Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Agenda - 11/16/2004 • KEN T W A S H I N - KENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS November 16, 2004 MAYOR: Jim White COUNCILMEMBERS: Julie Peterson, President Tim Clark Ron Harmon Deborah Ranniger Debbie Raplee Les Thomas Bruce White ........................................................................� COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA 5:30 p.m. Item Description Speaker Time 1. Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments Planning Staff 30 min 2. Downtown Strategic Plan Planning Staff 30 min PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE WORKSHOP AT 5 :30 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager WASH IN G T O N Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 NOVEMBER 8, 2004 TO: COUNCIL PRESIDENT JULIE PETERSON AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON, AICP, PLANNING MANAGER THROUGH: LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD SUBJECT: ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND UPDATE TO DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PLAN MOTION: None at this time. For information only. SUMMARY: The Land Use & Planning Board is finishing their review of the update to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP). The Board also is expected to hold a public hearing on November 22nd on the four applications received this year for annual comprehensive plan amendments. Staff will present at the workshop a summary of both issues and the Board's recommendation on the DSAP, per their hearing the evening of November 8th BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: Please reference the summary memorandum to the Land Use & Planning Board dated September 20, 2004 for the annual comprehensive plan amendments and the November 8, 2004 agenda packet for the Board's public hearing on the DSAP update. CA\pm S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2004\2042937cpa2004-4a-dcc.doc Enclosures: September 20,2004 memo to Board;November 8,2004 Board agenda packet cc: Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager Project Files#CPA-2004-1;#CPA-2004-4(A-D)/#CPZ-2004-(3-6) Parties of Record COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, C.D. Director PLANNING SERVICES Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager Phone: 253-856-5454 • Fax: 253-856-6454 KEN T Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. WASHINGTON Kent,WA 98032-5895 September 20,2004 TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: WILLIAM D. OSBORNE, PLANNER RE: 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS #CPA-2004-4(A-D)/#CPZ-2004-(3-6) Land Use&Planning Board Workshop—September 27,2004 INTRODUCTION The city received four (4) applications from private property owners this year for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map. Background information about each proposed amendment is included in this memorandum. Staff will present each proposed amendment at the September 27 workshop in order to allow the Board to discuss and ask questions about each application prior to a public hearing. For the public hearing, Planning Services will provide a staff report that includes a detailed analysis of the merits of each proposal, maps of each site and a staff recommendation. The four (4) proposed amendments have been classified as Proposals A through D. A description of each application follows: Proposal A — Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 26056 - 116th Avenue Southeast (Millenium-Kangley Building) Applicant(Agent): Joel Kessell,Engineered Solutions,LLC Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND SF-6 (Single-Family 6 NS (Neighborhood Services) USE Map units/acre ZONING Districts Map SR-6 (Single-Family 6.05 NCC (Neighborhood units/acre) Convenience Commercial) The 0.68 acre Site consists of one (1) tax parcel and is located at the northeast corner of 1161h Avenue Southeast and Kent-Kangley Road Southeast, and contains no structures. The terrain of the Site can be characterized as generally flat, mostly covered with gravel, and having groundcover vegetation along the east and southeast. The parcel is currently designated as Single-Family Residential, Six (6.05) Units per Acre for land use and zoning (SF-6 and SR-6, respectively), as are most parcels abutting the northern and eastern boundaries of the Site. To the south of the Site across Kent-Kangley Road,parcels are designated Mixed Use (MU) for land Use, and Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) for zoning. Parcels located directly across 11611' Avenue SE from the Site are designated as Single-Family Residential, Eight (8.71) Units per Acre for both land use and zoning (SF-8 and SR-8, respectively). The southwest corner of the Kent- Kangley/116`h Avenue SE intersection is designated for low-density multi-family residential for both land use and zoning(LDMF and MR-G, respectively). Issues: Site access restrictions, on-site parking (and possible vehicular queuing), site drainage and utilities locations are some of the issues of concern. The fact that Kent-Kangley Road is also a State Route (S.R. 516) means that vehicular access of the Site is restricted. To maintain traffic flows on Kent-Kangley Road/S.R. 516, the preferred access would be on 1161h Avenue SE, but the north boundary of the Site is less than one hundred fifty feet (150') north of the intersection. The City of Kent Public Works Development Assistance Brochure, Access Management (DAB 6-3) (see Attachment A, page 6), establishes a minimum corner clearance standard of three hundred feet (300'), with driveways being allowed only when alternative access is not available. The status of a water feature indicated by the City geographic information system (GIS) as bisecting the Site could also affect site access and developable area. A sanitary sewer service connection crossing Kent-Kangley Road will be required. The recently adopted updated Comprehensive Plan articulates policies to discourage expansion of Neighborhood Services land uses in areas where the adjacent land use is predominantly single-family residential (Policies LU-14.6 and LU-14.7). Also, the Comprehensive Plan includes policy language (Goal LU-13, and Policies LU-13.3 and LU-13.4) to encourage orderly and efficient commercial growth in existing commercial districts. Additionally, a 2001 Urban Land Institute publication entitled Ten Principles for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips (see Attachment B) previously provided to the Board, recommends limiting expansion of commercial zones when existing commercially-zoned land is underdeveloped. The buildable lands inventory for housing (population growth) would also need to be revised to reflect a decrease in capacity. Proposal B — Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 20651 — 84th Avenue South/East Valley Highway (Kent Office Building) Applicant(Agent): Edi Linardic, LDG Architects Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND MIC (Manufacturing/Industrial C (Commercial) USE Map Center ZONING Districts Map M2 (Limited Industrial) GWC (Gateway Commercial) The 6.26 acre Site consisting of two (2) tax parcels is located southwest from the intersection of 84`h Avenue South (East Valley Highway) and South 2081h Street, extending south along the west side of 84th Avenue S to slightly less than four hundred feet (400') from South 212th Street. The northern parcel of the Site includes a portion of the S 2081h Street roadway. The terrain of the Site is generally flat and is almost entirely impervious, with a large single-story structure (approximately 92,000 gross square feet — King County Assessor) and asphalt parking surface located thereon. The Site and most parcels in the vicinity north of S 212th Street are designated for Manufacturing/Industrial Center land use (MIC) and Limited Industrial (M2) zoning. The parcels directly south (a McDonald's restaurant) and southeast (including a strip mall and drive- thru espresso stand) across 84th Avenue SE of the Site are designated for Commercial (C) land use and Gateway Commercial (GWC)zoning. Issues: Limiting expansion of non-industrial commercial land use in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center, as requested by the City in the early 1990s and designated by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), is an important concern (see Attachment C, 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center, page 4). Access to 84th Avenue S will be restricted or prohibited, with a possible requirement of off- Land Use and Planning Board Workshop October 13,2003 Page 2 of 5 site revisions for S 2081h Street (private) to address the anticipated increase in traffic volumes at the traffic signal on 841h Avenue S. A buffer associated with an inventoried wetland located on the McDonald's parcel to the south might encroach on the Site. The recently adopted updated Comprehensive Plan articulates policies to preserve the designated Manufacturing/Industrial Center (Goal LU-15, and Policies LU-15.1 and LU-1.2) by discouraging and limiting uses neither associated with manufacturing, high technology nor warehousing. The buildable lands inventory for industrial use (employment growth) would also need to be analyzed to reflect any anticipated changes for employment. Proposal C — Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 11644 Southeast 240th Street (Lotto/Toppano) Applicant(Agent): Jerome Carpenter,Inslee, Best, Doezie&Ryder,P.S. Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND SF-6 (Single-Family 6 NS (Neighborhood Services) USE Map unit/acre) ZONING Districts Map SR-6 (Single-Family 6.05 NCC (Neighborhood unit/acre) Convenience Commercial) The 2-acre "L-shaped" Site is a portion of one recently reconfigured four (4) acre tax parcel located at the northeast corner of Southeast 240`h Street and 1161h Avenue Southeast. A two (2) acre square at the southwest corner of the parcel is zoned Neighborhood Convenience Commercial (NCC) and the remainder of the parcel is zoned Single-Family Residential, 6.05 Units per Acre (SR-6) since June 2002 when the City Council reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and established initial zoning for the DeMarco Annexation area. Prior to August 2004, the parcel was approximately 7.92 acres in size, and had been the subject of a 2003 Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning District Map amendment application seeking a designation of NCC for the remaining 5.92 acres. The Site of this proposal is generally flat, fronting both on SE 2401h Street and 116`h Avenue SE. The Site contains a number of structures associated with an existing commercial landscaping nursery use. The street frontage of Southeast 2401h Street is improved, while the street frontage along I I Oh Avenue Southeast north of Southeast 240`h Street is unimproved. The Site and parcels to the north, east, south, west and southeast generally are zoned SR-6, although approximately 3.2 acres located directly south of the site at the southeast corner of the intersection of SE 240th Street and 116th Avenue SE are zoned NCC. A two (2) acre parcel at the southwest corner of SE 2401h Street and 116th Avenue SE is also zoned NCC,but is being planned for development as a multi-use park. As noted above, the southwest portion of the Site parcel is currently zoned NCC. The Site and parcels in the vicinity are underdeveloped in regard to current land use and zoning designations. Notably, the remainder of the original 7.92 acre parcel (3.92 acres) subject to a 2003 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment application are being proposed as part of a larger residential planned unit development application. As the PUD application at this time has not been permitted, the prospective merits of that proposal are not suitable for inclusion in the analysis of this Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendment proposal. Issues: The conditions of the Site and vicinity parcels were considered during the recent DeMarco Annexation initial zoning (AZ-2001-1) and the current split designations for the Site were adopted by the Kent City Council in May 2002 after thorough consideration of public comment. Analysis from the DeMarco Annexation Zoning Staff Report, issued on May 21,2001,relating to the intersection bounding the Site of this amendment proposal reads: Land Use and Planning Board Workshop October 13,2003 Page 3 of 5 "[D]esignating additional commercial parcels other than the existing commercial property at the southeastern corner of this intersection [SE 2401h St. & 116'h Ave. SE] would create additional land use pressure to further erode the residential character of this area, and could jeopardize the policy for "corner store" retail. The surrounding neighborhood generally is single family residential, including low densities of one or three dwelling units per acre to the southeast and southwest of the annexation. A zoning designation of MRT-16 at the northeastern corner would bolster the viability of the neighborhood business designation at the southeastern corner, would promote additional homeownership opportunities, would promote a land use pattern that supports public transportation, and also would create a buffer from the impacts of the intersection on the lower density neighborhoods to the north and east. It also encourages developing the three parcels designated MRT-16 as a unified development proposal with better management of the sensitive areas on the sites." Concern about expanding the amount of commercial area at the intersection of SE 240`h/1161h SE was addressed by limiting the NCC-zoned portion of the Site to two (2) acres. The staff report for the 2003 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments (CPA-2003-4(A-C)/#CPZ-2003-(2-4)) noted: "Expanding the area of this zoning district at the northeastern corner of SE 240th St. & 116th Ave. SE beyond the existing two (2) acre portion bypasses the initial step of developing "corner store" commercial uses in an area designated for Neighborhood Services, and is therefore in conflict with Policy LU-12.2 and Goal LU-13 regarding size and appropriate location of intensive commercial use." Further,regarding vehicular access: "The existing two (2) acre NCC-zoned portion has reasonable vehicular access (see testimony of City of Kent Public Works Director Don Wickstrom in Kent City Council Meeting minutes, May 21, 2002, and electronic communication dated May 15, 2002 from City Transportation Engineering Manager Steve Mullen to City Planning Manager Charlene Anderson regarding access), yet is scaled to encourage pedestrian access to and from the existing residential neighborhood." The recently adopted updated Comprehensive Plan articulates policies to discourage expansion of Neighborhood Services land uses in areas where the adjacent land use is predominantly single-family residential (Policies LU-14.6 and LU-14.7). Also, the Comprehensive Plan includes policy language (Goal LU-13, and Policies LU-13.3 and LU-13.4) to encourage orderly and efficient commercial growth in existing commercial districts. Additionally, a 2001 Urban Land Institute publication entitled Ten Principles for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips (see Attachment 13), recommends limiting expansion of commercial zones when existing commercially-zoned land is underdeveloped. The buildable lands inventory for housing (population growth)would also need to be revised to reflect a decrease in capacity. Proposal D — Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 21320 —42"d Avenue South (Muth) Applicant(Agent): Richard Rawlings, Polygon, LLC Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND AG-R (Agricultural Resource SF-1 (Single-Family 1 USE Map Land) unit/acre ZONING Districts Map A-10 (Agricultural, 10 SR-1 (Single-Family 1 acres/unit) unit/acre The 15.35 acre Site consists of two (2) tax parcels and is located at the southeast corner of South 2121h Street and 42°d Avenue South. The terrain of the Site can be characterized as flat, with a substantial amount of Land Use and Planning Board Workshop October 13,2003 Page 4 of 5 delineated wetland area in the west. Current zoning for the property recognizes its status as agricultural land of commercial significance. The development rights for the entire Site were purchased by King County in the early 1980s. Issues: Resolution of the ownership of development rights, and possible changes thereto for the Site will be necessary for the City to consider this application further. Although the applicant has identified stormwater detention as the sole desired use of the property, the buildable lands inventory for housing (population growth) would also need to be revised to reflect a potential increase in capacity. Enclosed are code excerpts related to standards of review for amendments to the comprehensive plan and criteria for granting a rezone (Attachment D). Staff will be available at the September 271h workshop to highlight the location of each application (see Attachment E). A detailed review and discussion of each application will be presented. If there are any questions prior to the workshop,please contact me at(253) 856-5437. WO\pm S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2004\2042937-cpa2004-4a-d-LUPBwkshp092704.doc Enc: Attachment A:City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure 6-3(Access Management) Attachment B:Urban Land Institute,Ten Principles for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips,pages 8-9 Attachment C:Puget Sound Regional Council,2002 Regional Growth Centers Report:Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center Attachment D:KCC 12.02.050 Standard of Review,and KCC 15.09.050(C)Amendments Attachment E:Maps of CPA-2004-4(A-D)/CPZ-2004-(3-6) Attachment F:Summary Matrix of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Land Use and Planning Board Workshop October 13,2003 Page 5 of 5 i CITY OF KENT DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 6-3 KENT BROCHURE W n 5 N I N G T O N ACCESS MANAGEMENT The City of Kent has developed a Comprehensive Transportation Plan and a Master Plan of Roadways, indicating existing and proposed streets and their functional classifications. The City of Kent has also adopted the City of Kent Construction Standards which contain the basic elements of access management. This document provides some background information on access management and also provides guidelines for access management decisions. What is Access Management? Access management is the process of balancing the competing needs of traffic movement and land access. Access management provides access to land development while simultaneously preserving the safe and efficient flow of traffic on the roadway system. It applies traffic engineering principals to the location, design and operation of access drives (driveways) serving activities along the roadway. It evaluates the suitability of providing access to a given road, as well as the suitability of a site for land development. It addresses the basic questions —when and where access should be located; how it should be designed; and the procedures needed to implement the program. In a broad context, it is resource management, since it is a way to anticipate and prevent safety problems and traffic congestion. Access management includes: (1) classifying roadways based upon functional criteria which reflect the importance of each roadway to City mobility; (2) defining allowable levels of access for each classification of roadway, including criteria for the spacing of intersections and driveways with and without traffic signals; (3) applying appropriate geometric design criteria and traffic engineering analysis to the allowable accesses; and (4) adopting appropriate regulations and administrative procedures. In the City of Kent, the highest levels of access location and design are applied to Principal Arterials, and the least access control is applied to local Residential Streets. Why Do We Use Management Access? David Solomon, in his "Accidents on Main Rural Highways Related to Speed, Driver, and Vehicles," Public Roads, July 1964, recognized the need for access management as indicated by the following: "When conventional highways are constructed on new rights-of-way, initially there are few commercial driveways and the safety record is good. As the highways get older, the traffic volume builds up, roadside businesses develop, more and more commercial driveways are cut, and the accident rate gradually increases." Attachment A Page 1 of 8 September 27,2004 LUPB Workshop J Solomon concludes, "This demonstrates the importance of maintaining control of access when either two-land or multi-lane highways are built on new locations. Increased numbers of either intersections or driveways alone will also increase the accident rate. Intersections should be restricted to those essential for the highway, and the right (of direct) access from abutting businesses should be severely limited." While Solomon's article referred to rural highways, the same principal that an increase in the number of driveways results in an increase in the number of crashes (currently, the transportation and traffic communities use the word "crashes or collisions" in lieu of the word "accidents") on suburban and urban streets as well. In addition to the increase in the number of crashes, increasing the number of street intersections and/or driveways along a street also results in a loss of capacity for the public roadway. This condition is most often referred to by drivers as, "traffic congestion", "poor traffic flows", or the "moving parking lot." What Are The Symptoms of Poor Access Management? The symptoms of poor access management include the following: high collision rates and a large number of collisions; poor traffic flow and congestion; numerous brake light activation's by drivers in through lanes; unsightly strip development; neighborhoods disrupted by cut-through traffic; pressures to widen an existing street or to build a bypass; and a decrease in property values. What Are The Benefits of Access Management? Safety: Fewer and less severe collisions; and less auto-pedestrian, auto-bicyclist conflicts. Longer driveway spacing results in fewer locations at which traffic conflicts occur, and drivers have time to respond to one access conflict at a time. Conflicts between turning vehicles and other traffic is reduced. Variation in the speeds of vehicles in the traffic stream is reduced. Pedestrians and bicyclists have fewer and less complex conflict areas with autos. Efficiency: Less stop-and-go traffic; reduced traffic delay; increased and preserved capacity; reduced fuel consumption; and preservation of investment in the roadway system. Turbulence in the traffic stream is reduced and there is less "stop-and-go" traffic. Traffic delays and well as travel times are reduced because of less stops for entering or existing vehicles. Roadway capacity is increased; every time a vehicle stops in a through lane, all of the vehicles behind it must also stop, this effectively removes one or more lanes from service. Fuel consumption is reduced, and smoother traffic flows and reduced delays result. The public investment in the roadway system is preserved since the traffic capacity of the roadway is maintained. The need for costly and disruptive arterial widening or the construction of bypasses are greatly reduced or entirely eliminated. Page 2 of 8 Livable Communities: Enhances community character; preserves neighborhood integrity; preservation of private investment in abutting properties; and lower vehicular emissions. Community character is enhanced, both visually and functionally by a functionally designed street system. Land use patterns and land values are preserved. Cut through traffic is eliminated or greatly reduced. The resulting low traffic volumes and slower speeds contribute to safe and tranquil residential areas. Arterial streets can be designed to carry high traffic volumes safely and efficiently. Investment in commercial office and retail development does not become obsolete due to deterioration in the quality of service on arterial streets and a shrinking market value as travel times and delays increase until the point where bypass roadways are built and traffic volumes drop on the original arterial street. How Can We Manage Access? The City of Kent manages access by using the following tools: medians, auxiliary lanes, signal spacing, number of driveways, driveway location and design, driveway separation, corner clearance, joint & cross access; and reverse or alternative frontage. Medians: Wide nontraversable medians provide shelter for vehicles making left turns to and from the street. They also provide refuge for pedestrians attempting to cross wide streets. Consequently, collision rates on major streets with wide nontraversable medians have been found to be substantially lower than undivided streets or streets having a continuous Two Way Left Turn Lane (TWLTL). Medians can also be landscaped as part of a corridor beautification program. As with driveways, the spacing and design of median openings is important to the safe and efficient operation of the street. Safety benefits are reduced when median openings have inadequate storage for left turns, or when the openings are too close together. Narrow nontraversable medians (typically C curbs) provide shelter for vehicles making left turns to and from the street and prevent unsafe left turns onto the street. Narrow nontraversable medians do not provide all of the benefits of wide nontraversable medians, but require only very minor physical changes in the street to accommodate their construction. Narrow nontraversable medians also require less right-of-way and may be used more often where rights-of-way are limited. Auxiliary Lanes: Left-turn and right-turn lanes minimize the conflict between turning vehicles and vehicles attempting to continue in through traffic lanes. They also provide storage space where vehicles can safely wait to perform the turn maneuver. This results in smoother traffic flow, increased capacity and greatly increased safety. Signalized Intersection Spacing: Long uniform intersection spacings on arterial streets facilitate the use of traffic signal timing plans which can respond to peak and off-peak traffic flow conditions. Long and uniform spacings improve the progress of traffic flow and increases the number of vehicles that flow the traffic signal on a given green light timing. Capacity of the intersection and the arterial street is increased, fuel consumption and traffic emissions are decreased and traffic safety in improved. Page 3 of 8 Number of Driveways: The total number of driveways along a public street affects the efficiency of the public street. The number of driveways that each parcel should have should be limited as much as possible. Single-family residential lots, for example, are permitted to have only a single driveway unless they can demonstrate a need based upon lot constraints beyond their control. Commercial properties should be limited to a single driveway unless they can demonstrate that their development generates more than 2,000 vehicles per day. When a parcel has frontages on two (or more) public streets with different street classifications and functions, then the parcel should be limited to access on the lower classification of street. Driveway Location and Design: Driveway location and design affects the ability of a driver to safely and easily enter into and exit a site. If driveways are not properly located, exiting vehicles may be unable to see on-coming vehicles, and motorists on the street may not have adequate time to stop. If driveway widths are too narrow, or have an inadequate turning radius, drivers will be unable to maneuver safely and comfortably on and off the street and may have to use more than one traffic lane in order to make the desired turn. In addition, if there is a vehicle attempting to leave the driveway and the driveway width is too narrow, the entering vehicle will have to wait in a through lane of traffic. On the other hand, if the turning radius and/or driveway width are excessive, the large expanse of intersection area can be confusing and a hazard for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. Drivers need time to respond to vehicles entering and leaving the street and to safely maneuver their vehicles accordingly. Therefore, the minimum distance needed between driveways is greater as speed limits and driving speeds increase. This is why driveway separation standards are more stringent for arterial streets than they are for collector streets, and why they are more stringent on collector streets than they are for residential streets. Driveway separation or spacing standards are derived from traffic engineering principles, driver behavior, and vehicle dynamics. Considerations in establishing separation standards include street function and classification, driving speeds, location of adjacent streets and driveways, the volume of trucks, driver expectancy, and the separation and reduction of motorist, bicyclist, and pedestrian conflicts. Corner Clearance: Corner clearance is the distance from an intersection of a public or private street to the nearest access connection, or driveway. Corner clearance standards preserve good traffic operations at intersections, as well as the safety and convenience of access to and from corner parcels. Assuring an adequate lot size with appropriate corner clearance will protect the development potential and market value of corner properties. It will also help assure that these properties do not experience access problems as traffic volumes grow on the adjacent streets. If a driveway is located too close to an intersection which has a traffic signal, for example, the vehicles stopped for a red light may prevent successful entry into, or exit from, the site. Page 4 of 8 Joint and Cross Access: Joint and cross access requirements consolidate driveways serving more than one parcel and provide circulation between adjacent parcels. This allows vehicles to circulate between adjacent businesses without having to re-entering public streets. Joint access requirements are used to connect major developments and to reduce the number of driveways that would otherwise be required to serve abutting parcels. Joint driveways are also used to improve driveway spacing or separation, and sometimes permits more than one driveway to serve a single parcel where separation standards would not otherwise permit more than one driveway. This permits intensive development along a corridor while maintaining traffic operations and safe and convenient access to businesses. Property Owners unable to meet minimum driveway separation standards are typically required to provide for joint and cross access easements whenever feasible. Abutting properties under different ownership are encouraged to comply, but are generally not required to comply until they develop or redevelop their property. Flexibility is needed on an administrative level to work with the unique circumstances of each development site. The City of Kent, for example, relaxes the minimum driveway separation standards for properties that agree to consolidate accesses, or to provide for a joint access driveway. Reverse Frontage or Alternative Access: When land is subdivided for small commercial or residential uses, the lots abutting arterial streets should not be allowed direct vehicular access to the arterial street. Instead, an interior street which provides access to the arterial street should be required. This eliminates the conflicts between high-speed traffic and traffic entering and exiting at closely spaced driveways. Access to the arterial street is provided at a location which can meet separation and corner clearance standards, and which can then be designed to safely handle the traffic generated by the development. When a parcel has frontage on more than one public street, and one of those streets has a higher street classification and function than the other street, then the property should be required to obtain access solely from the street having the lower (or lowest) classification and function. When one of the public streets is an arterial street , and the other street is of a lower classification, such as a collector street, then access to the arterial street should not be permitted. Minimum storage, stacking space, or queue lengths: In designing driveways, adequate storage (or driveway queue length) must be provided on commercial sites to prevent entering vehicles from having to stop in the public streets, and to prevent exiting vehicles from blocking internal circulation aisles. This problem is most evident with drive-in service developments that generate high traffic volumes and require motorists to wait in their vehicles while being served, or until service begins. Such developments shall be carefully analyzed to assure that the Site Plan provides adequate storage. Specific storage areas shall be determined on an individual basis; however minimum storage lengths are required to be provided before any crossing or turning conflicts can be permitted. Page 5 of 8 The City of Kent Access Management Standards: 1. Minimum Driveway to Driveway Separation Standards; measured from closest edge of driveway to closest edge of driveway: a. For parcels abutting a Residential Street: 15-feet b. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Street: 50-feet. c. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Arterial Street: 200-feet. d. For parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Street: 100-feet. e. For Parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Arterial Street: 200-feet. f. For Parcels abutting a Minor Arterial Street: 200-feet. g. For parcels abutting a Principal Arterial Street (when alternative access is not available only): 300-feet. 2. Minimum Corner Clearance Standards; measured from the nearest edge of driveway to the point of curvature for the curb return on the adjacent street intersection: a. For parcels abutting a Residential Street: 50-feet. b. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Street: 100-feet. c. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Arterial Street: 200-feet. d. For parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Street: 50-feet. e. For Parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Arterial Street: 100-feet. f. For Parcels abutting a Minor Arterial Street: 200-feet. g. For parcels abutting a Principal Arterial Street (driveways are permitted only when alternative access is not available): 300-feet. h. For parcels adjacent to a traffic signal controlled intersection: 300-feet is the desired minimum separation from the intersection, and shall be used unless an approved Traffic Study successfully demonstrates that the affective area of the subject intersection is less than 300-feet from the intersection. 3. Driveway Design Standards: a. Residential Driveway Approaches shall be constructed as shown in Standard Detail 6-5(a) from the City of Kent Construction Standards. b. Commercial Driveway Approaches shall be generally constructed as shown in Standard Detail 6-5(b) from the City of Kent Construction Standards, except that the required radius and minimum (and maximum) driveway throat width combination shall be determined by a Vehicle Maneuvering Diagram provided by the Applicant for the appropriate Design Vehicle. c. Wherever feasible, a 5.0-foot wide planting strip located between the front of the sidewalk and the back of curb is desired to provide a visual cue to drivers as to where the driveway is located along the street, and to reduce the amount of sidewalk work required to meet ADA requirements. 4. General Access Provisions: a. In general, all properties abutting public streets are permitted at least one safe access to the public street system. b. On properties with multiple public street frontages, the City reserves the right to restrict vehicular access solely to the public street having the lower roadway classification, and/or to the safest access location. c. Development proponents wanting more than one driveway access to a public street will be required to justify the second driveway on the basis of development generated trips. A general rule of thumb based upon created trips and used by the City of Kent is that developments creating less than 4,000 trips per day will be limited to a single driveway. Page 6 of 8 d. Where the driveway location does not meet minimum City separation criteria, or where a safe driveway location can't be found, the City requires appropriate mitigation measures to provide for as safe a driveway as is feasible. 5. Common Mitigation Measures for Developments Which Can't Meet the Minimum Driveway to Driveway, or Driveway to Intersection Separation Criteria: a. Moving the proposed driveway as far from the closest driveway, or intersection, as possible. This is the minimum mitigation measure that will be accepted by the City, and in some instances this is not an adequate mitigation in and by itself. b. Along arterial streets, the creation of a new deceleration lane / right-turn pocket is often acceptable to provide a safe pullout for turning vehicles. This often requires significant off- site street improvements, and occasionally the purchase of additional right-of-way from adjacent properties in order to construct those improvements. c. Acquiring a cross-easement for ingress and egress from an adjoining property, and then using an existing driveway for the new development. d. Acquiring a binding agreement from an adjoining property to remove an existing adjacent driveway in order to meet the minimum driveway to driveway separation criteria; and then removing that superfluous driveway. Depending upon the trip generation characteristics of the subject development and the traffic volumes on the subject street, this mitigation measure (the removal of an existing driveway) may be considered adequate mitigation even when the full driveway to driveway separation distance that results doesn't fully meet the minimum driveway separation criteria. 6. The minimum protected queue (or on-site storage lane length) must be provided for the number of vehicles indicated below to prevent any potential turning conflicts within their lengths. These are the minimum lengths that will be permitted unless an approved Traffic Study includes a site and project specific queuing study showing that either more or less storage length is required to serve the subject development: a. For single-lane drive-in banks: storage to accommodate a minimum entering queue of 6 vehicles for a single window; banks having two windows need to accommodate a minimum entering queue of at least 9 vehicles per window; and banks having more 4 or more windows shall have storage to accommodate a minimum of 13 vehicles for each service lane. b. For vehicle wash facilities: facilities having a single service bay shall provide entering storage to accommodate a minimum of 12 vehicles; facilities having multi-bay designs shall have a minimum entering storage space of at least 6 vehicles for each service bay. c. For fast-food restaurants with drive-in window service: entering storage to accommodate a minimum of 8 vehicles per service lane shall be provided, but a minimum of 15 vehicles is suggested. Storage lengths for fast food restaurants is measured from the order board to the first service window. d. For service stations: a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate a minimum of 2 vehicles shall be provided between the pump islands and the public right-of- way, unless Expresso stands with drive-through windows are included on the site, in which case the minimum Expresso stand storage requirements will prevail. e. For shopping centers (50,000 square feet or more of gross leasing area): a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate a minimum of 4 vehicles shall be provided before any crossing, or turning conflicts can be permitted between the parking lot and the public right-of-way. Shopping centers having 100,000 square feet or more of gross leasing area shall provide a site and project specific queuing analysis to determine their appropriate entering and exiting storage lengths. Page 7of8 f. For all commercial developments (less than 50,000 square feet of gross leasing area): a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate at least 2 vehicles shall be provided between the parking lot and the public right-of-way before any crossing or turning conflicts can be permitted. Note: the City may require a site and project specific queuing analysis to determine the appropriate storage lengths when the commercial development includes one or more drive through facilities. g. For all Expresso stands with drive-through windows: entering and exiting storage lengths shall accommodate a minimum of 4 vehicles per window; but provisions for at least 15 vehicles is strongly suggested.. h. For pharmacies with drive-through windows: entering and exiting storage lengths shall accommodate a minimum of 5 vehicles per window. NOTE: Unless otherwise approved by the Transportation Engineering Section of the Department of Public Works, each vehicle above shall be deemed to have a length of 25-feet for the purpose of calculating minimum storage lengths. Last revised on May 2, 2001 Page 8 of 8 Ten Principles for Reminventimng A erica s Suburban ri s Michael D. Beyard Michael Pawlukiewicz i r Bankof America® I i The Urban Land Institute gratefully acknowledges the financial support Attachment B September of Bank of America in underwritingthis project. h Pro 7 LUPB Workshop o04 shop PO ne Back Retail-Zoned Land The zoning technique used by most suburban communities is to designate everything along the arterial highway strip for commercial uses and wait for retailers and developers to gradually fill in all of the individual sites. In this type of environment, new development sprawls outward even as sites closer to the city remain vacant and older retail centers deteriorate. Retail overzoning thus has had the effect of extending strips prematurely in discontinuous and inefficient ways as developers leapfrog over one another onto sites farther and farther away from the city. When economic conditions change, as they constantly do, some strips, or parts of strips, are left to deteriorate even before they have been fully developed. This leaves them unfinished indefinitely, at risk to competition from newer and more enticing shopping environments, and difficult to revitalize because of their char- acteristic sprawl and lack of focus. By pruning back the amount of land zoned for retail, suburban communities can stimulate retail growth, encourage revitalization, and improve the quality h of their shopping strips. It simply is not necessary for every major parcel along every arterial to be zoned for commercial or retail use. Suburban communities should take the following steps: Limit the quantity of commercially zoned land along emerging suburban strips to give landowners and retailers the incentive and economic strength to maintain a high-quality environment, react more swiftly to societal trends, and evolve on site as the retailing ... world changes. Rezone excess commercial land in older strips to encourage reinvestment - and improve the quality of existing retail properties. N 8 Create Variety Along the Strip Single-Family / Residential and Higher-Density, Open-Space Zone Mixed-Use Zone 1 �r Scale retail-zoned land to reflect a realistic assessment Node 1 of the size, strength, and character of the market. Lower-Density, Mixed-Use,and Stimulate infill, new forms of mixed-use, and pedestrian- open spade zone oriented retail development on remaining retail-zoned land. ' M"! Limit the extension of infrastructure—to prevent sprawl and congestion—as long as the existing infrastructure is underused. r Structure zoning in mature strips to encourage denser Higher-Density, Node 2 forms of development that can be reached by multiple a Mixed-Use Zone access modes. Single-Family ° Reserve some of the previously zoned retail land for Residential and Open-Space Zone housing, office space, civic uses, recreational facilities, and N open space. Reduce opportunities for and resist predatory behavior on the part of competing big-box retailers and centers. r RL r' 4 RL Before rezoning. After rezoning. 