
B. Middle Schools
C. Senior Schools
Buildinq 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
Washington
Terminal Park
Dick Scobee
Pioneer
Chinook
Lea Hill
Gildo Rey
Evergreen Heights
Alpac
Lake View
Hazelwood
llalko
Lakeland Hills
Arthur Jacobsen
Elementary #15
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
486
408
477
441
440
450
551
456
497
559
580
585
594
614
585
ELEM CAPACITY 7,1 38 7,1 38 7,1 38 7,1 38 7,138 7,1 38 7,723
Buildino 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 20't4-15 201 5-1 6 2016-17
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 CAPACITY 3,430 3,430 3,430 3,430 3,430 4,230 4.230
Buildino 2010-'t'l 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 201 5-1 6 20'16-17
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 CAPACITY 5,r64 5,1 64 5.1 64 5.1 64 5,164 5,'t64 5,164
COMBINED CAPACITY 1 732 1 732 1 732 1 732 l6 '17 '117
20
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2011 through2017
Section Vl
Capital Construction Plan
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
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 lilled '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 19g6 Bond
proposition provided funding to enhance the capacity of each facility to accommodate
technological applications. 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, leaming 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 April28, 1998 that provided $8,OOO,OO0 oversix
years to address some of the technology needs of the District; and $5,000,000 to provide funds
to acquire school sites.
During the 1997-98 school year, a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by
the Auburn and Dieringer School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the
school population from an area that includes a large development known as Lakeland South.
Lakeland South at that time was immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the Aubum
School District. On June 16, 1998 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a
joint meeting of the Aubum and Dieringer Boards of Directors. On June 22, 1998 the Aubum
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-g8
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 20Q2, 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
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through 2017
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 a168.71o/o 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 Hill area on a 10 acre site and opened in the Fall of 20Q7. 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 schoolyear, the Board convened a sixth Citizen's Ad Hoc committee to again
study and make recommendations aboutthe 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 schoolyear, 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 Aubum 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 measure that would have updated24 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 a|55.17o/o. The levy will fund $46.4 million of needed improvement projects at 24
sites over the next seven school years. Planning for the replacement of aging schoolÀ has
started with educationalspecifications and schematic design process beginning in 2010. A
future bond issue will be necessary to fund these projects.
The Special Education Transition Facility opened in February of 2010
for students with disabilities that are 18 to 21 years old.
This facility is designed
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.
z-)
1l
1l
1l
1l
Auburn School District No. 408
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2011 through20'17
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
The District is projecting 1800 additional students within the six year period including the
Lakeland, Lea Hill, and north Aubum 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 cunent 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 construction. The district is eligible for
state matching funds for modernization.
2011-17 Gapital Gonstruction Plan
(March 2011)
Proiect Funded
Projected
Cost
Fund
Source
Project Timelines
't0-11 't1-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17
All Facilities -
Technology
Modernization
Yes $12,000,000
2006
6 Year
Cap Levy
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
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2011 through2017
Section Vll
lmpact Fees
Aubum School District No. 4O8CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN2011 through 2017IMPACT FEE COMPUTATION (Spríng 2011)Middle School #5 within 6 year periodElementary #15 within 6 year periodI. SITE COST PER RESIDENCEFormula: ((Acres x Costx Student Factoril, PERMANENT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCEFormula:x Studentxnent to TotalIII. TEMPORARY FACIUTY CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCEFormula: ((Facilx Studentto TotalleIV. STATE MATCH CREDIT PER RESIÐENCEFormula: (Boeckh lndex x SPIx District Match x StudentXCosUMulti Family$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00CosVSinqle Family$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.æo.12440.05600.0519Student Generation FactorSingle Family Multi Family0.31300.15400.1650Fac¡lityCapacitv5508æ1500Cost/Acre$0$0$0SiteAcreage1225Q'{Elem (K- 5)Middle Sch (6 -Sr High (9 - 12)CosVMulti Family$7,6A.22$4,732.U$2,871.38$0.00CosVSinqle Family$11,946.60$7,896.29$0.00$19,U2.89o.12Æ0.05600.0519Student Generation FactorSingle Family Multi Family0.31300"15¿100.1650% Perm Sq FVTotal Sq Ft0.96520.96520.9652SizeFacility5508001500FacilityCost$21,750,0m$42,500,0m$0Elem (K- 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr High (9 - 12)CosVMulti Familv$21.19$8.45$0.00$29.64Cost/Sinqle Family$53.48$23.24$0.00$76.72Student Generation FactorSingle Family Multi Familyo.12400.05600.05190.31300.15¿100.1650tem% Temp Sq FVTotal Sq Ft0.03480.03480.0348FacilitySize26.53030FacilityCost$130,000$130,000$0Elem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr High (9 - 12)$2,532.19CosVMulti Family$1,179.68$639.31$713.20Cost/Single Family$2,977.73$1,7s8.10$2,267.39$7,æ3.22o.12400.05600.0519Student Generation FactorSingle Family Multi Family0.3130O.1s¿to0.1650DistrictMatch58.67"/o58.670458.670ÁSPIFootage90108130Boeckhlndex$180.17$180.17$1 80.1 7Elem (K - 5)Mid Sch (6 - 8)Sr Hish (9 - 12)26
V. TAX CREDIT PER RESIÐENCEFormula: Expressed as the present value of an annuityTC = PV(interest rate,discount period,average assd value x tax rate)W. DEWLOPER PROWDED FACILITY CREÐITFormula: (Value of Site or Facility/Number of dwelling units)Auburn School District No. ¿lOBCAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN2011 through 2017Tax CreditMulti Family.22Tax Cred¡tSingle Family$1,801.79Number ofYearsBnd Byr lndxAnn lnt RateCun Dbt ServTax RateAve ResidAssd Value$0.93$0.934.91o/o4.910Á1010$248,765$67Single FamilyMultiFacil Credit(nNo. of UnitsValue$0.00MulfiMultiFamily55î.30PER UNIT IMPACT FEESSingleFamilyFEERECAPSUMMARY$0.00$19,842.89$76.72($7,003.22)$o.00$7,60/..22$29.64($2,s32.1CostsPermanent Facility Const CostsFacility CostsMatch CreditCredit$4,610.44$2,305.22$11,11Discount)FEE (50% Discount)Credit$5,557.30$0.00Fee27
Sl'fe CosfAuburn School District No. 4O8CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN2011MULTI FAMILYSr High9-120.052150030$130,00040$326,A271,710,83361,7401,772,57396.52o/o3.ßo/o130$1 80.1 7æ.67o/o41.æoÀ$67,821$0.934.910ÃMid Sch6-80.056800$42,500,0m30$130,00025$326,8271,710,83361,7Æ1,772,57396.520Á3.480Á108$180.1758.67%41.33o/o$67,82r$0.934.910ÂElemK-5o.124550$21,7s0,00026.s$130,00012$326,8271,710,83361,7401,772,573%.52o/o3.480Á90$180.1 758.6701641.æo/o$67,821$0.934.910ÁSINGLE FAMILYSr High9-120.165150030$130,00040$326,e271 ,710,83361,7401,772,57396.52%3.ßo/o130$1 80.1 758.6701641.330Á$248,76s$0.934.91o/oMid Sch6-80.154800$42,500,0æ30$130,0m25$326,8271,710,8æ6't,7Æ1,772,57396.52%3.48o/o108$1 80.1 758.67o/e41.33o/o$248,765$0.934.910ÂElemK-50.313550$21,750,00026.5$130,00012$326,8271,710,83361,7401,772,57396.52o/o3.49oÁ90$180.1758.67"/"41.33o/"$248,765$0.934.910ÂIMPACT FEE ELEMENTSSingle Family - Aubum actual count (3/10)Elementary Cost Estimates Feb 2008Middle School Cost Estimate Feb 2008ASD District Standard of Service.Grades K- 5 @ 26.5 and 6 - 12 @ 30.Relocatables, including site \,1,ork, set up, and furnishingASD District Standard or SPI MinimumSee belowSPI Rpt #3 dated Nov 23, 201070 portables at 832 sq. fr. each + TAP 3500Sum of Permanent and Temporary abovePermanent Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. FoohgeTemporary Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. FootageFrom SPI RegulationsFrom SPI schedule for March 201'lFrom SPI Vllebpage March 2011ComputedKing County Department of Assessments March 2011(multi family weighted average includes condos)Cunent Fiscal YearCurrent Rate - (Bond Buyer 20 lndex March 201 I )FactorNew Fac Capac¡tyNew Facility CostRm CapacityTemp Facility CostSite AcreageSite CosVAcrePerm Sq Footageemp Sq Footageotal Sq FoohgeoÁ - Perm Facilities% - Temp FacilitiesI Sq FVStudentBoeckh lndexMatch 0,6 - StateMatch % - DistrictDist Aver AVDebt Serv Tax RateO Bond lnt RateProjectedCosUAcre$326,827Latest Dateof Acquisition2014SitesRequiredElementaryProjected Annuallnflation Factor3.000/6AdjustedPresent Day$310,687$223,710$336.747$290,381PurchaseCoslAcre$225,087$217,194$336,747$262,095PurchasePrice$2,701,O43$7,601,799$9,092,160$19,39s,002PurchaseYear200220082009Acreage12.0035.0027,OO74.OORecent PropertyAcquisitionsLakelandLabradorLakeland EastTotal2A
Auburn School District No. 408
Capital Facilities Plan
2011 through2017
Section Vlll
Appendix
Appendix 4.1 - Student Enrollment Projections
Appendix 4.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections
Appendix 4.3 - Student Generation Survey
Appendix A.l - Student Enrollment Projections
Auburn School District #408
Student Enrollment Proj ections
October 2010
Introtluction
The projective techniques give some consideration to historical and current data as a basis for
forecasting the future. In addition, the 'projector' must make certain assumptions about the operant
variables within the data being used. These assumptions are 'Judgmental" by definition. Forecasting
can be defined as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to the future, or from the known
to the unknown. The attached tabular data reviews the history of sfudent 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 modorates the impact of singular factors by averaging data over thirteen
years and sixyears respectively. The results provide atrend, which reflects a long (l3-year) and a short
(6-year) base from which to extrapolate.
