Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 12/16/2014
CITY OF KENT City Council MeetingAgenda December 16, 2014 Mayor Suzette Cooke Dana Ralph, Council President Councilmembers Jim Berrios Bill Boyce Brenda Fincher Dennis Higgins Deborah Ranniger Les Thomas adccW06823 This page intentionally left blank. KENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA December 16, 2014 Council Chambers Mayor Suzette Cooke Council President Dana Ralph Councilmember Jim Berrios Councilmember Bill Boyce Councilmember Brenda Fincher Councilmember Dennis Higgins Councilmember Deborah Ranniger Councilmember Les Thomas ********************************************************************* COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 5 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENT - Please state your name and address for the record. You will have up to three (3) minutes to provide comment. Please address all comments to the Mayor or the Council as a whole. The Mayor and Council may not be in a position to answer questions during the meeting. For more details regarding the public comment process, please refer to the section titled, “Public Comments,” on the reverse side. 4. OTHER BUSINESS A. 2014 Property Tax Levy for 2015 Budget, Ordinance – Adopt B. 2015 – 2016 Biennial Budget, Ordinances and Resolution – Adopt C. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Update to Kent City Code Regarding School Impact Fees, Ordinances – Adopt D. First Amendment to Contingent Loan and Support Agreement between the City of Kent and the Special Events Center Public Facilities District – Authorize 5. EXECUTIVE SESSION AND ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION A. Property Negotiations, as per RCW 42.30.110(1)(c) 6. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: A copy of the full agenda packet is available for perusal in the City Clerk's Office. The Agenda Summary page and complete packet are on the website at KentWA.gov An explanation of the agenda format is given on the back of this page. Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office in advance at 253.856.5725. For TDD relay service, call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1.800.833.6388. This page intentionally left blank. PUBLIC COMMENT This page intentionally left blank. Agenda Item: Other Business – 4A TO: City Council DATE: December 16, 2014 SUBJECT: 2014 Property Tax Levy for 2015 Budget, Ordinance – Adopt SUMMARY: This ordinance levies a property tax increase of 5.83% over the prior year. The tax is for the first year of the City’s 2015-2016 biennial budget, to be applied to the general fund for the purpose of paying the general expenses of municipal government. EXHIBITS: Ordinance RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee YEA: NAY: BUDGET IMPACTS: As described. MOTION: Adopt Ordinance No. , levying the property taxes for the first year of the 2015-2016 biennial budget. This page intentionally left blank. ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, levying 2014 property taxes for the first year of the 2015 – 2016 biennial budget for the City of Kent. RECITALS A. Pursuant to RCW 84.55.120 and after providing all appropriate notice, the City Council held public hearings on September 16, 2014, and October 21, 2014, to consider the City of Kent's biennial budget for 2015-2016, to address the City’s property tax levy to be imposed in 2014 for collection in 2015, and to review revenues and limit factors. B. In accordance with RCW 84.55.120, any increase in property tax revenue other than that resulting from the addition of new construction and improvements to property, annexations, and any increase in the value of state-assessed property and the refund fund levy, requires the adoption of a separate ordinance specifically authorizing the increase in terms of both dollars and percentage. C. Pursuant to RCW 84.52.010 and WAC 458-12-365, taxes shall be levied in specific dollar amounts. 1 Property Tax Levied (1%) 2015 – 2016 Biennial Budget Ordinance NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. – Recitals Incorporated. The foregoing recitals are incorporated into this ordinance. SECTION 2. – Property Tax Levied. There is hereby levied against the assessed value of the property in the City of Kent, Washington, a tax for the first year of the City's 2015 – 2016 biennial budget in the following amount for the General Fund, for the purpose of paying the general expenses of municipal government: Levy per $1,000 of assessed valuation Fund (estimated) Dollar Amount General Fund $1.5793 $22,083,991 This property tax levy represents a 5.8% increase over last year as shown below. 2015 Regular Property Tax Levy $21,084,821 Less 2014 Regular Property Tax Levy (20,695,808) Less New Construction Levy (147,061) Less Refund Levy (34,994) Plus Banked Capacity 999,170 Property Tax Increase $ 1,206,128 % Change 5.83% 2 Property Tax Levied (1%) 2015 – 2016 Biennial Budget Ordinance SECTION 3. - Limitation on Levy. The application of the General Fund levy shall be consistent with and shall not result in a tax revenue in excess of the limitation imposed by RCW sections 84.55.010 and 84.55.0101. SECTION 4. - Adjustments. City administration shall administer the Annual Budget and in doing so may authorize adjustments pursuant to RCW 35A.34, RCW. SECTION 5. - Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 6. – Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. SECTION 7. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force January 1, 2015, which is more than five (5) days from and after its passage and publication, as provided by law. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK 3 Property Tax Levied (1%) 2015 – 2016 Biennial Budget Ordinance APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of December, 2014. APPROVED: day of December, 2014. PUBLISHED: day of December, 2014. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Taxlevied-2015Ordinance.Docx 4 Property Tax Levied (1%) 2015 – 2016 Biennial Budget Ordinance Agenda Item: Other Business – 4B TO: City Council DATE: December 16, 2014 SUBJECT: 2015 – 2016 Biennial Budget, Ordinances and Resolution – Adopt SUMMARY: Taken together, these four ordinances and one resolution provide for the cost revisions and revenue enhancements recommended by the City Council at various workshop and budget sessions to establish the 2015-2016 biennial budget and bring it into balance. Upon passage, the Council will have approved the following changes: An ordinance to amend section 3.18.020 to increase utility tax by 1% on water, sewer and drainage services, allocated to the general fund for general expenses. The current 1% dedicated to building general fund reserves sunsets at the end of 2014. A resolution amending fee schedules for various land use, building code and other regulatory fees, as well as eliminating automatic CPI increase for business license fees. An ordinance amending the Kent Comprehensive Plan and its Capital Facilities Element to reflect a six-year plan for capital improvement projects for 2015 through 2020. An ordinance amending Section 3.28.130 of the Kent City Code, reallocating the distribution of business and occupation tax revenue received. Specifically, that revenues received shall first be applied to the actual cost to staff and operate the business and occupation tax division, including one IT position dedicated to support that division, but not to exceed the amount budgeted for that division by the City Council. These ordinances adopt the final 2015-2016 biennial budget and the total expenditure of the 2015 budget is $180.1 million and $182.4 million in 2016. EXHIBITS: (1) Utility Taxes – Amend Section 3.18.020 – Ordinance; (2) Fee Schedules – Resolution; (3) Comprehensive plan amendment to the capital facilities element for the 2015-2020 capital improvements – Ordinance; (4) Business and Occupation Tax – Ordinance, and (5) 2015-2016 Biennial Budget Adoption - Ordinance RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee YEA: NAY: BUDGET IMPACTS: As described. MOTION: Adopt Ordinance Nos. through and Resolution No. , enacting the 2015-2016 biennial budget. This page intentionally left blank. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, amending certain utility tax allocations. RECITALS NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. – Amendment. Section 3.18.020 of the Kent City Code is amended as follows: Sec. 3.18.020. Certain utilities subject to tax. A. In addition to the other business and license fees required by the ordinances of the city, the city levies upon all persons, firms, or corporations (including the city) engaged in certain business activities a utilities tax to be collected as follows: 1. Upon every person, firm, or corporation engaging in or carrying on any telephone business within the city, an annual tax equal to six (6) percent of the total gross income, including revenues from intrastate toll, derived from the operation of such business within the city. 1 Solid Waste Utility Tax Ordinance This six (6) percent tax will be allocated as follows: four and seven-tenths (4.7) percent to the general fund, three-tenths (0.3) percent to youth/teen programs, and one (1) percent to street improvement programs. 