9 PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report KENT MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIAL CENTER Community Context The Kent Valley has one of the longest histories of modern settlement in the central Puget Sound region. The first white settlers arrived in 1853, and soon established farms near what is now downtown Kent, which was originally incorporated as a one square mile town in 1890. Over time, the surrounding area experienced a succession of agricultural phases, from early hop and dairy production,to small truck farms just prior to World War II. Commercial logging was also important in the late 19th Century, with the Kent Lumber Company and other sawmills clearing and processing timber from East and West Hill forests. Transportation improvements, including heavy rail lines, the Seattle-Tacoma Interurban Rail Line, and hard-surfaced roadways for automobiles, encouraged the growth of new businesses and residents throughout the Kent Valley and on its surrounding hillsides. By the 1960s, valley lands had become highly attractive to industrial developers due to the flat terrain, the availability of transportation, and the proximity to Seattle, Tacoma, and SeaTac Airport. By the 1970s, warehousing and distribution had become increasingly important as part of Kent's industrial development. In the past few decades, Kent has been transformed from a small, primarily residential and agricultural community into an employment and population center for South King County. Located midway between Seattle and Tacoma along the Interstate 5 corridor, Kent is the region's sixth largest city with 2000 estimates of 59,331 jobs and a population of 79,524. Kent City-Wide Snapshot Area(square miles) 29.4 Population(2000) 79,524 Population per square mile 2,705 Employment(2000) 59,331 Employees per square mile 2,018 Housing units(2000): 32,488 Employees per housing unit 1.8 Source: US Census Bureau, Washington State Employment Security Department Attachment C September 27,2004 LUPB Workshop 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 1 City of Kent Employment Gov. 3% Const/Res Education 7% 3% FIRES 15% WTCU 29% Manuf. Retail 31% 12% Employment in the city of Kent is dominated by Manufacturing (31%) and Wholesale trade, Transportation, Communication, and Utilities (29%). Manufacturing and WTCU together provide 60% of all employment for the city. Also, Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and Services provide 15% of the city's employment. 12%of the city's employment is from Retail sector. Comprehensive Plan Kent's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1995, was the first full update of the City's planning regulations since 1977. The plan outlines policies for supporting the city's growth in accordance with the Growth . Management Act. The citywide plan is organized around a set of 14 broad planning goals,which include detailed policies addressing the following areas: Urban Growth, Transportation, Public Facilities, Housing, Urban Design, Human Services, Economic Development, Natural Resource Industries, Open Space and Recreation, Historic Preservation, Environment, Property Rights, and Permits. Chief among the city's plans for its future is the revitalization of its downtown. The City plans to direct a major portion of its near-term growth into the center. Working with an interjurisdictional task force in King County, Kent's plan is built upon the 20 year growth target of accommodating 7,520 additional households and 11,500 additional jobs. See the aerial photo on the following page for a depiction of the Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center. 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 2 W. IF 7. � ��r a Jr i` f �� �.'fir yCPP�d ♦,.. r'd'f� '� o f ,,f, A - a • NI r i� _ T -J - _ 3 5 i,.+ '$e"''`5•l t"`r+�R f f 'lF `t * ,' S7`�ma.+ r'r v �i4 ��-. C 1 I+ . �.r;:' t- i�'i. '.. .�� {. i.:r-�4`� is � ,q•,fir ��.+,�i(1.�. -�"'� r- � t �� �'x_. i y� n�M � � �•3'� � �{����. i• �;�1!•t l+�w`try.[C tf* T•�'}R , RN y� 11M1'4�NS18�N _ 4(' Mir ,f r.>t` i+++l 's •J � � .2t. i� ry 2 i ty7 P l' -':�.y�a 4y %b ''S. ( .. --_IX 1511 i ��; .�.� �. -k '}+Mil �1 � ,� �• �s�a �� S S l VU111�,!: w t r JWW s p `}F"7 �,` �� .�.,►t Yr�_yss•t�*'fr•`,�r'•Ti.. �S't, �.'� ��� �1+` .s Y y f., r Y TO l�P .T .. a� r I c• .-ia'.7R t{t F•fY l k�"j-ja 1 r °4�+ i} r r , • ,ti - i .� L'r. '•s7h 7 .',aT:__ Y.'.lr.+�L mar. 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 3 Manufacturing/Industrial Center Background The Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center (MIC) is located in the Kent Valley just north of downtown Kent. The center is generally bounded by SR-167 (Valley Freeway)on the east and south, SW 43`d Street on the north, and West Valley Highway on the west. The Kent center is part of a larger industrial area known as the Kent North Valley Industrial Area. The larger industrial area consists of over 6 square miles, with over 35,000 employees in Kent alone. The Kent MIC (covering 2,355 acres, or about 3.7 square miles) comprises about the eastern half of the Kent North Valley Industrial Area. The Kent MIC is planned and zoned for more intense development than the remainder of the larger Kent industrial area. The Boeing Company is a major property owner and business presence on industrial lands immediately west of the Kent MIC. Boeing's Kent Space Center and 240-acre Pacific Gateway Business Park are located just across West Valley Highway. Manufacturing Industrial Center Planning and Implementation Vision 2020 includes policy support for coordinated planning in the region's manufacturing/industrial centers. Appendix 1 ("Center Characteristics and Descriptions") of the plan includes the following language addressing these centers: Manufacturing/industrial centers are major, existing regional employment areas of intense, concentrated manufacturing and industrial land uses which cannot be easily mixed at higher densities with other uses. To preserve land at these centers for manufacturing, industry and related uses, large retail uses or non-related offices are discouraged. Provision of adequate public facilities and services, including good access to the region's transportation system, is very important to the success of manufacturing/industrial centers. In 1992 the city of Kent formally designated its manufacturing/Industrial Center, stating the center would be a concentration of manufacturing land uses and employment, and would be served by transit. The city established a target of 10,000 employees and designated the center in its comprehensive plan. The center boundaries are shown on the Land Use Plan Map (Figure 4.7 of the comprehensive plan). The plan includes the following goals and policies which support the center: define the boundaries of the center to encompass the most intensive manufacturing and warehouse uses; ensure the boundaries reflect accessibility to truck and rail corridors; limit non-manufacturing uses in the center;provide transportation and utility infrastructure to accommodate high-intensity manufacturing uses in the center; preserve land for manufacturing and related uses; and enhance transit service to and within the center. The city has not prepared a specific sub-area plan for its manufacturing/industrial center. Population, Housing, and Employment Population, housing, and household data were derived from the 1990 and 2000 censuses. The Kent MI center experienced a slight increase in population and a drop in housing units and households over the past 10 years. Between 1990 and 2000 the center's population grew from 190 to 197, housing units declined from 109 to 78, and the number of households decreased from 103 to 75. Population density increased slightly over the decade, from 62 persons per square mile in 1990 to 64 in 2000. Housing unit density dropped for the period, from 35 to 25 units per square mile. And household density dropped, from 33 per square mile in 1990 to 24 in the year 2000. With the number of housing units declining and employment growing over the 1990-2000 period, the ratio of jobs per housing unit increased strongly, from 128 jobs per housing unit in 1990 to 207 jobs per housing unit in 2000. Given the city's policy 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 4 focus and objectives for its manufacturing/industrial centers, these trends are positive. Residential uses are generally discouraged in the Kent Manufacturing Center, since they are adversely affected by industrial activity. Department of Employment Security data were used to evaluate employment trends in Kent center. Between 1995 and 2000 employment in the center increased by 16%, from 13,931 to 16,164. In the year 2000 half these jobs were in the wholesale, transportation, communication, and utilities sector, while just under 35% were in the manufacturing sector. The remaining 15%were split between construction (8%), services(5%),retail(1%),and other(1%). King County's Countywide Planning Policies established a goal of 10,000 employees for each manufacturing/industrial center.The Kent MI center had achieved this level before the year 1990,and has now exceeded the goal by 60%. Manufacturing/Industrial Center Population, Housing,and Em to ment 1990* 2000 Population 190 197 Persons per square mile 62 64 Housing units 109 78 Housing units per square mile 35 25 Households 103 75 Households per square mile 33 24 Employment 13,931 16,164 Employees per square mile 4,526 5,251 Employees per housing unit 1 127.81 207.23 * Employment data is for 1995 Source: U.S. Census(1990,2000), Washington State Department of Employment Security,Puget Sound Regional Council Manufacturing/Industrial Center Employment by Sector Services 4.8% Retail 1.0% FIRE 0.1 % WTCU 51.3% Manufacturing 34.6% Government/education 0.3% Construction/resources 7.9% Source:Washington State Department of Employment Security 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 5 Land Use, Character& Urban Form The Kent center has 55 blocks, each with about 36 acres. The center in composed primarily of one story manufacturing and warehouse. Kent center includes 458 parcels covering some 1,651 acres, with an average parcel size of 3.6 acres. Manufacturing/Industrial Center Character and Urban Form° Total area(acres) 1,970 Number of blocks 55 Average block size(gross acres) 35.8 Number of parcels 458 Average parcel size(net acres) 3.6 Road network(linear miles) 21.6 Freight railroad network(linear miles) 11.4 Source: King County Assessor,Puget Sound Regional Council Developable land contained in parcels makes up 70%of the center's total land area. The road network in Kent center consists of nearly 22 miles of streets, while the center is served by 11.4 miles of freight railroad tracks. These include tracks owned and operated by Union Pacific railroad and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway. Current land use information was obtained from King County assessor's office records. Current land use in Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Center is predominantly warehousing, with industrial use comprising 13%and commercial uses accounting for another 7%. The remaining 23% of the center contains a mix of open space,office,residential, government/military, and vacant areas. Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Existing Land Use Percentage Agriculture 0.06% Civic/Quasi-public 0.11% Commercial 6.93% Parks/Open Space 0.79% Industrial 13.06% Residential—Multi Family 0.13% Office 0.95% Parking 0.53% Residential—Single Family 1.26% Government/Military 1.86% Unknown(No Data) 5.42% Vacant 11.39% Warehousing 57.52% Total 100% Source: King County Assessor's Records,Puget Sound Regional Council See the map on the following page for a depiction of current land uses in the the Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center. 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 6 Kent Manufacturing Center(Current Land Use) 43rd � - r-:Agxiculmn Civic and Quasi-Public C—emial Foxest,Park,Open S pace ' Industrial Mining h \.`a` is Mixed Use \ Multi-Family Residential No Land Use Code 11_ office .AA Parking �\ Schools Single Fammly Residential - Tnb al,Govexxunent,Military IS Vacant \\ •`•- Warehousing Airport Grounds Facility I I i t i u S 212th r . m" O0 v 2000 0 2000 4000 Feet. 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 7 Planned future land use was derived from the land use element of the city of Kent's comprehensive plan, which designates the entire Kent manufacturing/industrial center for manufacturing use. The center will contain intense manufacturing and warehouse uses with access to truck and rail corridors. The City of Kent intends to improve its manufacturing base by not only defining and preserving areas to serve as its economic and employment core, but by creating better access in terms of commuting and transporting goods. Its policies for manufacturing and industrial areas discourage and limit land uses other than manufacturing and warehouse in the area designated as its Manufacturing Industrial Center. See the map on the following page for a depiction of planned future land uses in the Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center. Kent Manufacturing/Industrial Future land Use Percentage Industrial 0.01% Manufacturing Center 99.99% Total 100% 'This designation is to preserve land in this area for intensive manufacturing and warehouse uses as well as to provide accessibility to truck and rail corridors. Source: City of Kent Comprehensive Plan(1995) 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 8 Kent Manufacturing Center(Future Land Use) 43rd 0Agriculture Commercial ®Forestry a O Industrial Mixed Use � xs Parks and Open Space —1 FResidential r Q Resource Extraction Tribal,Government, Military i 2 1 2 Lh, � f l 1 — pp v 2000 0 2000 4000 Feet 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 9 Transportation and Access The Kent MIC has good highway access and is well served by freight rail facilities. The Valley Freeway (SR-167) provides major north-south roadway access to and within the center, with interchanges at S. 212`h Street near the north end of the center, and at Central Avenue N. near the south end. SR-167 includes four general purpose freeway lanes plus two high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. Other major highways and streets serving the center include East Valley Highway,West Valley Highway, 761h Avenue South, and 841h Avenue South. East-west access is provided by South 228`•h Street, South 2121h Street, South 1961h Street,and SW 43`d Street. While Sound Transit's Sounder Commuter Rail line runs through Kent MI center, the Kent Sounder Station, which opened for service in 2001, is located south of Kent center, at 301 Railroad Avenue,just south of James Street. Three north-south rail lines serve the Kent center: two parallel Burlington Northern lines run through the middle of the site, while a single Union Pacific line is located along the western edge of the center. The manufacturing industrial center is served by 5 separate transit routes, which operate an average AM peak frequency of one bus approximately every 32 minutes. There are no transit station areas within the Kent center. The closest is the Kent Sounder commuter rail station located on Railroad Avenue about '/2 mile from the center's southern boundary. Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Transit Routes and Frequencies AM Peak Period) Item Route# Destination Freq 1 150 Seattle-Kent 16.00 150 Auburn-Kent 30.55 2 153 Renton-Kent 30.00 3 154 Boeing 60.00 4 167 UW 26.00 5 160 CBD 30.00 32.09 References and Contacts City of Kent Comprehensive Plan(1995) Commuter Rail Station Area Study(2000) Charlene Anderson, Planning Manager,253-856-5454 2002 Regional Growth Centers Report: Kent Manufacturing Industrial Center Page 10 12.02.050 Standard of review. The planning department may recommend and the city council may approve, approve with modifications or deny amendments to the comprehensive plan text or map designations based upon the following criteria: 1. The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare; and 2. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the plan that warrant an amendment to the plan; and 3. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the comprehensive plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities elements of the plan. (Ord. No. 3237, § 1, 7-6-95) 15.09.050 Amendments. C. Standards and criteria for granting a request for rezone. The following standards and criteria shall be used by the hearing examiner and city council to evaluate a request for rezone. Such an amendment shall only be granted if the city council determines that the request is consistent with these standards and criteria and subject to the requirements of Ch. 12.01 KCC. 1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be compatible with development in the vicinity. 3. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated. 4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone. 5. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the city. S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2003\2032620-cpa2003-4a-c-LUPB 10 1 303code.doc Attachment D September 27,2004 LUPB Workshop d O • .1J �' ul ++ wCN o rn 1= a flN cea f � a . v = p Q cn c 0c •� O,\t 3S 3AV svt a� 3AV t7t,�! c0 . : N C CO a I cn Y o I 3S 3AV ZCL .2 1.._.. V i r wloop 3a l 3S 3AV 9L�` � S 3A �• CO V91c N w 3S 3/%806 F L96 CIS i �..` ^ r- .. bo P's' AMH IIVA 1SV3 � .j cn i w F- S 3AV 9L rn = t 64 AVE S L96 bS EaY r ►— _ 19L bS _..� W 04 r V d m _ NI' 7 E. �.._ _..1 MILITARY RD ti` m E ?3 TL N-m 66 i�6 lISS a - • r3`oao Attachment E September 27,2004 LUPB Workshop u .� 'G Y L. d +0 0 W N O LU �- O zo c o �0cCD o o i oco '> o o aNN m L a LOL L cn U _ � YVVcozz - X a _Id U CS 1 6�ll, El � 119 D ,, t � 19 , ,i ON Q L dx / Vt � < i t - E7, to EE i 00 El El❑❑ � L1 ❑O ❑ f F7 n J 4� Fsa U N LJ _L) ( LU �o/nw —,�. ✓ 0 n � W . • -. ° ' i � l =a• i 'R �� � �°. ; ;�� �� � �.,�. � - r jai. � _ x `�.�•- y,�+XS`� ,#� _ - ,_'- z �-. s� f :,;,f r�,;,�:�' _ ,� ' -�' �: n� x .�:-• ' `ski,_ -� � 1 " - WA ALL Aw : •;°;�1 ,fir, 1�,t AN"fill�%' .- `- 4 :'y. L�--�y�°�C -x •:e..'.' :r�`•K`� .J..i ,y_::.,.� �to v~�.�.i:U'��`Y.^:'.".... °��'�- � F�a�,- hap a L L O O p O ry V C V of L (A o d 4= Opp c a = O a 3 3 o w z �, �, w 41 -a � � ug Ad L co a � 3 Ym � w fw m � � Q t) = Y00VV Coo � UU N L L 1 PRIV I N.< L 91 i N 7 * '� L II C4 1 �- All l 1 —� Gy( f--IMY IJ LJCYIX _I N I COX J � CD M I CN --- - O y�A-N--M-M —� _ 00! o � _ m CN 1 I � —fiCOX '77 ' 4 aox if �N O I . ._- _x a I • � • )) a 1r t .y. LZ Ewe ow t t y`'t'I�'r't.E. 4Dff i`�"�t ^rc xa l• E .t Eal. J U5 ,;� r _ — at tilt�A 41'1• ,�'a..• _ _ x r� ad r �y z� gp s w • r . �a a a • a (.. G v ° C �V../ '� IC L L O C qt LA (D M a cn +O+ C a W N O � 1,1 . 1 1 � O O d M y f0 O > N O C y o c ` w d i L L �i Y . coo C 41 C 1a 41 CL O r.+ O � O 0 Z .Q Q CD = � 0 1 1 co a � 3 � a f � fu. � � m Q v = Q Ny � v z �Y n J V V � d C� 0 4 x � ZZ19 �s a i Li Fj, --M'AAA*41"N'l IV A A A A,-A It-IN A A,-,41 A CO U � , 31 3S 3AV 043 - ,aA-AA AAAA'a - 4131A 4t4 A Im A IN AAA-4 CN 4 ' -#1 31 A- �I �I � i UL 1" x Cn cn' -- A P91IIui , IIIEz Ul) x it co --3S3-Ad s� - — in ED zo .. � � ,� I ���' �' v _ � _two F. © L - u Ea 3Sld£_b 3SldBLL AA-N-A-,-1 d=- Em g M ,ICI AAA�' �aSw _ ,.,•31^ill A A� t mo o 9 a f r A Ar31 A 31�I#1 a �� Ha l .eK. ' a At 241 al Vic 771 30 17, MkIr t - �r fix` — - k -_: "`"""AAA � -•R-'A S'_ i. 4 x w r act, � '• �.x`�i�,��. J ;,,. � :. + �� •.Y..- r° � .> >g f'e � � ¢ "ire* .2• � .� 5' > _ ��. , � - w r t '• € ...d:. •' X`•fir Tya ; ,� u.Tir } _ n r 1 �-•' _ ,1 �� tea?' �,»��y� s .,r _ -�' � ^si -� "S f•.�rs.��. yy--'��'q)� '+�-�'-M#..#fig �. ;h�. ,.� t Jr - e'jgg AL �eve �� vi;.^Y• i4.M�' ?.[��' � �� :� # ��' r; - •._ `�•... .rf. - 4 - sse ,/ate - s= n J � + CD Zr L a� a� a� Ir +� o 0 zCN4 (A u j > a) CI N N � tL — > � rayC mLL = a a, vtm a a' N fL f � 0 QQ — --------- A H - d AAI#IININININ41AA^31�319 AA'N' AB 31AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ��41AAAAA91A�AAAA IAAAA 3a�I_^�I.31A�IA^#AAIN•#1A^#I^#IAAAAA �1�IAAAAAAAAAAAAA-NAAAA% NAAAA-AIN41AAININ•i1.31A�3 A.41AA AAAAAA A- �HAAA'NilIN 31 x i AA NINAA41 AAANAAA IN^�1. AAA AAAAA �AAAAA#AAA - � �. 31 1 1�1 #1 1#ICI A A A A A AAAAAA41�1•#1^31�191. A A A A _ � A A--i 31AA,NA A-N.31 AAAAINA IAAAAIN AAA^31^3f-31A•#A N4�#1 AAA #IININI#IAAAAA -NAAAAA AAAAA IN IN IN A A 414A A A U)A.41 A*A'I 31 #I31 i1.31 31 #I �--IAAAAA INAAAAAAINI1 M IAq N AA*AAAAAAAAA-N-41AAAAA to AA-� AA A-41 A-41AAA `1�1#I� �I.3 `#I AAAA `]1`31A`N`#IA AA`NAAA A`31 31AA-N-N-N.NA A`N 1'yi 31'l1`xldl 1 `N AA`1 A-41` -41A x `>1.3113 N`31`3 AAA-#14A ININ`NIN`N`31A`N `]IA`NAA cn 31$131 #I 3131 5. a 3♦ 3 41AINAAAA.ail Alm AAAA•#IINAIN A-NA AA A-NIN'•)I,AAA A`31AA •11 3 -NAAAAAAA41 AAAAAAA. A.N-N.N -AAA AAAAAAq mAAAAAAAA4oftA AA-NAAFI AAAN 'NAA-N A'NAA -� #I #IMA 31�AA41AAA I A41A'A 31 11`�IIN-41•#1 � IAAA'41 � L 00 3dAININAAINAA.41AININ%xAA'N-MA, AAA ININININI A-41AAAAAA IN IN AAA•#IAAI1AAAAIN 31 31'AAINA� �AAAA AA-9^#1A A491-11 AAA-41 RIVER NAAAAIN� AININ� AAA AANAN NAAAAA-M-41AA-I.3ilA-N�m-Y ,AA NAAA-NA AAA^�1.31A IN 31 AAIN 91A r-41 Poo � g oho'° mg c mo : m" r c2 E m— - m 0 m'°pO�3 - mm-�omm E E'° 15 m m E c° u — mtH�m .00 �3`oav i 4„ - x r } {tj f } .. e i i , r .. :. � 4 >2 �. '- i •fir :i� � � _ y r s M t • • } ` ` a_ < k s ^ � 4 i 14 lk 10, OL Ift ,., : Ar 10, a 0 N Attachment F September 27, 2004 LUPB Workshop C d O � U d C C 0 N C U) N d N = C C OD C ,O N 'i3 N U U U C U •m C ; O .` U U G C .y f6 J 0 J O J E C U 0 N C U U C 2 (n (n 'O 'O p f0 � o a o a -o v o 0o a E a 0 w 0 w U a 0 o -E -E 2 0 > cu m N > t U p N N V co y 0 C 2 O N ur w LL c a _a r m d L r c 2 0) �c 0)Q w �_ Q m 0 0 0 E m E (7 d m Z 0 Z 0 2 n y � � � d Z 0 E CL a c a z C U E E c c U E z ? c U E U E E E w 0 O U o U o o i o � c U Z N Z U U U N U U Z Z N Z U Z U U I n N (n a O O .o U co N O A Q Cq N N J @ O d Q _ O 1 m O 'O a N 0 C C U d C 41 C N U O m — d V) co 7 D Ocm 0 c 3 a N c O a) C U is M 3 Ln M J v o o J o U co y (a T T O) a — OO 1 6 v _ d C w O E a y E m d "�" > .00 (6 U LL O C > O U U. U U C •N LL L 1] LL VI i `O N N L C U 7 N i O C N C N (9 y U N C O N G7 Q) LJ7 m W L m E 0 0) U y c E .� y o) c - rn c 0 Z d Q rn Q m U) Q 0) -< 2 E a Z Q c N E a c o U E c E U E cow E U E E E D N O (n LL C O LL' C U O O U' O O U LL U) D N � D U N 2 U Z UZ N (n � ZU U Q N Q d co co coo M W (D r.- c0 d y o p y p N a) m N � V _ > O d p O L O Q N N (D Q N N O N -O N N E J L r t ! N CD (CV O Cl 'a 0 sT W V c T O N X CD Lf/ 'C '� M Z v o Z Z Q N d a N LL CD N d O > > > Y d d y Y Y U d � m _ CD E Q Q L m m M (� (�00 Cl •y 04 O M M Q1 �i (n N LO N .a rn = C N O O V O O O O N C 01 O CD O V p t- C. O O O M O C. O N N N O N M U O O O Nr N N Cl N d1 N N O * � N # N E d LL N N N N N # N Q N N Q V Q N ti. Q N Qv Qa a > Qo a n. > > o a a Z > N E E W Y # W Y W Y W Yxt Ucm LL C a ++ o d AE = U m Y z > c m 4 d =o a_ O E c ' O m c m a m v Y u a a 0 d Q c O r pO Y.N J COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, C.D. Director PLANNING SERVICES 40 Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager • Phone:253-856-5454 K E N T Fax: 253-856-6454 W A 5 H I N G T O N Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 AGENDA LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD CONTINUED HEARING NOVEMBER 8,2004 7:00 P.M. LAND USE&PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS: CITY STAFF Jon Johnson, Chair Charlene Anderson,Planning Manager Greg Worthing, Vice Chair William Osborne, Planner Steve Dowell Kim Adams Pratt, Asst City Attorney David Malik Pamela Mottram, Administrative Secretary Elizabeth Watson Kenneth Wendling This is to notify you that the Land Use and Planning Board will hold a continued Public Hearing in lieu of a Workshop on MONDAY, November 8, 2004 in the Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. The public is welcome to attend the continued public hearing. All interested persons may have an opportunity to speak at this hearing. Any person wishing to submit oral or written comments on the public hearing application may do so prior to or at the meeting. The agenda will include the following item(s): 1. Call to order 2. Roll call 3. Approval of Minutes from the October 25, 2004 meeting moved to November 22, 2004 4. Added Items to Agenda 5. Communications 6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings 7. (CONTINUED)PUBLIC HEARING: #CPA-2004-1 DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN(DSAP)UPDATE (William Osborne) Consideration of proposed changes to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP). The general boundaries of the DSAP are SR-167 on the west, Willis Street on the south, Titus Street on the east and Cloudy Street on the north. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District Map designations are being considered for properties between James and Cloudy Streets, and between First and Fifth Avenues. These amendments would change the designation of properties from high density single-family residential use to mixed use and low-density multi-family residential use. Amendments to the Zoning District Map designations for some properties along Central Avenue may be considered to change from high-intensity downtown mixed use to a general commercial use designation more consistent with the existing conditions. Proposed text amendments to the DSAP include updating of existing conditions information, listed capital projects, goals, policies and recommended actions to facilitate the revitalization of Downtown Kent. The draft revised DSAP document and related attachments is available on the City website: http•//www ci kent wa us/Plannin /g LongRangeSection/DSAP/downloads.htm For further information or a copy of the staff report or the text of the proposed amendment, contact the Planning Services office at(253) 856-5454. Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City in Advance for more information. For TDD relay service for Braille, call 1-800-833-6385,for TDD relay service for the hearing impaired, call 1-800-833-6388 or call the City of Kent Planning Services directly at(253)856-5499(TDD)or the main line at(253)856-5454 S:I Permit)Planl L UPBI20041Agendas1110804ph.doc COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES VENT Charlene Anderson, AICP,Manager W A 5 H I N G T O N Phone:253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 NOVEMBER 1, 2004 TO: CHAIR JON JOHNSON AND LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS FROM: WILLIAM D. OSBORNE, LONG-RANGE PLANNER SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT #CPA-2004-1 DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN UPDATE For Continued Public Hearing of November 8, 2004 SUMMARY: The Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) was adopted in April 1998 to recognize the role of Downtown Kent as a designated Urban Center. After six years, an update of this document to reflect changes in existing conditions, planned capital projects, and citizen interests would be appropriate. Staff will present for consideration several of the substantive proposed revisions of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. These include a number of recommended actions which would be effected concurrently with approval of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, including two proposed area land use and zoning map amendments (north of James and along Central Avenue), and text amendments to the Zoning Code (KCC Title 15) relating to development standards for multi-family residential (no minimum lot size for multifamily development), applying Downtown Design Review to all DSAP Districts, and changes to DCE parking space requirements in the East and West Frame Districts. Other proposed text amendments, including stormwater detention standards, and capital facilities in Downtown would be brought forward for consideration of implementation subsequent to adoption of the Plan. BACKGROUND: The Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP), recognized by the State, King County, and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) as a subarea plan of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, designated Downtown as an Urban Center/Regional Growth Center. The Urban Center designation criteria relate to addressing anticipated residential and economic development growth, and planned capital improvements. Funding allocated by the PSRC for transportation system improvements are tied to compliance with these criteria. Presently, the adopted DSAP (1998) contains outdated information. Several policy recommendations have been incorporated in the City Code, and some capital improvement projects have either been completed, delayed or removed from the six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and six- year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). In September 2003, the City Council Planning Committee received public testimony regarding specific economic development challenges due to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning east of the Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) Railroad tracks. Citizens proposed a rezone of the area to General Commercial (GC) Zoning. The Planning Committee requested staff to research and make a recommendation on this issue. Because the DSAP, as a subarea plan of the Comprehensive Plan, contains specific recommendations pertaining to the area of interest dating from 1998, an update of this document to some extent was seen as a necessary step in consideration of future Downtown land use decisions. The update of the DSAP provides an opportunity for the incorporation by reference of subsequent Downtown-related planning documents prepared by the City, such as the Commuter Rail Station Area Study (2000), the Kent Station Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (2002), and the Economic Development Strategic Plan (2003). Staff facilitated two public participation workshop sessions on May 17, 2004 and two sessions on June 14, 2004 to identify the challenges, opportunities, strengths and weaknesses of Downtown Kent — and to brainstorm opportunities and strategies addressing these issues in the update of the DSAP. Attendees were asked to discuss general questions about Downtown relating to the Urban Center criteria — affordable housing, transportation, land uses, public facilities, and parks and open space. Citizens identified a number of issues, through discussion and recording to DSAP District paper maps containing 1998 recommendations. The citizen input and responses from a general interest survey of City employees were summarized and provided to the Land Use and Planning Board in workshop on July 12, 2004. The Land Use and Planning Board discussed and commented on the issues, concerns, and recommendations contained in a graphic summary map. Several of the recommendations from this input process were incorporated into the suggested revisions. Revisions have more recently been made based on testimony from public hearings held on August 23rd (continued on September 271h) and October 25`h, 2004. OPTIONS: The following substantive revisions to the DSAP have been suggested, and are in addition to the revisions considered at the October 25`h public hearing. The draft presented to the Board includes insertions (noted in underline) and deletions (noted by strikethfo ) to date: 1. Revise development standards to encourage development of market rate multi-family residential units in Downtown (pages IV-2 and VI-12 to 14). a. Waive minimum lot size requirements for multi-family dwelling unit development in all DSAP Districts. b. Reduce or waive residential unit development permit fees in DSAP Districts. c. Extend Downtown multi-family residential development tax exemption program to rental units — owner-occupied multi-family residential market is practically non-existent statewide. d. Allow five (5) stories of wood-frame construction above a concrete base. 2. Change Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Map designations for the area between North First and North Fifth Avenues, and between James and Cloudy Streets from Single-Family Residential, Eight Units per Acre (SF-8/SR-8) to Urban Center Land Use and Downtown Commercial Enterprise Zoning (UC/DCE) in the south (8.4 acre) portion and Multi-Family Residential, Low Density Land Use (LDMF) and Zoning (MR- G or MR-T16) in the north (9 acre) portion, including five parcels (1.62 acres) north of Cloudy Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues (pages V-4 and VI-8 to 11, Attachment D/Figure V-2). A member of the Board requested staff consider designating the entire area (between First and Fifth Avenues south of Cloudy Street) for commercial land use — with either DCE or Office (0) Zoning. Based on a quick analysis of traffic impacts, staff does not recommend either of these zoning proposals — whereas multi-family residential use would be anticipated to have the same or less impact as single-family residential use (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation (7`h Edition), pages 271 and 308), Land Use&Planning Board Continued Public Hearing November 8, 2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Page 2 of 5 extending commercial zoning to Cloudy Street could roughly quadruple (DCE) or double (Office) the number of trips generated adjacent to the single-family residential use north of Cloudy (ITE Trip Generation, pages 1160 and 1453). The Board should select from one of the following options. The appropriate Zoning District designation for the proposed LDMF (Low-Density Multi-Family Residential) area would be: a. MR-G (allows apartments, sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre); or b. MR-T16 (allows condominium units only, sixteen(16) dwelling units per acre). Should the Board desire either Downtown Commercial Enterprise or Office Zoning Districts for ANY portion of the area proposed by staff for LDMF, the appropriate designations would be as follows: c. Commercial (C) or Mixed Use (MU) Comprehensive Plan Designation with an Office (0) Zoning District Designation; or d. Urban Center Comprehensive Plan Designation with a DCE Zoning District Designation. 3. Amend the Downtown Design Review Area to include all properties located within DSAP Districts—this includes the North Frame District (pages V-4 & 5, and VI-21 to 23, Attachment C/Figure V-1). 4. Rezone the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) area located between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central Avenue, to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay (GC-MU) (pages V-7 and VI-11 & 12, Attachment D/Figure V-6 & 12). 5. Revise DCE surface parking standards for the East Frame District (roughly between alley east of Central Avenue & Jason Avenue, and between Temperance & Titus Streets) — from three (3) spaces per 1,000 square feet commercial gross floor area to 4.5 spaces. This revision could be implemented in one of the following options: a. Without conditions on commercial development; b. Requirement that residential units comprise 25% of overall project gross floor area. The Board could choose to include a two (2) year "sunset clause" to review effectiveness/impact if one of the above options for revision is selected (pages V-8 & 9, VI-21 to 23, Attachment D/Figure V-6 & 12). 6. Revise DCE surface parking standards for the West Frame District (between SR-167 & Union-Pacific Railroad, and between Willis & James Streets) — from three (3) spaces per 1,000 square feet commercial gross floor area to 4.5 spaces. This revision could be implemented in one of the following options: a. Without conditions on commercial development; b. Requirement that residential units comprise 25% of overall project gross floor area. The Board could choose to include a two (2) year "sunset clause" to review effectiveness/impact if one of the above options for revision is selected (pages V-11, VI-21 to 23, Attachment D/Figure V-15). Land Use&Planning Board Continued Public Hearing November 8,2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Page 3 of 5 7. Improve recognition of roles and relationships among various interested parties in Downtown (pages IV-1 to 3, 5 & 6). 8. Expand scope of the study of land uses attributed with increased demand for public safety and social services to include day labor offices, casinos, adult entertainment businesses, and gas stations. Add policy language, "...Restrict or prohibit specific commercial uses in Downtown that are known to generate negative impacts on the larger community," to clarify the intent this recommendation (page IV-3). 9. Work with social services providers, public safety officers, temporary labor agencies, and educational institutions to address homelessness issues in Downtown (page IV-3). 10. Make Downtown Kent the transportation hub of South King County— seek expansion of commuter rail service and increased frequency of bus service in Downtown (pages IV-3 & 4). 11. Support the concept of a performing arts center or a hotel and conference center in Downtown to extend the evening hours of activity (pages IV-4 and V-18). 12. Support live performance arts in public places, and encourage live performance arts in Downtown retail and restaurant businesses (page IV-4). 13. Allow underground stormwater detention vaults where appropriate for development sites larger than one acre in Downtown to encourage attractive site development and maximum build-out of revenue-generating land uses (page IV-5). 14. Open Cloudy Street to connect Third and Fourth Avenues, and implement traffic-calming measures on Cloudy Street particularly near the Kiwanis Tot Lot, appropriately identified through use of the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program (pages V-3 & 4, Attachment D/Figure V-2). 15. Enhance or replace the pedestrian bridge over Mill Creek at Temperance Street — while ensuring protection of Mill Creek salmonid habitat (page V-8, Attachment D/Figure V-6 & 12). 16. Encourage large lot redevelopment opportunities in the West Frame District, including the Metro Park &Ride Lot (page V-10, Attachment D/Figure V-15)). 17. Consider restoration options for Historic Train Station (page V-13, Attachment D/Figure V-17 &28). 18. Encourage mixed-use development projects proximate to the Kent Transit Center, including the Municipal Parking Lot area (page V-19, Attachment D/Figure 21). 19. Improve coordination of public improvements with private development actions (page V- 20). 20. Plan for eventual undergrounding of all utilities in the Historic Core (page V-21, Attachment D/Figure 17 &28). 21. Incorporation of the Kent Economic Development Strategic Plan, Commuter Rail Station Area Study and Kent Station SEIS by reference (pages VI-7 & 8). Land Use&Planning Board Continued Public Hearing November 8,2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Page 4 of 5 22. Connect gateway improvements at Fourth and James to Kent Station to improve pedestrian-orientation (page V-3). 23. Include James and Pioneer Streets in the list for design and construction of design improvements (page V-12). 24. Include vertical curb and gutters in any design of angled parking extended along Saar Street to the Union Pacific Railroad to ensure pedestrian access (pages V-12 & 13). 25. Include consideration of pedestrian facilities when identifying and planning provision of connecting improvements for bicycles. Include traffic calming measures as facilities, and reference use of Neighborhood Traffic Control Program as appropriate to address safety- related improvements (page IV-4). 26. Include trails as part of entrance gateways to Downtown (page IV-5). 27. Replace "Sounder Commuter Rail & Bus Station" with "Kent Transit Center" throughout the DSAP document. 28. Revise "Traffic Mitigation" section to reflect ongoing efforts to update transportation concurrency analysis (pages VI-23 & 24). 29. Update existing conditions and project status of proposed northbound access street from Willis Street (pages V-9 & 10). Staff will be available at the November 8`h public hearing for further discussion. S:IPermit I Plan I CompPlanAmdments1200412041242-CPA-2004-1-L UPBHrg-110804.doc Enc: Attachment A:Draft Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Attachment B: 1998 DSAP List of Figures(Original) Attachment C: 1998 DSAP Figures(Original) Attachment D:2004 Draft Revised Figures Attachment E:Downtown Projects:Past,Present and Planned(1998-2009) Attachment F:August 17`h Attachment Description Memo SEPA Adoption Notice&Addendum cc: Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Services Manager Nathan Torgelson,Economic Development Manager Don Wickstrom,Public Works Director Parties of Record Project File Land Use&Planning Board Continued Public Hearing November 8,2004 CPA-2004-1 Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update Page 5 of 5 ATTACHMENT A LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD CONTINUED HEARING NOVEMBER 8, 2004 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan DRAFT KENT W A S H I N G T O N Integrated With The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Prepared for the City of Kent by MAKERS Architecture and Urban Design, BRW, Property Counselors, Langlow Associates and the City of Kent Planning Services Office With the Assistance of a Washington State Planning And Environmental Review Fund Grant November 8, 2004 Mayor Jim White Chief Administrative Officer Mike Martin City Clerk Brenda Jacober City Council Julie Peterson, President Tim Clark Ron Harmon Deborah Ranniger Debbie Raplee Les Thomas Bruce White Land Use and Planning Board Jon Johnson, Chair Greg Worthing, Vice Chair Steve Dowell Theresa Ferguson David Malik Elizabeth Watson Kenneth Wendling 1998 Downtown Stakeholders Task Force Brad Bell Merrily Manthey Pat Curran Steve Mariotti Connie Epperly June McEleran Tim Giminez Dee Moschel Beverly Hawk Leona Orr Jon Johnson Bill Stewart Jerry Kauth Bob Whalen Stephanie Klappenbaugh Howard Montoure Doug Klappenbaugh Rico Yingling Dick Lackey Charles Turner Introduction I. Introduction A. Purpose Since the days when Kent was a valley agricultural community, do,wntov,n Downtown Kent has served as the town's civic and commercial focus. In recent decades, the City has supported t tew Downtown through proactive planning and public improvements. Faced with the challenges of regional growth management, Kent citizens responded by requesting a regional urban center designation for downtown. The designation calls for a more intensive mix of uses and a wide spectrum of civic activities well served by the local and regional transportation system. Tl*s-The City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan pursues Vey'-s the citizens' vision for its urban center, as described in the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, and expressed in this document;_bye translating the Comprehensive Plan's general objectives into a redevelopment strategy consisting of an integrated set of civic actions-, phi-s-the Downtown Strategic Action Plan will-serves as a basis for developing the urban center and implementing the Kent Comprehensive Plan. It will provide a basis for future market analysis, environmental analysis, and community participation processes,,—_it-The Downtown Strategic Action Plan outlines methods for encouraging infill and redevelopment compatible with the economic, environmental, and community goals of the citizens of Kent. The Downtown Strategic Action Plan also provides a framework for project-level planning appropriate for each Downtown district defined in this document. Subsequent project level planning could be specified in Planned Action Ordinances. "Planned Actions" are discussed in Section C. of this introductory chapter. This Year 2004 update to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan intends to strengthen the connection between this policy document and the recently]jpdated Comprehensive Plan, as well as acknowledge changes in Downtown Kent that have occurred. since April 1998. B. Background Downtown Kent was established as the commercial center of Kent in the early 1900's when it served as a market town for a thriving agricultural valley. The pattern of retail trade and office development has changed in Kent since that time,but dewiitown Downtown has retained it=s its position as the center of City civic and cultural life. The City and dc�,ntewn Downtown merchants have worked diligently to maintain the vitality of the historic commercial core. Prior to this plan, the City of Kent had undertaken several downtown planning efforts: the 1966 John Graham Plan for Downtown, the 1974 Central Business District Plan, the 1983 L.I.D. 313 and Urban Design Plan, the 1986 Downtown Revitalization Task Force Report, the 1989 Downtown Plan, the 1992 Downtown zoning revisions, the 1995 Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, and the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-2 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Introduction designation of n K' nt as an urban center through the King County Countywide Planning Policies processes. Both public and private interests initiated this planning process. In 1995, the Kent Downtown Partnership and other citizens asked the City to fund a comprehensive market analysis for Downtown. The City Council agreed to budget $25,000 in general funds for the market analysis. In 1995 the City Council set goals for 1996 which included "Kent: A Home Town for Families - A Friendly Small Town - A Place to Work- A Place to Live," and "Downtown - A Community Focal Point." Downtown goals were first priority for 1996. In early 1996, the State of Washington awarded the City a $150,000 Planning and Environmental Review Fund (PERF) grant, which the City matched with the previously appropriated $25,000 for the market analysis and $25,000 of in-kind services. The Mayor appointed an executive staff. the Downtown Strategic Planning Team, which assisted the Mayor in appointing a Downtown Stakeholders Task Force. The Strategic Planning Team and the Planning Department hired an interdisciplinary consultant team to assist the City and the citizens to formulate a downtown Downtown subarea plan. The team consisted of MAKERS architecture and urban design, BRW, Inc., The Langlow Associates, Property Counselors, and Sierra Media. After the April 1998 adoption of the original Downtown Strategic Action Plan document, the Regional Transit Authority (since reconstituted as Sound Transit) determined the preferred South Station Site to be impracticable to service the full length of its trains and selected the North Station Site. Since February 5. 