. Two methods of estimating the nurnber of kindergarten students havs been used. The first uses the
avercge increase or decrease over the past 13 and 6-year time frame and adds it to each succeeding
year. The second derives what the average percentage Auburn kindergartners have been of live births
in King County for the past 5 years and uses this to project the subsequent fouryears.
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 Historyt o.f 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 in Prqiections - page 4
This table shows the threo basic factors derived from the data in Table l. These factors have been
used in the subsequent projections. The three factors are:
1. Factor 1 - Average Pupil Change Between Grade Levels
This factor is sometimes referred to as the "holding power" or "cohort survival." It is a
measure of the number of pupils gained or lost as they move from one grade level to the
next.
2. X'actor 2 - Average Pupil Change by Grade Level
This factor is the average change at eachgrade level over the 13 or 6-year period.
3. Factor 3 - Auburn School District Kindergarten Enrollment as a Function of King
County Live Births.
This factor calculates what percent each kindergarten class was of the King County live
births in the 5 previous years. From this information has been extrapolated the
kindergarten pupils expected for the next 4 years.
Table 3 - Pro.iection Models - pages 5-13
This set of tables utilizes the above mentioned variables and generates several projections. The
models are explained briefly below.
tr Table 3.13 (pg 5) - shows a projection based on the l3-year average gain in kindergarten
(Factor 2) and the l3-year average change between grade levels (Factor 1). The datais
shown for the district as a whole.
E Table 3.6 (pg 5) - shows a projection using the same scheme as Table 3.13 except it
shortens the historical to only the most recent 6 years.
tr Table 3.13A and 3.64 (pg 6) - uses the same factors above except Factor 3 is substituted
for Factor 2. The kindergarten rates are derived from the King County live births instead
of the average gain.
tr Tables 38.13,38.6,38.13A,38.6A, fOe 7) - breaks out the K-5 grades from the district
projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade
articulation.
tr Tables 3MS.13, 3MS.6, 3MS.134, 3MS.6A (pg 8) - breaks out the 6-8 grades from the
district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gainby
grade articulation.
tr Tables 3SH.13, 3SH.6, 3SH.13A, 3SH.6A (pg 9) - breaks out the 9-12 gradesfrom the
district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by
grade articulation.
tr Table 4 (pg 10) - Collects the four projection models by grade group for ease of
comparison.
tr Table 5 þgs 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.
Summarv
This year wo had a second consecutive year of unprecedented decline in student enrollment of 107
students. The loss ofthose students changes our historical average gain in students. Over the past 6
years the gain is now .97%o annually down from \.S3o/o;that equates to 135 students down from 213
in prior projections. Over the past 13 years the average gain has dropped from l.4I%oto .92Vo and
equates to 122 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 dishict.
The models show changes in the next six years:. Elementary level shows increase rangingfrom44g to 545. (paga7). Middle School lovel shows increase ranging from 190 to 2ll. (page 8). High School level shows increases ranging from 32 to 104. (page 9)
The models show these changes looking forwmd thirteen years:I Elementary level shows increase ranging from 911 to 1091. (page 7). Middle School level shows increase ranging from 414 to 49B. (page 8). High School level shows increase ranging from 485 to 531. (page 9)
This data does not factor new developments that are currently under construction or in the planning
stages.
2
Actuall0-1110t 0'1066'1016't 0131024107910411060'l't12't2211238't258'134414482Percent of GainPupil Gain0.84o/o1090.64%(0.25)0/62.O5o/o275(O.22)o/o2.34o/o 0.98%330 1410.990Á144(0.78)%84326416oó Gain for 1st 6 years.O.92o/o'122oÁ Gain for6 years0.97%135Gain for 1st 6Gain for last 6% Gain for 13 years.0.950Á124Gain for 1309-1010321033998993'1073103010401125103'l12441277130314101458908-o99981015102410481cø,41069109610341076125613r'.1135013521470307{899699510't 99971057107810071057103313371368135212631455906-07941101210021031'10499981058101410721372140013221147144'1805-06955963963'too2939't0651004102811371379138311821088I 408804-o58929609929181016957102011241'13014611261105588613672TABLE ThirteenYear H¡story of October 1 Enrollments(Rev 10/1 0)103-04922982909996947101811111 131105214731249101 09021370202-039059009619409731 06211441021't 026144112349279331342701-o284696894996614771't08102810't710041405't07310909301346100-ol8499431015105414129839E110159741202113210368559't2905914I 0311071101 I9989791 00312221157't0678651313599-001 305198/998549951023I 009974982962939959'l 156I 1651007g',t712942GRADEKDG12345b7II'101112TOTALSAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 20f 0101030926208724930955198623932132172339350613840TABLE1A Grade Group CombinationsKDG8542872583767998492807585668379122731584468428462763591 46942905276657416821592228135774688589228445735675s955288158876891u129556033709'l996301061427149998303761 9872941032306361597199K,1K-K-,25b35b3027498s59453012500759882850493259302883506860962801483659402887445259632870444358632928493259363045509261 50301 I51 4661 533087520062963024512761676-87 -a7-92860'189830542970198931 9129801982320430492021342631512047348832942't83Sbct)32742254371531 69216535443't44208634583097209034273206211033663196215634009-1210-124245308942253023431130894498309345353094463431 61466332025032365352413869532039835299404352343990prj1 0- l 1Page 3October 2010
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2010TABLE Factors Used in Projections218.40to717.Wto813.20to9216.207.201.40 |total 335.4011.O020.607.406.4015.208Source: Center for Health SÞtistics, Washington State Department of HealthFac{orAverage PupilLevelsChange Betvræen Grade'l13 YEAR BASE6 YEAR BASEKto 153.33Kto I39.801lo27.581to28.202to312to315.203to43to435.204to518.834to55to610.58toGO.¿f06to716.33TtoB i 13.838to9to 10to 1010to1110to1111 to 121'l lo 12totalFactor 'l is the average gain or loss of pupils as theymove from one grade level to the next. Factor 1 usesORofFactor3AUBURN SCHOOLDISTRICT KINDERGARTEN ENROLLMENTSAS FUNCTION OF KING COUNry LIVE BIRTH RATESYEAROFENROLLADJUSTEDLrvE I rocBRrHs IENRoL,lAUBURN KINDERGARTENENROLLMENT AS A OÁ OFADJUSTED LIVE BIRTHS78t79791808018181t8242t8383t8484/8585/8686/878718888/8989/9090/9191t9292t9393t94941959s/9696/9797/9898/9999/0000/0101to202t0303to404tos05/0606/07a7tog08/090911010t111M212t1313t1414t1515/1613,53913,478't3,52413,68714,37514,958't 6,048't 6,70817,00014,24118,62618,82719,51019,89321,A5221 ,62424,06226,35824,11624,97321,57322,12924,O1322,7172't,62222,42322,O7522,32722,O1421,83522,24222,72622,74523,72324,64325,09425,101598618600588698bbb72679282976981787',!858909920930927954963978854849912846905922892955941996998103210104.417o/o4.585o/o4.4360/04.296%4.8560/64.452o/o4.5240Á4.740o/o4.8760/04.2160/04.3860Á4.626%4.398o/o4.5690Á4.21Oo/o4.3010Á3.853%3.619%3.9930Á4.6630Á3.959%3-837o/o3.7980Ã3.724o/o4.1860/04.1860/04.O41o/o4.2770Á',u4101 5,o581t0tActual<-Prjc'td