2. Upon every person, firm, or corporation engaging in or carrying on a business of selling, wheeling, furnishing, distributing, or producing gas, whether manufactured or natural, for commercial or domestic use or purposes, a fee or tax equal to six (6) percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the tax year for which the license is required. This six (6) percent tax will be allocated as follows: four and seven-tenths (4.7) percent to the general fund, three-tenths (0.3) percent to youth/teen programs, and one (1) percent to street improvement programs. 3. Upon every person, firm, or corporation engaged in or carrying on the business of selling, wheeling, furnishing, or distributing electricity for light and power, a fee or tax equal to six (6) percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the tax year for which a license is required. This six (6) percent tax will be allocated as follows: four and seven-tenths (4.7) percent to the general fund, three- tenths (0.3) percent to youth/teen programs, and one (1) percent to street improvement programs. 4. Upon every person, firm, or corporation engaged in or carrying on the business providing cable television services, a tax equal to six (6) percent of the total gross income from that business in the city during the tax year for which the license is required. All revenue received from this tax must be applied only to funding the city’s information technology department operations and capital projects budgets in the proportion determined by the city council in its biennial budget, including all amendments. 2 Solid Waste Utility Tax Ordinance 5. Upon every person, firm, or corporation engaging in or carrying on a business providing solid waste collection services, a tax equal to seven and eight-tenths (7.8) percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the tax year for which the license is required. This seven and eight-tenths (7.8) percent tax will be allocated as follows: six and one-half (6.5) percent to the general fund, three-tenths (0.3) percent to youth/teen programs, and one (1) percent to street improvement programs. 6. Upon every person (including the city) engaging in or carrying on the business of selling, furnishing, or distributing water, sewer, or drainage services, a tax equal to thirteen (13) percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the tax year. This thirteen (13) percent tax will be allocated as follows: fourfive and seven-tenths (4.75.7) percent to the general fund for the use as allocated in the city’s budget; four (4) percent to the general fund only for the installation, operation, maintenance, and repair of street lighting, fire hydrants, and fire suppression systems subject to the limitations provided in subsection (A)(6)(a) of this section; two (2) percent dedicated solely to the repayment and elimination of debt in the city’s “other capital projects” fund subject to the limitations provided in subsection (A)(6)(b) of this section; one (1) percent to be applied only to establishing the city’s fund balance consistent with council policy and subject to the limitations provided in subsection (A)(6)(c) of this section; one (1) percent to street improvement programs; and three-tenths (0.3) percent to youth/teen programs. a. The four (4) percent allocation for street lighting and fire hydrants and suppression is further contingent on the requirement that the city allocate the funds freed up by this revenue to the city’s capital improvement fund(s). All transferred m After payment of all capital debt, 3 Solid Waste Utility Tax Ordinance unless otherwise allocated by Council,onies that become available in these reallocated capital improvement fund accounts the remaining funds must be applied equally to (i) information technology capital programs directed at funding long- and short-term hardware and software replacement and (ii) street capital programs, but further restricted to funding street maintenance, repair, and signage only. If the cost to install, operate, maintain, and repair street lighting, fire hydrants, and fire suppression systems is less than the four (4) percent allocation for these purposes, the full four (4) percent amount must still be allocated from the general fund to capital programs for the above-stated purposes. b. The two (2) percent internal tax allocation will be dedicated to the city’s capital improvements fund for the sole purpose of retiring all debt in the city’s other capital projects fund. This two (2) percent portion of the tax shall be eliminated on January 1, 2023, or on the first day of the year following the date the debt in this fund is fully retired, whichever occurs first. c. The one (1) percent internal tax allocation will be dedicated to the city’s general fund balance solely for the purpose of increasing the fund balance until that balance equals ten (10) percent of the city’s prior year operating expenses. This one (1) percent portion of the tax shall be eliminated on the first day of the year following the date the city’s general fund balance equals ten (10) percent of the prior year’s operating expenses. B. In computing the tax provided in subsection (A) of this section, the taxpayer may deduct from total gross income the following items: 1. The actual amount of credit losses and uncollectible receivables sustained by the taxpayer. 2. Amounts derived from transactions in interstate and foreign commerce which the city is prohibited from taxing under the laws and Constitution of the United States. 4 Solid Waste Utility Tax Ordinance SECTION 2. – Severability. If any one or more section, subsection, or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall maintain its full force and effect. SECTION 3. – Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; ordinance, section or subsection numbering; or references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations. SECTION . – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage and publication as provided by law; however, the utility tax increase implemented in this ordinance will not take effect and the city will not impose this increase until January 1, 2015. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK 5 Solid Waste Utility Tax Ordinance APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of , 2014. APPROVED: day of , 2014. PUBLISHED: day of , 2014. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Solid Waste Utility Tax Increase 2015.docx 6 Solid Waste Utility Tax Ordinance RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, adopting a new resolution amending Kent City Code fees effective January 1, 2015, including business license, planning and land use application fees, as well as permit and inspection fees required to comply with the provisions of the International Building, Residential, Mechanical, Fire, and other related Codes and the Uniform Plumbing Code, which amendments shall be assessed and collected beginning in the 2015- 2016 biennial budget; and repealing Resolution No. 1867. RECITALS A. On December 13, 2011, the Kent City Council passed Resolution No. 1851, establishing, amending and adjusting various development fees. B. On January 17, 2012, the Kent City Council passed Resolution No. 1852, clarifying (1) the application of certain business license fees to multi-family dwellings and to out-of-city businesses; (2) the technology fee amount to be changed for each business license transaction; and (3) the application of technology fees to certain fire code review fees. 1 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules C. On December 11, 2012, the Kent City Council passed Resolution No. 1867, amending business license, planning and land use application fees, as well as permit and inspection fees required to comply with the provisions of the International Building, Residential, Mechanical, Fire, and other related Codes and the Uniform Plumbing Code. E. The Kent City Council finds that in an effort to achieve a more equitable cost recovery, the fee schedules must be amended, a new Resolution needs to be adopted, and Resolution No. 1867 must be repealed. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: RESOLUTION SECTION 1. Adopt. Business License Fees. Beginning January 1, 2015, in accordance with chapter 5.01 of the Kent City Code (KCC), annual fees for business licenses will be based on the number of full and part-time employees employed at each business with certain exceptions for multi-family apartment and condominium businesses, home occupation businesses, and contractors doing business in Kent whose physical address is outside the city of Kent. The fees shall be assessed as follows: A. Number of Employees of Business Fee 0 – 24 $100 25 – 49 $200 2 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules 50 – 99 $400 100 or more $600 B. Multi-Family Apartments and Condominium Businesses. The business license fee for multi-family apartments and condominium businesses is based on the number of dwelling units as noted in the schedule below. The business license fees will be waived for apartments and condominiums that participate in and are in compliance with the guidelines set forth in the STAR program in accordance with chapter 5.14 KCC. Number of Multi-Family Dwelling Units Fee 2 – 10 Units $100 11-50 Units $300 51 Units and above $600 C. The Home occupation business license fee is $50.00. D. Contractors doing business in Kent whose physical location is outside the city of Kent shall be assessed a $100 fee. SECTION 2. – New Fee Schedule – Permit Technology Fee. As authorized by KCC Section 3.11.010(c), beginning January 1, 2015, a technology fee for all business license transactions will be assessed in the amount of one dollar ($1) per transaction; every other fee established by this resolution will be assessed a technology fee in an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the fee or ten dollars ($10.00), whichever is greater, with the exception of the exclusions listed in Exhibit A. 3 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules SECTION 3. – New Fee Schedule – Hearing Examiner Fees. As authorized by KCC Section 2.32.155, the fee that an applicant shall pay for any permit or approval that requires either an open or a closed record public hearing before the city’s hearing examiner and the fee for any appeal of any decision or recommendation to the hearing examiner shall be in the amounts shown on Exhibits B through F. SECTION 4. – International Fire Code Fees Established. As authorized by KCC Section 13.01.120, the fee schedule attached as Exhibit B shall govern the monetary charges assessed by the city for reviewing and processing permit applications, for issuing permits and other approvals, and for all related inspections. SECTION 5. – International Building Code and International Residential Code – Building permit and plan review fees. Pursuant to KCC Section 14.01.090, the fees to be assessed for building permits and related inspections under the International Building Code or the International Residential Code shall be as set forth in Exhibit C which is attached and incorporated into this resolution, with the following modifications: 1. Standard plan review Fees. Whenever construction documents, as defined in the International Building Code and International Residential Code, are submitted for review pursuant to section 107 of the International Building Code or section R106 of the International Residential Code, a plan review fee equal to sixty-five (65) percent of the building permit fee shall be assessed. 2. Basic plan review fees. The basic plan review fee, after and in addition to the payment of the initial standard plan review fee set forth in subsection (1) above, shall be a fee of ninety-eight dollars and sixty-one cents ($98.61) for each permit issued upon a certified basic plan. 4 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules Additional plan review fees shall also be assessed at a rate of one hundred thirty-two dollars and thirty-six cents ($132.36) per hour, or a portion thereof for an additional plan review required for changes, additions, or revisions to plans. 3. Administration of basic plans. Basic plans shall be administered as follows: a. “Basic plans” are defined as complete plans for an entire detached single family residential building, approved as such by the building official, which: (i) Are clearly marked as being approved and certified as “basic” by the building official; (ii) Bear the author’s (including, but not limited to, architect, engineer, or others) acknowledgment and approval of the plans submitted for use in the construction of a number of buildings, without any limitation of quantity or location. If any portion is designed by a licensed architect or engineer, this acknowledgment shall bear the author’s stamp and signature. (iii) Basic plan review fees shall apply only to detached single family residential buildings and shall apply only to the originating owner or applicant. (iv) Changes to basic plans that alter the exterior dimensions or structure of the building shall be treated as a new permit application. b. The process for administering basic plans shall be as follows: 5 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules (i) Any person may apply for plan review and certification of a basic plan by filing an application for such plan review and certification, along with two (2) or more complete sets of plans and the standard plan review fee. (ii) Upon completion and approval of plan review, the applicant shall provide reproducible copies of complete, approved plans to the building official. c. The city’s building official is authorized and empowered to interpret and determine the applicability and administration of the provisions of this section. SECTION 6. - International Mechanical Code – Mechanical permit and plan review fees. Pursuant to KCC Section 14.01.090, the fees to be assessed for mechanical permits issued for the installation of mechanical equipment under the International Mechanical Code or the International Residential Code, as may be applicable, shall be as set forth in Exhibit D, which is attached and incorporated into this resolution, with the following modifications: 1. Standard plan review fees. Whenever construction documents, as defined in the International Mechanical Code or the International Residential Code, are submitted for review pursuant to section 106 of the International Mechanical Code or section R106 of the International Residential Code, a plan review fee equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the mechanical permit fee shall be assessed. SECTION 7. - Uniform Plumbing Code – Plumbing permit and plan review fees. Pursuant to KCC Section 14.01.090, the fees to be assessed for plumbing permits issued for the installation of plumbing equipment under the Uniform Plumbing Code or the International Residential Code, as 6 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules may be applicable, shall be as set for in Exhibit E, which is attached and incorporated into this Resolution, with the following modifications: 1. Whenever construction documents, plans, specifications, engineering calculations, diagrams or other data are submitted for review pursuant to section 103 of the Uniform Plumbing Code or section R106 of the International Residential Code, a plan review fee equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the plumbing permit fee shall be assessed. SECTION 8. – Construction, Land Use and Development Fees. Pursuant to chapters 6.03, 6.06, 6.07, 7.02, 7.04, 11.06, 12.01, and other authorizations elsewhere in the Kent City Code, the applications, permits, approvals, review, inspection and other fees for various construction, land use and development actions shall be as shown in the attached Exhibit F. SECTION 9. Annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) Adjustment. On the first day of each calendar year, all fees, rates and charges established in this resolution will adjust by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), specifically the CPI-W Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, measured from June 1 through June 1, if the CPI-W reflects an upward adjustment from the previous annual June to June period. This section and its related CPI adjustments will not apply, however, to any Section 1 Business License fees and Section 2 Permit Technology fees. SECTION 10. Repealer. Resolution No. 1867 is hereby repealed in its entirety; provided, however, that Resolution No. 1867, and the fees established by that resolution, shall remain in full force and effect until the date the new fees are assessed and collected in accordance with this resolution. 7 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules SECTION 11. – Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. SECTION 13. - Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect and be in force on January 1, 2015. PASSED at a regular open public meeting by the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, this 16th day of December, 2014. CONCURRED in by the mayor of the city of Kent this 16th day of December, 2014. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY 8 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. ______ passed by the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, the ________ day of ____________________, 2014. RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK 9 Resolution Adopting Fee Schedules Exhibit A Technology Fee Exceptions Excluded from technology fees: 1. Fire permit fees for fireworks stands or displays; 2. Appeals; 3. Code text amendments, comprehensive plan map or text amendments, pre-application conferences, public notice boards and zone map amendments (rezones) under Exhibit “F” of this resolution; and 4. Fees listed under “Other inspections and Fees” in Exhibits “B,” “C,” “D,” and “E” of this resolution, except that a technology fee will be assessed and collected for each Adult Family Home licensing inspection under Exhibit “C.” Exhibit “B” City of Kent Fire Permit Fees Permit Issuance Fees: Fee Issuance of each annual operational permit under the fire code Hazardous Materials or High-piled storage permits $227.54 All other permits $113.77 Issuance of each annual fire protection system permit, per building $134.45 Issuance of a residential home heating fuel tank removal permit, per application $184.30 Issuance of a fireworks permit for a fireworks stand, per application $100.00* Issuance of a fireworks permit for a fireworks display, per application $113.77* * rate fixed by state regulations Development Plan Review and Permit Fees: Fee Fire Prevention Construction Permits- Plan Review Fee 65% of permit fee Permit Fee Per Permit Fee Valuation Table Total Value of Project Permit Fee $1.00 to $500.00 $63.33 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $63.33 for the first $500.00, plus $8.26 for each additional $100.