2001, Sound Transit Commuter Rail trains riding the Burlington Northern/Saute Fe railroad have been loading and unloading passengers between James and Smith Streets — approximating the North Station Site alignment. Several revisions to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan acknowledge this fact. The Commuter Rail Station Area Study, completed in 2000, updated the market analysis of the DSAP, and identified a number of parcels in Downtown with development and redevelopment potential in proximity to the Sound Transit rail station. While some things have not changed in Downtown Kent, other circumstances have changed since the 1998 adoption of the DSAP. The Borden Chemical Company sold their property and their operations to the City of Kent in 2001, significantly shortening the timeframe for potential redevelopment of the 20-acre site. Some of the recommended actions listed in Chapter IV and Chapter V have been completed, vet others are in progress or have since been deemed infeasible, Still other interested parties in Downtown Kent seek to expand existing business uses or obtain site improvement variances non-conforming to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning=particularly on Central Avenue. Some of Central Avenue within the boundaries of Downtown is currently zoned General Commercial (GC). The replacement of DCE Zoning with a zoning district more favorable to auto-oriented uses should be carefullmitigated by the application of Downtown Design Review. Interest in development opportunities along the James and Smith arterial streets adjacent to Kent City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-3 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Introduction Station exist although the area north of James is constrained by the current single-family residential Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Map designations. C. Process As a subarea plan and a supplement to the Kent Comprehensive Plan, the Downtown Strategic Action Plan and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement D� SAP) were prepared under new State provisions in ESHB 1724, which allows the integration of State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Growth Management Act (GMA)processes. It is a programmatic EIS and supplements the Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS issued in January 1995. it is alse ' .vi ,edaeT—���al Supplemental Public participation is essential to a subarea plan environmental review process. The first Opportunity for public participation was a general public workshop and a SEIS scoping session held in 1996 T-hePrior to adopting the DSAP the City subsequently conducted six additional public workshops and seven Downtown Stakeholders Task Force meetings. City staff responded to numerous letters telephone calls and Planning Department visitor's questions.Envii-on mental impaet Statement vvhieh supplemeRts the EIS by gFeater detail related to the speeifie reeemmended actions eontained iii the Downtown Stfategie n etion Plaii The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement(DSEIS) for the DSAP was issued on FebruaU 4 1997 The DSEIS-contained three land use and urban design alternatives and was distributed at a workshop to gather public opinion regarding a preferred alternative An additional environmental document; authorized by the Washington State Department of Ecology, entitled the Draft Downtown Strategic Action Phan and Preliminary Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, was issued on May 19 1997 to distreprovide additional information and allow additional time for public comment and discussion prior to integrated plan adoption. The Preliminary Final Supplemental Impact Statement contained additional impact analysis. additional - mitigation recommendations the preferred alternative comment letters received by the City in response to the DSEIS and the City's responses to the comments. The Land Use and Planning Board conducted a public hearing before recommending the Plan to the City Council with revisions The City Council Planning Committee received additional public comment within their review process and recommended further revisions Typically. the FSEIS would be issued prior to the decision process. In this instance the public hearings conducted by the Land Use and Planning Board and the City Council Planning Committee became part of the environmental review record. The preferred alternative was revised as a result of the recommendations of the Land Use and Planning Board and the City Council This document presents the revised preferred alternative for establishing development goals and policies for the whole of Downtown Kent. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-4 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Introduction ,,\s the process chart (Figure I-1) in the Appendix pp-I-vindicates. planninL. evaluation. and public involvement were coordinated throe211out the project. Public involvement occurred at three key points: settinL, of objectives, development of alternatives, and evaluation of alternatives. eu`r uviiiiie„tni iv r'i e.,ry pi i" ._. In 2004, the City of Kent is updating the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) to reflect the changes in existing conditions and development opportunities, as well as address concerns among some in the community about the negative impact of regulations on expansion of existing non-conforming uses. In late 2003, the City Council Planning Committee directed staff to analyze issues relating to zoning and development standards in the Central Avenue District of Downtown. Consideration of other issues, including the ,guidance of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan were identified as part of the work program. Beginning in March 2004, staff prepared background information contained in the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, as adopted in April 1998, for comment and suggested revision in public participation workshops. Morning and evening workshop sessions were held on May 17, 2004 and June 14, 2004 at the Kent Senior Activity Center to identify present conditions, challenges and opportunities in Downtown Kent. Public participation at these sessions included facilitated discussion of Downtown issues and the DSAP, as well as opportunities for the public to self-record issues, concerns and ideas on 34"x 44" maps. These maps depicted DSAP districts with 1998 recommended actions at the May sessions, and the maps at the June sessions included commentary carried over from the May sessions. As a substantial) -large population who work, eat and shop in Downtown Kent, all City employees were offered an opportunity to respond to an all-users electronic message (see Appendix ) about their vision of Downtown as a place to live, play, or shop. The responses are provided in summary form (see Appendix ), and were included in a map reviewed by the Land Use and Planning Board in a July 12, 2004 workshop. The Land Use and Planning Board offered some of their own comments, and reinforced some of the comments provided by citizens and City employees. PLANNED ACTIONS developmeot plans of a mefe detailed nature. These plans, A,hieh are themselves subafea + and neeessa +; . +; ,k lated to eif e deyel,,.. eiit, o and City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-5 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Introduction The Planned Action EIS process is a relatively new component of environmental law in Washington State. Under the ESHB 1724 provisions, local jurisdictions with an adopted comprehensive plan can opt to develop a 20-year vision for a subarea or neighborhood and create a Subarea Plan integrated with a Planned Action EIS. The Planned Action EIS evaluates the significant adverse impacts and reasonable mitigation measures associated with the development proposed in the Subarea Plan. Using this tool. the City would evaluates several detailed subarea project development scenarios prior to receiving and reviewing development applications for the Planned Action subarea. Whenever a Planned Action ordinance is adopted by the an agency reviewing any subsequent project proposal in the planning area must first determine that the project is consistent with the earlier Subarea Plan Planned Action EIS. Typically, this means that a submitted development proposal or proposals are consistent with and do not exceed the thresholds of uses and use intensities established in the Planned Action Ordinance. The agency must also determine that the Planned Action EIS has adequately addressed the significant impacts of the development and identified mitigation measures. Consistency is determined by a review of four areas: (1) type of land use allowed, (2) level of development allowed, (3) infrastructure, and (4) character of the proposed development. The benefit of this approach is that subsequent project-level development proposals may have a reduced amount of environmental review, if the development proposal is consistent with the adopted Subarea Dla Planned Action Ordinance. The purpose of creating an integrated plan and /environmental assessment document, consistent with PERF grant requirements, was to adopt a Planned Action ordinance if such an action was appropriate. In 1998, As-as a result of planning analysis and environmental review conducted, the planning team determined that, despite the recommended mitigation measures, existing City regulations may not have provided sufficient environmental protection to take the place of the SEPA process at that time. As a result, the City of Kent bas-chosen not to propose and adopt a Planned Action ordinance with the approved plan. However, the Downtown Strategic Action Plan provides development goals and policies for several districts within Downtown Kent. As such the DSAP is a framework for future development plans of a more detailed nature including Planned Actions. KENT STATION In 2001 however, with the City purchase of the Borden Chemical property, the OIPortunity to develop at higher intensities of mixed-uses in close proximity to the recently operational Sound Transit Commuter Rail Station was both real and immediate. AThe City initiated a Planned Action process for the property formerly owned by Borden Chemical-, identifyin site-specific ite-specific environmental conditions and anticipated impacts and mitigation measures for development of three (3) development scenarios within the North City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-6 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Introduction Core District Subarea. The City Council selected Alternative 2(Kent Station Proposal) as the Preferred Alternative in July 2002, and a private sector developer has begun the process to develop Kent Station. Groundbreaking occurred on June 30 2004. 9thffEventually other districts within Downtown Kent may Then -similarly present significant opportunities for planned actions.Hoe ever, pr-o eet level ^ a Planned Aetion ei-dioanee using this FSEiS integi-ated plan aftef adeption of adequate . Stakehaldei-s task fafee meetings. City staff i-esponded to numer-otis letters, telephone ealls session. The City eon"eted si,,i additional pttblie wer-kshops and seven Dewnto ' ' of An additional envifonmental deeiiiiient, authorized by the Washington State DepaAment gi-ated plan adoption. The Pf:e1iminai:y Final Supplemental impaet Statement Supplemental Envir-enmental impaet Statement, was issued on May 19.1 1997 to distribute and the Gity's the pi-efer-i-ed responses to the e „ts Plan to the City Catineil with fevisions. The City Couneil Platifling C.......ittee teeeived instanee, the publie hearings eendueted by the Land Use and Planniflg Board and the City Planning Board and the City Gouneil. This doeument pFesents the fevised prefer- uctci^-irccc-i�__. indicates,As the pr-E)eess ehaft on the next page planning, setting evaluation, and publie id evaittatioi , , a to a.i. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-7 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Introduction [Filz I-1. 1996-1997 DSAP Process Diagram] D. Organization of Report This report is organized to aid both public and private interests in making decisions concerning development and investment in the downtown. Section I is a summary of the background,purpose and process of the project, Section II describes the vision for downtownDowntown. Section III describes the plan concept, and Section IV outlines the recommendations for achieving the community and City's objectives. Section V is the heart of the plan. This section organizes the recommended actions by ems-districts within the down-tewnDowntown, showing the interrelationships among actions. Section VI contains the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) Fact Sheet and other required environmental data. The fact that the subarea plan is integrated with the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is consistent with Washington State Planning and Environmental Review Fund grant requirements. The process provided public participation and environmental analysis in conjunction with the planning process. As the plan evolved, E.,..iFE)11fl!e„*- ' environmental mitigation was often incorporated in problem solving and design solutions. The format of the integrated plan/FSEIS is different from the typical FEIS document. The following chart summarizes where typical sections of an FSEIS are found in this document. Typical SEPA EIS Section Location of Information in the Action Plan Fact Sheet A Fact Sheet is located at the beginning of Section VI. Executive Summary The information typically found in an Executive Summary is located in Section I. And Section VI. Introduction A summary of the project history, purpose, scope and public involvement process is included in Section I. Alternatives Considered A description of the alternatives considered is contained in Section VI, Environmental Information. Impact Analysis Impact analysis supplementary to the analysis found in the Draft SEIS and the Preliminary Final SEIS is included in Section VI, Environmental Information. Mitigation Measures A summary of mitigation/implementation measures is provided in Section VI, Environmental Information, and in Section III, Summary of Recommended Actions City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-8 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Introduction Response to Comments A summary of comments and responses is located in Section VI, Environmental Information. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 1-9 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_I.doc Vision II. Vision : Growing a Home Town Prior to this p4ftH Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP), Kent citizens contributed to a downtown vision expressed in the 1992 Community Forum ou Growth Management and Visioning, the 1989 Downtown Plan, and the Kent Comprehensive Plan geals-Goals and palieiesPolicies. The community expanded and reinforced the vision by participating in the public workshops, focus group discussions, and Downtown Stakeholders Task Force meetings that helped to form this plan as it was adopted in 1998. A Visit to the Future If this plan is successful, what will deN,ntswii Downtown Kent be like, say, 10 or 15 years in the future? What are the character and qualities that the City envisions for its downtown? One thing for certain is an early 21s`Century visitor entering downtown Downtown Kent will be presented with a more gracious welcome mat. Not only will key entry points around the downtown Po 'ntOwn perimeter be well marked with gateway landscaping, artwork, and directional signage, but the character of development on Central Avenue, James Street, and Willis Street will be more appealing for motorist and pedestrian alike. Robust automobile-oriented businesses will still find a home on Central Avenue, but recent streetscape improvements and incremental business expansions will have transformed the old strip into a more welcoming, attractive corridor. At the demote Downtown's southern boundary, a well-landscaped Willis Street will frame a rehabilitated single-family neighborhood to the south and the emerging mixed-use residential neighborhood to the north. An underpass will provide passage under the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe railroad right-of-way, and a trail along Willis will provide local residents safe bicycle access to the Interurban Trail, the park-and-ride, the Historic Core, Kent Station, and the Commons Recreation Center&P-ar-kPlayfields. Tie-In addition to the above-mentioned Interurban Trail access, the west section of the downtewnDowntown,between the Union Pacific Railroad and SR 167, will have seen major changes. Better street access will have spurred new commercial development between Smith and Willis Streets. There may be well-landscaped clusters of residential development as well. A newly refurbished Commons Playfields, the Commons Recreation Center—not to mention the Regional Justice Center—will form a civic anchor at the &Wnte,,v rrs Downtown's northwest corner. The Regional Justice Center,by then about 15 years old, will be a still-imposing but more familiar fixture. Regional Justice Center activities will have increased service businesses in the core, but vigilant work by the City will have kept undesirable businesses from proliferating in Kent. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan II-1 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Il.doc Vision sepai-ated mil- -1 ill 1' t what Nveuld fl 1iave 1 But, while the future visitor will notice many changes to the dw�rpo��rntown's perimeter, the most striking transformation will have occurred south north of Gowe Smith Street. The R eeioii l Ti-aiisi* Nuthof4ySound Transit ; iiniti ef-Commuter ra-i-1 Rail statieti Station, located between James and Smith Streets on either side of the railroad tracks. will be an important transit hub, with local feeder buses meeting the trains and regional buses for transfer to locations throughout the Pugcet Sound. Although commuter rail service was limited at first to two early morning northbound trips and tNvo early evening southbound trips, ee^ estion on the f oo. ays will have led to all-day rail service,—will mmake the train the preferred transportation option for commuters to Seattle, Everett or Tacoma or baseball fans heading for a Mariners game. The importance of this transportation connection will have given dowatown Downtown Kent greater prominence in the region and spurred development in Downtown. Smith Street will be one of the Downtown's most attractive corridors, with anew hotel,offee , and retail eemplex on the nefthpedestrian-oriented businesses and open spaces located on either side of the street. hi paAiCtila , the Givic—aiid Perfeigiiing Ar-t Cefitei==sae a liah of and evening e+"v wntown. Walking through the histot-iee Meeker Street Historic ewe Core to the eo;mutef Commuter i:a44-Rail station Station will be a pleasure because of the street trees, Sister Cities Parks, and pedestrian- oriented buildings. The fifst phase of the Be fde, site .-edevel pme. *Kent Station project will be ufldeycompleted, with an integrated mix of uses and open spaces supported by a street grid and structured parking. To the east of the BN&SF tracks, the D• blie Mafket and Sister Cities Parks will aver support another cluster of shops and commercial activities. T4ii-s-Railroad Avenue di-stfiet will offer a valuable addition to the unique historic retail core of Downtown Kent. With the Sister Cities Parks providing an attractive backdrop as well as a pedestrian connection to the Commuter Rail Station, the emerging Railroad Avenue activity center will have joined Meeker Street and First Avenue as places where citizens from all over Kent can come to spend some time. They will browse in specialty shops, share a cup of coffee, or enjoy an evening meal. The South Core area between Titus Street and Willis Street, while not having experienced the dramatic transformation of the North Core District, will have seen slower, incremental changes. New midrise mixed-use/residential complexes and townhouses., developed with sensitivity to well-maintained single-family homes of historic character, will have created one of south King County's most attractive in-town neighborhoods for those who want the convenience of local services, easy access to transportation, and a stable, pedestrian-oriented setting. The , „te-,-ail st.,tmieii ill be 1,,e t a , both sides Of tile:.ailI-oad,7HJst se,,t�rtIl Of JOWe Stfe-et. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan II-2 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Il.doc Vision Our visitor will be comforted by the fact that, except for some key infill and building renovation, the Historic Core, centered along Meeker Street and First Avenue, will remain much as it did in the late 1990s. The key to success of the Historic Core will have been the connections that the City made to the north and south, as well as those connections made to the east and west, which added supporting activity from nearby residents and workers. From the Present to the Future From the perspective of our visit to the future, it is clear how the dawn Downtown will reach its goals. By enhancing the historic character of its cel:eCore Districts, the City will retain its u' d link to the past—its roots. By emphasizing its pedestrian qualities with gracious sidewalks, pedestrian-oriented businesses and a variety of parks,the dam} Downtown will remain a comfortable, friendly place for people to meet and enjoy themselves. By encouraging a wide mix of commercial, residential, and public uses, the dOWnt&A-H Downtown will generate the activity necessary for a successful urban center. By fostering high-quality redevelopment through public works improvements and design guidelines, the dov,,iitewn Downtown will become a source of civic pride for the whole city. By integrating emerging transportation systems, the do,,vntown Downtown will regain its role as a regional crossroads. And,through the continued efforts and care of its citizens, the Downtown town will continue to be a "home town for the future." [Fig II-2• Map - Downtown Kent 20 Year Vision (1998)] City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan II-3 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Il.doc Planning Concept III. Planning Concept A. Market Analysis The foundation of a successful dewfltown Downtown plan must be an understanding of the realities of the real estate market. Consequently, the planning team conducted a market analysis during the first stages of planning in order to determine the potential for growth and the conditions necessary to foster positive redevelopment. The market area from which downtown Downtown Kent draws 80% to 90% of its sales extends west to Interstate 5, north to the Kent city limits at 1801h, south to 2771h, and east and south toward the Cascade foothills (see Fig 111-1). This area recognizes the existing concentrations of retail development in Tukwila and Auburn, the natural boundaries of the plateau to the west, and the existing transportation network extending to the east and south. Market Opportunities and Development Potential The mar' et analysis deto,.,,.,ined that.there There are several specific opportunities in downtown Downtown Kent. —Office/Education Offiee development is the strongest immediate eppeft-tinity. Continuation of historic levels of office absorption of 16,000 to 18,000 square feet per year in addition to law offices associated with the Regional Justice Center(RJC), and the development of a branch of the Green River Community College at Kent Station would result in potential office demand of: • 1996-2000: 92,000-112,000 square feet • 2000-2010: 260,000 270,000100,000 square feet • 2010-2020: 180;00080,000 square feet —Retail Projected retail development estimates are based on —dramatically increasing ow, ,-Downtown's share of market area spending.,with ifer-eas � �r shares fef speeialty food, apparel, eating/dr-inking, and fniseellafleetts retail sales which may be facilitated by the development of Kent Station and adjacent properties, and other large parcels Downtown. Kent Station will include a fourteen (14) screen Cineplex, which may generate additional spin-off retail activity. • 1995-2000: 46,000-49,000 square feet (including RJC impact) • 2000-2010: 100,040300,000 square feet • 2010-2020: 79,000100,000 square feet —Civic and Performing Arts Center City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-1 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept A Civic and Performing Arts Center has been proposed for downtawii-Downtown Kent. Attendees at performances at such a facility would also patronize surrounding businesses. While the level of spending in itself would only support a few thousand square feet of development, it would contribute toward extending the hours of the distr-ictDowntown into the evening. AHowever, a bond issue election held in 2000 to provide public funding for the Civic and Performing Arts Center failed to gain sufficient Support and development of this element would require significant private investment. III-1• Map—Market area for downtown Kent(1998)1 —Market Rate Residential One-third of the residential capacity for the City is in the dewntown powntotiNm area. In order for the downtown Downtown to approach this capacity over the next 20 years there must be successful projects that can demonstrate to the development community that there is demand for market rate housing. The best opportunities are single-use residential units on the edge of the coo-eCore Districts, where land costs are lower, and small condominium and apartment projects at high-amenity locations in the core. —Hotel/Convention Center A full service hotel with approximately 150 rooms, meeting facilities sized to accommodate groups of approximately 250, and restaurant could compete with hotels near the airport and Southcenter and attract over $2 million in spending to the area each year. —Health Care and Wellness Opportunities exist to increase Downtown Kent's stature as a wellness center. Downtown Kent is the location of an established community of traditional health service providers and providers of alternative health care and natural medicine. King County has recently constructed a 17,900 square foot facility for the King County Natural Medicine Clinic at the corner of South State and&East Meeker Streets. The Pediatric Infant Care Center anticipates relocating to a larger facility to be built before 2006. In the future, a dewiitow=Downtown facility of several hundred thousand square feet could provide an opportunity to consolidate various care providers. —Finally, additional development of all types creates demand for the others and provides an overall increase in vitality and interest. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-2 P:\Planning\Bilio\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept G lmmary of N/Iarkot 4r,-�Ivc' S2 II The • household and iH6E)Me gFONVth. -Oyefall business . nditions good, „tL, strong growth in taxable sales for-the City . V Ylil Ull VUJ111{rJJ l'Vlllll�l V11J are gVVl1�-YYi a whole and Downtown-. -The downtown Kent offiee mar-ket is dynamie with new eanstfu expanste 7 and feleeations, and trong rents. -The downtown fetail mar-ket is stable with net gr-ewth expeeted with eempletion of the r-enovation of the Dr-agness Building, Nnder-sen Boilding at the nef4heast eefnef of Meeker- Street and Fettt4h Avenue an Suites is peffefming well as a maf4Eet Fate assisted living pr-Ojeet for- senief.__ ti- d „t,,wn Kent. -Land The development e.. identified for-downtown Kent in the pr-evietts mar-ket. study entinue. to her-ealistie-and aebieyable i ,...,i4ieula-, -The Regional justiee Center-is air-eady gener-ating demand fer- law fifffis and asseeiated ser-viee businesses. -The Regional Transit Aether-ity (RTA) eemmttter-r-ail station in downtown Kefitwill r-einfer-ee the demand for- .1.,w,,te,,.,, housing .,n moo,t�;,� t,,, of retail ■ The medical seeter eentinties to snow potent for-gr-ow Community Health Center repfesents f4eility in this seeter-. Strategy The major goal of the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) is to encourage din Downtown growth, infill and redevelopment while creating a stronger community identity and civic/commercial focus through a-strategic public-aid= private partnershipsinf ll and fedevel,,pme t st,..,teg. . The P-la}i DSAP actions are intended to implement the dife tions p,.,,v4de l b, the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan (Compi-ehensive Plan), the goals and policies of the 1989 Downtown Plan, and the goals and policies in the downtown Downtown and commercial sections of the Land Use Ehapte+:Element. Consistent with the requirements of the Washington State Planning and Environmental Review Fund, the Plan-DSAP integrates environmental analysis and environmental impact mitigation measures within the land use, transportation, urban design,problem solving, and implementation framework of the P4&nDSAP. The Xifn DSAP presents a framework that will maintain s existing physical assets of Downtown, prepare for projected growth, and support future development. It recommends that public and private interests work together to achieve safe, attractive, City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-3 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-1 10804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept and convenient transportation systems, improved parks and open space, and adequate public facilities. Successful do,xiitown-Downtown redevelopment plans build on the community's existing physical and organizational assets. Fortunately, da�,iitown Downtown Kent eentains has many resources that will be a foundation for future growth and development. Vigilant City and business efforts have kept Kent's historic, pedestrian-oriented eere shopping districts along Meeker Street, First Avenue, and Railroad Avenue vital. The new Regional Justice Center is already a landmark and growing employment center. The downtown Downtown is blessed with a variety of parks and open spaces, including the active Commons Park, T t a t ,a' Sister Cities Parks, the Rose Garden, and Railroad Park. Kent's City Hall, the Commons Recreation Center, library, the Senior Activity Center, and the Resource Center_. These parks and open spaces provide�ti�y activities and enhance the Downtown's role as the City's focal point. Nearby residential areas add a built-in consumer and employment base. ffig 111--2•Map— Challenges facing downtown Kent(1998Y The community's optimism regarding future private development opportunity is well founded. The market analysis conducted early in formulating this plan prejeets-projected significant development potential for the downtown Downto-wn based on continuing growth of the Kent dowfltown .Qowntown market area. While the pace of this growth may fluctuate the growth potential remains. Opportunities include additional retail development, office development, a full-service hotel, and urban-style housing. In addition, the new restored Kent Public Market will bolster businesses Orrin the eere's east si-decore districts, and as service expands, the ' * sit station. selieduled to open in '999Sound Transit Commuter Rail Station, z001, will make Qmyntown Kent a regional transportation hub. The expanding presence of tithe eo mar-Commuter tu44-,Rai] station Station is also likely to stimulate in-town housing development and new employment opportunities. Commercial growth should occur as an indirect benefit of the Commuter fail-Rail station Station and a direct benefit of new in-town housing. Housing development, at densities consistent with the Regional Growth Center designation of Downtown Kent, should be encouraged throughout Downtown to stimulate an increase in demand for retail and commercial services. While the dewntewn Downtown contains valuable assets that serve as a foundation for a strong identity and vital economy, there are obstacles to growing a better dewntew Downtown Kent. The first is that Kent's assets are scattered and often disconnected. The second is that many of the commercial corridors and residential areas at the downtown's-Downtown periphery are underdeveloped or present a poor visual impression. Because of those assets and obstacles, the basic strategies at the root of the Downtown PlanDSAP are: • Connect and unify important downtown Downtown features., City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-4 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—Ill.doc Planning Concept • Enhance the periphery of the d6wiitewii Downtown to achieve higher quality development that supports its central activities.-- • Define special activity districts. • Select "target" areas as a basis for a phased implementation program to accomplish redevelopment and/or infill consistent with the Plan.-_ • Encourage housing development throughout Downtown; • Enhance civic identity. Connect and Unify Downtown's Features Civic improvements, including the Regional Justice Center, and the Kent Commons-,4Pd the Publie Mar-ket, are expanding the do f towii Dovmtow n eareCore. The core business areas along Meeker Street, First Avenue, and Railroad Avenue will continue to serve as the Downtown's commercial downtown's south anchor. To maintain and improve this role, the hi-40Fie Historic eoFe Core must be linked to the northern€eet+i-es districts by a combination of park, pedestrian, and vehicle connections along First, Second and Fourth Avenues and Smith Street. In addition, supportive redevelopment of the Smith Street corridor will strengthen the connection. Development of the new Dublie Mar-ket site an Bu gton Green, Yangzhau, afid Kaibar-a Parks are high ties.-The parks and the Public Market link the Historic Core District and the eomi:natei- Commuter fia-Rail s }Station to the Regional Justice Center and planned commercial, office, and residential activities to the north. [Fi. III-3:Map— The strategic redevelopment concept(1998)] During the planning process, several commuter rail station locations were proposed within a five-block area adjacent to the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe railroad tracks between Titus and James Streets. his-The plan recommends thatDSAP acknowledges that the new eemnititei=Commuter Fa44-Rail station Station be—located just se of Gewenorth of Smith Street to provides an efficient multi modal regional transportation hub. The Commuter i4-Rail station Station will enhance Kent's role in the region as "host community" and accentuate its identity. It will add significantly to the connectivity of northern and southern dewntewn Downtown districts if the City restores the historic train station located between Gowe and Meeker Streets, develops parking areas, vehicular circulation systems, and good pedestrian and visual connections to other downtown Downtown features. High-quality redevelopment in the surrounding areas would also enhance Kent's role as a "host community." For these reasons, pedestrian connections across Smith Street and traffic improvements in the vicinity are recommended in addition to the other connecting features described above. The Borden Property, purchased by the City of Kent, located between Smith and James Streets represents one of the unique redevelopment opportunities in the Green River Valley, if not the whole Puget Sound Basin. The City should prepare tehas taken advantage of this opportunity by ensuring that there is access to the site (especially along Second Avenue from the south)_It sheuldThe City is collaborating with a private developer to master plan the Kent Station site as a whole, and create a desirable City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-5 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept development setting around the site as described in the Kent Station Planned Action SEIS. The subdivision of Kent Station allows for the sale of parcels to developers in phases. Enhance the Periphery of Downtown The second deg ,town Downtown redevelopment strategy involves upgrading the areas directly around the expanded core. Similarly, allowing office and mixed-use development between Feufth First and Fifth Avenues north of Kent Station along James Street will accommodate and encourage investment in this highly impacted area. The single-family neighborhood east of Fourth Avenue and-jwst-north of james Cloudy Street is-a-n will be buffered from the intensive development along James Street by a lower intensity multi-family residential district. A combination of pedestrian-oriented street improvements and site design guidelines will help make the Central Avenue corridor a more fitting eastern entry into the eareCore Districts. The areas to the south, east, and west of the ece=Core Districts provide an ideal setting for residentially oriented mixed-use development to support eer-e Core District businesses and add life to the dam Downtown as well as reinforce Kent's identity as a"home town." Define Special Activity Districts The pl- -DSAP identifies and defines existing and emerging special districts within the demltoyrnDowntown area such as the k>istofie Historic Core business district, civic activity areas, Kent Public Market district, and in-town residential areas. Such definition provides the basis to direct growth in character with each district, and to establish the relationships and connections between districts. Planned Action Ordinances for each district could adopt subarea or subdistrict development plans with detailed environmental analysis of potential development scenarios The preferred alternative of each subarea plan would then provide guidance for future distrie-t-development of the whole district subarea or a discrete parcel of significant development capacity within the district. It is important to consider the existing assets of the districts, potential for improvement, redevelopment and infill, and their context or role within the dawti town Downtown. Select Target Areas Priority development sites have beenwere identified during tie-past planning processes. The eor,;,TiuterCommuter rail-Rail station Station site, Kent Station, the Kent Public Market site, and the eivie Civic and Performing ass Arts center site-are-were driven by previously determined plans. The Civic and Performing Arts Center did not receive the necessary bonds to locate and build at the Municipal Parking Lot as planned, and the Kent Public Market has since relocated there after a few challenging years at the Railroad Avenue site. Other projects such as priority in-town housing sites, essential pedestrian connections to connect existing and emerging activity districts, and public City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-6 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept gathering spaces have emerged during the analysis and public participation elements of the N-an-DSAP process. Specific implementation measures to develop target areas provide a framework for public and private action. Mitigation for environmental impacts identified during the SEPA review of the proposed plan is integrated with the implementation program. Specific development scenarios may require additional consideration of:site conditions, impacts on environmental conditions, and potential miti(ation measuresb ^ro SEPA thfeshelds eetild be .,.,*;sue fe..;i., established fef Enhance Civic Identity A major focus of this plan has been to define an identity for downtown .Downtown Kent. The image that has continually reoccurred throughout the process is the dew ntOWn's Downtown's role as a "home town." The intent of the pla*-ASAP is to "Grow a Home Town for the Future." But what does this mean? What are the characteristics of a "home town"that can be integrated into a dynamic 2 1"Century community? In looking at Kent's sustaining assets and the dewntowfi DoNvntown's opportunities for the future, the following characteristics stand out.. —Variety: A Sum Greater Than Its Parts Hometowns are where people gather for many different functions and activities. They bring people together and focus a sense of community. The dewntoWn Downtown is home to many civic and commercial activities and can make a vibrant residential neighborhood as well. As noted above, the key to t- pli+ii=sDSAP success will be the connections between the various elements. Physical connections between transportation centers, government services, businesses, and recreational activities will strengthen the community's economic, cultural, and social connections as well. —Quality: A Sense of Caring A hometown's value to its community is reflected in the quality of its physical setting. The actions recommended in this plan are directed at producing higher quality public improvements and private development. One index of 4W pkq"DSAP success will be the amount of careful, well-considered financial and human investment the recommended actions attract to the dew-ntewnDowntown. Equally important will be the design quality of development—embodied in the durability of architectural styles, features and building materials. —Friendliness: A setting for personal interaction A good hometown is a place where people meet, where they come to enjoy themselves as individuals and to celebrate as a community. Encouraging these activities means attention to detail. Comfortable, attractive sidewalks, street trees, cafes and meeting places, bicycle paths, parks, artwork, and public amenities are important features of a successful dewntownf)owntown. Safety is also an important consideration. Streets and public spaces must be well lighted. In addition, they must be designed to support Police and Fire Department efforts. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-7 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Ill.doc Planning Concept —Memory and Vision: Remembering the Past,Looking to the Future During the middle of the n=yet=twentieth Ce�centurv, Kent transformed itself from an active farming community into a robust, industrial-based suburb. Now, with the construction of the Regional Justice Center and a new transportation hub, Kent is again transforming itself, this time into a dynamic, multi-faceted regional urban center. As projected population growth occurs, and as this transformation takes place, it will be important not to lose the perspective of the past. The historic qualities of the core and small-town characteristics must be retained and reinterpreted into new development as the dowtitown Downtown grows to meet the future. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-8 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_lll.doc Summary of Recommended Actions IV. Summary of Recommended Actions A. Recommended Actions To implement the objectives and ideas presented in Section III, this plan recommends a series of actions, including regulatory measures, capital investments, and public programs. Section IV summarizes the recommended actions, describes the implementation steps, costs, and environmental impacts, and mitigation measures for actions that require environmental review. Figure IV-1 summarizes many of these actions and indicates where each action targets improvements. Figure IV-2 lists the actions according to their major categories and outlines their timing. Figure IV-3 provides a list of preliminary capital project costs. The actions are described in detail and the manner in which they interrelate to upgrade specific districts is outlined in Section V. To prepare for possible adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance, as discussed in Section I, the actions that would require environmental analysis under SEPA regulations, with identification of probable, significant. adverse environmental impacts and proposed mitigating measures are included in this section. If When a Planned Action Ordinance is ne4 proposed for adoptioned, d�ssi identification and analysis of existing environmental site/district subarea conditions impacts and mitigating measures will serve as awe foF project-level SEPA review, to be used as guidance when projects are proposed within the district subarea. The purpose of a Planned Action Ordinance is to conduct SEPA review for a number of development alternatives. one of which is determined to be most consistent witli the Comprehensive Plan, the DSAP, and any applicable District Subarea Plan. This "Preferred Action," when adopted by City Council, becomes the development blueprint for the District Subarea, with SEPA completed for the amount and character of development. Proposals meeting the identified requirements of the Preferred Action are generally exempt from additional SEPA review. General actions, which relate to more than one district are discussed below: ■ Continue to support the Kent Downtown Partnership, Kent's Main Street Prol4ram non-profit organization, as an allent of Downtown revitalization. Assist the Kent Downtown Partnership (KDP) in its efforts to identify and promote community interest and economic health in Downtown. ■ Promote Infill Housing. To meet the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan goals to enhance dowfltowfl Downtown as a place to live, and to create an attractive, dense mixed-use City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-1 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions neighborhood, the City should promote construction of housing units. A mix of housing types including condominium townhouses, stacked and attached units that resemble siiigesingle-family design and character, and residential mixed with commercial and office uses are desirable. In order to enable development of multi- family residential units in Downtown it would be advisable to waive the minimum lot size requirement (KCC 15 04 170) for multifamily residential unit development occurring within the DSAP planning area where many redevelopable lots are not of sufficient size to feasibly develop multi-family residential use even if so zoned. ■ Encourage the development of at least two hundred (200) units of new market rate housing in Downtown by 2008. Consider incentives such as reducing or waivingdevelopment evelopment permit fees for residential construction in Downtown and extending the existing Downtown multi- family residential tax exemption program to include market rate rental housing. Developers of condominiums are challenged by two factors in Downtown— condominium owners are still having difficulty acquiring home insurance and the developers do not receive the tax exemption for developing condos in Downtown. Consider also allowing development of buildings with five (5) stories of wood frame construction above a concrete base consistent with Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) zoning. ■ Promote the construction of high quality new commercial, office, or mixed--use development and redevelopment. Also encourage the development of a hotel/conference center to serve as an attractor for commercial activity To respond to the potential for additional dawiitewn Downtown office and commercial devie_1,;;e —development identified in the market analysis provide incentives for new development. Mixed Mixed-use development and a hotel/conference center will provide a variety of activities and living situations within districts that require ground floor retail uses. In order to be competitive in the marketplace new office space in Downtown Kent should provide Class A-type amenities found in other regional centers "Class A" office space, as described in CB Richard Ellis Commercial Real Estate quarterly reports "...have high quality standard finishes state of the art systems exceptional accessibility and a definite market presence." ■ Assist the Kent Downtown Partnership in increasing the variety and vitality of businesses located in Downtown. The KDP is leading the effort to attract two (2) new businesses to Downtown each year while retaining existing businesses and is also seeking to increase the number of existing retail businesses with evening and weekend operating hours. The development of office space a hotel/conference center and market rate housing in Downtown should increase the demand for variety in retail and restaurant choices available throughout the daytime and evening hours. Public comments received City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-2 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions during the 2004 workshops indicate a strong interest in increasing the variety f stores and restaurants in Downtown, with operating hours extending past 5 p.m. On the other hand, many comments were received about reducing the number of second- hand merchandise stores and thrift stores in Downtown (see Appendix ). ■ Conduct a study of existing parking requirements related to residential and commercial density regulations d -tw*Downtown. Revise the parking and density standards to improve the balance of on-site and off- site parking areas. Some property owners in Downtown have indicated difficulty in attracting redevelopment interest due to the maximum of 3 surface parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space for Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning. This on-site.parking requirement for commercial use is intended to encourage the use of on-street parking and the development of structured parking. Residential use has a minimum of one (1) space per dwelling unit, which should be an incentive for inclusion of residential units in commercial developments seeking to address parkin needs. eeds. ■ Survey the impacts of retail uses such as pawnshops, bail bond offices, day labor offices, casinos, adult entertainment businesses, gas stations and tattoo parlors in downtown powntown locations in other cities, Restrict or prohibit specific commercial uses in Downtown that are known to generate negative impacts on the larger community. Revise the zonifl Zoning code Code to consider assigning conditional use permit status for such uses to address the results of the survey, if necessary. Certain uses, including pawn shops, bail bond offices, casinos, adult entertainment businesses and tattoo parlors have been observed in other cities in the region to require an increased amount of police and social services. Developable land suitable for-retE�I t limited, and some Some plan participants have expressed in the past and present the opinion that a proliferation of such uses would not be appropriate. Tara avail^'�'� and suitable for-retail uses is limited, and some plan pai4ieipants have expFessed the ■ Work with social services providers, public safety officers, temporary labor agencies, and educational institutions to address homelessness issues in Downtown. Address the causes and consequences of homelessness, and the impacts on community livability. ■ Make Downtown Kent the transportation hub of South King County. Ensure that Sound Transit completes the Phase Il Sounder rail service expansion to eighteen (18) train trips daily by 2008. This increase in service will encourage a commensurate increase in connecting bus and shuttle service located in Downtown— City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-3 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions making living working shopping or dining in Downtown Kent convenient as well as attractive. ■ Add pedestrian and bicycle facilities and bi ^'" 'ones or t ai in all distriets of deivntown Downtown. Work with the community and the Bicycle Advisory Board to identify and pr-evide plan the provision of sidewalk improvements planting strips traffic calming measures wide curb lanes, trails and pathways. Utilize the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program as appropriate to identify safety-related improvements. The interm-ban Trail provides a regional north/south pedestrian/bicycle/equestrian connection. Improved east Ea-t/west links into d owfl tow nD own town will attract commuters shoppers, students and recreational cyclists. ■ Support the-a Performing Arts/Civic Center or a hotel/conference center in a downtown Downtown location. Insu-e Ensure that activities a� in the Urban Center will extend into the evening hours. With facilities for conferences and other events, a civic and performing arts center can be an important attraction, extending hours of activity into the night and providing a much-needed location for meetings, events, parties, catering facilities, and educational programs. ■ Support live performance arts in appropriate public places, and encourage live performance arts in retail and restaurant businesses. The City of Kent has sponsored the well-attended Summer Concerts in the Park series often held at Kherson Park at the northwest corner of Gowe Street and 2nd Avenue Such events draw the community together to enjoy live music during lunch in a family-friendly atmosphere Encourage the interest of retail and restaurant business members of the KDP and Kent Chamber of Commerce in providing space for live music poetly readings and other forms of artistic expression that contribute to the vitality of Downtown. ■ Ensure high-quality development on designated signature building sites. Work with property owners and developers throughout the development process, offering incentives as appropriate for compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines. ■ Enhance the City's established public art program. Reinforce Kent's downtown Downtown character and unique traditions through art. Encourage private and public development interests to provide downtown Downtown public art as part of significant projects. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-4 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions ■ Develop a downtown Downto«r;i street tree/vegetation plan. Provide a guide for creating an attractive pedestrian network of green spaces. Augment the Kent Street Tree Program to address the entire de,,\�ntown Downtown as defined by tlithe DSAP. Associate specific types of street tree plantings to specific streets throughout downtowiiDowntown. Identify sites for enhanced landscaping, focusing on parks, entry, and gateway features. Assign responsibilities (public and private) for street tree installation and maintenance. Integrate references to the Street Tree Program into development regulations. ■ Allow underground stormwater detention vaults where appropriate for development sites larger than one acre in Downtown to encourage attractive site development and maximum build-out of revenue-generating land uses. The use of above-ground detention ponds can deter from the attractiveness of Downtown, particularly when the detention ponds are large and poorly landscaped. Such ponds also limit the economic utility of land zoned for much more intensive activities. ■ Adopt street standards for the entire downtoii n DorN,ntown study area. Currently street improvement requirements are often determined on a case-by-case basis. Facilitate permit review and enhance street character by matching street standards to specific areas downtown Downtown in order to accentuate the identity of each area. Include requirements for undergrounding utilities in order to improve the attractiveness of the visual environment, and to provide more sidewalk space for walking or outdoor seating where appropriate. ■ Enhance gateways into do"'n-town Down town. Mark entrances to downtowiiDowntown from streets, trails and rails, provide artwork and amenities, and direct visitors to special attractions. Where there is very little public land for extensive landscaping, work with property owners to develop "signature buildings" that have high quality building and site design that adds character to the streetscape. A gateway design and installation program is underway in the City following a 1997 design charette. Special attention to the pedestrian and visual connection between the Historic Core and North Core (Kent Station) along Second Avenue will be critical. Improvements along Smith Street to connect the West Frame and East Frame will also be important. ■ Actively promote downtown Downtown historic preservation and commemorate historic sites with interpretive signs, art, tours, and educational programs. To implement the program, the City should update the existing inventory of historic resources, and develop regulations for historic preservation. The City has made City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-5 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions several efforts to develop historic preservation programs. The most recent effort concluded with a report, An Historic Preservation Program: Recommendations for the Historic Preservation Committee—December, 1990. The program should be revisited as many Kent residents and businesses have voiced continuing concern and interest in historic preservation in Downtown and throughout Kent. Collaboration with the Greater Kent Historical Society and Kent Downtown Partnership may be necessary to clarify the value and potential scope of this action item. ■ Explore specific redevelopment opportunities within target areas. A principal objective of this plan is to attract appropriate, high-quality development to downtown Downtown. The plan seeks to (1) attract positive development by creating a favorable development setting and(2) direct new development to achieve public objectives such as economic vitality and design quality as well as individual private interests. This effort is based on the fact that physical development and land uses that work together to complement one another and that are supported by appropriate facilities are much more successful than disjointed development limited by insufficient, unattractive public facilities. The Plan focuses redevelopment in identified areas in several ways. The land use recommendations seek to fine tune the ma's-City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. The transportation recommendations will upgrade connectivity and circulation to and within the down}townDowntown. The public facilities improvements will enhance an already attractive setting. District-specific design guidelines will increase compatibility between uses, reinforce the design quality of the districts, and take advantage of special opportunities. [Fg. IV-1:Map—Actions recommended by the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan are summarized above. (1998)1 B. Outline of Phasing Strategy Since the plan is based on projections and changing conditions for the next 20 years, it is clear that all of the actions will not commence immediately. In fact, civic actions ideally will be timed to take advantage of special funding opportunities to trigger or encourage desired development, to respond to emerging market trends, or to integrate related activities. The eh-ai4 flec�—?W? Since many of the actions are subject to funding, coordinated with other actions,timed to emerging trends, or triggered by private investment, the periods shown are estimates only. In general, the schedule sets priorities for action based on needs and opportunities. The chart suggests that during the next two years the City should concentrate on important new opportunities associated with current redevelopment, especially the Regional Justice City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-6 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions Center and the RT n eommHtei- ,- it r,-aiisit t„tioigS.,,,n Ti:ansit Commuter R, ;r St-a4enKent Transit Center. Actions that directly respond to these opportunities: (B4) the " ; (B2.c) Smith Street improvements; (C Lb)Burlington Green, Yanghzou, and Kaibara Parks improvements; Gateways at (C2.a) Fourth and James, (C2.f) Central and Meeker, and (C2.e) Central and Smith; (C3.a) the civic and performing arts center; (C3.b) the Kent Public Market; and (C3.c) the historic rail s +- depot structure are recommended for special attention during the next two years. Likewise, land use measures (Al and A2) and design are given high priority because they represent low public cost activities the City can take to update zoning and design guidelines to be ready for impending private development proposals. The redevelopment programs for the Fourth Avenue, ',;Historic eereCore District, seudi South eofeCore District, and Central Avenue District target areas could also be initiated during the next two few years to spur redevelopment in these areas. Initiating these actions over the next two few years makes for an ambitious work list and represents the current dynamic times. The actions recommended for implementation in two to five years are generally high- priority activities, but they do not have the immediate urgency of those listed above. The actions scheduled to implement after the first five years generally depend upon decisions outside the City's control, such as the R,,,-, el site developmentE)i- the Regional a4 &wi-;a prgjeet.the use of incentives for redevelopment of private property consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, and where applicable, a district subarea development plan. [Fig. IV-2: Table—Phasing of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommendations. (1998)J C. Preliminary Capital Project Costs The preliminary costs in Figure IV-3 provide a more realistic foundation for the vision and recommendations of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan D( SAP). Although the costs were carefully prepared, they are based on preliminary concepts, intended to serve as a general guide. The pin}-t-DSAP spans a period of twenty years of potential new development, redevelopment and infill in downtown-Downtown Kent. The DSAP, costs, and infrastructure needs may change and adjust. Each proposed project should be reevaluated in its own time based on specific plans, including district subarea development plans. Please note that the preliminary street improvement costs listed in the chart exceed the cost of}Tan-DSAP recommendations. The cost of full street improvement is included because sidewalk improvements can most economically be accomplished as part of a regularly scheduled street overlay project. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-7 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—IV.doc Summary of Recommended Actions Bicycle and pedestrian trails, lanes and paths can be accomplished in a number of different ways with widely differing costs. Further study of preferred locations and materials selection would be i-s-necessary before cost estimates can be provided. Additional detail regarding the street improvements and gateways is available at the City of Kent Planning at3eEtt SerN ices Office. Additional detail regarding the Squ*de-r- * r mil statie^Kent Transit Center is available from the r ' PHget c""" Regional Transit Authority Sound Transit) and the City of Kent Planning Services Office. [FiQ IV 3• Table—Preliminary Capital Cost Estimate(1998)] [Fiz IV 4• Map—Recommended Transportation Improvements (1998)1 [Fig IV-5• Map—Recommended Public Facilities (1998)] [Fiz IV-6• Map—Land Use Recommendations (1998)1 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-8 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—IV.doc Kent Downtown Districts V. Kent Downtown Districts The planning process identified several Downtown districts with distinct characteristics. It also identified how district redevelopment strategies can be integrated to benefit all districts. The following district descriptions illustrate more clearly how the recommended actions listed in Section III focus on individual districts, but also interconnect throughout de ",iiDowntown. The Dist;=iets districts include: • North Frame District • Central Avenue Corridor District • East Frame District • West Frame District • South Core District • North Core District • Historic Core District The 'Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) land use recommendations are directed toward fine tuning the City's comprehensive planning framework in response to specific redevelopment opportunities and community interests. The transportation recommendations mare intended to upgrade connectivity and circulation to and within the downtown Downtown for additional businesses and residents. The public facilities improvements envisioned in fl+is-the pfa-r�DSAP will enhance an already attractive development setting. DistFiet speei fie design Design guidelines will increase compatibility between uses, reinforce the design quality of the various districts, and take advantage of special opportunities. Within efle4h-most districts there are target areas that merit special attention. It is recommended that the City work with property owners and developers to ensure that new development on these properties meets its potential. The formulation of detailed district subarea development plans, to be adopted within a number of Planned Action ordinances, could provide specific guidance regarding environmental conditions, development potential, and impacts of such development. Each district is described below with recommended actions and target areas where the City-and,the Kent Downtown Partnership, the Chamber of Commerce, property owners, business owners, and volunteers may take a sustaining role. A. North Frame District Located along the north side of James Street, the North Frame District provides a transition between more intensive uses in the North eoi-e- Core and the single-family neighborhood to the north. The Nortli Frame disci-iet District includes the Commons Rar-kPlayfields, -OV-4t , its ball fiek , and several streets lined with single-family homes. While the overall intent of the p a -DSAP is to preserve the peaceful, insulatedsinle single-family character of the North Park neighborhood, east of Fourth Avenue, two busy arterial streets - N-.-Fourth Avenue and James Street offer significant challenges to City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-1 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts preservation of this character. Traffic along these streets the Regional Justice Center, the Sounder- Rail R- Bus StationKent Transit Center, and the development of Kent Station to the south intrude on residential the desirable qualities associated with single- family residential neighbor-heads to the e�Etent that plqfty-hames nefth of james Street an west f di t t F t4h Avenue e ffc[S [[di ft� fTILlt �[11I I . [Fib. V-1:Map_ The Kent downtown districts. 1( 998)I The Commons P-ar-k-Playfields brings mixed blessings. While being a much-loved open space and active recreation area that enhances single f mil -living conditions in the vicinity, it also draws people and traffic that impact single-family residential uses. Therefore, the -DSAP seeks to create a strong edge of high-quality mixed-use development along the north side of James Street west-e4between N-.North FettAh First and Fifth Avenues transitioning to multi-family residential development primarily along the south side of Cloudy Street. The area is a designated redevelopment target area. Relieving congestion on James Street may be achieved to some measure by connecting Cloudy Street to Fourth Avenue from Third Avenue for pedestrians and vehicles. Upgrading the streets and Commons Ptaf�Playfields to benefit the local neighborhood and the city at-at-large are also high priority actions. The actions presented below include public improvements, land use zoning, and design guidelines and supportive of the overall plan. The actions are coordinated specifically to encourage target area redevelopment. Public Improvements -Upgrade Commons Playfelds The Commons Park is an important resource for dow+itownDowntown Kent in many ways. For one thing, it is such an important attraction that shop owners have opened their stores in the evening during baseball season to take advantage of the increased traffic. However, there are numerous problems, including parking, access, drainage, and impacts to neighboring residents. A master plan.or district subarea development III-,in should explore a variety of solutions to these problems. Participants in then ... t,,wn "' " Downtown Strategic Action Plannin<y process voiced many creative ideas for park improvement. The ideas included: (1) an on-site parking lot that could retain stormwater in the winter; (2)pedestrian overpasses; (3)use of the Regional Justice Center's parking; (4) incorporating shared parking with redevelopment between N.North Fourth and N.North Fifth Avenues; and (5) the addition of a play structure. The City will explore the opportunity of shared public.parking arrangements with the Regional Justice Center for evening use of the parking garage located across the street from the Commons Playfields. —Improve James Street City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-2 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts James YFt=eerStreet will an important arterial, as well as b-i.,,, and in the future should include improved pedestrian and bicycle routes connecting the Commons Rark-Playfields and the Interurban Trail to the Borden site edevelapme +Kent Station, the c,,ander CopA,,,,te-Rail & Bus ct.,tionKent Transit Center, the Regional Justice Center, and schools and businesses in the Central Avenue corridor. Long-term planning should encourage bicycle and pedestrian uses. As development and redevelopment occurs, the City should require that James Street have sidewalks at least 12 feet wide be o.,h,,, eed with landscaping and sidewalks at least 12 feet wide. In addition, the City and developer-s should eansidef:the possible grade separation at the [Fig. V--2:Map-Proposed elements of the North Frame District(1998)] — Provide Gateway Improvements at Fourth Avenue and James Street: This high traffic intersection close to the Kent Commons and the Regional Justice Center is an important downtownrDowntown entry point. The , - ed R,,.., en landseapingb a per-haps ,h some of the building, m to all and deta4i+7 g. A design team that included members of the business community, an architect, a landscape architect, artists and planners recommended a distinctive crosswalk pavement design and distinguished streetlights. As redevelopment of Kent Station occurs, this intersection will likely see increased pedestrian activity. Pedestrian-oriented design, including safely features, will need to be considered in designing this gateway. [Fig, V-3:Drawings- The suggested concept for Fourth Avenue and James Street. 1( 998)] — Open Cloudy Street to connect Third and Fourth Avenues In order to alleviate traffic congestion along James Street, residents of North Park would be able to exit onto Fourth Avenue. All streets intersecting James Street directly north of Kent Station will be restricted to right-in, right-out turns t,,,..,,..d Foufth Avenueonto and off of James Street. T44-ae6enThe opening of Cloudy Street between Third and Fourth Avenues is already considered a mitigating action for the Kent Station development. — Implement traffic-calming measures on Cloudy Street to reduce vehicular speeds if Neighborhood Traffic Control Program analysis concludes such measures are necessary If findings of any Neighborhood Traffic Control Program (NTCP) study indicate necessity, design for reduced vehicular speeds in the vicinity of the Kiwanis Tot Lot, City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-3 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP-V.doc Kent Downtown Districts applying appropriate traffic-calming measures in order to improve safe vehicular and pedestrian travel behavior. Development Target Area Actions — Encourage Office/Residential Mixed-Use Development at the N. Fourth A-renue/N. Fifth venuein the First-Fifth Avenues/James-Cloudy Streets Target Area by amending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District designations As noted above, the phii-Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) promotes the conversion of the single-family area between N-North Feuf4h First and N-North Fifth Avenues and between James and Cloudy Streets to include a id=immix of uses complementary to Kent Station the Regional Justice Center, and the Sett de f reef gff Rail & Bus StationKent Transit Center. effeeOffice, retail and multifamily residential development would be encouraged along James Street to a depth of approximately 300 feet by designating the area for Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning- consistent with Kent Station development south of James Street. Further north of the proposed DCE district expansion to the south side of Cloudy Street, a designation of low-density multi-family residential (LDMF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use would encourage a transition between the intensive mixed-use development along James Street and the single-family residential housing to the north. Extension of low-density multi- family residential zoning to include the five (5) Single-Family Residential-zoned parcels (SR-8) north of Cloudy Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues would in part reaffirm a Council recommendation to rezone this area as adopted in the 1998 DSAP. Either a Multi-Family Residential-Garden Density (MR-G) Zoning District to allow market rate rental or a Multi-Family Residential-Townhouse 16 units per acre (MR-T16) Zoning District to allow only purchased units would be appropriate. These uses will benefit from proximity to the pafk-Commons Playfields and the visibility along Fourth Avenue and James Street. Also, they will be less adversely impacted by the par-k-Commons activity and traffic-_Figure V-4 illustrates the type of development that is envisioned. [Fiz V-4• Drawing- The type of office/residential mixed-use development envisioned for the N. Fourth/Fifth Avenue target area. (1998)] Desiqn Guidelines Finally, the City should expand the Downtown Design Guidelines area of applicability to include the North Frame District, and administer dis*ri^* spee ;^the design guidelines to ensure that: • Development presents an attractive building face and/or landscaping, particularly to James and Fourth Streets. • Site improvements do not negatively impact existing developmentlPfejee-ts to the north in terms of noise, traffic, air quality, sun/share, or visual intrusion. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-4 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts • Development does not result in houses converted to marginal offices without substantial redevelopment. Although on the periphery of the dowiitowtiDoNviitown, the North Frame at-ea District merits special attention. A master plan for the Commons P4r-k Playfields could begin to address important issues. Redevelopment of the area land along the T`T Foui h,'Fi ft ^.,entte eeFFiaersbetween First and Fifth Avenues north of James Street will provide opportunities for additional housing in a convenient dowiitoNvrii Downtown location near recreation resources and a regional transportation center. It will also provide opportunities for office/housing mixed use or housing near offices. Finally, as one of the doNN'iito A-n': Downtown's most important entries, the Fourth and James gateway merits high priority in the proposed gateway enhancement program. [Fig. V-S:Map—North Frame District 20 year vision (1998)J B. Central Avenue Corridor District Central Avenue comprises the downtown'. Downtown's auto-oriented strip. As such, it provides a setting for auto-oriented businesses, convenience stores, large-lot enterprises, and fast food vendors. On the other hand, the di District's collage of billboards and under-maintained structures does not provide an attractive entrance into the dewntewnDowntown. For this reason, the }Aa+-i-Downtown Strategic Action Plan identifies the entire Central Avenue Corridor district District as a redevelopment target area although there are some solid businesses. The target area and recommendations include Railroad Avenue in relation to the proposed ,omil",te,- Fail Station r-,,,,,,mutef Ra- tationKent Transit Center. Upgrading the corridor will require a two-pronged effort involving public streetscape improvements and incremental private investment. This type of major arterial redevelopment has proven effective in areas such as Lake City Way in Seattle and Central Way in Kirkland. Public Improvements — Upgrade Streetscape Along Central Avenue The width of the street right-of-way width limits the extent of streetscape improvements on Central Avenue. Nevertheless, public and private investment could substantially improve the sidewalks and upgrade the utilities. The high-level transmission lines will undoubtedly remain, but numerous service lines and cable should be placed underground to remove visual clutter. Public and private property owners could augment existing street trees with additional plantings on both public and private property. The intersections of Central Avenue with Smith and Meeker Streets represent important entry points into the downto,, nDowntown, and gateways are recommended at these locations. Public right-of-way is limited on Central Avenue, as it is with all Downtown streets. The gateways should make use of basic streetscape elements. In 1997, a design City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-5 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts charette resulted in a recommendation for special crosswalk designs, signs directing visitors to the Regional Justice Center, the Commuter- ai Dail stat "" StationKent Transit Center and the business core. The recommendation included special lighting to call attention to the gateways. Participants in the charette included a landscape architect, an artist, an urban designer, downtown Downtown merchants, and City representatives. The Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommends upgrading the sidewalks along Meeker and Gowe Streets between First and Kennebeck Avenues with street trees and lighting. Where these streets intersect Central Avenue, the City should emphasize improvements to integrate the corridor with the dev,-mown Downtown core and the e,omfliatet- Commutef fail Rail stationStationKent Transit Center. ffiz V-6•Map- Central Avenue Corridor and West Frame(sic)Districts are illustrated above. (1998)I Design Guidelines The City should add specific standards to the Downtown Design Guidelines to direct development toward higher quality building and site design. The design guidelines should complement streetscape improvements. For example, while it is desirable to place buildings near the public right-of-way, it may be preferable to set buildings back a few feet to allow wider sidewalks and utility placement. The following issues are some that the guidelines should address.. • Designate Central Avenue as a Class B pedestrian street from Willis to James Streets to provide a better setting for new development arising from the mnititei- S,,u*de.. Gemmttter-rail nail st tie Sta6e*KentTransit Center and core area investment. • Screen parking areas adjacent to the street right-of-way with low shrubs or walls and trees. • When development occurs, set back buildings to allow for at least a 12-foot-wide sidewalk. • Provide a pedestrian link between the public sidewalk and all business entrances, even if parking is in front of the building. • Control existing signs and remove existing billboards over time. • Provide pedestrian-oriented building facades and integrate signs into the architecture. (Fib V-7•Drawing-Desi,-n Issues That New Development Should Address in the Central Avenue District. (1998)] (Fiz V-8•Drawin,--Desiyn Issues That Existing Development in the Central Avenue district Should Address. (1998)] City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-6 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Because Central Avenue is many people's first impression of downtoN�,ii,-Downtown appearance and development quality, gi-e this corridor is important to the whole downtown Dov.nto«-n image. For this reason, corridor improvements should be given priority. Successful arterial improvements in other cities in the region have demonstrated that upgrading Central Avenue is possible if the City and property owners work together. Development Tarqet Area Actions — Consider rezonii ^Rezone properties along Central Avenue currently zoned DCE to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay (GC-MU) for purposes of lending requirements regarding conformity of use and zoning Properties adjacent to Central Avenue within the DCE Zoning_District have operating businesses that are non-conforming,uses, and have non-conforming site characteristics. A rezone would allow for the existing uses to be deemed conforming for the purposes of obtaining financingfor improvements. However, the applicant for any redevelopment or use expansion in Downtown, regardless of zoning, is not exempted from Downtown Design Review requirements. [Fi,-. V-9:Drawin,-- Central Avenue as it exists today. (1998)1 [Fiz V-10:Drawinz-A Visualization of How Central Avenue could look. (1998)] [Fi,-. V-11: Map- Central Avenue Corridor 20 Year Vision (1998)1 C. East Frame District Lying immediately east of the Central Avenue corridor, the East Frame District includes a diverse mix of commercial activities interspersed among single and multiple-family residences. Participants at a summer 1996 workshop to identify issues in this district emphasized the need for a more stable residential neighborhood, with access to services and relief from traffic and other impacts. Since the City Resource Center, Senior Center, and Kent MiddleHigh School are located in the district, it is rich in public services. However, better connections to the downtowti .Downtown core would improve access to shopping, professional services, restaurants, and City and County offices. The actions recommended for the East Frame District focus on urban design improvements which could, over time, upgrade the area's livability. The planning team explored traffic revision proposals to reduce through traffic in the distrietDistrict, but no workable options were identified. Public Improvements — Construct a Pedestrian Trail Along Mill Creek City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-7 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP-V.doc Kent Downtown Districts The proposed trail and landscaping connecting Mill Creek Park and Memorial Park will improve access to open space. — Improve Meeker and Gowe Streetscapes Upgrading sidewalks with lighting and landscaping on Meeker and Gowe Streets from First Avenue to Kennebeck Avenue would improve pedestrian conditions in the East Frame. The improvements would connect the First Avenue to Kennebeck Avenue sections to the Historic eei-e Core and t Fail station to create a more attractive setting. — lm_pr-,�Enhance or replace pedestrian bridge over Mill Creek at Temperance Connectivity between the residential neighborhood at the foot of East Hill and the Kent Middle School (formerly Kent Jr. High School), and Downtown destinations including the Soundef r utef v"" & Bus Statio'Kent Transit Center, and Kent Station would be significantly improved by enhancing or replacing the existing pedestrian bridge over Mill Creek at Temperance Street. Aside from ensuring the attractiveness of the improvement a particularly important consideration would be an increase in the width of this bridge to allow more than one person at a time to comfortably make passage Ensure also that any improvement to the pedestrian bridge does not adversely impact Mill Creek salmonid habitat. Design Guidelines Design guidelines are recommended to: • Increase compatibility between commercial and residential uses through screening, site design and building bulk regulations or guidelines. • Increase security and safety in the areas by providing lighting and pathways, reducing hazardous areas, and providing visible entries. • Provide useful open space and pedestrian-oriented streetscapes. — Consider options for flexibility in general parking standards for Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning in the East Frame District with the economic development goals of the City The property owners in the East Frame District are not proposing intensive, mixed-use projects—and interest in developingsuch uch projects in the East Frame is limited at this time. Four(4) options to consider: 1. Allow outright 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 gross square feet of commercial floor area; 2. Allow 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 g.s.f. of commercial floor area provided that 25% of the overall gross floor area of the project is multi-family residential; City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-8 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts 3. No change— the existing 3 surface parking spaces per 1,000 g s_f. commercial in the DCE zone is counterbalanced with a minimum of one-and-one half(1.5)parking spaces per multi-family residential unit east of the Burlington Northern tracks (KCC 15.05.070(C)). This could be seen as an incentive to include housing units in commercial development in DCE; 4. Add two (2) year"Sunset Clause" from date of adoption for any DCE parking standards revision to evaluate the effectiveness of the revision. While there are few specific recommendations for the East Frame District in this plan, the City should continue to monitor residential neighborhood conditions and act if special problems or opportunities arise. [Fig. V-12:Map—Proposed Elements of the East Frame District(1998)J [Fie. V-13:Map—East Frame District 20 Year Vision (1998)1 D. West Frame District The area between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks and SR 167 includes a large Metro park-and-ride lot with regional bus service, a skateboard park and sports fields, the remains of a historical residential neighborhood, industrial shops, and vacant lands. The Interurban Regional Bicycle Trail runs north and south through the West Frame Elisti-ietDistrict. In 2005, Metro plans to phase out the lafk- ark-rand-ride lot located between Smith and James Streets when the Kent Transit CenterGe„ muter-Rai' Station is ready to accommodate express bus service connections. b The parking demand from thean rate the flinetionc_of the tm+41 -park_afl-d-and-ride lot will be served byinte the Kent Transit Center garage'-ail station area design However, the area south of Smith Street may experience dynamic redevelopment. A mix of retail, office, and residential uses is consistent with current zoning. T4isThe plan-Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommends street construction and design guidelines to support development efforts. Public Improvements — Review Proposal for a New Access Street to West Frame from Willis Street Major redevelopment opportunities in the West Frame Districtsetith o- iih Street will depend on a new street connection northbound through the area from Willis Street. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) reviewed an August 2001 :s ,.,.,-.fatly feviewin g a proposal to upgrade the intersection of the northbound ramp off SR 167 and issued a response in March 2002 indicatingdenial. If such a north-south route connecting Meeker Street with Willis Street is determined to be feasible in the future, the City should carefully evaluate the economic development City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-9 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts benefits andi-ts impacts on the doA e,,vn's.Downtown's traffic system. A traffic signal was placed at the intersection of 74th Avenue South and Willis Street in 2004 to facilitate westbound turns onto Willis from 74th Avenue South. — Connect Interurban Trail to Core Districts Besides the proposed access, the most important transportation improvements recommended by this plan are bicycle and pedestrian connections from the Interurban Trail eastward along or near James, Meeker, and Willis Streets. The James Street pedestrian connection is especially important because some Commons Park users park at the park-and-ride and then walk to the ball fields. Crossing James Street is often difficult, so providing better parking and access for park users will be an important consideration in the recommended Commons Park Master Plan. Redevelopment Opportunities — Encourage redevelopment of King County-Metro Park & Ride lot Kind County-Metro is marketing for sale an 8 acre portion of the 9.5 acre Lincoln Park & Ride lot located between Smith and James Streets. The entire lot is zoned Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Much of the parking is anticipated to shift to the S d r, Rail p Bus Statie"Kent Transit Center garage as most express bus service trips are replaced by Sounder Commuter Rail service trips to Seattle. The remaining 1.5 acres will continue to provide one hundred (100) surface parking stalls for the reduced service park and ride. — Encourage redevelopment of the area between State Route 167, the Union-Pacific Railroad, Willis and Meeker Streets The access road and Interurban Trail improvements could be key factors in this redevelopment opportunity. Revising the West Frame District surface parking standards to allow for more surface parking stalls per thousand square feet of commercial gross floor area (see West Frame District Design Guidelines Recommended Actions). [Fig V-14•Drawings—Existinz view and the view with the proposed improvements along Willis Street near the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Note the bicycle pedestrian trail connectinje downtown to the Interurban Trail, gareensward improvements, and new mixed-use residential development along Saar Street. (1998)I Design Guidelines Design guidelines are recommended to ensure that the new development comprises a unified whole with compatible uses, integrated circulation, adequate capital facilities, and attractive amenities. The design guidelines should reflect the type of uses proposed by the property owners. This particular district would also benefit from large site master planning so that project review might involve a phased site master plan concept. A West City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-10 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts l=rame District SUbarea Development Plan. adopted within a Planned Action Ordintnnce_ could accomplish this <<<oal as Nvell. — Consider options for flexibility in general parking standards for Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoning in the West Frame District with the economic development goals of the City The property owners in the West Frame District are not proposing intensive, mixed-use projects—and interest in developing such projects in the West Frame is limited at this time. North-south access to this district has long been problematic, especially for vehicular traffic. Four(4)options to consider: 1. Allow outright 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 gross square feet of commercial floor area; 2. Allow 4.5 surface parking spaces per 1,000 g.s.f. of commercial floor area provided that 25% of the overall gross floor area of the project is multi-family residential; 3. No change—the existing 3 surface parking spaces per 1,000g s.f. commercial in the DCE zone is counterbalanced with a minimum of one (1) parkin space pace per multi-family residential unit west of the Burlington Northern tracks (KCC 15.05.070(B)). This could be seen as an incentive to include housing units in commercial development in DCE; 4. Add two (2) year"Sunset Clause" from date of adoption for any DCE parking standards revision to evaluate the effectiveness of the revision. [Fig. V-I5:Map—Proposed elements of the West Frame District are illustrated above. 