Average<-Prjctd Average<-Prjctd Average<-Prjctd Average* number from DOH113rdsBIRTHS19721973197419751976197719781979I 9801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199r1992199319941995'1996'199719981 9992000200120022003200420052006200720082009'13,71913,449't3,49313,54013,76'l14,642'15,09616,524't6,80017,10018,81 118,53318,97419,778'19,9s122,80321,O3425,57626,74922,79920,06022,33022,O2925,00521,57321,64622,21222,OA722,4A721,77821 ,86322,43122,87422,64024,24424,90225,19025,0579,1468,9668,995I,4279,1749,78810,06411,01611,200'11,40012,U112,35512,64913,18513,30r15,20214,O23'17,05117,83315,19913,37314,44714,6E616,67014,38214,43114,80814,67114,99114,51914,57514,95415,24915J20't 6,16316,60116,79316,7054,5734,4834,4984,5134,5874,A945,0325,5085,6005,7006,2706,1786,3256,5936,6507,6017,O118,5258,9167,6006,6877,4437,3438,3357,'t917,2157,4047,3367,4967,2597,2887,4777,6257,5608,0818,3018,3978.3522/3rdsBIRTHSTOTALLIVEBIRTHSCAL.ENDARYEARFactor Average Pupil Change Bycrade Level213 YEAR BASE6 YEAR BASEK13.00K15.9222't0.60J0.3332.2044.17417.0058.0852.80b6.58b710.087I12.7595.42l06.08l01120.9211121251 .20Fad.ot 2 is the average change in grade level sizefrom94/95 OR 01/02.prjl0-1 1Page 4October 2010
AUBURN SGHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2010PROJ23-2416556PROJ22t2316387PROJ21t2216234PROJ20t2116036PROJ19t201 5829PROJ18t1915622PROJ17t18I 5465PROJ16t',t7't5271PROJ'1511615093PROJ14t1514967PROJ13t141 4669PROJ12t',t31447'lPROJ1',U1214397ACTUAL10¡1114442DISTRICT PROJECTIONSElased on 13 Year HistoryTABLE3.13GRADEKDG12345b78o101112TOTALS1010't 0661016101310241 07910411 06011121221123812s81344I 063'to741 0341 03810431 0901057'to74'14051 1511147I 19810361076107110921059'1o571053I 106'to711367't3351061108710491089I 08410891117107A106710701120136412971245100011021097110211141 1361089'108410a4'1413129512471184't07511151110I 11511271 13311461 105109713771343120411461088112811231128114011461't43116211191390130712531'.t431 101I'1411136114'l11531159I 1561160117614121321121611921154114911541 1661172I 169117311i4146913421230I 156112711671162116711791 18511421 186118714671400't25111701140I 1801175'I 18011921 1981 1951 19912AO'1480139713091 1911179't21912't41z',t9123112371234123412391519143613321259I 153't 1931 188'11931205121112081212121314931410130612491206120112061218't224't22112251226I 5061423'13191246198741416617A1.1Gain1.O3o/o169o.94041531.30o/o2061.33o/o2071.O20Á1581.27o/o1930.850/61272.O3o/o2941.37o/o198Percent of Gain (0.59)%PROJ23-24108711't61113111711 41114911381'1441174133213211264129E1.O7o/o1631 09811271't24112811521 16011491 1551157139013391284126'l0.88%1361.18o/o1831.0Eo/6170KDG,|2.345þ7II10't112TOTALS10101 0661016101310241 07910411 06011121221123812581344Percent of GainPupil Gain'11091 13E'I 1351 139't 1631't711 1601 1661 16813741397't30212851't201',t4911461 15011741182117 111771179138513811360130310211 0501074I 0311 04810421079I 058107313281228120112591032106110581089't0661067I 043I 0961071't28913351 l91't203I 043107210691473't't251085I 067I 060111012871297't2991 1931054't083108010841 10811431085104410731326129512601300I 0651094I 091I 0951119112711431'to21097'1289I 333125812611076110511021 1061130113811271160111513131296129612591 t3lI 16011571 1611 1851 19311821 188I 1901396139213441362114211711 1681172I 1961204I 1931199't20114071403135513451 15311A211791 18312071215't2041210121214181414136613560.090Á12O.75Vo1081.2jo/o't761.33o/o't974.670/o1001.OAo/o1501.O3%163O,72o/o1160.E90ó143PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ14t19PROJ't7118PRo.J16t17PROJ15/16PROJ14t15TABLE3.6DISTRICT PROJECTIONSBased on 6 Year HistoryPROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ1 1t12ACTUAL10t11GRADEprjl0-1 1Page 5October 2010
PROJ23-24K123456789101112TOTALS1010106610't6101314241079.10411060'l't12122'.1123812s81344lAM1 06310741 0341 0381 043'1090'105710741 405115111471 1981015106710711092105910571053I 10610711367't335106110a710581068I 0751089't117107810671470112013641297't24510001 101'11121076109311141 136r 089108410841413't29512071144115411191 09411181 1331',!461 1051 09713771343120411461162I 13811'19113711431162111913901307125311431180't't62113711471160117614121321't2't61192't2051 1811't4811641174146913421230115612241't921't64117714671400125111701234120811781470't39713091 1911251122214711401130612491265151514021310124615581445131 1'1250Percent of cain (0.65)%Pupil Gain (94)O-37olo531.44o/o2072.30o/o337PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ'18t19PROJ17t't8PROJ16t17PROJ1s/16PROJ14t15TABLE DISTRICTPROJECTIONS3.134 Based on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistoryPROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ11t't2ACTUAL1An1GRADEAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2010PROJ23-24KDG12345Þ789't01112TOTALS10t01066101610131024107910411060't't12't22112381258134410141 05010741 031't 048104210791 0581073't3281228'12011 25910151054105810891066106710431096107'l124913351 191120310581054't46210731125108510671060111012871297't2991 1931't01109810631077I 1081143I 08510841073't326129512601300't1411 1061478111211271143110210971289I 33312541261114911211113113111271160111513131256129612591164't1571131113111 4411741332'132112601294'119911751',t3211481157139013391284126112't8117511491 1611374139713021285121411921162137713811360130312351206137A13851344136212481422'13851348134514651429't3491349Percent of GainPupil Gain0.O4o/o50.630Á911.3',t%191'1.650/0244PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJr8/19PROJ17t14PROJ16t17PROJ15/16PROJ14t15TABLE3.64DISTRICT PROJECTIONSElased on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistoryPROJ13t14PROJ12t',t3PROJ1 1t12ACTUAL10111GRADEptjlo-11Page 6October 2010
yearyearyearyearyearI-KUJ23-24KUG10101 066101 610131o.2410791o'231 06310741 0341 036104310361076147110921059I 057104910891084108911171078'lUö¿1 U/311151110111511271 1331 Uöö11241123112811401'14611U1'11411 t36114111531159111 41154114911541166117211271167'116211671179I'1851144I 18011751 1801192't 1981 1531 193't 1881 1931205121'l1 16612061201120612141224117912191214121912311237123451102109711021114I 1367299Gain 67116 1151076278787A787A7A78783E.6Ehsed on 6 Year HI-K(JJ23-24KL}G10101 06610161013102410791o.211 05010741 0311 04E104210321061105810891066106710431072106910731125108510541083108010841 10E11431 0651 0941 0911 0951119112710761105110211061 130I1381o471t16't 113111711411149109E11271124112811521 1601 1091 138I 135I 139I 1631171112411491146I 1501174114211311 16011571f 6l1t E5I 1931142117',!I 1681172119612041 15311821179I 18312071215123457119Percent of GainPuoil Gain0.95%1.700Â1061.460/0931.3301,860.59%391.oo% o.99% 0.960ÁO.97o/o660.96%0.95%bb4.94o/oO.94o/oÞb59Þbtrb666666Pf<()J23-24K123451UlUI 0661016I 0131024I 0791 U]41 06314741034I 038I 0431 U]5146710711 0921059't 0571 U5ö10681 075't 0891117'10781 1U11112I 076'109311141 136115411191 0941118l t33't16211381119113711801162113712051 1811224Ferænt ot (jarn u.vJ,,,6 1 .51,,/6 1 .9b-%2.25"/o146Pupil Gain 589s 125rK(JJ22t2372?'lf,K(JJ22t237053ut(oJ22t23PROJ21t227't43T'K(JJ21t226CA7PT{(JJ21t22PT(OJ20t217065rKTJJ20t216j321PT<(JJ20t21PT{(JJ19t206987FK(JJ19t206455PROJ't9t20FKUJI 8ll96909PT{QJ18/196749PROJ18/19I-K¡JJ17t\a6831PT{OJ17t1A6723PROJ17t14PT{()J16t176753PK()J16t176657PROJ161't7t-,t(oJ15/166675I-K(JJ15/166591PROJ'15t16I-K(JJ14t156613I-KUJ14t156552Pf(OJ14t156631IABLE K.5PROJECTIONS3E.13 Elased on 13 Year History¡.KUJ13t't46506T'KUJ13t146466IAtsLL,3E.13AK - 5 PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistorvPf<9J13t1464U,5PT{OJ12t136391Pf(OJ12t136373PK(JJ12t136360t-t<oJ't'u126275PT<()J't1t12626'7PROJ1 1t12bzbbAç I UAL'tot116204A(;I UAL10t116204ACTUAL10t't16204GRADEGRADEK-5TOTGRADEAUBURN SCHOOL'DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2010yeatPROJ23-24KDG10101066r0l6I 01310241 07910141050107410311048'to4210151054105810891066106710581054106210731125108511011098106310771 108114312451'.t411 1061 07811121127114911211113I 1311164115711311199117512',t8Fercenl 01 (jaln U.ö3"/6 1.42"/o1.t1','/o't082.lJ6"/o133Pupil Gain 5289PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PRAJ14t19PT{()J17t14PT(C)J16t17PK(JJ15/16l.t<()J14t156590IAtsLb, K.5 PF(AJECTIONS3E.64 Elased on Birth Rates & 6 Year H¡storyI-KUJ13t146,457PROJ12t136349PROJ11t126260ACTUAL'tot116?OAGRADEK.5 TÔTprjl0-l 1Page 7October 2010