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00. $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $187.27 for the first $2,000.00, plus $37.80 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00. $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $ 1,056.57 for the first $25,000.00, plus $27.28 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00. $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $ 1,738.68 for the first $50,000.00, plus $18.91 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00. $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $ 2,684.13 for the first $100,000.00, plus $15.15 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00. $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $8,745.82 for the first $500,000.00, plus $14.36 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00. $1,000,001.00 and up $15,924.29 Review of Building Permits Single-Family Plan Review 25.9% of the building permit fee Commercial Plan Review 35.2% of the building permit fee Review of Land Use Applications- Boundary Line Adjustment $138.79 Binding Site Plan $227.54 Short Subdivision $227.54 Other Site Plan Reviews $111.50 Exhibit “B” - Continued City of Kent Fire Permit Fees Preliminary Plat $753.15 Residential Variances $88.74 Other Project Approvals $134.24 SEPA Checklist $161.55 SEPA Checklist as Part of a Project $81.91 Requiring Hearing Examiner Approval $241.19 Other Inspections and Fees: Fee Each hydrant flow request (Two hour minimum) $142.74 per hour Initial fire and life safety inspection for new business, per application $111.70 Inspections outside of normal business hours (Two hour minimum charge) $142.74 per hour Additional inspections required: • when a construction inspection is not complete or fails to pass inspection; • when required corrections on an operational permit or fire inspection system permit have not been corrected by the second inspection; • when work is not accessible; • when work is not ready by scheduled inspection time; • when the construction permit or approved plans are not made readily available; • when the project requires multiple inspections for phased construction; • when requesting Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) or Certificate of Occupancy (CO) approval; or • when requesting inspections required for licensing and/or certifications. (One hour minimum charge). $142.74 per hour Additional plan review required by: • re-submittals*, • changes, • deferred submittals, • additions, or revisions to plans. *One re-submittal will be included in the plan review fee. (One hour minimum charge) $142.74 per hour Hazardous material inventory statement, management plan, or facility closure plan review and approval. (Two hour minimum charge) $142.74 per hour Code Modification or Alternative Materials and Methods Request (Three hour minimum charge) $142.74 per hour Appeal filing fee $331.65 Penalty Fees: Fee Failing to mark or maintain the marking of a designated fire lane. $206.09 Exhibit “C” City of Kent Building Permit Fees Total valuation determined by building official Permit Fee Assessed $1.00 to $500.00 $36.11. $501.00 to $2,000.00 $36.11 for the first $500.00, plus $4.70 for each additional $100.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00. $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $106.61 for the first $2,000.00, plus $21.56 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00. $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $602.49 for the first $25,000.00, plus $15.56 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00. $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $991.49 for the first $50,000.00, plus $10.78 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00. $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $1,530.49 for the first $100,000.00, plus $8.64 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00. $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $4,986.49 for the first $500,000.00, plus $7.28 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00. $1,000,001.00 and up $8,626.49 for the first $1,000,000.00, plus $4.86 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof. Other Inspections and Fees: For inspections outside of normal business hours and Adult Family Home licensing inspections (minimum charge – two hours) ............................. $132.36 per hour Reinspection fees assessed when work for which an inspection is requested is not complete, when required corrections have not been made, when work is not accessible, or when the permit or approved plans are not made readily available .......................................................................... $132.36 per hour Additional plan review required by changes, deferred submittals, additions, or revisions to plans .......................................................................... $132.36 per hour Investigation fee when work is commenced prior to obtaining required Building, mechanical, or plumbing permit....................................................... 100% of permit fee Appeal filing fee ................................................................................................................ $307.53 Exhibit “D” City of Kent Mechanical Permit Fees Permit Issuance Fees: 1. For the issuance of each mechanical permit ......................................................... $41.52 2. For issuing each supplemental permit for which the original permit has not expired, been canceled, or finalized ...................................................................... $12.98 Unit Fee Schedule: 1. For each forced-air or gravity-type furnace or boiler, including ducts and vents attached, up to and including 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) ........................................ $25.96 2. For each forced-air or gravity-type furnace or boiler, including ducts and vents attached, over 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) ............................................................... $33.73 3. For each floor furnace, suspended heater, recessed wall heater or floor-mounted heater, including vent ............................................................................................ $25.96 4. For each appliance vent not included in an appliance permit ............................... $12.98 5. For repair of, alteration of, or addition to each heating appliance, refrigeration unit, cooling unit, absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including controls, regulated by the mechanical code or residential code ........................................................................................ $24.65 6. For each boiler or compressor: to and including 3 horsepower (10.6 kW), or each absorption system to and including 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW).................................... $25.96 over 3 horsepower (10.6 kW) to and including 15 horsepower (52.7 kW), or each absorption system over 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) to an including 500,000 Btu/h (146.6 kW) ................................................ $48.01 over 15 horsepower (52.7 kW) to and including 30 horsepower (105.5 kW), or each absorption system over 500,000 Btu/h (293.1 kW) to and including 1,000,000 (293.1 kW) .................................................... $66.17 over 30 horsepower (105.5 kW) to and including 50 horsepower (176 kW), or each absorption system over 1,000,000 Btu/h (293.1 kW) to and including 1,750,000 (512.9 kW) .................................. $98.61 over 50 horsepower (176 kW) or each absorption system over 1,750,000 Btu/h (512.9 kW) ................................................................... $164.79 7. For each air-handling unit to and including 10,000 cubic feet per minute (cfm) (4,719 L/s), including ducts attached thereto, which is not a portion of factory assembled appliance or unit for which a permit is required .................. $19.46 over 10,000 cfm (4,719 L/s) ..................................................................... $33.73 8. For each evaporative cooler other than portable type ........................................... $19.46 9. For each ventilation fan connected to a single duct .............................................. $12.98 10. For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system authorized by a permit ..................................................... $19.46 11. For each hood served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood ......................................................................................................... $19.46 12. For each domestic-type incinerator ....................................................................... $33.73 13. For each commercial or industrial-type incinerator ............................................... $25.96 Exhibit “D” - Continued City of Kent Mechanical Permit Fees Unit Fee Schedule (cont.): 14. For each mechanical appliance or piece of equipment regulated by the mechanical code or the residential code, not classed in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed in this table .................................... $19.46 15. For each fuel gas or fuel oil piping system of one to five outlets .......................... $10.38 16. For each additional piping system outlet, per outlet ................................................ $3.89 Other Inspections and Fees: For inspections outside of normal business hours (minimum charge – two hours) .......................................................................... $132.29 per hour Reinspection fees assessed when work for which an inspection is requested is not complete, when required corrections have not been made, when work is not accessible, or when the permit or approved plans are not made readily available .......................................................................... $132.29 per hour Additional plan review required by changes, deferred submittals, additions, or revisions to plans .......................................................................... $132.29 per hour Investigation fee when work is commenced prior to obtaining required building, mechanical, or plumbing permit ....................................................... 100% of permit fee Appeal filing fee ................................................................................................................ $307.53 Exhibit “E” City of Kent Plumbing Permit Fees Permit Issuance Fees: 1. For the issuance of each plumbing permit ............................................................ $36.33 2. For issuing each supplemental permit for which the original permit has not expired, been canceled or finalized ....................................................................... $19.46 Unit Fee Schedule: 1. For each plumbing fixture on one trap or a set of fixtures on one trap, including water, drainage piping and backflow protection therefore ............................................... $12.98 2. For each building sewer and each trailer park or mobile home park sewer ......... $25.96 3. Rainwater systems-per drain (inside building) ..................................................... $12.98 4. For each water heater and/or vent ........................................................................ $12.98 5. For each industrial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and vent, except kitchen-type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps ................................ $12.98 6. For each installation, alteration or repair of water piping and/or water treating equipment, each .................................................................................................... $12.98 7. For each repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each fixture ................... $12.98 8. For each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter including backflow protection devices therefore ................................................................................................... $12.98 9. For atmospheric-type vacuum breakers not included in item 8: 1 to 5 vacuum breakers ............................................................................ $10.38 over 5 vacuum breakers, each ................................................................... $3.89 10. For each backflow protective device other than atmospheric-type vacuum breakers: 2 inch (51 mm) diameter or smaller.......................................................... $12.98 over 2 inch (51 mm) diameter .................................................................. $25.96 11. For each graywater or reclaimed water system .................................................... $73.37 12. For each medical gas piping system for a specific gas: 1 to 5 inlets/outlets................................................................................................. $89.54 over 5 inlets/outlets, each ...................................................................................... $10.38 Other Inspections and Fees: For inspections outside of normal business hours (minimum charge – two hours) .......................................................................... $132.29 per hour Reinspection fees assessed when work for which an inspection is requested is not complete, when required corrections have not been made, when work is not accessible, or when the permit or approved plans are not made readily available .......................................................................... $132.29 per hour Additional plan review required by changes, deferred submittals, additions, or revisions to plans .......................................................................... $132.29 per hour Investigation fee when work is commenced prior to obtaining required building, mechanical, or plumbing permit ....................................................... 100% of permit fee Appeal filing fee ................................................................................................................ $307.53 Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 1 Permit Application Type Planning Fee Development Engineering Fee Public Works Fee Total Fees Notes Accessory Dwelling Unit $72 $0 $0 $72 (1) Administrative Determination Letter $134 $0 $0 $134 Appeal of Administrative Interpretation / Decision $287 $0 $0 $287 Appeal of SEPA Determination $287 $0 $0 $287 Appeal of Short Plat $287 $0 $0 $287 Binding Site Plan - Preliminary $720 $2,795 $0 $3,515 Binding Site Plan Modification $431 / $576 $776 $0 $1,208/$1,352 (2) Code Text Amendment $720 / $2,159 $0 $0 $720 / $2,159 (10) (11) Combining Districts $2,159 $0 $0 $2,159 (10) Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment $2,159 $0 $0 $2,159 (10) Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment $2,159 $0 $0 $2,159 (10) Concept Meeting Review No charge No charge No charge Conditional Use $2,877 $776 $0 $3,653 (13) Document Recording Fees Actual cost Actual Cost (20) Downtown Design Review $287 / $720 $78 / $155 $0 $365 / $875 (3) (14) Hearing Examiner-Conduct of Hearing and Preparation of Decision Actual cost Actual cost (16) Hourly rate $134 $155 $148 N/A Lot Line Adjustment $431 $621 $592 $1,644 Lot Line Elimination $144 $155 $148 $448 Mixed Use Design Review $720 $155 $0 $875 (14) Multi-Family Design Review $720 + $15/unit $155 $0 $875 + $15/unit (14) Multi-Family Dwelling Tax Exemption - Application $1,336 $0 $0 $1,336 Multi-Family Dwelling Tax Exemption - Final Application $1,336 $0 $0 $1,336 (17) Multi-Family Tax Exemption Appeal - Conditional, Final, Extension $287 $0 $0 $287 Multi-Family Tax Exemption Extension of Conditional Certificate $67 $0 $0 $67 Multi-Family Tax Exemption – Contract Amendment $668 $0 $0 $668 Planned Unit Development Plan $3,597 + $67/unit $5,746 $0 $9,343 + $67/unit Planned Unit Development Plan Modification $359 / $1,079 $311 / $1,242 $0 $670 / $2,322 (4) Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 1 TABLE 1 NOTES: Permit Application Type Planning Fee Development Engineering Fee Public Works Fee Total Fees Notes Plat Modification/Alteration Minor/Major Minor: ¼ of plat fee Major: ½ of plat fee Minor: ¼ of plat fee Major: ½ of plat fee (15) Pre-Application Conference $359 $0 $0 $359 Public Notice Actual cost of publication (20) Public Notice Board $144 $0 $0 $144 (5) SEPA Checklist $359 / $1,007 $463 / $776 $0 $822 / $1,783 (6) SEPA Modification $109 / $359 $78 / $155 $0 $187 / $515 (7) SEPA Exempt Determination $134 $0 $0 $134 SEPA Environmental Impact Statement $2,877 + deposit $0 $0 $2,877 + deposit (8) Shoreline Conditional Use $1,726 $446 $0 $2,192 (13) Shoreline Exempt Determination $287 $155 $0 $442 Shoreline Substantial Development $1,439 $466 $0 $1,905 Shoreline Variance $1,079 $466 $0 $1,545 (13) Short Plat (2-4 lots) – Preliminary Plat $1,079 $1,553 $0 $2,632 Short Plat (5-9 lots) - Preliminary Plat $2,877 + $72/lot $2,795 $0 $5,672 + $72/lot Short Plat - Final Plat or Final Binding Site Plan $2,159 + $29/lot $1,553 $1,183 $4,895 + $29/lot Sign Permit $216 $78 $0 $294 (18) Special Home Occupation Permit $431 $0 $0 $431 (13) Subdivision - Preliminary Plat $5,036 + $72/lot $5,746 $0 $10,782 + $72/lot Subdivision - Final Plat $2,879 + $29/lot $4,193 $3,540 $10,612 + $29/lot Temporary Use $144 / $359 / $216 $78 / $155 / $78 $0 $223 / $515 / $294 (9) Temporary Sign $109 $0 $0 $109 Variance - Administrative $431 $155 $0 $586 Variance - Single Family Dwelling $431 $78 $0 $509 (13) Variance - Sign & Other than Single Family Dwelling $2,877 $155 $0 $3,032 (13) WTF Administrative Permit $431 $0 $0 $431 WTF Conditional Use $2,877 $311 $0 $3,187 Zone Map Amendment (Rezone) $2,877 $0 $0 $2,877 (10) Zoning Permit / Site Plan Review $36 / $72 / value $38.82 / $77.65 / value $0 $74.66 / $149.32 / value (12a- 12e) (14) Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 1 Two (2) re-submittals of the plans are included with the review fees described in Table 1. Additional re-submittal reviews, whether attributed to the application’s action or inaction, shall be charged at the hourly rate listed in Table 1. (1) The fees are applicable for an attached accessory dwelling unit, an interior