1( 998)1 (Fig. V-16:Map— West Frame District 20 Year Vision (1998)J E. South Core District The area immediately south and west of the Meeker Street setion of the histei-ie Historic e—eCore consists mainly of single-family houses, apartments, senior housing, and churches, with some small businesses and an elementary school. The attractive setting includes tree-lined streets and numerous older, but still viable, buildings. Willis Street provides a pleasant greenbelt on the south, and the civic campus and Meeker Street provide the north boundary. The railroads effects both the eastern and western margins, and development along these edges is less substantial. Howevef- the Git y pFopoce-m locate the eOffifflLiteF Fail StatiOfl SOuth of Govve Sti-eet wifli platf4fns on both sides of the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-11 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts The Plan Downtown Strategic Action Plan encourages residential mixed l lixed-use in this area to help achieve the Comprehensive Plante Llousing Element goals, and to provide a built-in market for dogwown Downtowji businesses. The area is already an attractive in-town neighborhood because of good automobile and transit access, public services, and pleasant streets. For this reason, vacant and underdeveloped properties in the entire district, except the BN&SF Railroad corridor, form a mixed-use redevelopment target area. The blocks directly west of the BN&SF Railroad tracks are appropriate for parking and commercial redevelopment. The South Core District could become one of the most attractive in-town neighborhoods in south King County. Looking at the distFiet District map, the South Core District seems to cradle the hiStOFie Historic Core District commercial area. Similarly, a strong mixed- use residential neighborhood would provide economic support for a more viable downtowflDownto«-n. Therefore, the City should assign high priority to the actions recommended for d}is-the South Core disti-ietDistrict. The impetus for the recommendations below is to facilitate redevelopment that strengthens this emerging mixed-use neighborhood. Commuter rail connections will make doer Downtown a regional transportation hub, elevating its role and image in southwest King County. Experience in other communities has shown that such increased visibility can benefit a downtown Downtown economically if the image presented by the station is positive and the connections throughout the dowjitewn Downtown are clear. Therefore, stimulating the economic and physical vitality of the downtown Downtown depends on in-a series of actions to connect the C...+-+mute,-Rail static~ Slatie^Kent Transit Center to the businesses, offices, and residences throughout downtownDowntown, and : g the area _ „ding Station. Public Improvements ■ Provide Quality Commuter Rail StationKent Transit Center Infrastructure The design of the station should complement and enhance the character of the South Core and Historic Core Districts. The station design calls for a platform on each side of the tracks and at least 800 commuter-parking spaces. It also calls for a"kiss and ride" drop off area and eight bus-bays so that both local feeder buses and regional busses can meet the train when it arrives. The} 4n-Do «mown Strategic Action Plan recommends a well-designed, distinctive station to provide doWflte)A,rpowntown with a strong identity and indicate a commitment to high quality development. ■ Reduce Station Kent Transit Center Impacts Carefully coordinate rail statie transit center design to reduce the impacts of the intermodal transportation facility on existing and future mixed-use development. Public Works has designed street widening projects to serve the Sounder-!'',,wi ff tef City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-12 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Rail .e, Bus StatiarKent Transit Center on Pioneer Street between Central and Railroad Avenues, and Smith Street between Fourth and Railroad Avenues. ■ Restore the Historic Train Station The historic Burlington Northern station De of located between Gowe and Titus Streets is an expression of Kent's history and character. The City should research opportunities to coordinate with the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe Railroad BNSF to restore the station. Recent discussions between the Kent Downtown Partnership (KDP) and BNSF have included the possible sale of the Depot for a nominal fee conditional on the building being removed from its current location proximate to the railroad tracks The Kent Downtown Partnership has considered the potential use of the Depot as a tourist inforniation office and the Greater Kent Historical Society and Museum has expressed interest in the Depot as a history center. Citizens at the 2004 workshops were supportive of these types of reuse of the Depot should it become feasible for purchase and relocation. ■ Construct traffic and pedestrian improvements to downtownPowntown streets as necessary to provide access: Design , r-e"irefnents may dietate new improvements forte Railroad and Central Avenues, and Smith, Meeker, Gowe and Willis Streets. Connecting pedestrians living in neighborhoods east of Central Avenue and west of Fourth Avenue with the Downtown Core Districts has been voiced as important. No less important will be the manner in which traffic currently passing through Downtown is routed in such a way to minimize delays while ensuring_pedestrian safety in a pedestrian-friendly environment throughout Downtown. ■ Improve connecting pedestrian corridors: Improve or install new sidewalks, streetlights, and tree grates along connecting pedestrian corridors. Use the design elements previously selected by the community and installed on First Avenue to establish a consistent pedestrian character throughout the core. ■ Consider the impacts of the potential Willis Street railroad underpass: The Willis Street and Burlington Northern/Sante Fe underpass and the Willis Street/Union Pacific underpass are two Kent underpasses included in the Seattle project of the Freight Action Strategy(FAST). Member- e 0 0 ��king f'n` ing within the next six years-This project is planned for completion during the next five to ten years (2009-2014). ■ Extend Angled Parking Along Saar Street to the Union Pacific Railroad Installing angled parking with vertical curbs and gutters would define the edge of the street and provide public parking. Both these improvements would help attract higher quality development to the area. The City could use the additional parking to provide required on-site parking as an incentive to developers. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-13 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts ■ Extend Pedestrian/Bicycle Paths from the Interurban Trail to the Core Connections to the regional trail will provide an amenity for local residents and bring visitors and commuters into the downtownDowntown. [Fig. V 17.Map—Proposed Elements of the South Core District. (1998)] Design Guidelines The Downtown Design Review Criteria should be refined to address specific issues in the South Core District, including: • Enhancement of the historic character of the core and rehabilitation of historically significant structures. Portions of the South Core District may be eligible for histenie Historic t District status.-: • Maximum compatibility between adjacent uses. Locate buildings to achieve privacy for residents, separate noisy activities and integrate parking.-; • Strong building relationship to the street, with entries visible from the sidewalk.-_ • Useable open space on site, as required in the Downtown Design Criteria, or require a contribution to acquire new or upgrade existing open space in the neighborhood..-= • Reduction of the impact of parking on the streetscape-_ • Minimizing the impact of service areas..-; • Unified architectural concept consistent with the character and orientation of surrounding buildings.-. • "Pedestrian scale" in buildings..-, • Building massing, details, and articulation to achieve an "architectural scale" consistent with surrounding buildings..-_ • Building forms (such as row houses or courtyard apartments), elements (such as roofs, porches, or bay windows), details (such as building trim or decoration), and materials consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. • Hardy landscaping to enhance building forms, articulate and enhance open space, and reinforce visual continuity with adjacent sites. Figure V- and Figure V- illustrate design guideline recommendations for this district. [Fig. V-18:Drawing—Architectural details appropriate in the South Frame District. 1( 998)1 [Fig. V-19:Drawing— This illustration demonstrates how landscaping can define open space and add texture to a building: (1998)1 Other Redevelopment Incentives City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-14 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-1 10804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts The City should undertake the following actions as the opportunity arises to enhance development opportunities in the South Core District. • Consider designating a historic district and/or historic sites. (See recommendations under Historic Core District.) • Consider a housing demonstration project in this area. • To increase potential for dowiitoNviiDowntown housing, explore means to reuse older homes more effectively. Several of these old homes are important resources. In the past, this type of housing has been successfully moved, clustered on more appropriate sites, remodeled to provide more than one unit, or adapted to another appropriate use. • Construct parking on the properties immediately west of the BN&SF Railroad between Willis and Titus Streets. Parking in this location would reduce conflict between railroad operations and existing residences, provide downDowntown parking and potentially allow redevelopment of the public parking lot at the southwest corner of First Avenue and Titus Street for housing. Reconfiguring First Avenue would add more parking and upgrade the development setting. /Fip. V-20:Map—South Core District 20 Year Vision (1998)1 F. North Core District With the Regional Justice Center, the Kent Public Market, a the-proposed e-ivie civic and performing arts center, f 4 and a town square parkCivie-and porming na 4 fffli " ^t<s ^As ^enter- ente , the North Core District includes some of the most important new urban development in south King County. These facilities and the future redevelopment potential of the property located between Smith Harrison and James Streets east of &South Fourth Avenue make the North Core District unique within the region. Because of these dynamic opportunities, the plaii-Downtown Strategic Action Plan designates the entire dirt North Core District as a redevelopment area. Some vacant and underdeveloped properties will not redevelop immediately. The North Core District links the Historic Core District and the oc.mm;iteF Kent Transit CenterCommuter-rail Dail station n with the Regional Justice Center, Kent Commons, and the neighborhoodres�ees north of James Street (North Park). It is especially important that new public and private investment be coordinated to provide improved connections between these activity areas. The recommendations below call for the City to take assertive action to realize the opportunities within the North Core District. [Fi,Q V-21•Map—Proposed elements of the North Core District are illustrated above. (1998) , Public Improvements City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-15 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts — Construct Traffic and Pedestrian Improvements to Downtown Streets as Necessary to Provide Safe, Convenient Connections: Connecting the North Core �'t et District vL4 and the eoniiiiutei-Kent Transit Centers it Rail station Station seM13-lust north of Lowe Smith Street will place new demands on Smith Street. Construct Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Improvements on Smith Street between First Avenue and Central Avenue. New street improvements may include a traffic signal at Railroad Avenue and Smith Street, straightening, a new center through lane on Smith Street, new crosswalks, pedestrian improvements, and directional signs. Citizens have voiced interest in a pedestrian bridge across Smith Street between First and Second Avenues-connecting the Library with the Sounder-Kent Transit Center garage The likelihood of such a pedestrian bridge being constructed depends on a number of variables including available right-of-way, funding, traffic flow and safety issues. Improve or install new sidewalks, streetlights, and tree grates along connecting pedestrian corridors to other Downtown districts. Use the design elements previously selected by the community and installed on First Avenue and Meeker Street to establish a consistent pedestrian character throughout the North eoxeCore District. — Enhance Parks Along the Railroad to Provide Linkages Between the North Core/Station Area and the Historic Core Upgrade Burlington Green, Yanghzou and Kaibara parks as connecting open space and as a kind of gateway. A canopy along the east side of the parks would provide pedestrian protection, serve as outdoor stalls for the Public mai-ke-Warket, and visually tie the Sister Cities Parks together. Not only will the parks be an important pedestrian link and open space resource, they will be highly visible to thousands of commuters taking the train from Tacoma to Seattle and be an important part of Kent's image. — Locate a Town Square Park near the Smith e+ + Aleeke- Street spin o#between the North Core and Historic Core Districts A Town Square Park would provide a downtown open space for large public gatherings and performances. It might consist of a small plaza constructed as part of or near the-a civic and performing arts center or hotel and conference center that could expand to accommodate concerts or celebrations by closing Seeend Avenue and the o^^t adjacent streets. Coordinate closely with the Per-forming ^"4L r + r (`.,mm ttee an the-the Kent Downtown Partnership, the Chamber of Commerce, and other interested parties to ensure that the park and eivie and~e~f^sing ai4s eenter- eem dement and enhances the mix of pedestrian-oriented land uses ene atietherand connects adjacent Downtown districts. — Support the Kent Public Market as a connecting activity between the Historic ceeCore and the area north of Smith Street: City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-16 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts [Fig. V 22: Drawin,,-- The above illustration shows existing conditions along Railroad Avenue. (1998)1 [Fig. V-23:Drawing-A canopy along Railroad Avenue will provide pedestrian protection and market space (1998)] —testy-uet Pedestrian "All Cross" or Seramble System at the morn-. of F,,,,r+l, Avenue and Smith Street The King County Regional justiee Center- (RX) brings man),new empleyefs and it is linked to the-e6r-e Core area sheps, r-est-atir-ants, and-ser-viees An "all s pedestrian eenneetion, whieh provides fer-pedestrians to move diagonally thr-ough4he inter-seetion in the signal sequenee while all autemobiles wait, wetild facilitate pedestrian linkage. it is r-eeommended that the Ptiblie Wor4s DepaAment explore the feasibility e sueh a design and the intefseetion be upgraded with gatev,,ay landseaping and signs. if an 44-all�efess--or-seramble system-is-not-€easib e, then, at a .gnals can be [Fig. V-24: Drawing- "All cross"or "scramble"intersection at Fourth and Smith Streets to allow 4-way crossing at a signal sequence. Decorative pavement, canopy or trellis, and enhanced private landscaping are possibilities. (1998)] Design Guidelines Refinement of the existing design guidelines is recommended to: Ensure quality development in the North Core District, especially along Fourth Avenue and Smith Street. Classify Smith Street between Central and Fourth Avenues and Fourth Avenue between Titus and James Streets as Class A, pedestrian-oriented streets. Ensure that development along these streets addresses the Kent StationRerden site issues described below. Redevelopment Opportunities The flali- supports and integrates other development activities, including those described below. — Establish Design Parameters and Review Process for Redevelopment of the Borten Kent Station Site City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-17 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP-V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Because of its large size, central location, and transportation access, the }Kent Station site is one of the premier d01A'fltE)Wn Downtown redevelopment opportunities in south King County. indieated no ininlediate mom, the City should take steps to ensure that when redevelopment occurs, it is carefully coordinated-. Therefore, it is recommended that the City establish a master plan process for this site, such as a Planned Action. with standards to guide any future redevelopment proposal. The standards should include: • Guidelines for streets and sidewalks.. • Provision for extension of Second Avenue into the site.. (realized as Ramsay wavy: • A defined, appE priate mix of uses and use intensities-.* • Convenient access to transit facilities..-, • Orientation to adjacent sites...: • Provision of open space and pedestrian amenities.-: Design guidelines for architectural and site design character..., • Mitigation pleasures for probable significant adverse environmental impacts. — Support residential development in the North Core District: The North Core District is assuming a more central location and role in din DowntoNvii activities. Vehicle and pedestrian circulation between activities in the North Core District and , including the Kent Transit Centerr - ' + + +atte and the adjacent Downtown districts will become increasingly important. For these reasons, the North Core District recommendations merit high priority. [Fig V 25• Drawing—Shown above is the proposed Civic and Performing Arts Center design by the Bumgardner Partnership (1998H — Support a Civic and Performing Arts Center or hotel and conference center in Downtown: A Civic and Performing Arts Center or hotel with facilities for conferences and other events, would be an important attraction to the down-tewnDowntown, extending hours of activity into the night. It would provide a much-needed location for events, performances, meetings, and educational programs. The center would also be a lively element if pedestrian-oriented uses, such as small shops, newsstands, flower stalls, coffee bars, pedestrian spaces, and/or public artwork, are included along Fourth Avenue and Smith Street. The entry to the site could include a plaza that for outdoor performances and celebrations. [Fig V 26•Drawing—Architect's drawing of the proposed Kent Public Market building—courtesy of the Kent Downtown Partnership. (1998)I — Support the Kent Public Market The Kent Public Market on Railfoad Avenue between Meek Meekef and Smith Street '" adds an--important weekend activity in Downtown. It will anehef businesses on Raikead City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-18 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Avenue, enhanee the Sister Cities P--lEs Eemplex-and serves as a connecting element between the eoiii ;itrtei- Norm Corolr-ail station and theNei-tliHistoric Core bistricts. To Railroad Avenue and ., side alk, ith ass fSiste-C ties n,,,•vs t provide i.,,.ii vuu �,.�,,.,., u„ai u o,�,a.��u,,. ��,ci,a iui'i�p j`-tea shelter- fef autdoer- stalls in the summer-and pedestr-iafi weather-pf!eteetiefi in the — Encourage mixed-use development proiects in proximity to the So*n&-r Commuter- Rail & Bus Kent Transit Center Encourage private sector interest in redeveloping or developing vacant or underutilized sites to mixed-use, through incentives such as expedited permit review at no additional cost, provided that project designs meet applicable development standards and Downtown Design Review criteria. The Municpal Parking Lot, located between Smith & Harrison Streets, and Fourth and Second Avenues, could provide an excellent opportunitX for mixed-use development featuring structured parking. /Fig. V 27. Map-North Core District 20 Year Vision (1998)J G. Historic Core District The Historic Core District is the traditional and geographic heart of downtoA n Downtown Kent. The Historic ear-e Core contains three discrete retail areas: one along Meeker Street, the community's "main street"; a second, emphasizing restaurants and specialty shops,just to the south and east along First Avenue (also known as the Old Titusville District); and a third, stretching along Railroad Avenue opposite Burlington Green and Yanghzou Parks. All three feature pleasant pedestrian conditions and turn-of- the-century buildings. The distr-iet Historic Core District also includes the Kent City Hall/civic campus just south of Gowe Street. The Historic Core District is bordered by the public parking lot and library on the north, the Central Avenue eeCorridor District on the east, and the South Core District mixed-use residential neighborhood eonamutei-fail stab^., on the south and west. Considerable activity is generated within the Historic Core District by the Regional Justice Center located within 1,000 feet. All of these activities will support the Historic Core District economically if they are included in a comprehensive redevelopment strategy. The Downtown Strategic Action Plan D( SAP) addresses the areas immediately surrounding the Historic Core District as well as the distriet District itself because of the dynamic redevelopment potential of those areas. The surrounding districts will support the Historic Core District by accommodating residences, transportation facilities,jobs, and improved streetscapes and parks, directly adjacent to the Historic Core District. This strategy builds on the dQ,stFiet'srDistrict's current strengths, including pedestrian-oriented streets, civic attractions, and a variety of activities. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-19 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Several actions are recommended for the existing Historic Core District that are intended to: • Enhance the historic architectural character and pedestrian amenities.-_ • Develop vacant or underutilized sites..-,- • Visually and physically connect the Historic Core District to the surrounding districts. [Fig. V-28: Map—Proposed elements of the Historic Core District. (1998)1 Public Improvements — Make Pedestrian Improvements While the dew+ntewn Downtown benefited from recent improvements, including those to Rose Garden Park, First Avenue (Titusville business district), Meeker Street, and Kherson Park, further improvements are recommended to make connections with neighboring districts. Safe and attractive streets between the eommtitei=Kent Transit CenterGe„ muter mil pail st +ionStatio„, the King County Regional Justice Center and other offices, businesses and residences throughout downtown Downtown will encourage pedestrian use. Pedestrian lighting and street furniture should be installed in the Historic Core District along Fourth Avenue when pedestrian systems are upgraded in the North Core and South Core Districts. As development occurs, 12-foot-wide sidewalks should be required on the east side of South Fourth Avenue. Meeker Street and Gowe Street pedestrian improvements should also be extended eastward from First Avenue to Kennebeck Avenue. — Enhance Gateways The intersection of Fourth Avenue and Meeker Street is identified as a gateway and should be enhanced with special street lighting, signage, distinctive intersection paving, artwork, and/or landscaping. The most effective way to upgrade the image of this intersection is additional good quality infill development with corner entries, architectural features, or plazas. — Inform Historic Core property and business owners of the locations and functional lifespan of utility facilities, and involve these stakeholders in the planning and coordination of street improvements Several buildings in the Historic Core may require utilities upgrading in order to attract stable businesses. Some buildings of historic age maybe required to upgrade connections to the public utility system as it is upgraded—and without sufficient communication and coordination those on-site upgrades may be a factor that compromises pursuit of historic register status for such buildings. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-20 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP—V.doc Kent Downtown Districts — Plan for eventual undergroundinp, of all utilities in the Historic Core to improve the attractiveness of the visual environment and increase available sidewalk space for walkin14 and other appropriate activities Design Guidelines and Historic Preservation Activities Meeker Street and First Avenue retains much of the character of an early twentieth- century small town. Preserving this traditional quality is an important aspect of the community's desire for a "home town" identity. Therefore, revised design guidelines for the Historic Core District should emphasize traditional building forms, materials, and details. All of the streets in the Historic Core District are Class A pedestrian-oriented streets according to City design Downtown Design guideiiiiesGuidelines. New buildings in the Historic eete-Core should adhere to the Downtown Design gdel inesQuidelines so that the buildings provide continuous building frontage along the street. In general, exterior remodeling to existing buildings should be directed toward restoring the original character. However, there are some cases where the building is significantly altered or is not historically significant. The City should update the existing inventory of historic commercial buildings and encourage context-sensitive restoration and renovation i-ede clop ent in the Historic Core where appropriate. A facade restoration project was initiated by the Kent Downtown Partnership in 1997. The program should be continued, and should include educational materials that demonstrate restoration techniques that conform with the Landmarks and Historic District Preservation Program. The program could also include low-interest loans and tax abatements to encourage fagade restoration. [Fiz V-30•Drawhws—Facade Improvement and Iufill Development Concepts (1998)1 [Fib V-31•Map— Conceptual Desiyn for the Commuter Rail Station (1998)1 Redevelopment Target Areas Because there are several different opportunities in the Historic Core District for the City to encourage private redevelopment, the whole district is identified as a redevelopment target area. One opportunity that merits further exploration is the district's designation as an histei-ic Histonclandmadi Landmark distrie District. A very different set of opportunities lies east of the BN&SF Railroad corridor. Several properties are underutilized and could be rehabilitated to provide space for start-up businesses if the surrounding streetscape, access, and parking conditions can be upgraded. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-21 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Kent Downtown Districts Recent efforts by the City and the Kent Downtown Partnership have kept the Historic Core District viable. New initiatives should build on this work by focusing on redevelopment opportunities as they arise. Continued infill and connections to the Historic Core District will benefit the downtawnDowntown as a whole. [FiQ. V-32:Map—Historic Core District 20 Year Vision (1998)] City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-22 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_V.doc Additional Environmental Information VI. Additional Environmental Information A. Fact Sheet Description of Proposal The City of Kent is supplementing its existing downtown Downtown plan with a Downtown Strategic Action Plan that focuses on future actions and implementation measures. The plan will identify the main features of the City's dewrpowntown form for the next several decades, including what type of development should occur where and how it should be served. In 1998, the T4ie-environmental analysis€ee-uses focused on the screening of plan alternatives as prepared with contributions by advisory committees, Downtown Stakeholders Task Force, City staff, downtown-Downtown property owners and merchants, and the public at-large. Location of Proposal The Downtown Strategic Action Plan and Integrated Preliminary Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement(SEIS) addresses the downtown-Downtown area as indicated in Figure III-1, Study Area. The approximate limits of downtown Downtown Kent are SR 167 on the west, Cloudy and James Streets on the north, Woodford Avenue and Titus Street on the east, and Willis Street/SR 516 on the south. Proponent and Lead Agency City of Kent Planning Depai4mentServices Office 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue South) Kent, WA 98032-5895 206/859 339Ot a 856-5454 Proposed Implementation Date The Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) is �'oa +^ '' was adopted on April 7, 1998. The first update of the DSAP is anticipated to be adopted on ...., 2005. Responsible Official Tar-nes 14a Kim Marousek Plan:„-T 1`fe +er-Principal Planner City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-1 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information City of Kent 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.) Kent, WA 98032-5895 206/859 33°Wt 5 856-5454 Contact Person Linda William D. Osborne, Planner City of Kent 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.) Kent, WA 98032-5895 206/959 3390t 53) 856-5454 Principal Contributors City of Kent Kent Downtown Partnership MAKERS architecture and urban design BRW, Inc. Property Counselors The Langlow Associates Kent Citizens and Property Owners Draft SEIS Issue Date February 4, 1997 Preliminary FSEIS Issue Date May 19, 1997 Final FSEIS Issue Date April 8, 1998 Public Meetings A public workshop on the proposed plan alternatives and Draft SEIS was held February 5, 1997 at the Kent Commons. Comments on the Draft SEIS were accepted until March 6, 1997. The Kent Planning Department hosted an Open House on May 19 to display current modifications to the plan based on public input and comment. The Kent Land City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-2 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Use and Planning Board met April 14 and May 19 to review the plan and preliminary final SEIS. A public hearing was held May 27 and was continued to June 2. The Kent City Council Planning Committee included public comment on August 6, 1997. Nature and Date of Final Action The adoption of the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan is seheduled anticipated€er Apfil 7, '99 early in 2005. Type and Timing of Subsequent Environmental Review The programmatic Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), preliminary Final SEIS and subsequent Final SEIS constitute the required environmental review for the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The Final SEIS will serve to supplement the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Final SEIS which was issued January 30, 1995. Any subsequent environmental review will occur on a project-by- project basis. The draft and final SEIS seek to adequately address the anticipated impacts of certain types of subsequent implementation actions consistent with the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. In the future, the City may decide to adopt a planfied action Action ordinance which meets the requirements of RCW 43.21C.240.2. If such an ordinance is adopted, the City, while reviewing a subsequent project action that is consistent with the recommendations of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, may determine that the requirements for environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation measures in the City's development regulations and the Kent Comprehensive Plan provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of the subsequent project. As a result, project-level development proposals may have a reduced amount of environmental review, if any. Location of SEIS Background Data City of Kent Planning Depat4mentServices Office 400 West Gowe Street (Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.) Kent, WA 98032-5895 206,1959 339,Gt 53) 856-5454 Cost of a Copy of the Preliminary Final SEIS This document is available for a fifteen dollar fee to interested citizens and groups. Copies may be obtained in person at the above address, or by mail. One copy will be provided to each individual or group upon request. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-3 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information B. Executive Summary Alternatives and Selection Process During November and December of 1996, the consulting team formulated three alternatives. The alternatives were based on the issues identified in public meetings, the environmental and technical analysis, and the redevelopment options outlined in the market report. All three alternatives were consistent with, and refinements of, the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Community members evaluated and commented on the alternatives at public meetings in January. The City published a Draft Supplementary EIS (DSEIS) in February of 1997 evaluating the environmental impacts of the alternatives. Additional public meetings were conducted in February and March to review the DSEIS and to discuss the components of a preferred alternative with citizens. The three alternatives were: —Alternative 1 Alternative 1 described growth and development downtown Downtown with limited guidance. It emphasized current trends, such as capturing business from motorists, enhancing the historic core, and encouraging commercial development on Central Avenue. It recommended maintaining existing zoning, improving streetscapes, and improving access to all sections of downtowaDowntown. This alternative proposed a commuter rail station at Smith Street with a Smith Street railroad underpass. —Alternative 2 Alternative 2 focused on attracting regional trade based on further development of the compact historic commercial/civic core of downtownDowntown. It emphasized encouraging investors to assemble land, identifying redevelopable sites, and increasing park and street improvements. This alternative described a master plan process to develop the existing industrial property between Smith and James Streets east of S. Fourth Avenue. It also described commercial redevelopment of the north side of James Street. It proposed locating the proposed commuter rail station between Gowe and Meeker Streets and closing Gowe Street to vehicle traffic at the railroad grade. This alternative included railroad underpasses at James and Willis Streets. —Alternative 3 Alternative 3 focused on attracting regional trade based on a business/hotel/performing arts complex located in the north area of downtawnDowntown. It proposed relocation of the industrial use located on the Borden site. The relocation would be followed by a dramatic redevelopment of the property as an active link between the historic commercial core and the King County Regional Justice Center. This alternative suggested expansion of Second Avenue as a visual and pedestrian link to the historic commercial core. It placed the rail station between Smith and James Streets. James and Willis Streets railroad underpasses were also part of this alternative. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-4 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information The Downtown Strategic Action Plan Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement contains complete descriptions, maps, and analysis of all three alternatives. The Preferred Alternative and the Recommendation Process The preferred alternative is presented as the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan in Part I of this document The actions recommended in the Downtown Strategic Action Plan are generally based on the concepts expressed in Alternative 2. During the Land Use and Planning Board and City Council review of the preliminary FSEIS, which contained a recommendation for the alternative 3 (north), rather than the alternative 2 (south) rail station location, more citizens testified in favor of the alternative 2 commuter rail station location (south site)than in favor of the alternative 3 location (north site). Business owners from both the north and south sites did not approve of relocation proposals. Retail business owners located east of the railroad right-of-way believed that rail station activity would generate additional business, others viewed businesses east of Railroad Avenue and south of Gowe Street as urban blight, to be replaced by a parking garage. Relative costs and vehicle and pedestrian circulation were debated. The City Council voted to recommend alternative 2 (the south site) and passed a resolution to approve the plan with the alternative 2 (south) station site in a location south of Gowe Street. The recommendations made by The Land Use and Planning Board, the City Council Planning Committee, the City Council Committee of the Whole, and the final City Council approval action items have been incorporated in the plan. The recommendations and actions include: Land Use and Planning Board Recommendations 1( 998) 1. Additional study of the north and south depot locations. 2. Do not revise the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation of the north edge of the North Park neighborhood east of James Street from single family residential to limited office/mixed use multifamily residential overlay. 3. Eliminate the Commons Park parking as shown on the Plan maps and recommend angled parking with a wider and improved Fifth Avenue. Locate the angled parking on the west side of Fifth Avenue next to the Park. 4. Study the parking for the park on Meeker near Union Pacific railroad. 5. Develop realistic costs in relation to the Plan. 6. Consider an additional Gateway location at Central and SR-167. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-5 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information 7. Add a safe place for a drop-off/pick-up location at Commons Playfields. This should be located on Fifth Avenue within the angled parking. 8. Study traffic patterns in the North Park area to consider safety and access. These recommendations were carried out and/or incorporated in the plan, and referred to the City Council for final action. The Commons Park recommendations were incorporated in an action to provide a master plan for the park. City Council final Action 1( 998): 1. Change the plan sections that refer to the Performing Arts/Civic Center located in a specific location to a general location downtow DOwntOwn. 2. Include additional support for bicycle lanes and paths. 3. Include additional support for historic preservation and commemoration. 4. insur-e-Ensure pedestrian and bicycle safety on the recommended trail linking Mill Creek Park with Kent Memorial Park. 5. Extend the Office/mixed use multifamily residential overlay that is recommended between Fourth and Fifth Avenues north of James Street and south of Cloudy Street north beyond Cloudy Street to the edge of the existing multi-family zone. 6. Refer only to a south commuter rail station location in the final plan document. The above recommendations afe-were incorporated with the plan as adopted in 1998. Incorporation of the Update Process & Recommendations As the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) is updated, as in 2004, additional recommendations may be considered and some recommendations previously adopted may be deemed completed or may be removed. Text may be revised to reflect changing conditions and amendments to the goals, policies and recommended actions of the DSAP and any consequent map designation changes may be proposed as part of the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process (KCC Chapter 12.02). Additional Environmental Analysis City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-6 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information The environmental impacts of adopting and implementing the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan were identified and analyzed in the DSEIS and the Preliminary FSEIS. Since May 19, 1997, when the Preliminary FSEIS was issued, the City has received additional traffic and commuter rail station environmental information that is summarized below. In December, 1997, the Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) issued a Kent downtown Downtown related document, the Tacoma to Seattle Commuter Rail Draft Environmental Analysis and the Technical Report in Support of Environmental Assessment. The environmental assessment includes proposed mitigation for traffic impacts during peak park-and-ride trips, including turn lanes in several locations, and signalization on Railroad Avenue. It includes assessments of potential impacts to socioeconomic factors, transportation, noise and vibration, hazardous materials, biological resources/ecology, historical, park, and recreation resources, archaeological and cultural resources, visual quality, safety and security, air quality, water quality, hydrology, and earth. Both documents, incorporated with this EIS by reference, are available for public review in the City of Kent Planning Department. A later assessment of 2010 PM Peak Transit Station Traffic Impacts, dated January 20, 1998, by HT Associates, a transportation consulting firm, is also incorporated by reference. It is available for public review in the City of Kent Planning Department. The findings stated: "The impacts of traffic at either location are rather subtle...There would be a slight, but perceptible, degradation of intersection LOS in the CBD by station traffic at either location. However, the even more subtle differences in impact between the two locations probably cannot be regarded as significant, in light of the travel models inherent limits of precision. This is not to say that there would be no difference —rather, that it is below the model's significance threshold. In September 2000 the Commuter Rail Station Area Study (CRSAS) was published with the intention of supplementing the Comprehensive Plan and DSAP, providing a framework for economic policies redevelopment opportunities land uses and streetscape improvements in the vicinity of the Regional Transit Authority (RTA)-selected Sptm4er- r Rail .e Bus St do Kent Transit Center (formerly known as Sounder Commuter Rail & Bus Station) site located along the Burlington Northern Sante Fe Railroad tracks between Smith and James Streets. A traffic study was completed as part of the CRSAS The CRSAS is incorporated by reference into this EIS. In July_2002 the City Council adopted the Kent Station Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Kent Station SEIS) which established a range of environmental impact thresholds for the redevelopment of the site formerly occupied by the Borden Chemical Company, and the City municipal parking lots located between Smith and Harrison Streets A number of impact studies were completed during the SEIS process The Kent Station SEIS is incorporated by reference into this EIS. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-7 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information In October 2003 the City Council adopted the Economic Development Strategic Plan, which includes implementation actions for Downtown Kent. This document is incorporated by reference into this EIS. Environmental Impacts and Mitigation The DSEIS contains environmental analysis of the environmental impacts three proposed alternatives and recommended impact mitigation measures. The actions proposed in the preferred alternative, together with an analysis of preliminary project related environmental impacts and recommended mitigation measures were discussed in the Preliminary FSEIS. The project related analysis and recommended mitigation measures were discussed in the Preliminary FSEIS should be considered advisory—used as a guide as projects are initiated. If the City adopts a Planned Action ordinance in the future, some of the recommended actions are potentially eligible for a reduced amount of environmental review, if any. Those actions, impacts and mitigation measures are listed below. Proposed planned actions are discussed below: Land Use Rezone Amending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District Map designations for the SF-8 area between Fourth First Avenue N. and Fifth Avenue N. along James Street north to Cloudy Street, and five (5) parcels north of Cloudy Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues N.; and to extend the Downtown Design Review Area to include all of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan Districts Discussion: Revise the Comprehensive Plan map and adopt a new zoning designation for the area between Fein First Avenue N. and Fifth Avenue N., north of James Street to Cloudy Street. Revise For the area extending three hundred feet (300') north from James Street between First and Fifth Avenues, revise the existing Comprehensive Plan Map designation,NSF-8 (Single Family residential, 8 dwelling units maximum per acre) to Gemmef6alUrban Center(UC). The zoning cede-district designation shall allow 'unite be changed to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) consistent with the adjacent zoning along the south side of James. instit„te fle3A site development goideliaesamply Downtown Design Guidelines to ensure high-quality, substantial development. aggfegatien of lots and to prevent lot by lot f single family hemes to effiee eemmer-eial ose. The new zoning designation should be eensistent with the existing 0, Pfefessienal Offlee, designation (Zoning Code Seetion 15.04.150) with the foil etiei3� City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-8 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Suggested fe-visions to the existing developfflent 4a-ndar-ds afe as follows: CuFFeH Revised Uo fmitted T Tses would be prohibited. Multifamily uses would be a ndit: .,1 us �,.,.r-rvnt Yards 2YCe Redueo to 10 F^^t to be the- For the area between First and Fifth Avenues, and between Cloudy Street and the proposed DCE zone north of James Street change the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from SF-8 to Low Density Multi-family Residential (LDMF) to provide a buffer between the residential neighborhood north of Cloudy and the mixed-use development along James Street. Between Fourth and Fifth Avenues, extend low-density multi-family residential designations north of Cloudy Street to include the five (5) SF- 8/SR-8 designated parcels immediately south of the existing adjacent LDMF/MR-G district along the west side of Fourth Avenue. Change the zoning district designation to either Multi-Family Residential Townhouse 16 units per acre (MR-T 16), or Multi- Family Residential Garden Density (MR-G) which also allows 16 units per acre—the only difference is whether units are owner-occupied or rented. Notably, condominium insurance problems still exist statewide and the City of Kent Downtown Multi-Family Residential Development Tax Exemption applies at this time only to owner-occupied units Developers therefore have at least two reasons not to develop condominium units in Kent. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • The proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning District Mapc-Ole revisions if adopted will result in the eventuala conversionless of single family housing units within the area of change—to a mix of multi-family residential and commercial uses. • The proposed bulk and scale of offiee/feside tialmixed-use development as well as the placement of buildings on the site may create impacts to homes in the existing MR-G, Gafden low density multifamily residential district, although MR-G or MR- T16 zoningis s proposed for extension south of Cloudy from the original 1998 proposal. The N4RG disc-iet is loeated neft7, oft e e Offiee/, :. efit_a .ire___ • Replacement of single family homes with offiee/ elide„+ ^'a mix of uses will eliminate the private open space created by the typical single family yard. However, because of the potential increase in population in the area, the need for open space may increase. Multi-family residential development would restore some of the open space in more concentrated areas. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-9 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information • During the weekday peak hours, office uses will create additional traffic and turning movements onto Fourth Avenue N. • The increased intensity of mixed-use development allowed for an estimated 8.4 acres under Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) Zoningdensity of a e use and eased residential dens4y will result in approximately four hundred-ten (410)efea e additional peak hour trips above the number of trips anticipated for Single-Family Residential, Eight Units per Acre (SR-8) Zoning* ^pa 4 en *h u,�� • The increased intensity of development allowed under low density multi-family residential zoning for an estimated 10.6 acres (either MR-G or MR-T16—each with a maximum of sixteen (16) units per acre) will result in approximately eighty-one (81) additional PM peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. • Offiee fesidential Mixed-use development will increase the area surfaced with impervious surfaces. • An increased number of occupants will work and live in the proposed rezone area. Due to the proximity of jobs, services, shopping, and recreation, pedestrian activity will increase. • The soil in the proposed rezone area may not support multi-story buildings on conventional foundations. Mitigation Measures: • Ensure that the new zoning designation permits adequate housing to replace the existing housing units as development occurs. DCE zoning encourages inclusion of residential units and MR-T16 or MR-G both provide for appropriate development of housing close to the Downtown Core. • Adopt-Incorporate the North Frame District into the Downtown desk g{r. elinesDesign Review Area, and recognize the specific to-context north of the proposed rezone area, to ensure high quality, substantial effiee r-esi efifi 'mixed-use and multi-family residential development compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. • To make better use of existing open space, improve Commons Playfields, located directly west of the recommended rezone area, by instituting a master plan based on neighborhood involvement and participation. • Prior to issuance of development permits, the owner and/or developer shall construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study (see page 20). City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-10 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information • The developer shall construct stormwater facilities consistent with City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V of this plan. • If required by the building official, prior to or in conjunction with a building permit application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. Responsibilities: • The City of Kent Planning Services Office is responsible for rev-isingamending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning District designation mapsand zenii+g;Uursuant to the legislative review process before the Land Use and Planning Board, which then forwards a recommendation through the Mayor to the City Council for final action. The City also is responsible for developing new design guidelines and the Parks Master Plan. • The property owners and/or the developer proponents are responsible for on and off- site analysis, corridor mitigation, public facilities and other improvements. Rezone the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) area located between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central Avenue, to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay (GC-MU) Discussion: Revise the Zoning Districts map designation for the area between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central Avenue, to General Commercial, Mixed-Use Overlay (GC-MU) Continue to apply Downtown Design Guidelines to ensure high quality substantial development that rejects and improves pedestrian connectivity to Core Downtown districts. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • In the short-term Central Avenue may continue to provide a visual, noise, and physical health (concentrated pollution) barrier for pedestrians seeking access to and from the Core Downtown districts. • Ingress and egress from small parcels with auto-oriented commercial uses onto Central Avenue will continue to be problematic for pedestrians and other vehicles. Mitigation Measures: City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-11 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information • Ensure that permit applications for GC and GC-MU zoned properties within Downtown are subject to Downtown Design Review. • Ensure that pedestrian amenities are included as part of Central Avenue street improvements. Responsibility: • The Planning Services Office is responsible for area-wide rezone proposals that are presented to the Land Use and Planning Board as part of the legislative review process. The Land Use and Planning Board then forwards a recommendation through the Mayor to the City Council for final action.. Develop Master planning requirements to apply to any redevelopment proposal for the Borden Kent Station Site Discussion: Because of its central location and large area,the former Borden industrial property Kent Station presents a great future opportunity for mixed-use (office, retail and residential) development. However-, t n--owners have ne immediate 1,lans to r-el a to or-redevelop t he site. ifs l-a-the ali the owners of t c'len site prepo a redesi H.^.. plThe City of Kent purchased the property in 2001, adopted a Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement(Kent Station SEIS) detailing a range of development uses and intensities and anticipated probable, adverse, significant impacts. The City is currently reviewing site development permit applications under a Master Planned Development Agreement. The pIafi-MPDAm*4e is consistent with the recommendations of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. Environmental Impacts: • No adverse environmental impacts are expected to result from this action. The master plan requirements should result in an improved development proposal consistent with the City's adopted plans. Mitigation Measures: • None are required. Responsibility: • The Kent Planning Depai4ment-Services Office would be responsible for developing the master plan requirements and submitting it to City Council for action. Promote infill housing — encourage the development of at least two hundred (200) units of new market rate housing in Downtown by 2008 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-12 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Discussion: In order to meet the Comprehensive Plan's intent to enhance the downto Downtown as a place to live, the City should promote the construction of new urban-style infill housing. Housing types should include condominium townhouses, stacked and attached units that resemble single-family design and character, and residential mixed with commercial and office uses. Consider using incentives such as reducing or waiving development permit fees for residential construction in Downtown and extending the existing Downtown multi-family residential tax exemption program to include market rate rental housing_ Developers of condominiums are challenged by two factors in Downtown condominium owners are still having difficulty acquiring home insurance and the developers do not receive the tax exemption for developing condos in Downtown. Consider also allowing development of buildings with five (5) stories of wood frame construction above a concrete base. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Development of additional residential units will increase the need for open space. • The bulk and scale of residential development as well as the placement of buildings on the site, may create impacts to-for adjacent homes and/or businesses. • During the weekday peak hours,residential uses will create additional traffic and turning movements onto adjacent streets. • The increased residential density will create additional peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. • Residential development will increase the area surfaced with impervious surfaces. An increased number of occupants will live in to devvnto Downtown. Due to the proximity of jobs, services, shopping, and recreation,pedestrian activity will increase. • The soil in the specific site may not support multi-story buildings on conventional foundations. • Recent development of high-density multifamily residential uses appears to have created a demand for parking beyond what is required by code. Mitigation Measures: • As residential units increase downtown, assess the amount of available park and recreation facilities in relation to the number of households. • Adopt design guidelines, specific to the individual districts, to ensure high-quality, substantial residential development. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-13 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study (see page VI-20?) • Construct storm water facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V of this plan. • If required by the building official, prior to or in conjunction with a building permit application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. • The City should conduct a study of the relationship of on-site and off-site parking and residential density to determine whether existing parking requirements are adequate to provide sufficient on-site parking. Responsibilities: • The City is responsible for design guidelines, park master planning and zoning code analysis. • The property owner and/or developer is responsible for required on- and off-site analysis,public facilities, and other improvements. Promote the construction of high quality new commercial, office, or mixed use development and redevelopment. Also encourage the development of a hotel/conference center to serve as an attractor for commercial activity Discussion: To respond to the potential for additional downtewn-Downtown office and commercial development identified in the market analysis the City should encourage the construction of commercial, office, and mixed-use developments within the downte Downtown, provide a variety of living situations within districts that require ground floor retail uses, as well as hotel and conference space for business-industry meetings. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Development of mixed-use development that includes residential units will increase the need for open space. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-14 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information • The proposed bulk and scale of commercial, office or mixed-use, development as well as the placement of buildings on the site, may create impacts to adjacent homes and/or businesses. • During the weekday peak hours, commercial, office or mixed-use uses will create additional traffic and turning movements onto adjacent streets. • The increased commercial, office or mixed-use density will create additional peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. • Commercial, office or mixed-use development will increase the area surfaced with impervious surfaces. • An increased number of occupants will work and live in the owntown. Due to the proximity of jobs, services, shopping, and recreation, pedestrian activity will increase. The soil in the specific site may not support multi-story buildings on conventional foundations. Mitigation Measures: • As the number of residential units within mixed-use development increases in downte,wnDowntown, assess the amount of available park and recreation facilities in relation to the number of households. • Adopt design guidelines, specific to the proposed area, to ensure high-quality, substantial office, commercial, and mixed-use residential development. The guidelines should require development that is compatible with adjacent uses and that maintains the pedestrian quality of the downte Downtown. • Prior to issuance of development permits, the owner and/or developer shall construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study (see page VI-20?). • The developer shall construct storm water facilities consistent with City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, cr as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V of this plan. • If required by the building official, prior to or in conjunction with a building permit application, the developer shall submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-15 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information Responsibilities: • The City is responsible for park master planning and design guidelines. Public Facilities Masterplan the Commons Pa*Playfields. Discussion: Masterplan and improve the Commons Pftr-kPla. fy ields. The Commons Pef1-Pla fy ields is are an important resource for downtown Downtown Kent in many ways. A master plan should explore a variety of solutions to parking, access, restrooms, seating, drainage, and traffic problems, as well as the potential for more efficient use. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Currently the Commons Playfields typically hosts six softball games or nine soccer games at one time. It hosts assorted other activities when soccer is not under way. The high utilization f r ball fields is p 4ly a, e t the laek fphJ.s nc�f tl}iTsze. Master planning the park to add physical support facilities, such as restrooms and bleachers may result in less space available for active and passive recreation. • The increase in facilities may result in an increased need for on-site or off-site parking. The addition of parking on site would reduce the open space usable for recreation, but would create safer access to the park. • Automobiles entering and exiting a Commons Paf�Playfields parking area entrance wouldeould create increased traffic congestion. • The increased park usage may create additional peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. • The development of a parking lot, restroom, bleachers, or paved paths would result in increased impervious surface. • Increased park usage and traffic circulation may result in adverse impacts to pedestrian safety. • The soil in the specific site may not support buildings on conventional foundations. • The use of the park at night and required lighting would create adverse light impacts to adjacent areas if not installed and managed carefully. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-16 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Mitigation Measures: • If needed, develop additional play fields in other areas in the City. • Review available parking for Commons Playfields use.... Consider restricting the number of parking spaces provided on site to drop off, loading, and handicapped spaces. • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide storm water facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Investigate ways to construct safe pedestrian crossings between the Commons Park Playfields and the RJC parking lot. • If a building is constructed, prior to or in conjunction with application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. • Shield lights so that off-site impacts are minimized. Schedule events in order to minimize night time use and restrict night time hours. Responsibility: • The City shall masterplan the park and mitigate redevelopment, if any. Site a Town Square Park in the area between Smith Street and Meeker Street to provide a Downtown open space for large public gatherings. Discussion: A Town Square is a traditional community gathering place. It should be large enough to hold community celebrations, performances, and ceremonies. It should be located near civic and historic places shared by the community. Environmental Impacts: No adverse environmental impacts are expected to result from this action. The Town Square will provide a safe, well-organized space for public gatherings. Mitigation Measures: None are required. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-17 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Responsibilities: • The City shall be responsible for identifying appropriate sites, working with land owners, master planning and developing the facility. Masterplan Burlington Green, Kaibara, Rosebed and other parks along the railroad to enhance open space and park facilities and strengthen connections between the Kent Transit Center and the core. Discussion: Enhance parks along the railroad to provide linkages between the station and the core. A canopy along the east side of the Burlington Northern/Yanghzou Paarks would provide a pedestrian protection, serve as o tdoe-stalls for-the madEet, and visually tie the Sister Cities Parks together. The expansion of the General Commercial (GC) Zoning District on Central Avenue parallel to these parks may have long-term impact on the attractiveness of usingthese parks. Environmental Impacts: No adverse environmental impacts are expected to result from this action. The plan should result in improved pedestrian connections. Mitigation Measures: • None are required. Responsibility: • The City shall be responsible for master planning and developing the facility improvements. • The City or, in some instances, a property owner and/or developer may be responsible for construction of the improvements. • Owners and/or developers whose buildings occupied portions of dew-fitown Downtown gateways would be responsible for incorporating building designs compatible with the gateway. Support development of a Civic and Performing Arts Center or a hotel and conference center. Discussion: Support a civic and performing arts center between Meeker-and Smith Streets- A eivie a peffefming afts center at this l-e-tion'or a hotel with facilities for conferences and other events,would be an important attraction to the downte Downtown, extending City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-18 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised-1 10804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information hours of activity into the night. It would provide a much-needed location for meetings, events, parties, catering facilities, and educational programs. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • T4e-A Civic/Performing Arts Center, or hotel and conference center may be able to use space presently providing parking—at least in the interim. • Before and after the performance hours, patrons uses will create additional traffic. • T42e-A preposed Civic and Performing Arts Center or hotel and conference center willn+ay create additional peak trips to and from the Kent Valley. • The-�Aprepesei-Civic and Performance Arts Center, or a hotel and conference center could increase in area surfaced with impervious surfaces. • The patrons attending events at the propose a Civic and Performing Arts Center and persons using the additional retail and retail service shops will increase pedestrian activity in the surrounding area. • The soil in the specific site may not support multi-story buildings on conventional foundations. Mitigation Measures: • Allow joint use of Civic and Performing Arts Center, or hotel and conference center parking for public parking. • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the adopted City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. • The developer shall provide a traffic impact study (see page VI-20?) • Construct stormwater facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V. of this plan. • If required by the building official, prior to or in conjunction with a building permit application, submit a soils report stamped by a licensed geotechnical engineer. The soils report must identify soil classification, bearing qualities and include foundation recommendations. Responsibilities: City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-19 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Tw-A Civic and Performing Arts Center, or hotel and conference center developer would be responsible for conducting the necessary studies and implementing the required mitigation. Support development of the Public Market: ReGonfigure Railroad Avenue as needed between Smith and Harroson Street to OnGlude angled parking and to lornit traffiG to one way. Discussion: The Kent Public Market has been a successful community attraction in it'-'1tS present location between Smith and Harrison Streets. variety of goods and services. The City can take several actions to support this important activity, including „ „ding glee ..,,,-king on Rail-ea n N,o,,,,o .,,,a OUtd,,,,-, e di*g b spaee ,, the Sister- Cities Pafics discussing with the Lions Club and other sponsors how to increase the viability of the Public Market. Future relocation or restructuringof f the Public Market may become necessary to meet the mixed use development goals of the City for this area. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • Development of the market will create an additional demand for parking. movements onto the proposed adjacent streets. The festr-ictian of Railroad venue to one way between Smith and Harfison Stfeets may impaet tfaffie flows and ttifflinbg movements in the aj t • The proposed market may create additional peak hour trips to and from the Kent Valley. • The patrons to the proposed market will increase pedestrian activity in the surrounding area. foundations, Mitigation Measures: *Gendtiet a pafking study to assess the amottnt of publie and pfivate par-king available • Construct street and vehicle access improvements consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards or as modified and approved by the Public Works Director. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-20 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_Vl.doc Additional Environmental Information ,The developer- shall pfovide a tfaffie impaet study (see page 1,11 20-2) • Construct storm water facilities consistent with the City of Kent Construction Standards and source control best management practices, or as revised and approved by the Public Works Director. • Construct pedestrian improvements as set forth in Section V. of this plan. *If fequir-ed by the building effieial, prior-to of in eoi�ttnetien with a building pefmit appheation, submit a soils r-epeft stamped by a Neensed geoteehnieal engineer-. The soils r-epoft must identify sei! elassifieation, bear-ing qualities and inelude foundation a ati Responsibilities: • The property owner and/or developer is responsible for required on- and off-site analysis, public facilities, and other improvements. -rt n bli WedEs D ft a. Construct pedestrian/bicycle trails from the Interurban Trail into downtew Downtown near Saar, Willis, Meeker, and James Streets. b. Ensures' t 't along the south side f james Str- of...t,en the nei4h Befdefi (playfield) site is improved, and ens that good pedestrian and bicycle routes are established when the larger- er-de Kent Station site is developed. c. Establish a pedestrianibicycle route along Kennebeck Avenue and Mill Creek north of Smith Street connecting Mill Creek Park with Kent Memorial Park, and to other segments connecting to the fail stationKent Transit Center. Urban Design Revise the Kent Zoning Code and the Downtown Design Review Handbook to address more specific design guidelines for all of the districts identified in Section V. Discussion: Design guidelines are development review criteria that address the design of the site and structures of a proposed development. Guidelines provide flexible means to incorporate community goals and policies concerning aesthetics, character and function into a development. Effective design guidelines are the most important means that the City can use to achieve the high-quality, pedestrian-friendly design character called for in the plan concept. They are also useful in increasing compatibility between different activities in mixed-use zones. It is recommended that the existing design guidelines be updated, with more specific guidelines for the different districts, to achieve the objectives defined below. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-21 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Institute or refine design guidelines for the following areas. The guidelines should address the characteristics and uses proposed for each of the following districts. Ensure that the guidelines address multifamily and mixed use buildings where appropriate. a. Historic Core: Address historic preservation, adaptive reuse, and small-scale infill to provide a mixed-use area with pedestrian and commercial emphasis. b. Central Avenue Corridor: Conduct a corridor study to serve as a basis for improvement of the Central Avenue Corridor. Include Railroad Avenue as related to the Kent Transit Center. Address design guidelines, buffers for adjacent residential neighborhood, zoning code enforcement, zoning use issues, and streetscape improvements. c. Smith Street and Fourth Avenue Corridors (North Core, North Frame, Historic Core, South Core): Attract high-quality development that adds to the streetscape and provides an excellent setting for Borden redevelopment. d. Area East and West of the Core (South Core North Frame, West Frame): Encourage small- to medium-scale mixed-use redevelopment west of Fourth Avenue and East of State Street, emphasizing residential neighborhood qualities. e. Area Between First and Fifth Avenues N. (North Frame): Buffer residential neighborhoods with fencing and landscaping. Present an attractive streetscape frontage. Prevent conversion of single-family houses to offices (require a minimum lot size f East Frame.- Revise DCE sui face parking standards in this district, with any conditional criteria to increase the number of stalls per thousand square feet of commercial zross floor area from three (3) to four-and-a half(4.5). t; West Frame• Revise DCE surLacarking standards in this district, with anv conditional criteria to increase the number of stalls per thousand square feet of commercial Qross floor area from three (3) to four-and-a half(4.5). fh.The guidelines should illustrate and describe the following details for each district: • Design intent. • The guidelines should provide graphic examples of how such uses would achieve the intent of each district. • Residential and mixed use buildings where appropriate. • The City's intent for target areas. • How development should respond of public investment including streetscape, the Kent Transit Center, parks, etc. • Historic preservation where appropriate. • Recommended additions or changes to the Pedestrian Plan Overlay. • Deviations from the general design guidelines. • Revisions for"problems" identified through prior administration of the core. Environmental Impact Evaluation: • No adverse environmental impacts are identified City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-22 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Mitigation Measures: • None are required. Responsibility: • The Planning Department is responsible for reviewing the Design Guidelines and presenting revision proposals to the City Council for adoption. Traffic Mitigation The overall transportation plans for downtown-Downtown as discussed in the Comprehensive Plan are to concentrate growth in the Urban Center and other activity centers in the City to facilitate public transportation and reduce dependency on the automobile. The City adopted as acceptable a Level of Service L� OS) SlandaM-F for automobile traffic on streets and intersections within the Urban Center boundaries which are generally consistent with the study area defined for the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The previously adopted LOS Standard used transportation analysis methods which have since become obsolete. The City is currently in the process of revising the City of Kent Concurrency Ordinance as needed to reflect current transportation analysis methods. The role of Downtown Kent as a pedestrian-oriented destination for several transportation modes (including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit) will be recognized in such analysis. Traffic impacts created by the development recommended in this plan will also impact streets and intersections around the study area. Traffic mitigating elements of the plan, such as commuter rail improved METROMetr-e transit circulation, improved pedestrian and bicycle and pedest,-i connections, and housing development close to jobs will serve to help mitigate the probable adverse environmental impacts in and near the dewntewnDowntown. The City's Level of Setwiee (LOS) standard allows development without,regard to 4 impaets until the aver-age velti it), (v/e) ratio downtown r-eaebes 1.0 (LOS F). if the N,/e ratio in 2010 exeeeds 1.0 v.,44A-ut.the proposed plan aetions, these aeti- mitigation (an additional travel lane, for- e�iafnple) would be separate ffepa the site speeifie aeeess, safety and street design improvements r-equifed under- SEPA. it eetild, depending on the spatial extent ef the tr-affie impaets, be r-eqttifed for-any of the d tewn t do used to ,to the avefage In fatie. 0.90 (T OS D/E) m4th two inters eefiens exhibit;,,g vie ranes rrfe to f 4.an 1.0 (( 1/7 a 201 0 t ff` and th 1. de me tce�it� c�-isn� e�2t��6��—��cv-r��rarrrc-volumes ... ....... .....,.:b.. ...,......,.... 0 genattributable-te through trips these trips fef which both ends the origin and the destination are etitside downtown Kent). The gfem4h in thfaugh trips Will be ME)st. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-23 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information evident on jaffies Stfeet and Central Avenue, due to trips between the Valley DOE) industrial area and the East Hill/Kent Kangley afea. Willis Stfeet is alse for-eeasted to high oi4t E4 tl ig trip <,tl,YY^Y Unless the adverse impacts of this growth in overall traffic can be mitigated, the City's level-of-service (LOS)thresholds will be exceeded, and more severe congestion and delay will result. Possible mitigation measures' could include-widening for the creation of additional turning lanes along�4t" Avenue South Smith Street, James Street, and Central Avenue at 1 inter-seetions along Willis Street. It could also include improvements to promote transit use (such as park-and-ride lots in the East Hill residential area, increased transit service and incentive programs for Valley Floor vftUey floor-employers). The mitigation process is as follows: The developer eitherslal provides a detailed traffic impact study TIS to identify both existing and future adverseal}traffic impacts upon the City of Kent street and road network,,including street capacity, traffic queues, and traffic signal levels-of-service (LOS),and then constructs those mitigation measures listed in the approved TIS as a condition of development or; in lieu of conducting the above-described TIS and subsequently constructing or implementing the respective mitigation measures identified in that TIS the developer may instead agree to pay Environmental Mitigation Fees (EMF) toward the City's cost of constructing the City's South 272"d Street/South 277t" Street Corridor Project. The final benefit will be determined using $1 068 (in 1986 U.S. Dollars and adjusted for inflation and rezones) for each new PM peak hour trip generated by the developmentan t,-affie signal system eaused by the pr-oposed development. The study shall identify all inter-seetions at lev sei `E " o "F" due t d tr-affie wort esure-de v'elepment. The study shall then identify what impr-evements are neeessaf-y to mitigate the development impaets thereen. Upon agreement by the City with the findings of the s4t* and isur-es outlined in the study, implementation an&E)r- eanstfuetion of sai mitigation measur-es shall be the eenditional r-equifement of the issuanee for-the respar-mits. in liett of n ui u implementing D study, f inflation.and— pay a fair- share of-, the eonstndetion eests of the City's Settth-22-77-12'��-&tfee�� Pr-ejeet. The final benefit value will be detefmined in 1986 dellafs, adjusted for C. Monitoring System The monitoring system is intended to identify and monitor system capacities for elements of the built environment, and to the extent appropriate, the natural environment. The City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-24 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information system will monitor the consequences of growth as it occurs within the downtown Downtown area, and provides ongoing data to update the plan and environmental analysis. Some systems can be monitored by the City with readily available data. Impacts to other systems require detailed analysis that is typically undertaken by development proponents. The following chart lists the systems, the factors to be monitored and the responsibility for providing information to update the monitoring program. Component Unit Baseline Response Land Use Building Permits Number of Permits Housing Dwelling Units Multifamily Single Family Retail Square Feet Office Square Feet Service Square Feet Density Avg. FAR Vacant/Underdeveloped Acres Land Transportation Intersections (per Peak Hour LOS intersection or avg..) Parking Total Spaces Occupancy Bus Ridership Commuter Rail #of AM/PM Trains Ridership Public Facilities Stormwater Impervious Surface Detention Facility Capacity Sewer Gallons/day/customer Water Gallons/day/customer Parks Acres/1,000 • Active population • Passive The City should evaluate the above impacts every three years on a predetermined date. Based on the evaluation, the City should update the Downtown Strategic Action Plan and the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to ensure that planned actions and mitigating measures are adequate to realistically address the impacts of growth and change. Incorporate public participation into the evaluation and update process. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-25 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Appendices A. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSES 1997-1998 The City received twenty-one written comments from nineteen correspondents during the public comment period for the Draft Supplemental Environmental impact statement in early 1997. The City published the comments and responses in the Preliminary Final Environmental Impact Statement. The following is a brief summary of the comments. The proposal to revise the Comprehensive Plan and rezone the property approximately three parcels deep north of James Street between fourth Avenue and the Burlington Northern/ Sante Fe railroad right-of-way to allow limited office use with a mixed use overlay for office and multifamily housing received a number of comments. The major concern was the loss of the single family homes located within the proposal area, and the impacts the office/multifamily use would have upon the North Park neighborhood generally. Owners of the property directly adjacent to James Street sent letters in favor of the rezone proposal. The response to the neighborhood impact issue noted that the mitigation was proposed in the form of cul-de-sac streets to block office traffic through the adjacent neighborhood, and that expansion of the office area was not anticipated. On June 2, 1997, the Land Use and Planning Board voted to recommend revise the plan to eliminate the proposal in response to public comments. A question regarding the boundaries of the proposed Comprehensive Plan revision and rezone of property between Fourth and Fifth Avenues north of James Street received a response explaining the proposed boundaries. After further analysis, the boundaries have since been moved north in response to comments. Comments were received regarding a Smith Street Underpass of State Highway 167. The option was taken under consideration. The cost of such a measure was questioned in another comment letter. The proposal was not included in the proposed plan after analysis. The performing Performing Arts/Civic Center was discussed. One writer inquired about the possible donation of a portion of the municipal parking lot for this use. The response was that the details of the proposed project were beyond the scope of this study and that City Departments could provide details as the project develops beyond the conceptual stage. Several urban design suggestions were noted. One suggestion was to extend the downtown.Downtown gateway project beyond the plan boundaries. Another was to provide for space at the corners of blocks for people to gather. Another was to make sure that awnings are provided on new and refurbished buildings. A trellis structure similar to the trellis on First Avenue was suggested for Fourth Avenue. Several comments City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-26 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information concerned additional pedestrian improvements throughout the downtown DOwntOwn core. The comments were noted and awnings, open corners, and pedestrian improvements are elements of the plan. The gateway project does not include locations outside the core, but the City will consider the suggested locations as separate projects. Preservation of historic downtown Downtown properties was a concern. The plan recommends to resume the historic properties analysis and preservation process conducted in the early 1990's and institute regulations and incentives for restoration and preservation. Several comments were received regarding traffic congestion, and the writer was referred to traffic analysis contained in the Preliminary Final SEIS. Additional traffic analysis has since been provided by the Regional Transit Authority's (Sound Transit) Environmental Analysis of the proposed Commuter Rail Station (Kent Transit Center), and the analysis of commuter rail traffic included in this document. Several comments expressed approval of Plan alternative 2, and the south commuter rail station location. The response was that the analysis of locations favored the north site because access and circulation was more problematic for the south site. Since that time, after numerous comments were received at public hearings, the south site was incorporated in the plan. Other commuter rail concerns included noise and vibration impacts, parking, circulation. The response noted that beyond the information offered in the Preliminary Final EIS, the RTA will be required to perform these evaluations for station improvements. One correspondent requested public restrooms. Restrooms and telephones are not included in the plan. A request for additional detail regarding the proposed James Street Underpass at the Burlington Northern/Sante Fe railroad was noted. A conceptual diagram of the underpass was provided in the Preliminary FSEIS, a preliminary cost estimate has been provided. The response stated that the Washington State Department of Transportation and/or the City will perform detailed evaluations before underpass construction. Several comments were received regarding costs of proposed projects. The response noted that costs estimates at the level of detail requested were not available at that time. Preliminary cost estimates for major proposals in the plan are included in this document. Questions and comments regarding the SEPA process, notice procedures, public participation, capital facilities information, and sources of information were answered. Written Comments were received from the following participants: Pamela Newcomer February 5, 1997 Perry Woodford February 5, 1997 City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-27 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Joseph Kolodziejczak February 5, 1997 Val Batey, Regional Transit Authority February 7, 1997 Paul Hammerschmidt February 28, 1997 Washington State Department of Community, Trade & Economic Development Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation February 26, 1997 Tom V. Harmer February 26, 1997 Mr. Gregory Griffith February 27, 1997 Carol McPherson, Kent Arts Commission February 27, 1997 Gary Kriedt, King County Metro Transit Division March 4, 1997 Doug Johnson, King County Metro Transit Division March 4, 1997 Howard H. Montoure March 6, 1997 Robert Whalen March 5, 1997 Dee Moschel March 6, 1997 Pat Curran, Kent Downtown Partnership March 4, 1997 Don B. Shaffer March 4, 1997 March 31, 1997 Ms. Carol Schwindt March 5, 1997 Mr. Melvin L. Kleweno, Jr. March 12, 1997 Robert A. Stevens March 5, 1997 B. Glossary Commuter Rail Station (Kent Transit Center): ^ station aii The facilities for boarding and alighting passengers on a-the commuter rail line, which operates along City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-28 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information existing Burlington Northern-Sante Fefreight railroad tracks between Smith and James Streets. Also referred to as "G Rail R Bus c+^+i^^Kent Transit Center" to reflect the eonnee4enshift of service routes anticipated when King County METRO-I4i4s express b sei=viee to the Co *er Rail Station sells the Lincoln Park & Ride Lot for redevelopment.. Developer: An individual or business entity which buys real estate and prepares it for resale at a profit. Preparation generally includes assembling or subdividing parcels, obtaining permits and clearances, constructing utilities and streets and, in some cases, constructing buildings. Economic Market Study: A study of the market demand for services, goods or housing within a particular area, and the extent to which that market demand is already being satisfied. For example, a major developer might want to know if the current market demand for multiple family housing is great enough to justify a project; or if a proposed new shopping center would generate enough sales for tenants. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): A document which analyzes the significant environmental impacts of a particular action or proposal, possible alternatives to that action and mitigation measures for those impacts analyzed. ESHB 1724: A Washington State law that requires local jurisdictions to consolidate their local permit review and hearing processes and better integrate environmental regulations with the Growth Management Act. This 1996 law also mandates faster decision making by requiring local jurisdictions to implement a 120-day permit processing period for all land use and building permits. Facilities: Capital improvements. Often, but not always, the term implies capital improvements which are ancillary to or supportive of the main purposes of an overall project. For example, "The recreational facilities for this action includes a playground, tennis court, swimming pool and community center." Floor Area Ration (FAR): A measure of development density expressed as the amount of building floor area divided by the total development site area or parcel. Grade Separated: Rights-of-way that are separated from general purpose rights-of-way by a level change, often on an elevated structure or in an underpass. Growth Management Act (GMA): A 1990 Washington State law that mandates managing population and employment growth through comprehensive plans, regionally coordinated plan implementation and creation of urban growth areas. Impacts: The effects or consequences of actions. Environmental impacts are effects upon the elements of the environment listed by SEPA. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-29 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information Joint Development: Projects financed and developed jointly be public agencies and private developers. Local Improvement District (LID): A special district in which a tax is assessed to pay for a specific public improvement, such as a new road. Mitigation: Actions which avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, compensate or correct otherwise probable significant adverse environmental impacts. Mixed Uses: Any combination of activities which mix residential, offices, shops and other related uses. Mixed uses exist in concentrated centers and increase activity and density. Mixed uses can be single activities in their own buildings but clustered within walking distance; or buildings containing two or more activities, as in office space located above retail shops. Pedestrian-friendly: Designed to accommodate pedestrians' (and sometimes cyclists') priorities of safety, minimized walking distance, comfort and pleasant surroundings. Planned Action: One or more types of project action(s)that: 1) are designated planned actions by an ordinance or resolution adopted by a city; 2) have had the significant environmental impacts adequately addressed in an EIS prepared in conjunction with a comprehensive plan or subarea plan; 3) are subsequent or implementing projects for a comprehensive or subarea plan; 4) are not essential public facilities; or 5) are consistent with a comprehensive plan. Programmatic EIS: The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a"program," consisting of a policy plan for many inter-related projects. Under Washington's State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), an EIS must be prepared for significant public programs or policy documents, as well as for individual development projects. Sound Transit (formerly "Regional Transit Authority (RTAQ: In the Puget Sound region, the agency responsible for planning, building and operating the regional transit system. The system includes, regional bus service, high occupancy vehicles (HOV) lanes and access, light rail transit and commuter rail. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA): Chapter 43.21 C of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW)—the general policies and regulations intended to help lead agencies and citizens make better environmental decisions. Station Area: An area with an approximately '/4 mile radius around a een+mtAer4 mid rail�the Kent Transit Center containing transit-related activities and designed to accommodate large numbers of people. Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS): Preparation of a SEIS is appropriate when a proposal is substantially similar to one covered in an existing EIS. New information indicating a proposal's probable, significant, adverse environmental City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-30 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Additional Environmental Information impacts may be provided in an SEIS. The SEIS should not include analysis of actions, alternatives or impacts that is in the previously prepared EIS. City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan VI-31 P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\DSAP Revised_110804\Revised DSAP_VI.doc Contents ATTACHMENT B List of Figures LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 8, 2004 FIGURE 1-1: THE PROCESS USED TO PREPARE THE KENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGICACTION PLAN.........................................................................I� FIGURE 11-2 DOWNTOWN KENT 20 YEAR VISION...................................I..................... II- FIGURE 111-1: THE MARKET AREA FOR DOWNTOWN KENT............... ............................... III- FIGURE III-2: CHALLENGES FACING DOWNTOWN KENT.............................:.................... III- FIGURE III-3: THE STRATEGIC REDEVELOPMENT CONCEPT. .......................................... III- FIGURE IVA: ACTIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE KENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN.......................................................................IV- FIGURE IV-2: PHASING OF KENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ................. .........IV- FIGURE IV-3 PRELIMINARY CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES.................................................. IV, FIGURE IV-4 RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ...............................IV- FIGURE IV-5 RECOMMENDED PUBLIC FACILITIES............:..........................................IV FIGURE IV-6 LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................IV. FIGURE V-1: THE KENT DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS. ............................................................V. FIGURE V-2: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE NORTH FRAME DISTRICT. ...........................V. FIGURE V-3: THE SUGGESTED CONCEPT FOR FOURTH AVENUE AND .LAMES STREET.......................................................................................V- FIGURE V-4: THE TYPE OF OFFICEIRESIDENTIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ENVISIONED FOR THE N. FOURTH/FIFTH AVENUETARGET AREA............................................................................V- FIGURE V-5 NORTH FRAME DISTRICT 20 YEAR VISION................................................V- FIGURE V-6: CENTRAL AVENUE CORRIDOR AND WEST FRAME DISTRICTS. ............................................................................................V-! FIGUREV-7: DESIGN ISSUES THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT SHOULD ADDRESS IN THE CENTRAL AVENUE DISTRICT IV-....................................V-1' FIGURE V-8: DESIGN ISSUES THAT.EXISTING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CENTRAL AVENUE DISTRICT SHOULD ADDRESS...:...........:.......................V- FIGURE V-9: CENTRAL AVENUE AS IT EXISTS TODAY...................................................V- FIGURE V-10: HOW CENTRAL AVENUE COULD LOOK. .................... FIGURE V-11 CENTRAL AVENUE CORRIDOR 20 YEAR VISION........................................V- FIGURE V-12: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE EAST FRAME DISTRICT...............................V-' FIGURE V=13 EAST FRAME DISTRICT 20 YEAR VISION.................................................V FIGURE V-14 VIEW ON WILLIS STREET NEAR UNION PACIFIC RR TRACKS.........................V FIGURE V-15 PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE WEST FRAME DISTRICT.............................V ; Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 9633RPT5DOC4/7/98 Contents FIGURE V-16 WEST FRAME 20 YEAR VISION.....:.........................................................V FIGURE V-17: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE SOUTH CORE DISTRICT. ...........................V FIGURE V-18: ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS APPROPRIATE IN THE SOUTH FRAMEDISTRICT. ..................................................................................V- FIGI„IRE V-1 Q: HOW LANDSCAPING CAN DEFINE OPEN SPACE AND ADD TEXTURETO A BUILDING. .............. ........V................................................. FIGUREV-20 SOUTH CORE DISTRICT 20 YEAR VISION.. ...............................................V. FIGURE V-21: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE NORTH CORE DISTRICT......................;.....V. FIGURE V-22: EXISTING CONDITIONS ALONG RAILROAD AVENUE....................................V- FIGURE V-23: A CANOPY ALONG THE INTERNATIONAL PARKS.......................................V l FIGUREV-24: AN "ALL CROSS" OR"SCRAMBLE" INTERSECTION AT- FOURTH AND SMITH STREETS.................................................................V- FIGURE V-25: PROPOSED PERFORMING ARTS/CIVIC CENTER.......................................V- FIGURE V-26: THE PROPOSED KENT PUBLIC MARKET BUILDING, COURTESY OF THE KENT DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP...............................V- FIGURE V-27 NORTH CORE DISTRICT........................................................................V- FIGURE V-28: PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF THE HISTORIC CORE DISTRICT....................... V FIGURE V-30: FACADE AND INFILL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS.......................................V- FIGURE V-31 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR COMMUTER RAIIL STATION :.............................V FIGURE v-32 HISTORIC CORE DISTRICT 20 YEAR VISION...................................V- Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 9633RPT5DOC4/7/98 ATTACHMENT C LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 8, 2004 14 l s L12 qlilt s v to Nt- b S: r - - - y 6 W i 4'4 0,n 1 1 n x 4�4 �r�s11F;4,A L1e1d v7,r]�S Yad 6 Vision Masterplanned park and access -•Fourth Avenue,with gateways. Grade-separated railroad improvements enhance the serves as the downtown's crossing prevents increased rail Commons and Commons Park signature avenue,linking civic service from cnoKrng east-west ��� 9 as important downtown / and commeroial activities. traffic. attractions.—% Umrtec office and mixed-use The new RTA commuter rail and I development protects single Mixed-use i family residences from arterial bus station makes downtown development street impacts. Traffic calming Kent a regional transit hub and improvements.and / - measures prevent through accentuates the town's identity. the Kent Performing /-�':: traffic Arts Center link the ^L1 - oo Crdinated commercial RTA station and c ' c redevelopment,gateways.and RJG'Commons street improvements give the area with the I p� , �I C DGF = _?' Central Avenue comdor a more i attractive Character and greater historic core—j I= ? economic viability. h'� F ~ I I v,I.2 :rl:•OIl ..I III r:::a:D� 1 1. = i''—' `•� �= I �i� �_ ° _ WD,Io t 11 ty� .GINIDI J �:� 7 •Or—� �f x�w�Baa:B3, ur uB� uoml�- t7 .,..raBr,Mee�•'�•"� �,r � ill --' li j -�_� —� :vu: � aJ� .�--. -_��•``.,,�� .�, �. sir+� _ + '- - -•� qr do=AL '/ ! i f7v ��'��z� I _ :!I.�:� •---'al I. C• :��5�+!I' lip 'r't4r-irnr- iti _FFII ti " ''d I A '� ate' -infill housing with pedestrian El links to the core strengthens IC- the area east of Central ' 1 r I c If �D°' Avenue. Public Market and Sister Cities Parks strengthen Railroad Avenue as a local business district and conned the RTA station with the historic core. t Mixed-use residential development south of the core -Quality infill development creates an in-town reinforces the historic core's neighborhood and supports core architectural character and businesses. pedestrian orientation. Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan Vision 0' s�oa• 400 North? This graphic is a visualization of types of commercial•office,and residential infill and redevelopment as they could conceptually develop during the twenty year span of the Draft 5/30/97 Plan. It is intended as a visual aid for discussion purposes. It does not represent specific development plans for any particular property. Figure 11-2 Downtown Kent 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 11-4 9633RPT5.DOC.4/7/98 '.i 7 -- r Y � 1 i 4 • F 1 AN fir'�• 1". I Me 1��..`�.�,� L k.t 1-6 1l�il IN —I NO `�/ P�' Ar ," �24` Cl• ' ya71r�-.-i`"1 `TJ IS 4-4 IN LI einIA '1-ti�- .cr — IF �� Irk•�j Fr 1-Af ■� a' {cy'ALIN y T Planning Concept feasibility of raising the necessary funds through grants and private contributions. I. The result of that study will affect whether the proposal will be pursued in the immediate future. MAJAC Do n n K . i r J. 'el MIfI� _ L � -al 4 8 + — Figure //1-1: Market area for downtown Kent. — Market Rate Residential One-third of the residential capacity for the City is in the downtown area. In order for the downtown to approach this capacity over the next 20 years there must be successful projects that can demonstrate to the development community that there is demand for market rate housing. The best opportunities are single-use residential '. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan III-2 9633RPT5DOC-4 r7/98 Planning Concept II Underdeveloped and Barriers and poor i connections separate unsightly poor ression of imp areas present downtown activities. downtown. f� I I �i � go .iI1G) I :r, o �80 � � I a '�/ t!��l if,��gl;p ..'1��0 1, Qr 1I ! '1 ..�7%•=.;-,it I I )'/ /� I 1 I II'lu ndl•_„ F1 .ny'S$i 'a ���t .I wC---,I.W 1 I II I I / .1 I" - -- P, " 01 ►' I:o'� n,to i I � p :I II Ig!4 I I��I��' ��,1l=rl �I n�Ib� I f• a- /.•' , �yy l u . * . Gr�I j�rnl �o C. ,. �I L'oll Utlra OI�IL•�I r'/l q a U,Illli; r— 6II aldid°q � _. 1 W4 _ •GI �� � � n I o q a � ii:Ilol ni LIB. , Q rul II It_ _�•1 IIAI I U,o 'Q'%�� o c:'l a Qi p bi'i I Q� lo- oIla 1 � ��u�I. a4 � H •,r-• o � �� �I 4 Legend.- Key commercial buildings ••••.Improved streeiscapes ®Parks and open space -Important public anractlons Figurelll-2: Challenges facing downtown Kent. III-5 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 9633RPTSDOC-4 nt98 Planning Concept UO ; ✓ I�4 Ili �---•y�- I i ' • ,/ i 1 •I t� _��.1. 1� :. ,7— oiljmy ,-..; I ' r' ; fir ll� e Jt• Ai -•— } 111111C���,��a_.777 yx-r=%r_... - _ •� El.hCO'�l: ll: y_--~—.1'I. .qg• i _ !I r' 4th &5th — — I -���` Avenues I I o ;JIB 9 III �a•�-� :o - f'�„''o'�- '� ry, . North _� { 5 I❑ �'l''1 -- ;D oa.: James Street i '�"��°�, f� , ,° Z.. —� III:Il:j� �l G `��•�•• ...-- .cam, _ - _ ��nF:r-,. 1 g Ir �1�C a��'-6 Q 1, central El.a `- Avenue =_= 1 1 El.t) ( �z Smith Street , Corridor o i South of — ---� Borden Site i oo, �.' -- o Site rcp :: Borden Ln� r — Fourth 1 �. Avenue 00 - Al 77 i" J. nc;!. - Historic p11 c -_ -- Streets . n I- p• -_ �J In Core ;� l.J�o .'� I >A� -._'�— —_ — - _ :-"��:[ar.7-.--t•" C i��1}�p a.�.— ! 6 C"�C - c E1.e Southern I "( _,�_-'�4 r e'! Core _ t � � South -a - -- `.Railroad Corridor izry Gil -• r W w .1 i H e- 1� n-° al i 0"�. a •1 '( --i i ' i Eff Figure 111-3: The strategic redevelopment concept. 111-7 Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan 9633RPT500C-4 r7198 Summary of Recommended Actions Master Plan and Upgrade I �/I i'o u i,� I �J -- r U l Commons Park Institute Design Guidelines Parking&access For Residential and Office Areas • Drainage ,I *Achieve high quality- smaller scale development da I i Rezone To Allow ° Office With Mixed — pyi� 'i Plan For Future Of Borden Site � ,�_ ,�$P I, I; 1. `I ( - !r *Create high quality Use Overlay ' rClou y Stree III` I' er development nearby i t7nonD • p �t alp •Retain street access �. �L •Institute design guidelines " Pedestrian o 1� +¢ 1► �, I� 's— All Cross .l� j } , "rpossible Rail Grade Separation Intersection i ..lames Streeter� �� � l r • '� Focus High Quality �� Development North of Smith l y— Streetscape improvements ��,� *Guidelines to make Existing I J i■ ' I i 4 ._ compatible with Borden site Park& Ride `-rU _ pi C R.J.C. � — - e _� Potential 1' \ 16°' b' r Improve Parks Civic Square 'l '• //r - y i��'` � 11—To Provide Key II N' I r North/South �—CM Connection IEF / t Smith Street s.. ��• f--,- —_:fit Encourage -• t, , 1 e ib, r6,r Create a Trail Mixed-us Development 1 L ___ I I► a►,i ; 19!_ long Mill Creek, _Linking Mill Creek a —�— TTb Meeker Street 1 �- ° a Park w/Kent I a Memorial Park upport Market _ II I } N i I �`, �' � �� _ � •eo•. Refine Design - Titus Street_ y. ' Access .�jl:" o, _ Guidelines To Build Road l I q �e� i '- "-" - QualityResidential � __w ff i a to ;' I v� a ,� q Neighborhoods hborhoods And J'SaarStreet Ensure Compatibility Willis Street a' I' ii ° With Commercial Improve & Public Uses Bike/Ped.Links To a .n_,; cp.�lr o iieaap� ueoo is l' 'CO�§'' Downtown From ��'� Interurban Trail o t r o Il, n� • 1� °� 1. ;. - I Central Avenue Design Guidelines Commute Streetscape Improvements To Encourage Infill Rail Station Refine Design Guidelines Redevelopment w/Parking Structure With Residential To Upgrade Componment Commercial Corridor Legend: Enhance 4th Ave. ©Public Facilities Redevelopment ■ Street Corridor r Improvements Opportunities—�Special Districts �--r Core Area L__J with Design Guideline i I ��� Bike/Ped. Links Design Guidelines Parks/Open Space Gateways I I To Encourage Mixed-use I-- Transit Station Infill And Reinforce Historic Character Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Summary of Recommended Actions Figure 1V-1:Actions recommended by the Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan are summarized above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-4 -9633RPT5 DOC-1+n/98 Summary of Recommended Actions RECOMMENDATION YEARS 0-2 2-5 5-10 10-20 TimMg Issues A. LAND USE A 1. Redesignate SF-8 area between Fourth . and City to revise zoning. Fifth Avenues N. to limited office/mixed use residential 0 1 nalammm A2. Prepare for Borden site master plan proposal A3. Promote infill housing As needed to promote at least I500 units. A4. Encourage mixed-use development As needed. A5. Study impacts of pawn shops,bail bond offices, and tattoo parlors B. TRANSPORTATION B l. Develop commuter rail station RTA working with Cityjor timely service B2. Construct street improvements a. Fourth Avenue b. Second Avenue Triggered by site development. c. Smith Street Linked to rail station connections. d. Central Avenue High priority. e. Saar Street Triggered by private development f. Meeker Street High priority o Seventh Avenue Property owner initiated. a B3. Plan for underpass at James and Willis Determined by Regional Fast Streets/BN&SF tracks Corridor project. B4. Install pedestrian "all cross"at Fourth and Links RJC to core. Smith B5. Adopt street tree standards , C. PUBLIC FACILITIES C 1. Upgrade downtown parks a. Locate a Town Square b. Enhance parks along railroad Could be incremental effort. c. Masterplan Commons Park - High priority. d. Develop street tree plan `x _ C2. Enhance Gateways a. Fourth and James b. Fourth and Smith c. Fourth and Meeker Supports rail station d. Fourth and Willis e. Fourth and Meeker e. Central and Meeker f. Central and Smith C3. Add public buildings a. Performins Arts Center b. Public Market c. Rail station structure C4. Provide trails and Paths Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-6 -9633RPT5D0C-n/98 Summary of Recommended Actions RECOMMENDATION YEARS 0-2 2-5 5-10 10-20 Timing Issues a. Links from Interurban Trail b. Path along James Street c. Mill Creek/Kennebeck C5. Incorporate public art _.: ._. _ � 101 Continuous effort. D. DESIGN GUIDELINES D1. Refine design guidelines a. Historic Core District b. Central Avenue Corridor District c. Smith and Fourth corridor d. East and west of core e. North James corridor E. TARGET AREAS El. Explore redevelopment opportunities a. Obtain Smith Street right-of-way b. Work with property owner on Borden site Triggered by private development. c. Fourth Avenue d. Central core historic streets Ongoing effort with KDP. e. South Core District Begin residential development incentives. f. Eastern core g. Central Avenue Corridor District Figure 1V--2: Phasing of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan recommendations. • Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-7 -9633RPT5DOC-4/7M Summary of Recommended Actions Recommendation Cost Suggested Funding A. TRANSPORTATION A 1. Develop a commuter rail system. $6,600,000. Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority,Sound Transit A2. Street Improvements* a. Fourth Avenue $1,172,578. City,federal grants,developers b. Second Avenue $883,256. City,federal grants,developers c. Smith Street $1,525,461. City,federal grants,developers d. Central Avenue Undetermined City,federal grants,developers e. Saar Street $1,110,684. City,federal grants,developers f. Meeker&Gowe Streets E.of First $565,597. City, federal grants,developers g. Extend Seventh Avenue S. (Naden Avenue)north of Willis Undetermined Developer h. Install historic street lights $166,523.(Meeker St Example) City,merchants,property owners A3. RR Underpass of Willis&James Street $13,000,000. for each underpass State, Federal,City A4. Install pedestrian "all cross"at Fourth $103,000. City Avenue and Smith Street B. PUBLIC FACILITIES B 1. Upgrade downtown parks a. Town Square Park $720,160 City,state grant b. Enhance railroad parks $216,300. City,state grant c. Master Plan Borden Park $40,000 d. Develop Street TreeNeg. Plan $35,000 B2. Enhance Gateways $824,000. City a. Fourth Avenue and James Street b. Fourth Avenue and Smith Street c. Fourth Avenue and Meeker Street d. Fourth Avenue and Willis Street e. Central Avenue and Smith Street f. Central Avenue and Meeker Street B3. Three new public buildings a. Civic and Performing Arts Center $13,800,000. Public voted bonds,donations b. Public Market $640,00. Private/public partnership c. Commuter Rail Station Structure Undetermined Federal,state,RTA,city B4. Trails and pathways Undetermined State,federal grants,city a. East/West links—Interurban Trail b. South side of James Street trail c. Pedestrian/bicycle route from Mill Creek to Kent Memorial Park d. Green River Trail to Commuter Rail Station—Central or First B5. Public Art Undetermined City,annually funded program, donations,grants Figure IV-3 Preliminary Capital Cost Estimate Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-9 -9633RPT5D0C-n/98 Summary of Recommended Actions - - --- j o-'► � o�i!q ._ Qa:k ---� B4 Plan For Underpass ! � �' � -- Ism, -ila� I• F ! IL IM j B2.a :._. J 1~i� !I°mil P' r, B2.b � —..__. _ = _ . 29 o B2.0 1.7 / l; —�� it 1► . -:�no�i o��ua , r B5 - Install o� Pedestrian Friendly R a .!. Crosswalk System ° B2.f "All Cross" or un r Q '. ;�_ .Scramble" �_e .,a:.r..,, ,. , !i . a Ed --- L (� OF ■ � - �: �1 I€ �`—'! {I I �o_—� ! •ai.si -k. ,ice air O1'-R 0 _o Xrris �1: •,�: � "'"' ;-�L i -yam •1__ •I• �:.'J'-:.._f v °}r Ii 1� y _r` !�1 `\\'\•;'� �•n �t. C� I! IC''—�GI! Ufl '!�'I I•�—�1�[ • —��'�� ` 1,4 _ ��■�rIt it "7703U-J! a R. I1711 rig :- /�� OcMr 'i` ''•'.:I I - � a �'nn D..— 'R��I;n�o �!�`D lf�, ' �iTSr-"'If. :.a 1�: � :Z Legend: B 2.9 ' •■ Street n•I Streetscape ' •■= Improvements ........i Improvements Pedestrian"All Cross" i 1 Intersection Gateways B2.e CPossible Underpass ,'Transit Station Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Transportation Improvements Figure IV-4 Recommended Transportation Improvements Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-10 -9633RPTSDoc 4n/98 Summary of Recommended Actions j Focus Support f -1 Upgrade special Improvements iproposed public . districts and on connecting facilities to add LJ target areas with downtown c wide-spectrum redevelopment attractions. : of activity. opportunities r=1 I(c(j!l I cl "' I i..i r l—� Il ;; L--I ,ram I _I / II lil'I,u` CI SI�•�� I i j i .1 ! �, I r III I � ff��tt I � Ij:`�I!!I�:� � I1'o' .iNM�a1 Q�. � I � fl;�• � •' ;i L+�I ! �� ..�� •"���.�` 'r'Ilfllp It hi,'. Sn 9I IjpLjli �� � f1 ! � I 1❑ ��,•,•h1 'r'"-' I,�,pJ� c �•�,� to pni I k rC^ , (lI i i 'ra1InlIIQd' 51I INa i ., .' �:,7 / ry. ° �,I A -,a;'•1•_i � I tl I �p �II :I�al��-ll4l •�� I tl..I ` L _..-if. tn o I 1 i t7 a c I I f IIV I �i 1i i•I •� _ — •nk, II irJl ntlO I I '° ' jnb Qli„r I _ :fC7, . Tri, 9 1 I I i IL 4 1 1- :' 1, CIL =F�7!I IMP.17,001 1 �O M. 1'b ,tlI c fit I ( 1. r;_ III �. •� o.t�A � \.� lu�La I �1�I�I��1 ��j•; � I It1 I it..gl�,,al�,`rM,�S:c�.:t;�o :�'.'• `I �I' ' n Jr�I�Ilc,l + �, o ��Il hl_`�Illld-f-fin �Cl ', --[iUdlb �aln'Hoicq a��pnl ► i� � �•r1 Legend., Key commercial buildings •••..Improved streetscapes ®Parks and open space —Imponanl public atirac:ions Figure IV-5 Recommended Public Facilities Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-11 -9633RPT3DOC-4n/98 Summary of Recommended Actions iul 00 1 I DoP,�]' S I'_--�.r I, , Ir7-0!I� CI 1;'1 �' i 1J__�.' wo,LU1r:r ',' i! A.1 Redesignate I oy' I�,zc; To Allow Mixed-Use o:o '' And Multi-Family t _ a ,!`II• r l _- Residential Uses it • hn= �. lit -.��....-� _ _—_ �}U. Oi ; i- 113 iE I;,.�"'. �. ,.low re tilt p ,.t! 0 - 9 ,--^ r fi j: I ;��� � 1 Ilia ID d 1 1 0 ,_ 441 up } �i i •�`: O � .I�'—;''', `,. •�? i ��?•.J.Q..'': �U IU` �tiE: � '� A.3 Encourage O = I j ; j; ; �f[' - Masterplanned � Mixed- Use Redevelopment -_ �-1 °' 'I� r ,� ' '�qe 71 L .'Ei' if _ .•. •f'f,I ����—c - � i_O �''--`�+� � ".L.,1I_ '1a1 ,� ; ;+--i.'�`,� � w� �,y���.�Sc�4 - j_ QOff.+t. '•.�411 U' - ��: �I e. S I �j• IT__1 :r—r '��_[,�"�� c i�+�(�➢':dr"; _-i a p'. III `1 I I�,I ❑,A I ;--, � �r�� .•�;�_ .—��i I f,I a'; d�7J• :ci f! �a!���-�rj�i •°' a}� `i� '�ai� I��)'' •��q,4 - �Or➢.�-••.- �.G?�- �Io f. I Ir rv!� ++� h I„ , u!t '�s :it--•yip v.%''tP-�.��CclL.I^ J, �`� .-�� j. ��Ll [ .oZl+� p j •r1 Qa 4 •+ ;-"__,:. D Pjk�•i,�• ;� iC iJ� .�'r--r_ —_�L—, �:\•��'_o°,-r�I Q pa�;� i;�G�!��__A`-�;--�;— :r;��� f t I� 1 C— o rt""'a {�.�'o�,➢.�aA �10 t: o°.,4V,,'_..� i U Ali I� '• .�a_�`� 1�:I /I 1--- � I ts��`���i?�'„9.,r^b�'➢0���1 .i�pa,i' q�' r � '' t y� 1 fM Mt 7M► M •,�+ - 'I)�{! ;a-�•.+O-_'�,I:G7.i0-i�.L_�! �� �;Cat I �� �� .�, Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Land Use Recomendations Figure IV-6 Land Use Recommendations Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan IV-12 -9633R.MDoc-4n/98 Kent Downtown Districts L Ina." bl At �it!•Q t :�•-+--t J i ..'.:M `v ,� {� I 1 _ 0 0 North Frame`'►'�� ���� ��9 1` 'aa i �I �.a�_I �r.l -I�' •� +1 (It !If�'l� �1 ��QQ �+.�� �+''��, 7 !.k-T�II �� �.IJ -[�]j'�t' •�� Ec it Central I a Avenue IRS Corridor j I j t � `•(, _ I ! ci3 tip d ' - _ North Core ' ; ,� a r—:P' A.8-2 VIP ;F ' I ,' West ' � _; 0i— - i 1 .�L —_:( East _! Frame 4 ;�: I —� Frame ;- _ a "a Ca' Li I ' I — '',cam•` ! p , . Historic Core jJf '! ' ••� a, f .,•�L !South C�wJ��I��- ! `�r -. r�"•','`O;'��'i:`bp G�.ti..' '.Cb p V � p!i or 9 n � ;. s- _ e�f `i. � .� iq4 'l :!• �,p_.. 4:t� .1 �fe;l;;a _! — - - 77! _-� _ Or- 1 , a a ,+ } I a =:' ���1�-�C�•-'i(.Q i�?i :4..,�Ir ; �o- 6„ I , i T Figure V-is The Kent downtown districts. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V_2 — 9633RPT500C-d77/98 Kent Downtown Districts Institute Design Guidelines For Residential and Office Areas Improve Local Circulation & Reduce •Achieve high quality- Impacts of Through Traffic smaller scale development •Open Cloudy Street i `--1. '; f--a •Open ENV commercial street i ( ci_—_�� i i— •Cul de sac 1st.2nd 8 3rd fill Master Plan and UpgradeCommons Park Park �!— •Parking&access I j ; ❑I Ir�_� -- • Drainage . Layout!use �- �p ` � r A ❑ l c� 0 • ot�, � � � Plan for Possible J F � Rail Grade Separation Cloudy Street J �- .Tj I I E ❑ '0 I r� Lj Rezone To Allow Office With Mixed Use Overlay Construct Gateway Elements • Screen Parking Lot 0' 100' 250' Soo* loon• N j Legend: Public Facilities I Street �Redevelopment Opportunities Improvements I---I Special Districts with Design Guideline i ---3� Bike/Ped. Links ®Parks/Open Space 0Gateways ransit Station Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan i l ! North of James Street Area Figure V-2:Proposed elements of the North Frame District Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-4 9633RPTSOCC—417/98 t �� � t 1• lx E Ni. ,� t i�c r r W LI r — i r IN 1 � le l 1 a• i i1 f• S..,j LU C) Kent Downtown Districts — Provide Gateway Improvements at Fourth Avenue and James Street. This high traffic intersection close to the Commons and the Regional Justice Center is an important downtown entry point. The unimproved Borden-owned parking lot at the southeast corner could be greatly enhanced by a sign and landscaping that complement the architecture and plantings of the public facility. A wall could incorporate the buff color scheme of the Commons and Regional Justice Center and perhaps echo some of the building materials and detailing. A design team that included members of the business community, an architect, a landscape architect, artists and planners.recommended a distinctive crosswalk pavement design and distinguished streetlights. INTERSECTION - CROSSWALK DESIGN FnZEEr NAME j DOWN TOWN STREET K E N T SIGNAGE SIGNAGE IDENTIFICATION DETAILS SIGNAGE 2'X 2' GATEWAY LIGHT Figure V-3: The suggested concept for Fourth Avenue and James Street. Development Target Area Actions — Encourage Office/Residential Mixed-Use Development at the N. Fourth Avenue/N. Fifth Avenue Target Area As noted above, the plan promotes the conversion of the single-family area between N. Fourth and N. Fifth Avenues to mixed-use office and multifamily residential development. These uses will benefit from proximity to the park and the visibility along Fourth Avenue. Also, they will be less adversely impacted by the park activity and traffic) Figure V-4 illustrates the type of development that is envisioned. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-5 9633RPT5DOC-4r7/98 k f_- .L � 1 r•� is � f i.�� ! ti� fi.�>Z.,_� ' �..�..._!.�... GILD 'JI Aj IT 7L L'- � 1 r •.-� 1 � I!! - 11 1 1 _ -._ } �� yof 1? I 1 • •R, c,4 •'r F 1, Kent Downtown Districts I I E E I Figure V-4: The type of office/residential mixed-use development envisioned for the N. Fourth/Fifth Avenue target area. Finally, the City should administer district-specific design guidelines to ensure that: • Development presents an attractive building face and/or landscaping to James and Fourth Streets. • Site improvements do not negatively impact projects to the north in terms of noise, traffic, air quality, sun/share, or visual intrusion. • Development does not result in houses converted to marginal offices without substantial redevelopment. Although on the periphery of the downtown, the North Frame area merits special attention. A master plan for the Commons Park could begin to address important issues. Redevelopment of land along the N. Fourth/Fifth Avenue corridors north of James Street will provide opportunities for additional housing in a convenient downtown location near recreation resources. It will also provide opportunities for officelhousing mixed use or housing near offices. Finally, as one of the downtown's most important entries, the Fourth and James gateway merits high priority in the proposed gateway enhancement program. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-6 9633RPTSDOC-V7/98 Kent Downtown Districts Upgraded Commons Park with improved access, drainage and parking--.: Office mixed-use development •Cloudy Street connection "ro 5� > t� LL R � c�0o Qom, c p O i7 � ❑ , e >� ° n 13 of C James St. n ., �:_, al II ►u nl ro I L W o coocbcooC Z M Cc(� I W 2 ti Commons > --Gateway feature C LL o •' Pedestrian connections ? James Street landscaping •• Lo tad i and sidewalk improvements m Grade-separated railroad , crossing as part of the regional. Fast Corridor project Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan North Frame District Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies and Downtown Kent Strategic ACion Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building infill,including height.location, use,density,and site amenities. i Figure V-5 North Frame District 20 year vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-7 - 9&33RPT5DOC-417/98 Kent Downtown Districts Possible Rail Grade Separation Jill, Lj Na alb Tel L Improve Smith Street At Railroad o Improve Parks L To Provide Key North/South P A, Connection ip Create a Trail Along Mill Creek, Linking Mill Creek �3 u _4 Park w/Kent meth Stregr_L&jL0 Memorial Park Support Market : Ja OL 10 Refine Design Guidelines To Build -Meeker Street Quality Residential 15, j I H-, .q Neighborhoods And E. Gowe Street- In/?., Ensure Compatibility With Commercial & Public Uses Extend Meeker& Ifus S e 7- C3 Gowe Street Improvements rl U; D To The East A L L Saar Street r New Parking Garage 9 Between Titus & Gowe Streets 40 2.w fool low N LaLd: -4. Improve Central Commuter Avenue Streetscape Refine Design Guidelines Rail Station To Upgrade Commercial Corridor Legend: Public Facilities Redevelopment Street Opportunities Improvements L' l r__-j Special Districts with Design Guideline Gateways JL Special O it intersection Parks/Open Space 6ansit Station Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Central Avenue Corridor District Figure V-6: Central Avenue Corridor and West Frame Districts are illustrated above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-9 9633RPT5DOC-4/7f98 Kent Downtown Districts . —Union ad,ac«,t (� re.10enGe. r. I � Good pedoatrlan clrcutatlon 1 from street through site '. l I 0 Pedestrian onanted fuade or landscaping by strest front r ` ACGnIWta M4aMes 77 00 , , � l f Modulate largo facades y \ •t.� fora mors human scale New Miry and street front oath building elementa or landscaping Orient panting areas for joint ues� and to reduce visual Mnpact. Landscape and provide pedestrian c. Figure V-7 Design Issues That New Development Should Address in the Central Avenue District. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-11 9633RPT5DOC-4/7/98 1 E ti -��Y1Niii Lal sr ill Z�J ff—ps ar■r .era iY11 a v-t n.rrow+ns, -4 Flo .Mrrr 4s�iata��i call!1!li r�aF F's'3—lr-lpl I L.3.. 1...Ia.iV ^•fY Oia Clip wi_7.1_ , S 1 i• arrall� ,fi�il■t:1. :4'Ol'4P i+i�4as�1• -...__—• 1" t DPP ��� '{4=F i- �i� jAON ��l 4 •>r P��i ir 1•i�'17rli1 DityJlYy i6:L �! �ti�3y�� l f [lYi 1?Y s1.fM�•a YCJ.i■{ra.�� q�i'j.iV� �+ tjjj1...���111�SSSF `7�v ���4� ~* yi I• f{�. i• Y i i �� ��: Jr liY �. •. Win',F ��,' * � �,� � �µ`� i +• �. +• !t + ...fi 'r"P� il+laiLJ■1J�+4.f'O�i:SLir+'yo -;•. �:�jr :u;l...+lY.r+./�tvr�i-i=_c+na al �:Yirr��■Ny�i PlcD�J01 r bin;■a i _. �.. �...-._ •- -_....._— P■illlr�'arA Hl wOTP 7k'+ � rr■i.yJ■lid tv'y,n4::a r" u�r:y !i).ai w7la,.yr%.o#llik_� N F:O GSaFy u11t; ---.. - '+a FCi1FFPs Ffsi ■vdi vi74 I" rb JFii:.■ J i 1 1 IilL�rt' 4r- :is :�•'S ::?ti ti!F_��• Tri'c! i; Devf ,mien ti I Vl'- :`e rr i . lr r.. 0 d;,5rrk-' v�::1:J JLJ r�ctii Kent Downtown Districts Commerclet properties must be wi back and buffered from—ldentul areas New buildings must fsature pedestrian oriented lacades with display wlndoe , "ether protection or other elements lasrt Design Standards am for Slgna that are Integral with front yard parking lots the building'a architecture 7 DO �� OO \ Screening of"m" areas is raquirsd O Material standards encourage higher quality ConsWction on Ofacades Drl—ys and parking lot..bare- O N, `\ Parking lob In front yards are regulated for greater•Mcwncy C rsq-6 to include brWwpe and traffic safety O \ screen and-alkwey to entrance O Figure V-8:Design Issues That Existing Development in the Central Avenue district Should Address. Because Central Avenue is many people's first impression of downtown appearance and development quality, the corridor is important to the whole downtown image. For this reason, corridor improvements should be given priority. Successful arterial improvements in other cities in the region have demonstrated that upgrading Central Avenue is possible if the City and property owners work together. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-12 9633RPT500C—4/7/98 Kent Downtown Districts y , I .. ..• �.- ti`v�i.a - —tom'-_� Figure V-9: Central Avenue as it exists today. I S Figure V-1 D:A Visualization of How Central Avenue could look. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-13 9633RPT5DOC-YJ/98 Kent Downtown Districts I�j i Grade-separated railroad crossing ......... -» James St. ylL' J > �1 f s G {ram CE Ir- 01=1 c) _ Redevelopment on Central Ave. , supporting Commuter Rail Station •••••••"' ' ' _ Smith St. Public Market ............................ r -- " jr, Gateways on Smith and qg = Meeker Streets = q �= Meeker St. w� Intersection and east/west sidewalk improvements at Meeker and Gowe r Streets ................................ Incremental redevelopment according j ri a"' I I Titus St. to Central Avenue Corridor guidelines••• r I� Street trees where space permits••••••••r,., F �•� L: `, Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan Ce ntral Avenue Corridor ridor District II I ? I I i Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific f recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building infill, including height,location, use,density, and site amenities. Figure Figure V-11 Central Avenue Corridor20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-14 9633RPTSDOC-4/7M Kent Downtown Districts " �!� li � �Q �f �� I� f► Create a Trail Along Mill Creek g 1 i� �_i1L r I k .�.. o Linking Mill Creek ,.lames Street- Park w/ Kent ° b eo--o Memorial Park 0 0a� 'i : I � _- - � rTT- �; tS�ll ` •.. looj' I I S � i�' Refine Design Guidelines To Build ,,,Smith_tre_etQ° Quality Residential -i; �� !� , ,�';� Neighborhoods And Lib. i - --� c Ensure Compatibility Q w: -`1! !F .> ' tQ With Commercial kEi ice° 8� Public Uses -.Meeker Street"� =Lowe.Street, - Extend Meeker& Gowe Street -Ttus Stree- — � ' _ l Improvements To The East C-�--b; � °.0al. `Saar Street_�~ ��' Q .�� \ ' '; "i ' Improve Central �:� a '• La(it � —?Q-*o'4Q_ � -I Avenue Streetscape IIQo ' ;Ct ° `p-n _ "-- Refine Design Guidelines =ems Srr�t � '' To Upgrade fl Poop � -, --, �, !I---�rr��,p� ��q �; ,; Commercial Corridor V 1W 2W !Do low' N l :r3 j.�rye� i 11L -MO.•i t:C.1 11L6..i Legend: t ®Public Facilities Redevelopment Street Opportunities Improvements i !I I---I Special Districts — ( ! L__I with Design Guideline ; ; .JL Special _ OGateways ir"Intersection Parks/Open Space i iTransit Station T Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan \ East Frame District Figure V-12 Proposed Elements of the East Frame District Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-16 9633RPT500C-4/7/98 Kent Downtown Districts James St. In, L_ C • Mill Creek/Memorial Park Trail w d .......... � Jai 1 I Its• j v r I� mith St. l Y I ..Senior Center - r �''* .. ....•...•"' Downtown gateways at Smith, �' t t _ ►= I ` Titus, and Meeker Streets r; � Residential development b ......... -•••• Pedestrian improvements on dv Meeker and Gowe Streets li I I� I ...................... ...• Central Avenue Corridor improvements and redevelopment 11 Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan ' III East Frame District ' I Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies T _ and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible ouilding infill, including height. location, use,density,and site amenities. Figure V-13 East Frame District 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-17 9633APTSDOC-4!7/96 rAI f'�s ;�a - �• _ .mot %• �'� .-Ir 1�,yY��y 1 1 r_�-...c+•n`�r� �. � I,tN �T�t�'"�����- ,.frJ t.�.s1 E���Si:f i-� •C __ .ter.-i r:.1�. � • 1 �`�i..rt� •�� }e.•.�'s.+i .I'f"- a �'i -;.�•_ S IN {' T rl4ri s/fl .,,-rT.�_.:�._':�E i'z��� � r i..,��•r r ...r�'•' -�, tl`"', ��"' r �.g Eli;.• { �} �� �-i 'x 1'' ��� � y�� 'en � - r +s-.� h a r• 3 ', '� - r 1'sg a �. Le '' (� a -.'� •a'�„•_++L.�� � � �•-:�fs Ax r4-���:•� ! .-� "-ir ��-y- at .,v �i. � +�+•-.+.ri&s� , ..;�''��"� I { I��.��..�.,��•S.-`.� �,� � .. (•.i( n �-r-.r�'��5.�, "-' •� --r •.,. ��, _ �� .ter •�-.:.,� M y •.� r s•'s �: .as i �.8•�_. __"� �r °•S3 .ray. .•{•r,� f ilk �.• i.r`�cr j# �� � ji �, r a s a•.r .c r ter! ti •, r iai }' o F ► rl 'JQ +�if�s : f ' + i r�e �'i_ r i.ru'r2 rir li 1g `�i...i .af", �r/[ F_41 Vili�! .t. Lr'' F=>.`a t�ii tiLi cW.-:'71 ,-,ra< c7 Li:�';� Vle ks � Cee f� ► d e "Cr.'� f+•5r rjr �' t N 1 hh•� .� i Lt1 t! zip,•..:. pi'.roi�'.i fra_:.ks. Afore. !ry� Ncyl to Vi�u.�r�lrt:7:~I ip_�i I ' ' -� .r r, o f + � m. T a '►i L-'�I�f�tr •�',Li�.l.•IY+`1 fJ �:i� ).ter?�,j..,s�Fl i>r:[ i, ft`tvemaii rsr a rl� ti�� .� ;X '' 'rf? ;, 1 i r _ �.tr ,. . �i .,-i�_, i tom' !..Ld,`1�..� G�—4. _in*r�fT;���a�v�i_ Saa''i St:qirF Kent Downtown Districts 19 Ally J. 14 tiL.��r 1 3 -��1.�`•`�c 1\ f ��i e e �� � P �'`•�..s� a -cam,, 'v 1� �`�Y'�I y- Figure V-14 Existing view and the view with the proposed improvements along Willis Street near the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Note the bicycle pedestrian trail connecting downtown to the Interurban Trail, greensward improvements, and new mixed-use residential development along Saar Street. Design Guidelines Design guidelines are recommended to ensure that the new development comprises a unified whole with compatible uses, integrated circulation, adequate capital facilities, and attractive amenities. The design guidelines should reflect the type of uses proposed by the property owners. This particular district would also benefit from large site master planning so that project review might involve a phased site master plan concept. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-19 9633RPT5DOC-4r7/98 Kent Downtown Districts D' 1W ISP SDP low Master Plan and Upgrade o Commons Park • Parking&access . Drainage . Layout/use A al / Improve Connections To Park �- / LJ Interurban '1 Trails Park & Ride will be phased out �� �' I' • Di •,� II . L and parking transferred R.J.C.— to Rail Station. Area j it i ;jig; y may be available for rl: ; ! ji development Encourage t Mixed-use - Ir Development I I. %] jy r I r• r.-r n �L� � • I 17 Improve �o '`� --- - Bike/Ped.Links To —Meeker Street Downtown From iViI ` i ': I T ! o_{ Interurban Trail {fir 0-1 ' rr ruse ; i New Access Road % i , 11 o r !r I i'I 1 By Developer `' \�!2 a I ; c Willis Street Legend: �j- Public Facilities Redevelopment ■I I �t Street i Opportunities Improvements �� I �Special Districts � J with Design Guideline Gateways Bike/Ped. Parks/Open Space U Links Cul-de-sac ;_--{Transit Station Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan West Frame District Figure V-15:Proposed elements of the West Frame District are illustrated above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-20 9633RPT5DOC-4r7/98 I. Kent Downtown Districts • -- •..