6 yearyear211498PROJ23-24b7I10411 0601 112I 09010571074I 053110610711067107011201089108410841146I 1051 097't143116211191156'1 16011761 1691173't't741182I 18611471 1951 199120012AA12121213't221122512261234123412393711Percent of Gain O.24o/oPupil Gain 80.300/6100.81 0/626(0.03)oÁ(1)2.85o/o932.28o/o761.980Á68O.670/0'l .1 1o/o391.100Á391.090/6391.47o/o391.060Á3923PROJ22!233672PROJ21t223633PROJ20t213594PROJ19t203555PROJ18/19351 6PROJ17t't83492PROJ't6t173425PROJ15/163348PROJ14t153256MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSElased on 13 Year HistoryPROJ13t143257PROJ12t133231PROJ11t123221ACTUAL10t113213TABLE3MS.13GRADE6-8TOTAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 201013 year4146 year190PROJ23-24Þ7I10411 060111210791 05810731043I 0961071106710601110108510841073114311021 0971127116011151138I'14411741149I 1551157I 160I 1661 168't1711't77't1791182'1't881 190I 1931 1991201't204121012123627Percent of Ga¡n (0.07)0Á -.O1o/o.81o/o2618o/ot)3.100ó1011.84o/o60L560Á5317o/o6.95oÁ .94o/o .94o/o .93o/" .92o/oPupil Gain(2) (0)3333333333PROJ22t233594PROJ21t223561PROJ20t213528PROJ19t203495PROJI 81193462PROJ17t't83456PROJ'16t173403PROJ15/163343PROJ14t153242MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSEþsed on 6 Year HistoryPROJ13t143236PROJ12t133210PROJ1'tt123211ACTUAL10t't13213TABLE3MS.6GRADE6-8TOT10 year4086 year211PROJ23-2467I10411 0601't121 0901057'to7410531106107'l't06710701'120108910841044't146I 105109711431162111911471 160't1761't4811641174't1921 164't1771234120811741251't2221265Percent of Gain O.24o/oPupil Gain 80.300Á100.81o/o26(0.03)0Á 2.85o/o 2.28o/o1.71o/o590.060,61.380Á482.47o/o(1)9376287PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t213621PROJ't9t203533PROJ18/193485PROJ't7t183483PROJ16t173425PROJ15/163348PROJ1 4t153256MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSBased on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistoryPROJ13t'143257PROJ12t133231PROJ11t123221ACTUAL'tot113213TABLE3MS.l3AGRADEÞ'10 year3606 year190PROJ23-24b781041I 06011121 0791 0581073104310961071106710601 11010851084107311431102I 09711271160111511311144117411321148115711751149I 16112181192't162123512061248Percent of Gain (0.07)0,6 (0.01)%Puoil Gain Q\ lû)0.810/626O.18o/ott3.100Át0l1.80o/o60'1 .350Á46(O.34)o/o(12)'l .41o/o482.50o/oa7PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t213573PROJ19t2A3485PROJ14t193437PROJ17t143449PROJ16t173403PROJ151163343PROJ141153242MIDDLE SCHOOL PROJECTIONSEÞsed on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistorvPROJ13t143236PROJ12t133210PROJ1'U'.tz3211ACTUAL10t113213TABLE3MS.5AGRADE6-8TOTprj10-1 IPage 8October 201 0
'13 year48513 year49313 year503yeat326 year1046 year32PROJ23-24o10111212211238125813441 4051 15111471 198136713351061I 087136412971245'100014't3129512071184137713431204114613901307125311 43't412132112't611921 469134212301 15614671400125111701480't39713091 1911 4931410't306'1249150614231319124615191436133212599-12 TOT5061490'l485049065098507050935141519752875377545754945546Percent of Gain (3.16)0Á (1 .05)oÁ'' .170Á573.910/6't92(0.56)0/6O.460/0240.930/6471.10o/o561.73o/o901.690/o891.51o/o8l0.670/0360.950Á52GainSR. HIGH PROJECTIONS3SH.6Eþsed on 6 YearPROJ23-2491011121221123A'125813441328122812011 25912891335r't9112031247129712991 193132612951260130012891 333't2581261131312961296125913321321126012981390't33912A41261't374't397130212851385138113601303'13961392't344'136214071403'1355't345141814't4136613565554Percent of cain (O.8no/o O.O4o/oPupil Gain A4\ 21.13o/o572.060/o105(0.75)o/o O.47o/o(3s) 240.860/61.230Á641.600/6a41.330/6711.'l8o/o64O.31o/o170.800Á4444PROJ23-249101112122'l123812581344I 405'1 1511 1471 198I 3671335106110a7'1364't2971245100014131295120711841377134312041146I 39013071253114314121321121611921469't34212301 1561467140012511170't470139713091t91147 1'1401't306124915151402'131012461558't445r31 't12505564Percent of Gain (3.16)oÁ(1.0s)%(51)1.17o/o573.91o/o192(0.56)0ó 0.460Á(28) 240.930/6471.10o/o561.73o/o901.5'loÁ801 .11o/o600.840ó1.66%91Puoil Gain fi60)46PROJ22t23PROJ24235510PROJ22t235472PROJ21t22PROJ21t225493PROJ21t225427PROJ20!21PROJ20t215429PROJ20t215367PROJ19t20PROJ19t2053s8PROJ19t2052A7PROJ1 8/19PROJ14t195273PROJ18t195197PROJ17t18PROJ17t185209PROJ17t185141PROJ16t17PROJ16t175165PROJ16t175093PROJ15t16PROJ'15t165141PROJ15/165070PROJ14t't5PROJ141155t80PROJ14t155098SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSBased on 13 YearHistoryPROJ13t14PROJ13t145075SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSElased on Birth Rates & 13 Year HistorvPROJ13t144906PROJ12!13PROJ12t't3501 9PROJ12t134850PROJ11t12PROJ1'U125017PROJ11t124901ACTUAL10!11ACTUAL10t115061ACTUAL10t1'l5061TABLE3SH.13GRADEGRADE9-t2 TOT3SH.13AGRADE9-12 TOTAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 201013 year5316 year104PROJ23-24I101112122'l1238I 25813441328122812011 2591289'1335I 19112031287129712991 1931326't2951260130012491 333125A1261'1313129612961259133213211260129813901339't284't261't37413971302128513771381136013031378'13851344136214221385134E134514651429134913495592Percent of Gain (0.84%Puoil Gain {44\o.440Á1.13%572.060/0105(0.75)oÁ(3s)O.47o/o 0.860/61.23o/o641.60%841.19o/o640.860/60.590Á321.660/6912442447PROJ22t235500PROJ21Í225468PROJ20t2'l5422PROJ19t205358PROJ14t195273PROJ17t1A5209PROJ161175165PROJ't5t16514'lPROJ14t155180SR. HIGH PROJECTIONSEþsed on Birth Rates & 6 Year HistoryPROJ13t145075PROJ12t13501 IPROJ1 1t12501 7ACTUAL10t115061TABLE35H.6AGRADE9-12 TOTprj10-1 1Page 9October 2010