accessory dwelling unit or for a detached accessory dwelling unit in a single- family residential zone. The fee includes the cost of the Planning Services Office recording of the accessory dwelling unit covenant documents with King County. An accessory living quarters in a commercial or industrial zone is subject to the applicable construction value-based fee. (2) Any changes to an approved, but unrecorded Binding Site Plan is subject to the $431 fee for a modification to a Binding Site Plan. Any changes to a recorded Binding Site Plan are subject to the $576 fee for a modification to a Binding Site Plan. (3) The planning $287 and engineering $78 review fees are applicable to minor alterations and improvements. The planning $720 and engineering review $155 fees are applicable to all new buildings, redevelopment, and major alterations and improvements. (4) Any minor change to an approved Planned Unit Development Plan is subject to the planning $359 and engineering review $311 fees for a modification. Any major change to an approved Planned Unit Development Plan is subject to the planning $1,079 and engineering review $1,242 fees for a modification. (5) The Planning Director has the authority to change this fee as needed to cover City expenditures. (6) The planning $359 and engineering review $463 fees are applicable only to SEPA review of construction of one single family dwelling on an individual parcel. All other SEPA checklist applications are subject to both the planning $1,007 fee and the engineering review $776 fee. (7) The planning $109 and engineering review $78 fees are applicable only to modifications to a SEPA determination for one single family dwelling on an individual parcel. All other modifications to a SEPA determination are subject to the planning $359 and engineering review $155 fees. (8) $2,877 fee plus a deposit, equal to the estimated cost of contract services necessary to complete the EIS process, must be submitted to the city. Planning Engineer Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 1 Review (9) Temporary Use Permits 0-30 days .......................... $144 $ 78 31-90 days ........................ $359 $155 Extensions beyond 90 days .. $216 $ 78 (10) Application requires public hearings. If multiple permit applications which require the same hearing procedure are submitted at the same time, the applicant will be charged the full fee for the permit application with the highest fee and 50% of the established fee for each of the other permits eligible for a consolidated review and hearing. (11) The $720 fee is applicable to amendments to Single Family Residential zones only. Amendments to all other zoning districts or sections of the zoning code are subject to the $2,159 fee. (12) a) The $36 fee is applicable for Minor Single Family Dwelling Construction on an existing dwelling such as a deck, minor addition of less than 25% of existing floor area, interior remodel or accessory building of 500 square feet or less on the same lot as the existing dwelling. The Development Engineering review fee for the site plan review for these permits is $38.82. b) The $72 fee is applicable for Major Single Family Dwelling Construction on an existing dwelling such as major addition of more than 25% of existing floor area or an accessory building of more than 500 square feet on the same lot as the existing dwelling. The Development Engineering review fee for the site plan review for these permits is $77.65. c) All new single family dwelling construction in a residential zone is subject to the following fee schedule: Building Services Planning Engineer Eng. Construction Valuation Fee Review Insp. Fee Fee $0 - $74,999 ................................... $ 72 $389 $143 $75,000-$124,999 ........................... $144 $389 $143 $125,000 - $224,999 ....................... $287 $389 $143 Over $225,000 ................................ $431 $389 $143 d) All new buildings, tenant improvements, an accessory living quarters in a commercial or industrial zone and other construction and development activity, other than single family dwelling construction, is subject to the following fee schedule: Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 1 Building Services Planning Engineer Eng. Construction Valuation Fee Review Insp. Fee Fee $0 - $99,999 ................................... $ 480 $466 $72 $100,000-$249,999 ......................... $ 959 $466 $72 $250,000 - $499,999 ....................... $1,439 $466 $72 $500,000 - $999,999 ....................... $1,918 $466 $72 $1,000,000 - $4,999,999 .................. $2,877 $466 $72 $5,000,000 - $10,000,000 ................ $3,837 $466 $72 Over $10,000,000 ............................ $4,796 $466 $72 e) The zoning permit fee for those development projects for which no building permit is required but which requires site plan review and a zoning permit, shall be based on the value of the proposed development to be undertaken. The value of the proposed construction/ development shall be determined based on professional estimates by a licensed engineer, architect, landscape designer or contractor. These estimates may include, but are not limited to, grade and fill of the site, paving, placement of utilities, lighting, landscaping, and other site improvements. The combined total of the cost estimates for all development on the site shall be the established value basis for the zoning permit fee [as listed in 12c or 12d categories above as appropriate]. (13) Application requires a public hearing before the Hearings Examiner. If multiple permit applications which require a Hearing Examiner decision are submitted at the same time, the applicant will be charged the full fee for the permit application with the highest fee and 50% of the established fee for each of the other permits eligible for a consolidated review and hearing. (14) Application fees may be reduced by 75% if the application is for a mixed-use building. Fee reduction applies to site plan review/zoning permit, mixed use design review, multi-family design review and downtown design review. Fee waivers do not apply to SEPA, short plat, subdivision or other permit requests associated with the development of a site, nor does fee reduction apply to mixed use development where the commercial and residential uses are not located within the same building. (15) Plat alteration fees are determined after review whether the changes requested are minor or major. A minor change is done administratively and the fee is 25% of the cost of the original preliminary plat fee. A major change requires a public hearing or meeting and the fee is 50% of the cost of Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 1 the original preliminary plat fee. A public notice board is required for a major alteration. (16) For applications that require a public hearing before the city’s Hearing Examiner, the project applicant is responsible for 100% of the Hearing Examiner’s hourly fee and associated expenses. Payment in full shall be submitted to the City prior to release of the Hearing Examiner’s decision. This requirement shall not apply to appeal hearings. (17) These funds are distributed to the King County Assessor’s Office by the City. (18) The engineering fee only applies to freestanding signs, not wall mounted signs. (19) The applicant shall pay all document recording fees charged by King County, and all administrative fees charged by the title company for processing. Payment in full shall be submitted to the City before documents are sent for recording. (20) For applications that require public notice, the applicant shall reimburse the City for 100% of publication and mailing costs. Reimbursement shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the final decision. Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 2 Permit Application Type Review/Intake Fee Inspection / Issuance Fee Total Fee Notes Civil Construction - Non-Residential $4,969/$15,685/$47,675 $3,845/$12,128/$37,1 23 $8,815/$27,813/$84,798 (1.a) Civil Construction - Minor $621 / $1,398 $444 / $1,183 $1,065 / $2,581 (1.b) Civil Construction - Plats $14,908 / $28,730 $11,536 / $22,333 $26,444 / $51,062 (1.c) Civil Construction - Short Plats $1,864 / $4,814 $1,331 / $4,845 $3,195 / $8,660 (1.d) Critical Areas - Reasonable Use or Variance $2,174 $0 $2,174 Critical Areas - Monitoring Report $7,854 $0 $854 (2.b) Critical Areas – Delineation Report Review $1,708 $0 $1,708 (2.a) Critical Areas – Conceptual Mitigation Plan $1,553 $0 $1,553 (2.a) Critical Areas – Final Mitigation Plan $2,329 $1,775 $4,104 (2.a) Demolition Permit $311 $296 $606 Deviation Request to Construction Standards $669 $148 $847 Grade and Fill - Major - Tier 1 $621 $887 $1,509 (3.a) Grade and Fill - Major - Tier 2 $932 $1,183 $2,115 (3.a) Grade and Fill - Major - Tier 3 $1,242 $2,366 $3,609 (3.a) Grade and Fill - Major - Tier 4 $1,553 $3,550 $5,103 (3.a) Grade and Fill - Minor $466 $444 $910 (3.a) Grade and Fill - Minor (SF Only) $155 $148 $303 (3.b) Hearing Examiner Actual Cost Actual Cost (4) Hourly Rate $155 $148 Recording Fees Actual Cost Actual Cost (5) Sewer - Certificate of Availability $233 $74 $307 Sewer - Permit $78 $370 $447 (6) Street Cut Permits $311 $444 $754 (7) Street Use Permits $155 $222 $378 Water - Certificate of Availability $233 $74 $307 Water - Permit $78 $370 $447 Water Backflow Inspection $0 $148 $148 Backflow Prevention Assembly Annual Administrative Fee $0 $83 $83 Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 2 TABLE 2 NOTES: Two (2) re-submittals of the plans are included with the review fees described in Table 2. Additional re-submittal reviews, whether attributed to the application’s action or inaction, shall be charged at the hourly rate listed in Table 2. (1) Civil Construction a. Applies to work with a construction valuation of $60,000 or greater with the following sub-categories: Non-Residential Tier Construction Valuation Small $60,000 - $199,999 Medium $200,000 - $1,099,999 Large >/= $1,100,000 b. Applies to work, residential or non-residential, with a construction valuation of less than $60,000. The lower fee applies to work with valuations less than $20,000.00. c. The lower fee applies to plats 39 lots and less. d. The lower fee applies to short plats 4 lots and less. (2) Critical Areas (a) Review fees for a single family residential parcel only may be reduced by 25%. (b) Monitoring reports are required yearly for the required monitoring period. Fee assumes one site visit to verify report findings and one letter of acceptance from the city. Additional reviews will be billed at the hourly rate. (3) Grade and Fill Exhibit “F” City of Kent Planning, Development Engineering, Public Works, and Land Use Review Fees Table 2 a. The quantities and review thresholds for Grade and Fill permits are as follows: Grade and Fill Quantity Cleared or Disturbed Area New or Replaced Hard Surface Tier 0 cy - 49 cy 0 sf - 6,999 sf 0 sf - 1999 sf 0 50 cy - 499 cy 7,000 sf - <3/4 acre 2,000 sf - 4,999 sf Minor 500 cy - 4,999 cy 3/4 ac - <1 ac 5,000 sf - <1 ac 1 5,000 cy - 49,999 cy 1 ac - <2.5 ac 1 ac - <2.5 ac 2 50,000 cy - 99,999 cy 2.5 ac - <5 ac 2.5 ac - <5 ac 3 100,000 cy and larger 5 ac and larger 5 ac and larger 4 b. The Minor Single Family Grade and Fill fees apply to work performed on one single family residential parcel of 6,999 sf or less only. Short Plats, Plats, and other projects spanning multiple parcels fall into the other categories. (4) For applications that require a public hearing before the city’s Hearing Examiner, the project applicant is responsible for 100% of the Hearing Examiner’s hourly fee and associated expenses. Payment in full shall be submitted to the City prior to release of the Hearing Examiner’s decision. This requirement shall not apply to appeal hearings. (5) The applicant shall pay all document recording fees charged by King County and all administrative fees charged by the title company for processing. Payment in full shall be submitted to the City before documents are sent for recording. (6) Side sewer permit Inspection / Issuance Fee may be reduced by 50% if the work is an emergency repair only. New installations, grease interceptors, and similar work is subject to the full fee listed in the table. (7) Street Cut Permit Review and Inspection Fees may be reduced by 50% if the following criteria are met: a. The location of the work is behind the curb and gutter (if any), or outside the pavement surface (if no curb and gutter exist), and b. The size of the disturbed area is 50 square feet or less, and c. The work is in front of a single family residential zoned parcel only, and d. There is no traffic control plan required, and e. The work is not being done by a franchised utility company. This page intentionally left blank. ORDINANCE NO.________ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, amending the Kent Comprehensive Plan and its Capital Facilities Element to reflect a six-year plan for capital improvement projects (2015-2020) (CPA-2014-3). RECITALS A. The State of Washington Growth Management Act (GMA) requires internal consistency among comprehensive plan elements and the plans from other jurisdictions. B. To assure that comprehensive plans remain relevant and up to date, the GMA allows amendments to the capital facilities element of comprehensive plans concurrently with the adoption or amendment of a city budget. C. The City of Kent has established procedures for amending the Comprehensive Plan in Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code (KCC), allowing amendment of the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the City’s budget. As part of these procedures the City Council may hold the public hearing instead of the Land Use and Planning Board. KCC 1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Capital Facilities Element for 2015-2020 Capital Improvements 12.02.010. D. The City of Kent Finance Department has submitted proposed amendments to the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan to identify a six-year plan for capital improvement projects, including costs and revenue sources. E. On October 6, 2014, the City provided the State of Washington the required sixty (60) day notification under RCW 36.70A.106 of the City’s proposed amendment to the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The sixty (60) day notice period has passed. F. On October 6, 2014, the City’s SEPA responsible official issued a SEPA Addendum to existing environmental documents consisting of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Draft and Final (ENV-2010-3) and the Downtown Subarea Action Plan Supplemental EIS Draft and Final (ENV-2012-30). The SEPA Addendum explained that the proposed amendment would not create unavoidable impacts beyond those previously identified in the EIS. G. After providing appropriate public notice, the City Council of the City of Kent conducted a public hearing on October 21, 2014, to consider the six-year plan for capital improvements and the requested amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and its Capital Facilities Element. H. On December 16, 2014, the City Council for the City of Kent approved the Capital Facilities Element amendment to the Kent 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Capital Facilities Element for 2015-2020 Capital Improvements Comprehensive Plan (CPA-2014-3) to reflect a six-year plan for capital improvement projects (2015-2020). NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. - Amendment. The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and its Capital Facilities Element are hereby amended to reflect a six-year plan for capital improvement projects (2015-2020), as set forth in Exhibit “A” attached and incorporated by this reference (CPA-2014-3). SECTION 2. – Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; ordinance, section, or subsection numbering; or references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations. SECTION 3. – Severability. If any one or more section, subsection, or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and that remaining portion shall maintain its full force and effect. SECTION 4. – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage and publication, as provided by law. 3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Capital Facilities Element for 2015-2020 Capital Improvements SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of December, 2014. APPROVED: day of December, 2014. PUBLISHED: day of December, 2014. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Compplanamend-Capitalimproveplan 2015.Docx 4 Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Capital Facilities Element for 2015-2020 Capital Improvements 2015 – 2020 Capital Improvement Program September 30, 2014 This page intentionally left blank. 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Sources of Funds CIP REET 2 Revenues 800 800 800 800 800 800 4,800 Donations / Contributions 5 5 5 5 5 5 30 Drainage Revenues 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 48,000 Facilities Revenues 1,135 541 500 500 500 500 3,676 Grants 2,227 2,316 1,114 1,046 749 308 7,760 IT Revenues 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,047 1,250 1,250 7,297 Sewer Revenues 1,075 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 6,075 Sources To Be Determined 22,235 46,731 39,147 40,885 38,254 26,796 214,047 Street Revenues - B & O Tax 4,700 4,700 4,747 4,794 4,842 4,891 28,675 Voted Bonds 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 34,000 Water Revenues 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 16,800 Total Sources of Funds 78,227 68,143 59,363 60,877 58,200 46,350 371,159 Project Requests General Government 3,742 3,400 4,734 1,597 5,012 3,606 22,090 Public Safety 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 34,000 Transportation 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 72,000 Parks, Rec, and Comm Svcs 5,572 5,388 6,831 4,427 5,116 4,117 31,451 Utilities 22,913 47,355 35,798 42,853 36,072 26,627 211,618 Total Project Requests 78,227 68,143 59,363 60,877 58,200 46,350 371,159 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Amounts in Thousands Requested 1% 0% 13% 1% 2% 2%2% 58% 8% 9% 4% Sources of Funds CIP REET 2 Revenues Donations / Contributions Drainage Revenues Facilities Revenues Grants IT Revenues Sewer Revenues Sources To Be Determined Street Revenues - B & O Tax Voted Bonds Water Revenues 6% 9% 19% 9% 57% Project Requests General Government Public Safety Transportation Parks, Rec, and Comm Svcs Utilities 1 This page intentionally left blank. 