• U.. nion Pacific Railroad � �� noc � ��`�' James St -- � �— III I11 D ••Interurban Bicycle Trail / III 11D i III I all 11D gllla 0D ' I I II 1-Q 2IID q ilia alb''••I T` Ill as !111D � IrIaI1111D 1)III a IIII -•Metro Park-and-Ride o° TIIIIa till D a1 1 11101111 D I �i n ;Ina fit D 1 Q� I r`3Q I Smith St. II C ja p c G I Better parking and access to d the park I al C Z - I� Meeker St. F I ... New office, retail, residential, I . and commercial activities in a I� masterplanned development I ,lr ❑ a 1 !IIIIIIIlid •New access road off Willis Street C, \� I •••Trail connection from Interurban Trail to Downtown G ' Willis St. Ili � 0 �� Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan West Frame District I I i I . Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies - and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building i infill,including height,location,use,density,and site amenities. li I i1I �; I I_ Figure V-16 West Frame District 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V_21 — 9633RPT5DOc—417/98 Kent Downtown Districts Enhance 4th Ave. Improve Corridor Bike/Ped.Links To Downtown From Central Avenue Interurban Trail Streetscape Improvements Refine Design Guidelines To Upgrade Commercial Corridor Fill I �: Meeker Street ' U�-p I C I I ¢ tu Street� d I T �U •': -�7�'�I \ \ C=P + I i I I I I ❑ i s I , t o O j!�n / - i'--C+—I AM tre Willis et :'EO 4 \, ° li17 _ South Core Commuter Redevelopment Target Area Rail Station With Design Guidelines and Parking To Encourage Mixed-Use Garage Residential Redevelopment Cr ,00• zso• aov low N i ! Legend: ©Public Facilities Redevelopment Street r--I Special Districts Opportunities Improvements f� L__I with Design Guideline OGateways ',—; Bike/Pod. Links w ®Parks/Open Space U , I�Cul-de-sac � �Transit Station Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan -'—Iii 1 South Core District Figure V-17.Proposed Elements of the South Core District. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-24 9633RPTSDOC-4/756 �� , . I� �ice• �'_ -� --'=ice.;,�, r-- I ,II. iI� irk ��'� � .11ii � r .., 11.�.,..y.•.p�:. .�1 / •I j '� I h�r� � r' '1I '� IV '. �� _f. Kent Downtown Districts Fourth Avenue signature ai improvements. > L Infill along core streets tl v -• Realignment of supports historic character � street o z CO u- m Gowe St. -- co 7OIc City Hall P O I It - r 152 _ I oCL � i � N �^lrt 1 a - M g -4 _ It a y L73 ^ Willis Str tom ? � I � Z�. ^ ",• Boulevard 2 Path to Cluster of mixed-use/ Interurban multifamily residences Gateway landscaping Trail•_•••• around courtyards and along upgraded Redevelopment coordinated streetscapes with new parking along railroad Parking and ; street improvements along railroad:.............. Commuter Rail Station.............. i Parking • Bus center • Station structure • Platform and site imorovements Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan South Core District II i i Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies — —�= and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific r recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building infill,including height,location,use,density,and site amenities. Tr Figure V-20 South Core District 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-28 9633RPTSDOC-4r7/98 Kent Downtown Districts Rezone To Allow Office With Mixed Plan For Future Of Borden Site Use Overlay *Create high quality development nearby •Retain street access Master Plan and Upgrade •Institute design guidelines Commons Park Focus High Quality •Parking&access Development North of Smith •Drainage •Streetscape improvements •Layout/use •Guidelines to make . - compatible with Borden site Existing a �� j ! Possible' {jam � Park 8 Ride Q May be available $ i S ail Grade for development 7 o f r Separation' / .---------- jo e R.J.C. jr 110 i Interurban Trail Improve Parks Pedestrian To Provide Key All Cross " Intersection Civic North/South Some Street Connections Square Connection When Development Occurs 0' 100' 250' SW 1000' N Legend: Public Facilities Redevelopment t Street Opportunities� �—,Special Districts Improvements �i L__J with Design Guideline OGateways j , --IN Bike/Pod. C.= I ®Parks/Open Space U Links Cul-de-sac ,Transit Station it ' --- Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan North Core District Figure V-21:Proposed elements of the North Core District are illustrated above. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-30 96-13RPTSDOC-ar//98 Kent Downtown Districts � I _ --b _ Figure V-22: The above illustration shows existing conditions along Railroad Avenue. I Figure V-23:A canopy along Railroad Avenue will provide pedestrian protection and market space Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-32 9633RPT500C-417/98 Kent Downtown Districts — Construct Pedestrian "All Cross" or Scramble System at the Corner of Fourth Avenue and Smith Street The King County Regional Justice Center (RJC) brings many new employers and visitors to downtown. The RJC can be a boon to the downtown if it is linked to the core area shops, restaurants, and services. An "all cross" pedestrian connection, which provides for pedestrians to move diagonally through the intersection in the signal sequence while all automobiles wait, would facilitate pedestrian linkage. It is recommended that the Public Works Department explore the feasibility of such a design and the intersection be upgraded with gateway landscaping and signs. If an "all cross" or scramble system is not feasible, then, at a minimum, signals can be sequenced to encourage pedestrian crossing, especially during non-peak traffic periods. Ja M dam` Figure V-24: All cross"or`scramble"intersection at Fourth and Smith Streets to allow 4-way crossing at a signal sequence. Decorative pavement, canopy or trellis,and enhanced private landscaping are possibilities. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-33 9633FIPT5DCC-<17i98 r� 1 _._-_ I,__.•.----��'^Y.,1 -��'_...�* I i i :�'�� - __ - - jig ---- J �l IrTit 1 r '�- 1zz 1 i r -! Xx }.` 17U- c 1 y ilia Z ' - — r- r� Qw lr c, IC; L'�` �l I ! LZ rx Kent Downtown Districts KENT PERFORMING ARTS cENTER Figure V-25.Shown above is the proposed Civic and Performing Arts Center design by the Bumgardner Partnershil — Support a Civic and Performing Arts Center Downtown. A Civic and Performing Arts Center with facilities for conferences and other events, would be an important attraction to the downtown, extending hours of activity into the night. It would provide a much-needed location for events, performances, meetings, and educational programs. The center would also be a lively element if pedestrian-oriented uses, such as small shops, newsstands, flower stalls, coffee bars, pedestrian spaces, and/or public artwork, are included along Fourth Avenue and Smith Street. The entry to the site could include a plaza that for outdoor performances and celebrations. v I S�HA. 8 f SMOG G G ,__:i.. cuar qk - "TM'' A 1/ Figure V-26 Architects drawing of the proposed Kent Public Market building-courtesy of the Kent Downtown Partnership. — Support the Public Market The Public Market on Railroad Avenue between Meeker and Smith Streets will add an important activity. It will anchor businesses on Railroad Avenue, enhance the Sister Cities Parks complex, and serve as a connecting element between the commuter rail station and the North Core. To support the market the plan recommends additional parking on Railroad Avenue and a sidewalk with a canopy east of Sister Cities Parks to provide a shelter for outdoor stalls in the summer and pedestrian weather protection in the winter. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-35 9633RPTSOOC-4,7/98 ZEE. �1 f - _-- - 'IF.�., r..�45'11.L: r'�.cY�f^.•: f•.L,l Cf)T.� !• ..r l._-FE J}7()Nf.q$t.^.'vL?:S t>s8 JFt.pC7SE�G�emr1-i:aad P&/aiC1i!i:r.g A as }` u Bumg---------------- 1L� 1�••*A '.'. 'mot •r ��ais5f���� —"'��L�y�r�ea.+'�Jrg�+,�TY�� '�a.i�,�-t i�1 i#��w�:l�R L_�••_i��'. � �{ � .T-`.:i..{� {�J ._ 1��fir—��.��f� . ,�..�,-....a-�.-... 1�•�� L to r� r 1 r,+���'� } f�„�..�•� j j-..e f"ti f.i :J.F !:• .7 rl+ic 4 i,�f } r_. sy of m-, -.•1viL e E&A.VI.cco�.3 d i7 i i.9 o 1.1-.- wiul'J .f7 �` ✓�l"+l}i7 Jrr I ,1 'ti':�'� ✓; '�r'.rlLl�rlt s�i3i�F?L?f'.afi."t7. Potential for masterplanned Kent Downtown Districts mixed-use development••: Signature street Office development Mixed-use development improvements along Smith Street• : along Fourth Ave.•• Gateway feature r >_ ^� y ? J James St. 1CC_C0=C OC Cc I J I cc Sit tU 1115$ a Ill ,IS S ;ll Itt tt� - '�1 8nlil�$ll 111 llti3 6 to (All i Smith St. � -Meeker St - PedQnan•• Q Improved ° ¢ Public c all-cross/gateway = Sister Cities M Market intersection o Parks tL ° tL m06 a� Z U •Outdoor performance/ m celebration area -Smith Street street improvements i Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan i North Core District i Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management policies and Downtown Kent Strategic AGion Plan reccmmendabons. It does not represent a specific r recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building I infill,including height,location,use,density, and site amenities. Figure V-27 North Core District 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-36 9633RPT5DOC-ar7/98 Kent Downtown Districts Core Area Design Guidelines To Encourage Mixed-use Infill And Reinforce Historic Character Improve Parks To Provide Key Potential North/South Civic Square Connection 11 . Assure ■, �i -- —� Pedestrian /"", ;j;(! 1';f'.•� - m Oriented Support Market Redevelopment With Improvements At This Gateway S ith Street ' F__4 - " �Lib: Emphasize Restoration of I i J � Buildings Which I Support Historic _Meeker Street R14 I Character ' Of The Core Enhance I , �i' Railroad 4th Ave. �l j South Corridor Corridor �� Redevelopment Ttus Street 1h, ' '� _l. c Target Area fit M Central Avenue rn—o W A Streetscape Improve - l I Improvements p Saar Street Bike/Ped. ;■ ' ���_ �; Links To DowntownFrom� ' Willis Street- - _os Commuter Interurban Trail %P, j p o�1 pp bflba 4 � ; �',. ~ i e v tar 2W 5W 0 oQ Rail Station l l tam `D� '--",� to N Design Guidelineso {..— cp p� ; �'�i 13 To Encourage �__� o, oil o j,I Mixed-Use Infill Redevelopment Legend: III ®Public Facilities Redevelopment ■e v a Ill n Street Opportunities Improvements [---I Special Districts it e O L__J with Design GuidelinGateways iL)Transit i --� Bike/Ped. ii Links Parks/Open Space U i ' Cul-de-sac --- Station r, =- T Downtown Kent SubArea Action Plan Historic Core District Figure V-28: Proposed elements of the Historic Core District. Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-38 9633RPT5DOG-417198 Kent Downtown Districts i �Q'g 6MIE Ali- GAILcgr Imp Before After _— QQQQQQQQQD .� � � Q Q _ !itl Ll I (off--L EN FRANKLIN BUILDING I. Meeker Street - Before _ Repaint the building exterior. With the exception of this building and the Ben — Replace the canopy with a larger more traditional I Franklin building•all the buildings along the south side S These two buildings can be tied together with a similar of Meeker Street are two stones tall. This one story canopy and install below transom windows. Remove painting scheme and eomiee line. building is somewhat of a "missing tooth"along[h projecting and wall signs and replace with pedestrian c oriented signs that hang below the canopy Meeker Street elevation. This drawing suggests the addition of a second story for residential use. I t iy n �Ililljl!!"°q Ill IjIP��I Ilndl E E N t F Rjlr l� � w1 �ulli �l p, 110f+i►�IIIi� ��►IIu - III,Ii. Nr,, il,®k,ql' x r ��I II li liUl. I!Ji�!�--I lei 'I!—' Remove sign and paint a nnv sign. with a more —i 1. Meeker Street - After traditional font stvie, onto the buildin_ facade. The Ben Franklin building has a large amount of wall surface. This lame area can be decorated with a vaner of painted patterns. It is also an ideal location for a I Increase Ne storefront glazing to the maximum height downrown mural possible and install transom windows. Add awnings over cacti bay. Replace the existint projecting signs with signs that han,from the awmnt below. by Armin Quilic Figure V-30 Fagade Improvement and Infill Development Concepts Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-40 9633RPTSDOC—4/7/98 Kent Downtown Districts James S�� '1"j 9 � .� � . In' n cccxo 00 Co r t-; ,q It y 1118.2 3 III ng s ;i,;u 2t0 Smith SL r 1 iz- L� - p tool Meeker SL I - �_Gowe SL city Hall s 3 � II I a •r s - Oooe %r-7 - r tj v _o Willis street Boulevard Figure 31-Conceptual Design for the Commuter Rail Station Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-41 9633RPTSDOC-ar7198 Kent Downtown Districts Innll development ; Library in historic core which and park become civic focus reinforces historic in the North Core District Pedestrian all-cross intersection..., character••• - ••••Sister Cities Parks Signature building improvements at Fourth and Meeker... Public Market � I � Meeker St. - r _ 0 01 ^040 � Titus fSt.� •� Mixed-use/residential: > Street improvements on development••• - Meeker and Gowe Streets •' Q Q c extended to east of m Fourth Avenue o U- o u- Central Avenue••••••••. improvements•••••.•• U Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan ' Historic Core District II f i Please Note: This visualization is a conceptual interpretation of growth management polies and Downtown Kent Strategic Action Plan recommendations. It does not represent a specific ? recommendation for any one parcel. Its purpose is to provide an example of possible building — infill, including height,location,use,density,and site amenities. ` /r i 1 I Figure V-32 Historic Core District 20 Year Vision Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan V-43 9633RPTSDOC-48M ATTACHMENT D LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD y CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 8, 2004 �2 .2 tt 2 dO a cn a� cu > am 0 2 U m cu dal O � ° ' QO (1) _Y Lmcu Q .L O Lm � - 5 ty cn cu 66 b a`) cu r' 1 LL Appendix : Revised DSAP Recommended Actions Figure IV-2: Phasing of Kent DowntoNN,n Strategic Action Plan Recommendations RECOMMENDATION Strategic Time Frame from 2004 A. LAND USE 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years Timing Issues Al. Redesigate SF-8 area between James&Cloudy City to revise zoning. Streets and Fourth&Fifth Avenues N.to DCE and multi-family residential A2. Review master plan development applications for Kent Station(fmr.Borden site) At least 200 market rate dwelling units by 2008. A3. Promote infill housing Revise existing multi family residential a. Extend multi-family residential tax abatement to development tax abatement program. rental units in Downtown b. Reduce or waive permit fees for Downtown residential development c. Allow five stories of wood-frame construction Review applicable building and fire codes. above a concrete base d. Remove Zoning Code minimum lot size Include in 2004 CPA/CPZ cycle. requirement in development standards for multi- family residential zones in DSAP districts As needed. A4. Encoura e mixed-use development a. Lincoln Park&Ride lot King County selling 8 acres of DCE-zoned 9.5 acre lot;see Recommendation D1.d. b. Municipal Parking Lot Possible long-term interest in mixed-use redevelopment. c. Ten(10)acres between SR-167,the UP RR, Lot zoned DCE is for sale,see Willis&Meeker Streets Recommendations B5 and D/.d. A5. Study impacts of pawn shops,bail bond offices,day labor agencies,casinos,adult entertainment businesses,gas stations and tattoo parlors A6. Rezone DCE area on Central Ave.between Smith Fold into 2004 CPA/CPZ cycle. and Gowe Streets to GC A7. Allow underground stormwater detention vaults Review applicable development standards of where appropriate for Downtown sites larger than Public Works Department. one acre in size B.TRANSPORTATION 0-2 years 2-5 ears 5-10 years 10-20 years Timi ng Issues El. Develop commuter rail station Service components completed in 2001. B2. Construct street improvements a. Fourth Avenue 1 James to north of Smith St. Cont feted in 2004. 2 North of Smith St.to Meeker St. Scheduled for completion in 2005. b. Second Avenue Triggered by site development. I Sidewalk replacement Smith St.to Harrison St. Scheduled for completion in 2006. c. Smith Street Linked to rail station connections&Kent Station development. 1 Fourth Ave.to Railroad Ave. Scheduled for completion in 2005. 7 Central Avenue High priority. 1 Smith St.to George St. Completed in 2004. e. Saar Street Triggered b private development riori f. Meeker Street Hi h g. ISeventh Avenue Property owner initiated. B3. Plan for underpass at James and Willis Street&Lat Determined by Regional Fast Corridor project. UP and BNSF tracks Links-1..: RUG ie B4 136- Adopt street tree standards Street tree plan and species selection document is currently applied to development. B4. B5. Consider accessibility options from Willis and Meeker Streets for properties located between SR- 167 and the Union Pacific RR IV-2 SumRecActionsMatrix Page I Appendix : Revised DSAP Recommended Actions C. PUBLIC FACILITIES 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years Timing Issues Cl. gradedowntown parks a. Locate a Town Square b. Enhance parks along railroad Could be incremental effort. c. Masterplan Commons Playfield High priority-coordinate parking. d. Developstreet tree plan Completed. C2. Enhance Gateways a. Fourth and James b. Fourth and Smith Su c. Fourth and Meeker orts rail station d. Fourth and Willis e r� -Q d"fie---ef e. Central and Meeker f. Central and Smith Connects Kent Station and Historic Core. g. Second and Smith C3. Add public buildin s a. Performing Arts Center b. Public Market This item completed,but Public Market has returned to Municipal Parking Lot. C. Rail station structure Service components completed in 2001,parking garage completed 2002. C4. Provide trails and Paths a. Links from Interurban Trail b. Path along James Street c. Mill Creek/Kennebeck C5. Inco orate public art Continuous effort C6. Improve pedestrian bridge over Mill Creek at Temperance eSt. plementation-coinciding with C7. Plan for eventual undergrounding of all utilities in Long-reran im the Historic Core District private development T -- D. DESIGN GUIDELINES 0-2 years 2-5 ears 5-10 years 10-20 ears Timing Issues DI. Refine design guidelines a. Historic Core District Completed,incorporated into adopted Downtown Design Guidelines. b. Central Avenue Corridor District See above. c. Smith and Fourth corridor See above. d. East Frame and west-e€eere West Frame Include in 2004 CPA/CPZ cycle. District parking standards revision Consistent with DSAP boundaries-include in e. North er Frame District incorporated into Downtown Design Review 2004 CPA/CPZ cycle. Area E. TARGET AREAS 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years Timing Issues El. Ex Aore redevelopment opportunities a. Obtain Smith Street right-of-way b. Work with property owner on Borden site Sale completed.City is master planning site. c. Fourth Avenue On oin effort with KDP. d. Central core historic streets e. South Core District Revise residential development incentives,and encourage mixed-use. f. ter= g-Central Avenue Corridor District f. F. COMMUNITY BUILDING 0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years Timing Issues Fl. Continue working with Kent Downtown Partnership Ongoing. in revitalization efforts a. Assist in identifying and promoting issues and Ongoing. opportunities to benefit community interests and economic health b. Activelypromote historical reservation Ongoing-education,inventory,archive. c. Support live performance arts in public places, Revise codes as needed. and encourage live performance arts in retail and restaurant businesses F2. Encourage adaptive reuse of historic Kent Depot Assist KDP and Greater Kent Historical Society efforts F3. Address causes and consequences of homelessness in Downtown IV-2 SumRecActionsMatrix Page 2 3IAV Wb Ji ° plm O .0 O y tD L O 0 n �:—.--.--ram.—•-- ----��-� �, n. n 'Q 3 —0 O r D d N f 0 Nv N ❑ JAlHd � ❑ o R �� o I :��o 0 0 L T - (D -o CD Mw� Dp Del 00 6503: E CD LJ N 4 O > .•l •t 1 J � � O � N N f •• f �� chi EP El i = LL N 3 d G q� qO� R Jl. O•p a�°i> m m C O c? ❑ ❑ Q a Q 3 x m c ° p Q >, ty -V5ocoow p "� w� m t0 = Wo ayedv , c `o cE • =c��o IN \ .N (0 (p >U y d C C d � � O C (p W cz to ob y a a C d U \ A a• O C N 7 O o LL 3 E 0 3 4 m Q 0O d J is L a ; o C E c4° c .2 E � -� ,4 3 �9� U CD wto • = r ds10 � _ V Q c . , = to N Il. O L- V -0 U O a� -o J '� Z o 0 � 1 r WIN um [or. rAli Fam a _ • � ON ■=■ { .J L7 � Q � V 0 z m FM MOW LLJ LIVE .■ ;. �N ■� - - ME 1 - - Iwolid■� ' - + ANNE CA �, ice■ � , `_ � - ■ ON ' i " .- i, aw co // Master Plan and Q fl f1 HI I i Upgrade z o o EST FRAME DISTRICT Commons Park - Parking&access Q : Lb Recommended Actions L°ayouuse t . p - tc;3 n r—, Downtown tra is ,Improve i I I 1 i 1 i IJ .''.Connections ..,:.� Action P I a n to Park Facilities �1 y Improve aigna9e for August 23, 200 tuC parking Kent u u available as overflow Commons t' �..''w for Commons 0000 �I S acres of 9.5 acre ti''•..,`...'`• w Regional .'`•. l� Lincoln PftR lot 0 Justice for sale - too parking ,�.,'''•.,'i Center oo stalls to remain asi mosi bus service is in `,,'`•,\:',"•.ti` o U W UQQ�G transferred to Sounder �J I z •... • .. Enhanc 4th Ave O Station •''' ' Corridor 0 z r_ am z Revise VarKing ' edestrian E7 >w Standards All Cross" - - —inter s�ctio ❑a z zz W ARRISOIJ ST W HARRISON ST O Q o Li Q Assure Pedestrian- } [oriented Redevelop- & U ment at This Gateway Improve Ped � way Bike Connectivity Better parking W MEEKER ST rid from Interurban n accessLL Trail _ l� U Encourage large lot redevelopment 1 Q D# Q } 0 L ❑o o ❑ d I0 z 1 a 0 TI w J Cesign 3uide ines to Q 1 ncourage Mixed-Use to D Q Infill Redevelo ment ❑ I= w o d O Q r N SR 516 irI TGateway New Access Road by IL Developer 4 w w Figure V-15 ❑ Q L mIM HAV Q� — 0 Lr w Elh N nd D1d1S a p N 3AV E1d1S �" S _� 3 OCD wOR co o o pQ o p oun r—ol—n rr + M 7 7 � �c":4 �'.Y 'd _ .�msav�•,.,....r` .+.+fir '�".' 0 0 o my o -_ —OL wEfEl 0 - r0^p .. 4-4--4 37 � n v G d t v d Jf :r J` d O� u Y N✓=P= � G C nd z - end z S t0 E u m m € oc `mom mE m mm rc C c m N�' in C7 3 - � `c ay `❑ .0.Ur 111 LL O• • 1 c Q D Q ago '00 N nd 1 o a = o cQ N C t t —t9 sN O Cl 0 .o�� E W�� � 0 •of c E aQ� CDC 'm 3 � v O c e rt c R E r1 2 0 "'a COT � w > L N 0 Etc `1 NOSI4`dW I.L 3 r'I LL r'r+'r•' :•: Q N 3nH Nl(')7NIl J Q (( 3: IT ❑ fl -C CL)LJ ., LL� `� M N env 3iV! Sant/�1t�1S a -I �:. I rs Q o 0 0 o CD v ! w m U Q c c i I TITFFF IOJ771 ic a ° o O co o a� m CD m o - - S AV S300NOMC300 o CD � d - m T ❑ ❑ N s E N O > - ' J c AV GVMJ � 3nd 11 ` c as � s w S3 kVUEO ° 3nd L o s AV o R = 0 o O t Eo0 -._ o O --- o� c cc Vco c E o ❑ 0 c r(n TL oo 0 C N o�= N 2 M ~v ❑ U O C A N v — c1n) E d 7 7 - O Cl Lu ) and G 067 = dm N .V O C N —� 2 a > N - � = dU �d C 2 n O ❑ ❑ iJ E a U >� a.006 o 0 0 - , N o LL 0 o e I�J' ' T T `p'7 xN L ❑ 3 3 4N AV b N C C > Cp T `o 0 W o�N - a� �� Sands Sands G. n n � o u � p a LV � O QOE � C� ,_ V a Q RIV Q3nd s SaMa cn 06 f _q w� � O Y � �/� �/� V �l — v/ cn O f NOSIGVA� a z iL Ca ej _ o a a ant/N30VN ATTACHMENT E Appendix :Updated Downtown Capital Projects,Costs and Dates LAND USE & PLANNING BOARDCONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Downtown Projects NOVEMBER 8, 2004 Past, Present and Planned 1998—2009 April 1998—Present(completed) • 2000 Sidewalks & Gateway Improvements $1.13 million • James &Central Intersection Improvements $1.20 million • Washington Ave/Meeker St.Road Improvements $3.50 million • 2nd Ave.Extension $500,000 • 1"Ave./4 h Ave Widening and Utility Trench $750,000 Projects Planned • Downtown ITS Project $3.20 million (Includes Smith St.widening,Pioneer St.Widening and RR interties) (2005) • Ramsey Way/40'Ave Signal $350 000 (2004) • Right Turn Pocket on Central Ave and Willis $150 000 (2005-06) • Left Turn Lane on Willis St. and 4d'Ave. $163,000 (2005-06) • Central Ave Sidewalk Improvements(Smith St. to Gowe St.) $400,000 (2005-06) • Willis Street Grade Separations at UP and BNSF Railroad $37 Million (2009-2014) Downtown ProjectsList MM.doc Appendix : Updated Downtown Capital Projects,Costs and Dates • Right Turn Lanes at Harrison St. $95,000 (2005) • WSDOT overlay of SR516 (SR167 to Central Ave.,Central Ave.to Smith St.) (2005) • Left turn pocket at Lincoln Street at Smith Street $1 Million (2005) 0 Left turn pocket on Willis St. at 2nd Ave. $750,000 (2005-06) DowntownProjectsList Wdoc 2 ATTACHMENT F LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 8, 2004 Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager WASHINGTON Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 DATE: AUGUST 17, 2004 TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR&LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS FROM: WILLIAM D. OSBORNE, LONG-RANGE PLANNER RE: DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN UPDATE MATERIALS FOR MEETING OF AUGUST 23, 2004 An important note for all members of the Land Use and Planning Board regarding the organization and use of the draft Downtown Strategic Action Plan(DSAP)update documents packet: The draft DSAP (Attachment A)was re-created in Microsoft Word, and the images and tables included in the original document were unavailable in original quality digital format for inclusion in Attachment A. To minimize the same type of logistical difficulties experienced with the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update (Community Design Element) by attempting to insert and remove digital images from a Word document under revision, a photocopy of the original 1998 List of Figures (Attachment B) and photocopies of all of the original figures themselves are provided separately (Attachment Q. The figures that have been `updated,' primarily diagrammatic maps and tables (Attachment D), are labeled according to the label of the original figure(s) being replaced. Public Works Engineering provided the document Downtown Projects: Past, Present and Planned, 1998-2009 (Attachment E), which is proposed to replace the Capital Cost Estimates table(Figure IV-3). Descriptive placeholder references for figures are located throughout the draft DSAP document, and a photocopy of each figure can be found in the sequentially-organized Attachment C. In cases where a drawing/ figure was accompanied on a page by text in the original document, the page was digitally scanned in order to crop the text out of the image. The photocopied figures follow the scanned versions for comparison. In addition to presenting the staff report which focuses on the draft DSAP text, staff will ask the Board to review each of the figures. Please contact me at (253) 856-5437 if you have any questions about the staff report, the draft DSAP document, or any of the attachments. William D. Osborne, Planner P:\Planning\Billo\DSAP\Memos\dsapnavmemo-082304.doc Enclosure cc: Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager Nathan Torgelson,Economic Development Manager Don Wickstrom,Public Works Director Project File KE IT WASHINGTOM ADOPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS Adoption Document(s): Supplemental EISs Description of current proposal: The proposal is to update the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action . Plan (DSAP) which was originally adopted in April 1998. This update proposes textual and substantive changes which reflect updated planning goals, public and private improvements, and development which has taken place in the DSAP planning area over the past six years. Some Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map re-designations as well as potential Zoning Code amendments are proposed. A more specific project description is contained in the Addendum to the DSAP Supplemental EIS dated October 18,2004. Proponent: City of Kent Location of proposal: The proposal is a sub-area wide non-project action. Title of document(s) being adopted: City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Draft(February 1997) and Final (April 1998)-Prepared by the City of Kent. The City is also adopting the Kent Station Planned Action Supplemental EIS, Draft (April 2002) and Final (July 2002). Description of document(or p)rtion)being adopted: The City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, draft and final, are being adopted in total. This document is a sub-area element to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The DSAP is a programmatic integrated GMA planning document and Supplemental EIS which evaluated goals, policies and actions specific to the downtown related to growth and redevelopment. The Kent Station Planned Action Supplemental EIS was prepared as a supplement to the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan EIS. This document analyzed alternatives for a Planned Action in downtown Kent, as identified in the DSAP. The Kent Station SEIS,draft and final,are adopted in total. If the document has been challenged (WAC 197 11 630) please describe: These documents have not been challenged. Document availability: These documents are available for review at the City of Kent Planning Services office,220 Fourth Ave S,Kent,WA 98032 from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. We have identified and adopted these documents as being appropriate for this proposal after independent review. Along with the addendum, these documents meet our environmental review needs for the current proposal and will accompany the proposal to the decisionmaker(s). Name of g9M9 adopting the document:City of Kent Contact person/Responsible Official: Kim Marousek,AICP(253)856-5436 Principal Planner . City of Kent Community Development Dept. 220 Fourth Ave South Kent,WA 98032 Date: ib) Signature S:\Permit\Plan\Env\2004\DSAPadopt.doc COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director PLANNING SERVICES Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager � Phone:253-856-5454 KENT Fax: 253-856-6454 W A 5 H 1 N G T O N Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 CITY OF KENT. ADDENDUM TO THE KENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC.ACTION PLAN (DSAP) UPDATE Responsible Official: Kim Marousek SCOPE The City of Kent has completed environmental analysis, pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA), for an update to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) which is a sub area element to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The DSAP was originally adopted in April 1998 as an integrated SEPA-GMA document. This was a programmatic Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to the City of Kent's Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The DSAP was meant to provide a basis for future market analysis, environmental analysis and community participation processes. The plan outlines methods for encouraging infill and redevelopment compatible with the economic, environmental, and community goals of Kent's citizens: The focus of this update is to reflect changes in existing conditions, update the planned capital projects and to reflect more current citizen interests. Generally, the update includes analysis specific to Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map amendments as well as some Zoning Code text amendments. The following substantive revisions.to the DSAP are proposed: 1. Revise development standards to encourage development of.market rate multifamily residential units in Downtown(pages IV-2 and VI-12). a Waive minimum lot size requirements for multifamily dwelling unit developments in all DSAP districts(where multifamily is permitted).. b. Reduce or waive residential unit development permit fees in DSAP districts. c. Extend downtown multifamily residential development tax exemption program to rental units. d. Allow ,five(5) stories of wood frame construction above a concrete base. 2. Change Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Map designations for the area between North First and North Fifth Avenues and between James and Cloudy Streets from Single Family Eight Units per Acre (SF-8/SR-8) to Urban Center Land Use and Downtown Commercial Enterprise (UC/DCE) in the south portion and Multi-Family Residential, Low Density Land Use (LDMF) and zoning of either Multifamily Residential, Garden Density or Multifamily Townhouse District, 16 units per Acre (MRG or MRT-16, respectively) in the north portion (pages V-3,4 and`VI-8 to 10, Attachment D/Figure V-2). Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) Supplemental EIS—Addendum . 3. Amend the Downtown Design Review Area to include all properties located within the DSAP Districts: This includes the North Frame District(pages V-4,Attachment C/Figure V-1). 4. Rezone the Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) area located between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth on either side of Central Avenue to General Commercial or General Commercial Mixed Use(pages V-6 and VI-11,Attachment D/Figure V-6& 12). 5. Revise DCE surface parking standards in certain areas of the East and West Frame from the current cap of 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area (GFA) to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA of commercial development. Additional details regarding the proposed textual and substantive revisions can be found in the City's Comprehensive Plan Amendment file#CPA-2004-1. This SEPA addendum adds analysis to the existing SEIS specific to the above-noted proposed substantive revisions to the City's DSAP. Through this analysis, it was found that the proposed revisions did not create additional adverse environmental impacts beyond those identified in the DSAP SEIS. The mitigation proposed in the DSAP SEIS are sufficient to cover any impacts associated with this nonproject,programmatic planning document. SEPA COMPLIANCE In October 1993, the City of Kent issued a Determination of Significance (DS) and Notice of Scoping for the Comprehensive Plan (ENV-93-51). After a series of public meetings, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued on July 18, 1994 for the Draft Comprehensive Plan, issued on the same date. The DEIS was distributed to City Council and Planning Commission members, adjacent jurisdictions, affected agencies and other parties of interest. After comments on the DEIS were solicited and reviewed, a Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS) was issued and distributed on January 30, 1995. Subsequent to the Comprehensive Plan EIS, the City embarked upon a specific analysis of the downtown core area. This resulted in an integrated SEPA and GMA document titled the Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP). This SEPA analysis contained within this document was prepared as a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to the City's Comprehensive Plan EIS. The city issued a Draft and Final SEIS for the DSAP on February 4, 1997 and April 7, 1998, respectively. The SEIS analyzed the environmental impacts of the DSAP. The purpose of this environmental analysis was to assess the impacts of the Plan on the City within this specific area. The DSAP SEIS does not analyze the significance of site specific impacts;rather,it analyzes the significance of impacts upon the downtown area. This Addendum to the DSAP SEIS provides additional information regarding the proposed changes to the plan specific to potential environmental impacts not previously-anticipated in the original SEIS. However, this proposed nonproject action will not create unavoidable adverse environmental impacts beyond those previously identified in the SEIS. STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY Future project permit applications on the property within the DSAP area will be subject to and shall be consistent with the following: City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, the Kent City Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Building Code, Public Works Standards and all other applicable. laws and ordinances in affect at the time a complete project permit application is filed. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW—BACKGROUND The City of Kent has followed the process of phased environmental review as it undertakes actions to implement and amend the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The State Environmental Page 2 of 5 Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) Supplemental EIS-Addendum Policy Act (SEPA) and rules established for the act, WAC 197-11, outline procedures for the use of existing environmental documents and preparing addenda to environmental decisions. Nonproject Documents An EIS prepared for a comprehensive plan, development regulation, or other broad based policy documents are considered "non-project,"or'programmatic in nature (see WAC 197-11-704). These are distinguished from EISs or environmental documents prepared for specific project actions, such as a building permit or a road construction project. The purpose of a non-project-EIS is to analyze proposed alternatives and to provide environmental consideration and mitigation prior to adoption of an alternative. It is also a document that discloses the process used in evaluating alternatives to decision-makers and citizens. Phased Review-SEPA rules allow environmental review to be phased so that review coincides with meaningful points in the planning and decision making process, (WAC 197-11-060(5)). Broader environmental documents may be followed by narrower documents that incorporate : general discussion by reference and concentrate solely on issues specific to that proposal. SEPA rules also clearly state that agencies shall use a variety of mechanisms, including addenda, adoption and incorporation by reference,to avoid duplication and excess paperwork. Prior Environmental Documents - The City of Kent issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Comprehensive Plan on July 18, 1994 (#ENV-93-51). The DEIS analyzed three comprehensive plan land use alternatives, and recommended mitigation measures, which were used in preparing comprehensive plan policies. The preferred land use alternative which was incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan was most closely related to Alternative 2 of the DEIS, (the mixed-use alternative). A Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS) was issued on January 30, 1995, and the Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the City Council on April 18, 1995. The Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP)was adopted as a sub-area element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. It translated the Comprehensive Plan's general policies and objectives into a more specific redevelopment strategy. The DSAPs major goal is to encourage downtown growth while creating a stronger community identity and civic/commercial focus through coordinated public and private development. The basic strategies include connecting and unifying important downtown features; defining special activity districts; and selecting target areas for phased infrll and redevelopment. The City and Sound Transit undertook a further planning study in 2000 to examine potential transit-oriented development (TOD) near the Kent Commuter Rail Station. This resulted in the Commuter Rail Station Area Study(CRSAS), September 2000. The objective was to encourage development of a dense mix of land uses in a'pedestrian environment near transit facilities to encourage higher transit use. This document is hereby incorporated by reference pursuant to WAC 197-11-635. This study is available for review from 8 am- 5 pm in the Kent Planning. Office, 220 Fourth Ave S, Kent, WA 98032. The City, acting upon recommendations from the DSAP, established a Planned Action within the downtown area,pursuant to WAC 197-11-164. This area, "Kent Station," went through specific environmental analysis resulting in a supplemental EIS issued in July 2002. The draft and final SEIS for the Kent Station Planned Action are also adopted for this DSAP amendment pursuant to WAC 197-11-630. Page 3 of 5 Downtown Strategic Action Plan(DSAP) Supplemental EIS-Addendum Scope of Addendum-As outlined in the SEPA rules, the purpose of an addendum is to provide environmental analysis with respect to the described actions. This analysis builds upon the DSAP SEIS but does not substantially change the identified impacts and analysis; therefore it is prudent to utilize the addendum process as outlined in WAC-197-11-600(4)(c). ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS All environmental elements were adequately addressed within the parameters of the City of Kent Supplemental DSAP SEIS, draft and final. Further, subsequent "project" actions would require the submittal of separate environmental checklists, pursuant to SEPA, which will be analyzed for consistency with the original mitigating conditions and may require new mitigation based upon site-specific conditions. The original DSAP document discussed specific environmental impacts and mitigation measures for goals and policy recommendations. These impacts were topically grouped under Land Use, Public Facilities, Urban Design and Traffic Mitigation. The update to the DSAP follows the same process. Specific text modifications can be found in the Draft DSAP documents associated plan update in file#CPA-2004-1. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Land Use Proposed land use and zoning changes include the re-designation of a portion of the SF-8 zoning in the North Frame district to multifamily residential and Downtown Commercial Enterprise(DCE). The area proposed for DCE zoning is the residential area along James Street. This area is further identified in the maps contained in the Draft DSAP update in file #CPA- 2004-1. The total area identified for the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map re-designation is approximately 19 acres in size. This could create approximately 500 new PM Peak hour trips to the City's transportation network. The mitigation proposed in the existing SEIS would call for site-specific traffic analysis upon new development or redevelopment in this area. This mitigation is adequate to mitigate any future impacts associated with future development in this area. Additionally, the proposed draft DSAP update calls for Design Review in this area upon development. This would help to ensure high quality development consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, the draft DSAP update seeks to rezone approximately 5 acres of property along Central Avenue between Smith and Gowe Streets at one parcel depth from DCE to GC, General Commercial This rezone is consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan map designation of Commercial. No significant impacts are anticipated with this proposed action. Another proposed amendment to this portion of the DSAP would consider various incentives to residential development in the downtown area. These incentives include reducing or waiving development permit fees for residential development, extending the multifamily tax exemption for market rate rental housing, and to consider,allowing five (5) stories of wood frame construction above a concrete base. No additional mitigation measures are warranted for this proposed amendment. Urban Design Proposed changes to this portion of the document include a modification to the surface parking cap contained in the city's Zoning Code. This change would increase the allowable surface parking in the East and West Frame districts to allow for 4.5 stalls per 1,000 square feet of Page 4 of 5 Downtown Strategic Action Plan(DSAP) Supplemental EIS—Addendum Gross Floor Area for commercial developments. No mitigation measures are warranted for this proposed code amendment. Public Facilities and Traffic Mitigation Proposed modifications to these portions of.the DSAP are largely textual in nature and do not substantively change the nature of the original analysis under the SEIS. Therefore, no additional mitigation measure area proposed, II. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION A. SUMMARY Kent City Code section 11.03.510 identifies plans and policies from which the City may draw substantive mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act. This nonproject action has been evaluated in light of those substantive plans and policies as well as within the overall analysis completed for the City's Downtown Strategic Action Plan SEIS. B. DECISION The City of Kent DSAP SEIS, draft and final, provided analysis with regard to the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. The City has reviewed this proposed amendment and has found it to be consistent with the range, types and magnitude of impacts and corresponding mitigation outlined in the DSPA SEIS. . The proposed amendment is similar to, and does not substantially modify,the goals and policies outlined in the DSAP. This analysis and subsequent addendum did not identify any new significant impacts associated with this proposed amendment to the DSAP. Therefore, this addendum, combined with the Downtown Strategic Action Plan SEIS adequately evaluates potential adverse environmental impacts and provides appropriate mitigation. Based upon this analysis, a separate threshold determination is not required for this action. This document and corresponding environmental record may be utilized in the future in conjunction with environmental review for future project-specific land use proposals on the subject property in accordance with the guidelines provided by WAC 197-11. Dated: October 18,2004 Signatur Kim arousek,AICP, Responsible Official - KM:jm\\S:\Permit\P1an\Env\2004\DSAPaddendum.doc Page S of 5