'13 year169143t)year7A66PROJ23-24E.13E.6E.134E.6A1010I 0101 010r 0101023102'l1014101410361032r 015101 5104910431058I 05814621054I 101't't011075'10651088't076I 1011087111 410981't27't't09114011201 153I 1311 16611421't791 t53PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15116PROJ14t15PROJECTION COMPARISONSBYGRADE GROUPPROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ't1t12KINDERGARTENACTUAL10t11TABLE4GRADEAUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2010year9227686 year467383PROJ23-24E.13E.6E.134E.6A5198s1985 198s198525252465252524653555341534653345457542354275399555154985530548956005526566s55815730563657955691586057465925580 1599058566055591 161205966PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t't9PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ'15116PROJ14t15PROJ't3t14PROJ'12t13PROJ11t12GRD I -- GRD 5ACTUAL10t't'lGRADEI 3 year4984146 ¡'ear21'l190PROJ23-24MS.13MS.6MS.13AMS.6A321332133213321 332213211322',1321'l323132103231321032573236325732363256324232563242334833433348334334253403342534033492345634833449351 6346234853437355534953533348535943528362 ,|35733633356 13672359437113627PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20tz'lPROJ19t20PROJ18/19PROJ17t14PROJ16t17PROJt5/16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12t't3PROJ11t12GRD 6 -- GRD 8ACTUAL10t't'lGRADE1 3 year4854935035316 year3210432104PROJ23-24SH.I3SH.6SH..I3ASH.6A5061506150615061490150174901501748505019485050194906s0754906s075509851 805098518050705't4150705141509351 6550935t 65514152095141s20951 9752735197527352a7535852875358537754295367542254575493542754685494551 054725500554655545564s592PROJ22t23PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ18t19PROJ't7t18PROJ16t17PROJl5/16PROJ14t15PROJ13t14PROJ12t13PROJ't1t12GRD9-GRD12ACTUAL10t11GRADE1 3 year2074'18186 year789743PROJ23-243.133.63.13As.6A144A2144A2144A2144821439714494I 43881444714471146021444114574146691477814648147691496714975149851501315093150751s27'l15225I 54651 538915622155241 s8291 5708160361587816234160411638716157't655616300PROJ22123PROJ21t22PROJ20t21PROJ19t20PROJ'18/19PROJ17t18PROJ16t17PROJ15/16PROJ14t15PROJ't3t14PROJ12t't3PROJ11t12DISTRICT TOTALSACTUAL'tot11GRADEprjl0-l IPage'10October 2010
AUBURN scHooL DlsrRlcr sruDENT ENROLLMENT pRoJEciloNs - october 20,t0PROJECTION COMPARISONSBYGRADE GROUPTABLE5Total =Diff =o/o =October 1 Actual CountAND Projected CountsNumber Projection is unde(-) or over ActualPercent Project¡on is 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 Rates2002-03Total DiffoÁ57415723573557435776)oo((18)(Þ.1235)o0((0.31)%(0.10)oÁ0.03%0.61 0,62001.42DiffTotaloÁ5914s827580258395831)oo((e4(112)ei5)(ıJl)oo((. no/o(1 .89)oó(1.27)oÁ(1.40\oÁ2000-01Total Diffoh5844581 1566459195895)oo((33)(180)755l3.15%2.740Á1.51o/o'1.'150/0't999-00Total Diff%585657785735581 15785)oo((78)(1 21)(4s)(71j)oo((0.54)oÁ(0.96)oÁ(2.U)oÁ(2.93\oÁ'1998-99DiffTotaloa58376M9602659365917)oo(2121899980)oo(3.630/63.24o/o1.70041.37o/oGradesK-5ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri 3E.642002-o3Total DiffoÁ315131853't9231853192)oo(3441344'l)oo(1_080,6130o/o1.080Á1.300Á2001-o2D¡ffTotal%30493025301 13025301 ,|)oo((24)(38)(24)(38))oo((O.79)o/o(1 .25)o/o(0.7e)%(1.25)o/o2000-01Total Diff%29803023300930233009)oo({80)a¿s){80)(75))oo((2.62)0/o(2.46)0/0(2.62)0/0Q.46\0/01999-00DiffTotaloÃ29702927289529272895)oo((4s)(75)(43))00((2.64)0/0(2.7O)o/o(2.64)0/0(2.70\o/"1 998-99DiffTotaloa28602910247829102A7A)oo(50185018)o0(1.75o/o0.63%'1.750/00.630/6Grades6IACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.642002-o3Total Diffoa45354577459445774594)oo(42594259)oo(0.93%1.30o/o0.930/61.30o/o2001-o2DiffTotalVo44984455447644554476)o0((43)(22){4s){22})oo((0.96)0/6(0.49)0/6(0.e6)%(4.49)oÃ2000-01DiffTotaloÃ43114369439443694394)oo(58835883)oo((O.32)o/o(1.49)o/o(0.32)o/ofi.49\o/o1999.00DiffTotaloÃ422543014313430'l43t3)oo(76887688)00(2.74o/o1.51%2.74o/o1.510Á1 998-99DiffTotaloÂ424541 1041034',t104103)oo((rs5)(142)(135){142\)oo((3.18)%(3.35)0/6(3.18)0/6ß.3Ð%Grades9-12ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.642002-03Total DiffoÁ134271 348513521I 3505'13562)oo(O.43o/oO.70o/o0.580Á1.O1o/o)oo(589478135Total2001-02DiffoÁ134611 330713289133191 3318)oo(o.97040.50%0.100/6(0.33)%)oo((154)(172j{142)(143)2000-0'lTotal DiffoÁ1313513203I 30671331 I13298)oo((0.30)0,6(0.82)%(1.44)o/o(1 .89)oÁ)oo(68(68)'176163Total1999-00DiffoÁ130511 3006129431303912993)oo((4s)(1 08)$2)(s8))oo((O.34)o/o(0.83)%(0.09)oÁ(o.44\o/oI 998-99D¡ffTotaloÃ)oo(1276514{44)1294213069130021295612898)oo(0.98%0.500Á9.1 1o/o(0.34)oÁA[GradesACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.64prjl0-1 1Page 1 IOctober 2010
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2010PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUP (Cont¡nued)TABLE5Total =Diff =o/o =October 1 Actual Count AND Projec{ed CountsNumber Projection is unde() or over ActualPercent Projection is under(-) or over ActualPrj 3.13 - 13 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg tncreasePrj 3.134 13 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth RatesPrj 3.6A - 6 YEAR HISTORY & King Cty Birth Rates2007-o8DiffoÁTotal)oo({s7)(4)(83){48})oc((0.e3)%(0.07)0/6(1.35)oÁß.78\o/o614260856138605960942006-07Total Diff oÁ)oo((2.6s)%(1 .86)oó(2.72)o/oQ.O't\o/o60335871592158695912)oo((162){112)(164){121)2005-06Total DiffoÁ5887s750579557505784)00((137)10t\(13?)(1 03))oo((2.33)o/of .56)0/6(2.33)o/on.75\oÁ2004-05Total D¡ffoÁ)oo((0.49)0/6(o.34)oÁ(1.24)o/o(0.81)06s7355761582157095756)oo(2686(26)212003-o4Total DiffoÁ)oo((11e)(112)(16s)1143i)00((2.06)%(1.94)o/o(2.93)oÁ(2.48\o/o57745655566256055631GradesK-5ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prì 3E.642007-08D¡ffTotaloÁ3097310731 1631A73116)oo(10191019)oo(O.32o/o0.610Á0.32o/o0.61 0/62006-07Total Diff oÁ314431 313t4631 313146)oo((1 3)2(13)2)oo((O.41)o/o0.06%(O.41)o/o0.060Á2003-04DiffTotaloa31 693132313731323137)oo((J 1,}{.J¿J(órJ{32})o0((.1no/o(1 .01)o/o( ino/o(1 .01)0/62004-05Total Diffoa32743295331 13295331 1)oo(21372137þo((8.86)oÁ(6.06)0/6(8.88)0,6(6.06)0/62003-04Total DiffoÁ32943214321632143216)oo((80){78)(80)f7e))oo((2.43)o/o(2snoa(2.43)o/oQ3noÁGrades6IACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri 3E.642007-08Total DiffoÁ53205190519251905192)oo((1 30)(1 28)(1 30)(1 28))oo((2.44)'Ã(2.41)o/oQ.44)o/o(2.41)o/o2006-07Total DiffoÁ52415085508650855086)oo({1s6){1ss)(156)(1s5))oo((2.98)0/6(2.96)oÁ(2.98)oÁ(2.96)0,62AO3-O4Total DiffoÃ50324898488048984880)oo((134){1s2)(1 34){152))oo((2.66)0,6(3.O2)o/o(2.66)%ß.42\o/o2004-05Total Diff%46634783476947834769)oo('t20r06't20106)oo(5.900Á3.690Á5.900Á3.690/62003-04Total D¡ffoÃ46344630463946304639)oo((4)5(4)5)oo((0.09)0,6O.11o/o(0.0s)%O.11o/oGrades9-12ACTUALPrj 3E.'13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri 3E.64Total2007-o8Diffoa145591438214446I 435614402)oo((7n(1 13)(2û3)(157\)oc((1.22)o/o(O.78)o/o(1.39)oÁ(1.08)oÁ2006-07Total DiffoÁ144181408714153140851 4144)oo((3s1)(265)(333)Q74\)oo((2.30)o/o(.A4)o/o(2.31)o/o11 .90)oÁ2003-04Total DiffoÁ136721s499135421344713510)oo((173){13ü)(225){162))oo((.zno/o(0.95)oÁ(1 .65)oÁ(1.19o/o2004-05Total DiffoÁ136721383913901137A713836)oo(167229115164)m(1.22%1.670/0O.84o/o1-20o/n2003-04Total DiffoÃ1370213499135't71344913485)oo((2û3){185}(253){216})00((1 .48)0,6(1 .35)oÁ(1 .85)oó(1 .58)oÁAilGradesACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Pri 3E.64prj t o-1 1Page 12October 2010
AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS - October 2010PROJECTION COMPARISONSBY GRADE GROUP (Continued)TABLETotal =Diff =o/o =Oc{ober I Actual Count AND Projec{ed CountsNumber Projection is unde(-) or over ActualPercent Projection is underO or over ActualPrj 3.13 - 13 YEAR HISTORY & Us¡ng Average Kdg lncreasePrj 3.6 - 6 YEAR HISTORY & Using Average Kdg tncreasePrj 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, 9-12 articulationpattem.Articulat¡on pattern has nonumeric ¡mpact on efficacyof projec{ion models.AverageoÁ)oo((0.10)oÁ0.100Á(4.7't)o/o(0.49)%AverageDiff)oo(tzr\/.f A\(31)i1n201 0-1 IDiffTotaloÁ62086282632362526269)oo(741154461)oo(1.19o/o1.850óO.71o/o0.980/62009-10DiffTotaloÁ61596254629462376264)oo(9513578105)00(1.54o/o2.19o/o1.27o/o1-71o/o2008-09Total D¡ffoÃ61986179623761296172)oo(ile)39{6s)(26))oo((0.31)0/60.63oi6(1.1',t)oÁ(0.42)o/oGradesK-5ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.64AverageoÃ)oo((l.05)0/6(0.8Ð%(1 .05)0/6(0.85)0/6AverageDiff)oo((7)(s)(7)l9)2010-1IDiffTobloÁ3213323r',323632343236)o0(21232123)oo(0.650/6O.72o/o0.650ÁO.72o/o2009-1 0D¡ffTotaloÁ31 963242324332423243)oo(46474647)co(1.44o/o'' .47o/o1.44o/o1.47o/o2008-09Total D¡ffoÁ32063179319531793195)oo(QN(1 1)(f r))oo((0.84)oÁ(0.34)oÁ(0.84)0/6(O.34)o/oGrades6IACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.l3APrj 3E.6AAverageoÁ)m((0.68)%(0.75)0,6(0.68)oÁ(0.75)oÁAverageDiff)oo({4n(31)(47)(31)Total2010-11D¡ffoÁ50614921502749215027)00((140)(34)(140)(34))oo((2.7no/o(O.6no/o(2.7no/o(o.6noÁTotal2009-1 0DiffoÃ52345074512850745129)oo((1 60){1 06){1 60)(1 05))00((3.06)oÁ(2.O3)o/o(3.06)0,6(2.01)%2008-09Total DiffoÃ52995129s15551295155)oo((170)(144)(170)(144))oo((3.21)o/o(2.72)o/o(3.21)o/o(2.72)o/oGrades9-12ACTUALPrj 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.134Prj 3E.64Averageoa)oo((O.29)o/o(0.15)0,6(0.60)0/6(0.45)0/6AverageDiff)oo(tcÞ;(rbj(6ei(38)Total2010-11DiffoÁ14482144371 45861440714532)00((0.31)oÁ0.72o/o(0.52)oÁ0.35%)oo((45)104i7s)502009-10Total D¡ffoÁ1458914570146651455314636)oo((0.13)0,6o.520Á(0.2s)%O.32o/o)0c(76(36)472008-09DiffoÁTotal)oo((216)(116i(266)(181)'t47031MA7M5A71443714522)oo((.4no/o(o.79)o/o(l.81)oó(1.23)o/oAilGradesACTUALPû 3E.13Prj 3E.6Prj 3E.l3APrj 3E.64prjl0-1 1Page l3October 2010
Appendix A,2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
En rol lment Projections
Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2011BASE DATA. BUILDOUT SCHEDULEASSUMPTIONS:Student Generation FactorsUses Build Out Estimates received from developers.Student Generation Factors are updated Aubum data îor 2011 as altowed per King County OrdinanceIalres area labeled Lakeland Projects @ 50% and dividesacross 201 1 -i6Takes area labeled Kersey Project @ 50% divides across 2011-2016Takes area labeled Brtdges and other Lea Hill area developments and projectsacross ZO11-ZO1Tlncludes knownin N. Aubum and other non-Lea Hill and non-LakelandI23456PMulti-Family0.12400.05600.0519SingleFamilv2010 AuburnFactorsElementaryMiddle School0.31300.1 5400.16500.23190.6320otalntorTotal42010103551785559275295375112844375112521608060529631412152017772453840000007724538402016-17155605296314121520'r6105335525500001050JJC5255201 5-1 621252925827410602015345108535712100651202344559622014-152414242072188¡fg2014320100495310012þ51132342055582013-1422530314815660720136922034JbI754417782s538402012-131561919398s822012185582831I7544176726033342011-12134113555822520111354221223251116064522242010-11914522249lAuþurn School Dist¡DevelopmentITableLakeland/Kersey Single FamilyLea Hill Area Single FamilyOther Sinqle Familv Units505035608540701005080175652004580552008065200TotalUnitsleils K-5Mid School Pupils 6-8Sr. High Pupils 9-12155212218100100202139117Multi Fami0075758525UnitsTotal K-12UnitsTotal MultiK-5EIMid School Pupils 6-8Sr. High Pupils 9-12UnitsTotal HK-5EleTotal K-12Mid School Pupils 6-8Sr. High Pupils S-12CumulativeTotal K-12Elementary-GradesK-5MidSchool -Grades6-8Senior High - Grades 9 - 12TotalBuildor¡ts March 11 + ND3.6 ave projections45
0,6 of changechange +/-Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-M arch ZO1'l2017-18o66667777IIII151616161616161617202120202627262727282728283435343341434243434444444555565453585959596062616263767876747274747476777677799598959383858485878887889010911210910612152016-171 060201 5-1 68492014-156072013-14382New Projects - Annual New Pupils Added & Distributedby Grade Level2012-132252011-12912010-1110101 0661 01610131024107910411 0601112122112381258134414482Percent of averagePupils by Grade& Level6.83%7.01o/o6.93%7.O1o/o7.12o/o7.28o/o42.18o/o7.19o/o7.28o/o7.44Yo2',1.910/o8.99%9.22o/o8.94o/o8.760/o35.91olo100.00% Total6 YearAverageEnroll.98910141 00410141 0311 05310411 053107713021 3351295126714473TABLE2GRADEKDG12345o7II101112Totalso/o6.83%7.01o/o6.93%7.01o/o7.12o/o7.28o/o7.19o/o7.28o/o7.44o/o8.99%9.22o/o8.94o/o8.760/o100.00%6yr Ave988.671014.00'1003.671014.001031 001053.171041 .001053.001076.831301.501334.501294.501267.3314473.176 ¡Bar Historical DataAverage Enrollment and Percentage D¡stributed by Grade Level1G1110101 0661 01610131024I 07910411 06011121221123812581344144824.730Á-107og1010321 0339989931 073I 0301 04011251 031124412771 303141014589-O.78o/"-11408-09998101510241 04810441 0691 0961 0341 076125613411 3501352147030.990Á144o70899699510199971057107810071 057I 03313371 36813521263I 45590.98%14106{794110121002I 0311 049998I 058101410721372I 40013221147144182.UoÁ33060695596396310429391 0651 004102811371 3791 38311821 08814088TABLE3GradeKDG1234567II101112TotalsBuildouts March 11 + ND3.6 ave project¡ons46
Buildout Data for Enrollment Projections-March 2011% of change+l-2019-20Projected1 1831215121112161242125111971228122512301256126574011240124712781254126112933807145714491384142014741 4651 4001 4365775169831130Á191201 8-1 IProiected731 I37645710167921.14041882017-18Projected102914701 08010411044'10491 051109210871 108107510731075't1 1611 1011161144I 1061 10311451 '13911451157'1 1801 13311751 169117511871 1951'16012031 19612031216122311841226122012261240124773441 0961 064I 081107011221 088I 095I 0981148113211281129120711671 160122012401 198124412481267375914131 1601 155120513871 3561 08111071 39913321279I 03414671 351126112371453 1486 15211421 1405 14331280 1347 13251220 1236 12985577't66802.130Â3482017-18Proiected10271 0561 0811 038I 0551 049104710771074I 1051082'10831 0691 0991 095110011521113I 09511251122112711521187112311531 150I 1551 1801 1891148117911761 1801206121511701201119712021228123772361 0861 065I 0801 05911131 0881 0941 088I 13811291128111812441164I 1601203 12261238 12331194 126437221 336123712091267I 3101 35612121222132213321 33312261 3801 3511314I 3531 36614111 3341 33614091 3941 3911352144114331 36814045646166041.95o/o3't 82016-17Proiected720136575474't633r2.440Á3892016-17Proiected710436355546162862.27o/o362201 5-1 6Proiected703335345374159422.æoÁ368201 5-16Proiected694935295446159242.19o/o3422014-15Projected686933895316155743.470Á5232014-15Proiected680933755398155822.78o/o4222013-14Proiected6667334050441 50512.410Â3542013-14Proiected662733205213151602.240Á3322012-13Proiected648632804931146971.44042092012-13Proiected646832605100148281.660Á242New Projects - Pupil Projection CumulativeGrade LevelMarch 20112011-12Projected631 3324149341 4488O.O4o/obNew Projects - Pupil Projection CumulativebyGrade Level Updated Ma¡ch 20112011-12Proiected63053231505014586O.71o/o1042010-11Actual10101 0661 016101 310241 07962081 04110601112321312211238125813445061144822010-11Actual10101 0661 01610131024I 079620810411 060111232131221123812581344506114482% ofchangechanqe +/-GRADEKDG12345K-567IGR 6-8I101112GR 9-'t2TotalGRADEKDG12345K-5b7IR 6-8I101112GGR 9-12TotalUses a 'cohort survíval'model assumîng 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesprevious years number plusCurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otherfactor uses '100% cohortsurvival, based on 6 yearhistory.Uses a 'cohort su¡vival'model assuming 100% ofprev¡ous year newenrolfees move to the nextgrade level.Kindergarten calculatesprevious years number plusCunent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otherfactor uses 100% cohortsurvival, based on 6 yearhistory.TABLE 4ND 3.13TABLE 5ND 3.6Buildorfs March 11 + N D3.6 ave projections47
Bui ldout Data for Enroll m ent Projections-M ar ch 201 1change +/-2017-18Proiected10201 0701 080104110441 0491 0301 08310871 1081075107310841 095I 1011116114411061143115411181136't1571180121411781 15311781 195123612121194121412651249122637401 09610641 081't0701122I 0881 0951 0981148113211281129120711671 160122012401 198123512481267374914131 1601155120513871 3561 0811 1071 39913321279103414671 3511261123714531421128012201 4861 40513471236152114331325't29855772016-17Proiected485536575474201 5-1 6Proiected59't8353453742014-15Projected6887338953't6155923.74o/o5622013-14Projected6646334050441 50302.480Á3642412-13Proiected645532804931146661.29o/o1AtNew Developments - Pupil Projection Cumulativeby Grade Level, Updated March 20ll2011-12Proiected63043241493414479-o.o20Â-3201 0-1 1Actual10101 0661016101310241079620810411 060111232131221123812581344506114482GRADEKDGI234567II101112TotalUses a 'cohort sulíval'model assuming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nextgrade íevel.Kindergarten calculatesbirth rate average plusCurrent generation based on% of total enrollment. Otherfactor uses 100% cohortsurvival, based on 6 yearhistory.TABLE 6ND3.13A2017-18Projected10201 056I 081I 0381 055I 0491 0301 06910741 10510821 0831 084'1081I 0881'1001152111311431141't 1051120115211871200't't65113711731 1891223I 1961 1891208124912431220't0861 065I 0801 05911131 0881 0941 088113811291128111812041164I 1601203123811941218123312643715'13361237120912671310I 35612121222132213321 33312261 3801 35113141 3531 36614111334I 336140913941 3911352144114331 368140456462016-17Projected363555462015-16Projected352954462014-15Proiected6846337553981 56203.100Á4b92013-14Proiected661 I33205213151512.350Ã34t2012-13Proiected6444326051 00148031.54o/o225New Projects - Pupil Projection CumulativebyGrade Level Updated March 20112011-12Proiected62983231505014578O.670/o9ti2010-11Actual10101 0661016101310241 079620810411060111232't31221123812581344506114482GRADEKDG12345o7II'101112TotalUses a 'cohort suìvival'model assuming 100% ofprevious year newenrollees move to the nertgrade Íevel.Kindergarten calculatesbirth rate average plusCurrent generation based on% of totalenrollment. Otherfactor uses '100% cohortsurvival, based on 6 yearhistory.TABLE 7ND 3.6ABuildouts March 11 + ND3.6 ave projectionschange +/-48
Appendix 4.3 Student Generation Survey
Auburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1/'1l05March,2O11SINGLE FAMILYTotalsments Under ConstructionTotalsTotal1324142318474582088457145l3l315655HS551b81111167163171121Þ171Middleo934314014422111616434160Elem2101013223339947138187I5324Total133l0472659158HS411þ72140Middle5I211I1340Elem41730112578TO BEOccupied0000000000000n000uulTentOccupancy30211426Þ15880400181I8378113342UN¡ts/Parcels302114¿oo15I80400181I83781133421036Development NameAlder MeadowsAspen MeadowsAuburn PlaceCambridqe PointeDawson HillsHazel ParkKelli MeadowsLakeland: The ReserveLakeland: Verona SouthLakeland: Verona NorthLittle FieldsMarchini MeadowsPacific View-MeadowsRiver RimSera MonteWashinqton National, Div 1$tudent Generation FactorsTotal0.4331.1431.0000.8853.0003.1 330.500o.7250.520o.4640.6250.8550.5771.1820.3940.3570.632HS0.1670.238o.o710.2311.3330.7330.1250.1 380.1 680.0880.3750.2050.1410.1820.030o.1430.165Middle4.2000.429o 2140.1540.5000.9330.000a1750.1 050.1160.1250.1 930.2450.3640.0910.0950.154Elem0.0670.4760.7140.5001.1671.4670.375o.4130.2480.26001250.4580.2310.6360.2730.1 '190.313To BeOccupied301043I3418143CurrentOccupancy30633117135100421Units/Parcels601676125169118564Development NameBeaver MeadowsGreenviewLakeland: Pinnacle EstatesLakeland: Vista HeiqhtsTrail RunRiverpointeStudent Generation FactorsTotal19o275211190HS5271b324Middle52715322ElemI313311b454t5t20't1
Auburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1/1/05March,20112O11 andwith Plats SubmittedTo BeOccupied311475578386189924I31I22201063731303025614917437I10413292518162143Total from Under ConstructionGrand Total Students AnticipatedGurrentOccupancy00000000000000000000rì0n00n00n0Untts/Parcels311475578386l89924831I22201063731303025614917437I10413292518162143Development NameAlicia GlennAnderson AcresBackbone RidqeBrandon MeadowsBrandon PlaceBridgesBridle EstatesCam-WestCarrinqton Polnteit Dhaliwal PlatEstes ParkHarpreet KangHazel HeiqhtsHazel ViewKendall RidqeKersev 3 ProiectLakeland: East Phase 1Lakeland: Forest Glen At LakelandLakeland: Park RidgeLawson PlaceMeqan's MeadowsMonterev ParkMountain View EstatesNew Hope Lutheran Plate At Tall TimbersSpencer PlaceStipps PlatVintaqe PlaceWillow PlaceYates PlatStudent Generation FactorsTotal2AI4354924411OJ1552051413672368219162IÞ110235boI181611101355901445HS52II13643164151431762215422I29o1172543335424377Middle521I126031541513316582054A2127o1162443233122353Elem10421724121b31I3'103763311741I804354123334I8b567045715Totals4t5t2011
Auburn School DistrictDevelopment Growth since 1/1/05MULTI FAMILY2011 Under Gonstuction2011 anddMarch,20l1Student Generation Fac'torsTotal4827151183487HS11I232l9I19Middle12124320121Elem25148645246To BeOccupied000000000000GurrentOccupancy29816817070362101791219332Units/Parcels29I16817070362101791219aaa¿Ja1350Development NameButte EstatesCoxM/oodward THLakeland: CapriLakeland: CarraraLakeland: MaderaLakeland: Palermo AptsLakeland: SienaLakeland: SoranoPacific Ave DuplexesPasa Fino llSeasons at Lea HillVillaoeStudent Generation FactorsTotal0.4830.6250.0300.1120.043o.1440.0690.0250.6670.2110.5840.232HS0.06900.01 190.02940.01430.03870.02970.01270.08330.10530.11750.0519Middle0.13790.3750.0060.023500.02210.019800.16670.05260.15360.056EIem0.2760.2500.0120.059o.o290.0830.0200.0130.4170.0530.3130.124Total14551935272I4194313HS20251143I123970Middle43140820215176ElemI22102302151104167To BeOccupied15GurrentOccupancv100Units/Parcels115Development NameTrail Run TownhomesStudent Generation FactorsTotal4HS1Middle1Elem2Total4HS'lMiddle0Elem3To BeOccupied20510326548360GurrentOccupancy00000Units/Parcels205'10326548360Complexes Under ConstructionTotal Anticioated StudentsDevelopment NameAuburn Hills AoUTHCraio Commercial"D" Street PlatMonterev ParkSundallen GondosTotals4t5f2011
DE TERMINATION OF' NONSIGNIFICANCE
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 20lI-2017 Capital Facilities Plan by
the Auburn School District No. 408 for the pu{poses of planning for the fbcilities needs of the
District; 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 20ll-2017 Capital Facilities Plan as
part of the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The cities of
Algona, Pacific, and Black Diamond 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
jurisdiotion' s Comprehensive Plan.
Proponent: Auburn School Dìstrict No. 408
l¡cation of the Proposal:
The Auburn School District includes an areâ of approxirnately 57 square miles. The
Cities of Aubum, Algon4 Black Diamond, Kent, and Pacific and parts of unincorporated King
and Pierce Counties fall within the District's boundaries.
Lead Agency:
Aubum 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 intbrmation is available to the public upon request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-ll-340(2). The
lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be
submitted by 4:00 p.m., May 9,2011. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on
timely comments ancl may retain, modifu, or, if signifrcant adverse impacts are likel¡ withdraw
the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline.
Responsible Official:MikeNewrnan
Deputy S uperintendent, Business and Operations
Auburn School District No. 408
Telephone:
Address:
(2s3) 931-4900
Auburn School District
915 4th Steet N.E.
Auburn, WA 98002
You may appeal this determination in writing by 4:00 p.m", May 9, 2011, to
Mike Newman, Deputy Superintendent, Aubum School District No. 408, 915 4'I' Sfeet N.E.,
Auburn, WA 98002.
Date of Issue:
Date Published
Apnl22,20Il
Ãpnl22,20lt
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
WAC 197 -11 -960 Environmental Checklist.
Purpose of Checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requlres 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,
lnstructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about
your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the
environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an ElS.
Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best
description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your
knowledge. ln most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own
observations or project plans without the need to hire experts, lf you really do not know
the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not knoW'or
"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary
delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline,
and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. lf you have problems,
the governmental agencies can assist you,
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do
them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional
information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The
agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or
provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be
significant adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be
answered "does not apply". ln addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for non-
project actions (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project,"
"applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and
"affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
The adoption of the Aubum School District's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan ("Capital
Facilities Plan") for the purposes of planning f'or the District's facilities needs. The cities
of Aubum and Kent and the King County Comprehensive Plans will be amended to
include the Auburn School District 2011 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilitiès
Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Cities of Algona, Black
Diamond, and Pacific Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Aubum
School District 2011 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 fbr 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:
Auburn School District No. 408
915 4th st. N.E.
Auburn, WA 98002
Contact Person:Michael Newman, Deputy Superintendent, Business/Operations
(2s3) 93 1-4e30Telephone
2
4. Date checklist prepared:April 1, 2011
5
6
Agency requesting checklist: Auburn 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 9, 20i1.
After acloption, the District will forward the Capital Facilities Plan to the cities of
Aubum, Algona, Black Diamond, 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.
B. List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have undergone or will undergo
additional environmental review, when appropriate, as they are developed.
L Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental
approvals of other proposals directly affecting the propefi covered by your proposal? lf
yes, explain.
None known.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your
proposal, if known.
The cities of Auburn and Kent will review and adopt the Capital Facilities Plan for the
purposes of updating the cities' school impact fees and incorporating the updated Plan as
a part of the Capital Facilities Elements ofboth the Aubum 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. The Cities of Algona, Black Diamond, and
Pacific Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Aubum School District
3
2011 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan and each jurisdiction may adopt a school impact fee ordinance to
implement school impact fees.
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 Auburn School
District's 20i1 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 Comprelrensive Plan to include the Auburn
School District 2011 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of each jurisdiction's Capìtal
Facilities Element of their Comprehensive Plans. The Cities of Algona, Black Diamond,
and Pacific Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Aubum School District
2011 Capìtal Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's
Comprehensive Plan and each jurisdiction may adopt a school impact fee ordinance to
implement school impact fees.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient inforrnation 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 2011 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Aubum school District. The District
includes an area of approximately 57 square miles. The Cities of Auburn, Algona, Black
Diamond, 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
4
The'Auburn School District is comprised of a variety of topographic landforms and
gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of ihe sitós at which the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified
during proj ect-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)? lf you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify
them and note any prime farmland.
Speoific 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 revìew when appropri ate.
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 prnject-level environmental review and local approval at the time
of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the putpose, type, quantity, and
source of any fill materials to be used have been or wili be identified 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 projecrlevel
5
environmental review when appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be
subject to locai approval processes.
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 surl'aces. 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 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-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 ttre 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-s¡te 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:
6
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
applicable air regulations and air permit requirements. Proposed measures specific to
the individual projects includecl 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 (íncluding year-round and seasonal streams, sartwater, 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 Aubum 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 patterns have been or will be researched and
incorporated into the designs of the individual projects.
2) will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200
feet) the described waters? 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 tocal
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.
lnformation with respect to the placernent 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
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 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 Supplønental 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 ìncluded in the
Capital Facilities Plan on groundwater resollrces has been or will be addressed
during project-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.
I
The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the
projects included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project-level
environmental review.
c. Water Runoff (including storm water)
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will
this water flow? Willthis water flow into other waters? lf so, describe.
Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have stormwater
runoff consequences. Specific information regarding the stormwater impacts of
each project has been or will be provicled during project-level environmental
review when appropriate. Each project has been or will be subject to applicable
local stormwater regulations.
2) Could waste mater¡als 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 ancl 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 mea.sures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the prdects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during
proj ect-level environmentai review when appropriate,
I
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 Auburn 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 appropri ate.
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 landscæing requirements.
10
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
An inventory of species that have been observed on pr 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.
site.
List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the
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
prcrj ect-l evel environmental review when appropriate.
c ls the site part of a migration route? lf so, explain
The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes
have been or will be addressed during project-level environmental review when
appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Appropriate measures to preserve or e,nhance r¡'ildlife have been or will be determined
during proj ect-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 includeci in the Capital Facilities
Plan have been or will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site
11
design planning when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject
Actions.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? lf so, generally 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 approvai at the
tirne they are developed, when appropriate.
12
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project
(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
A variety of noises from taffic, 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 assoc¡ated
with the project on a short-term or a longterm basis (for example: trafiic,
construction, operation, other)? lndicate what hours noise would come
from the site.
The projects inoluded in the Capital Facilities Plan may create normal
construction noises that will exist on short-term bases only. The construction
projects could increase taffic 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. Similarl¡ the
placement of portables at school sites will increase the capacity of school facilities
and may create a slight increase in hafüc-related or operations-related noise.
Neither of these potential increases is expected to be significant. Please see the
Surrplernental 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
B. 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 Auburn School District, including
residential, commercial, indusffial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc.
13
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? lf so, describe.
The known sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have not been
used recently for agriculture.
c. Describe any structures on the site
The 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 zon¡ng 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 wili 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 identified during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
14
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"
area? lf so, specify.
Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during projectJevel
environmental review.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
The Auburn School District currently serves approximately 13,977 full-time
equivalent ('FTE") sfudents. Enrollment is expected to increase to approximately
15,77I FTE students by the 2016-2017 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 projectJevel environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed
mitigating measures have been or will be developed at that time, when necessary.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with
existing uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive
planning process and during project-level environmental review when appropriate.
L Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? lndicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects
included in the Capital Facilities Plan.
15
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? rndicate
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.
Proposed measures to reduce or control housíng impacts, if any;c
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 projectJevel
environmental review when appropriate.
10.Aesthetics:
..,. .' .i." s. : What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not includingiantennas;what is the Brincipal exterior building material(s) proposed?
The aesthetic impacts ôf thç projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been
or will be addressed during projectJevel environmental review when appropriate.
b. what views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been
or will be addressed during project-level environmental review 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 appropriatê.
16
11. Light and Glare:
a. what type of light or glare will the proposal produce? Wnat ilme 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-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 orr glare may affect your proposal?
Off-site sources gf light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan have, been or will be evaluated during projectJe,vel environméntal
review when appropriate.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed
during proj ect-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 Aubum
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 wiil be addressed during project-level environmental review when appropriate,
17
The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed new school
facilities, may enhance recreational opporlunities 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 Capitat Facilities Plan have
been or will be subject to mitigation during project-level environmental review when
appropriate. School facilities usually provide iecreational fhcilities to the community
in the form of play fìelds 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 PIan. The existence of historic and '
cultural resources on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in detail during
proj ectJ evel 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 projectJevel
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 inclucled in the
Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be add¡essed during project-level
environmental review when appropriate.
18
b. ls site currently served by public transit? lf not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan
and public 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 rnany
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-levei environmental review when appropriate.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
The mitigation of haffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital
Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project-level environrnental
review when appropriate
19
15. Public Services:
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for''
exampie: 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 pubiic 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 cunently 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 appropliate.
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
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:ô
21
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in
conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the
types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater
intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly
and in generalterms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;
emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or
production of noise?
To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities,
including new high school, middle school and elementary school capacity, will be
constructed, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional
impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, access roads, and sidewalks could inorease
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 reiease of toxic or
hazardous substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or
gasoline f'or 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 and/or City
requirements and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
("NPDESU) permitting requirements. Discharges to air will meet applicable air
pollution control requirements. Fuel oii 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 offof the project sites and a loss to animal habitat. These impacts have been or
22
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 conserye plants, an¡mals, fish, or mar¡ne life
are:
Specific measures to protect and conserye plants, animals, and fish cannot be
identified at this time. Specific mitigation proposals will be identified, however,
during proj ect-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 inclucled 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 sens¡tive
areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for govemmental protection; such
as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no
impact on these resources.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are
No specific measures are being proposed at this tirne. Appropriate measures would be
proposed during project-specific review. Annual updates of this Plan will be
coordinated with the Cities of Auburn, Algona, Kent, and Pacific, and King County as
part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to
protect erwironmentally 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
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 wiil increase the Diskict's demands on hansportation 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