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Sources of Funds CIP REET 2 Revenues 800 800 800 800 800 800 4,800 Donations / Contributions 5 5 5 5 5 5 30 Facilities Fund 1,135 541 500 500 500 500 3,676 Grants 2,227 2,316 1,114 1,046 749 308 7,760 IT Revenues 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,047 1,250 1,250 7,297 Sources To Be Determined 22,235 46,731 39,147 40,885 38,254 26,796 214,047 Street Revenues - B & O Tax 4,700 4,700 4,747 4,794 4,842 4,891 28,675 Utility Funds 11,875 11,800 11,800 11,800 11,800 11,800 70,875 Voted Bonds 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 34,000 Total Sources of Funds 78,227 68,143 59,363 60,877 58,200 46,350 371,159 Project Requests General Government Facilities 1,532 880 1,290 550 755 650 5,657 Fleet 0 1,100 0 0 0 0 1,100 Technology 2,210 1,420 3,444 1,047 4,257 2,956 15,334 Total General Government 3,742 3,400 4,734 1,597 5,012 3,606 22,090 Public Safety Police Department 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 34,000 Total Public Safety 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 34,000 Transportation Other Projects 960 960 960 960 960 960 5,760 Street Overlays 11,040 11,040 11,040 11,040 11,040 11,040 66,240 Total Transportation 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 72,000 Parks, Rec, and Comm Svcs Programs 362 363 364 366 366 367 2,188 Planning & Design 120 0 0 0 0 0 120 Redevelopment & Renovations 1,290 3,725 6,167 2,311 3,400 500 17,393 Development 3,800 1,300 300 1,750 1,350 3,250 11,750 Total Parks, Rec, and Comm Svcs 5,572 5,388 6,831 4,427 5,116 4,117 31,451 Utilities Water 12,238 20,460 10,958 7,528 7,982 6,927 66,093 Sewer 1,075 3,990 10,830 10,410 5,370 6,125 37,800 Stromwater 9,600 22,905 14,010 24,915 22,720 13,575 107,725 Total Utilities 22,913 47,355 35,798 42,853 36,072 26,627 211,618 Total Project Requests 78,227 68,143 59,363 60,877 58,200 46,350 371,159 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Amounts in Thousands Requested 2 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Priority Sources of Funds Facilities Revenues 1,135 541 500 500 500 500 3,676 IT Revenues 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,047 1,250 1,250 7,297 Source To Be Determined 1,357 1,609 2,984 50 3,262 1,856 11,117 Total Sources of Funds 3,742 3,400 4,734 1,597 5,012 3,606 22,090 Projects Requested Facilities 1 HVAC Lifecycle Replacements (Lifecycle)200 100 100 100 100 100 700 2 Emergency Repairs 100 100 100 70 100 100 570 3 Kitchen Equipment (Lifecycle)46 40 25 20 20 30 181 4 Roof Repairs (Lifecycle)500 150 450 35 400 145 1,680 5 Kent Pool (Lifecycle)25 25 25 25 25 25 150 6 Centennial Center Reseal 45 45 45 50 185 7 Fire Alarm Upgrades 20 20 8 Parking Lots (Lifecycle)165 195 130 100 590 9 Floor Covering Replacements (Lifecycle)150 290 200 60 100 800 10 Commons Racquet Ball Wall Repairs 40 40 11 City Hall Elevator Doors 60 60 12 City Hall/Council Chambers Renovation 100 100 13 Facilities Card Access 75 75 75 225 14 Corrections Portable Back-up Power Conn.50 50 15 Tenants Requested Renovations 56 50 50 50 50 50 306 Total Facilities Projects 1,532 880 1,290 550 755 650 5,657 Fleet 4 Fuel Island Replacement 1,100 1,100 Total Fleet Projects 0 1,100 0 0 0 0 1,100 Technology 2 Hardware Lifecycle Replacements 1,236 509 622 622 622 622 4,232 3 Emerging Projects 242 193 200 200 200 200 1,235 3 Software Lifecycle 733 718 2,622 225 3,435 2,134 9,867 Total Technology Projects 2,210 1,420 3,444 1,047 4,257 2,956 15,334 Total Projects Requested 3,742 3,400 4,734 1,597 5,012 3,606 22,090 General Government 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Requested Amounts in Thousands 3 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Priority Sources of Funds Voted Bonds 34,000 34,000 Total Sources of Funds 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 34,000 Projects Requested 1 New Kent Police Station 34,000 34,000 Total Projects Requested 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 34,000 Public Safety 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Requested Amounts in Thousands 4 Priority 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Sources of Funds Street Revenues - B & O Tax 4,700 4,700 4,747 4,794 4,842 4,891 28,675 Sources To Be Determined 7,300 7,300 7,253 7,206 7,158 7,109 43,325 Total Sources of Funds 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 72,000 Projects Requested 1 Citywide Gaurdrail & Safety Imp 20 20 20 20 20 20 120 1 Kent Shuttle Service 155 155 155 155 155 155 930 1 Neighborhood Traffic Control 30 30 30 30 30 30 180 1 Sidewalk Repair 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000 1 Signals/Contollers 75 75 75 75 75 75 450 1 St Light Replacement 50 50 50 50 50 50 300 1 St Striping/Thermoplastic Program 130 130 130 130 130 130 780 1 Street Overlays 11,040 11,040 11,040 11,040 11,040 11,040 66,240 Total Projects Requested 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 72,000 Transportation 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Requested Amounts in Thousands 5 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Priority Sources of Funds CIP REET2 Revenues 800 800 800 800 800 800 4,800 Donations / Contributions 5 5 5 5 5 5 30 Grant - King County 232 235 237 239 242 1,184 Grant - Other 5 6 6 7 7 8 39 Grant - Washington State 1,990 2,075 872 800 500 300 6,537 Source To Be Determined 2,540 2,267 4,912 2,576 3,562 3,004 18,862 Total Sources of Funds 5,572 5,388 6,831 4,427 5,116 4,117 31,451 Projects Requested Programs 3 ShoWare Lifecycle 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800 4 Green Kent Program 20 21 21 22 22 23 129 5 Adopt-A-Park Volunteer Program 42 42 43 44 44 44 259 Planning & Design 7 Park and Open Space Plan 120 120 Redevelopment & Renovations 1 Community Parks Reinvestment Program 525 700 700 600 500 300 3,325 2 Neighborhood Park Reinvestment Program 475 1,100 400 700 300 200 3,175 11 Lake Meridian Park Phase I 290 1,450 1,740 13 Van Dorens Park Renovation 125 2,018 2,143 14 Russell Road Field Conversion 250 1,743 1,993 15 Kent Memorial Park Renovation 121 811 932 16 Lake Fenwick Park Phase I 100 1,185 1,285 17 Springwood Park Improvements 200 2,600 2,800 Development 12 Kent Valley Loop Trail Implementation 250 150 150 550 18 Strategic Development 150 150 150 150 350 2,650 3,600 19 Strategic Assemblages 3,400 1,000 1,600 1,000 600 7,600 Total Projects Requested 5,572 5,388 6,831 4,427 5,116 4,117 31,451 Parks, Recreation & Community Services 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Requested Amounts in Thousands 6 Priority 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Sources of Funds Water Revenues 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 16,800 Sources To Be Determined 9,438 17,660 8,158 4,728 5,182 4,127 49,293 Total Sources of Funds 12,238 20,460 10,958 7,528 7,982 6,927 66,093 Projects Requested Water Supply & Distribution 1 HCP Implementation (Clark Springs)164 95 238 893 212 242 1,844 2 Tacoma Pipeline 1,889 30 30 30 30 30 2,039 3 Water Conservation 50 50 50 50 50 50 300 4 Landsburg Mine 100 100 100 100 100 100 600 5 Guiberson Reservoir Replacement 3,000 6,000 3,000 12,000 6 Misc Water Improvements 2,035 2,000 2,035 2,000 2,035 2,000 12,105 7 East Hill Pressure Zone (640)2,095 4,030 2,650 1,750 2,500 2,150 15,175 8 Large Meter & Vault Replacements 75 75 75 75 75 75 450 9 Hydrant Replacement 30 30 30 30 30 30 180 10 Source Generators 200 250 450 900 11 Wellhead Projection 800 800 800 800 800 800 4,800 12 Reservoir Painting 250 250 500 13 Security Improvements 50 50 50 50 50 50 300 14 Transmission Mains 750 750 750 750 750 750 4,500 15 Jenkins Creek Bridge Replacement 2,000 2,000 16 SCADA System Upgrades 150 150 150 150 150 750 17 Automated Meter Reading 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000 18 Water System Plan 300 300 19 Seismic Joints on Bridges 250 250 250 750 20 Road Projects 3,500 3,500 21 212 Plant Valve Replacement 100 100 Total Projects Requested 12,238 20,460 10,958 7,528 7,982 6,927 66,093 Utilities Water Supply & Distribution 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Requested Amounts in Thousands 7 Priority 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Sources of Funds Sewer Revenues 1,075 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 6,075 Sources to be Determined 0 2,990 9,830 9,410 4,370 5,125 31,725 Total Sources of Funds 1,075 3,990 10,830 10,410 5,370 6,125 37,800 Projects Requested Sewer 1 Miscellaneous Sewer Replacements 675 1,790 5,080 5,310 5,120 5,250 23,225 2 Linda Heights Replacement 300 1,600 1,900 3 Skyline Sewer Interceptor 100 2,100 2,200 4 Miscellaneous Pump Station Improvements 100 100 100 100 100 100 600 5 Horsehoe Sanitary Replacement 300 1,750 2,050 6 Derbyshire Sewer Improvements 400 3,100 3,100 6,600 7 SCADA System Upgrade 150 150 150 150 600 8 Frager Rd Secondary Wetwell & Grinder 625 625 Total Projects Requested 1,075 3,990 10,830 10,410 5,370 6,125 37,800 Utilities Sewer 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Requested Amounts in Thousands 8 Priority 2015 2016 2016 2018 2019 2020 Total Sources of Funds Drainage Revenues 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 48,000 Sources to be Determined 1,600 14,905 6,010 16,915 14,720 5,575 59,725 Total Sources of Funds 9,600 22,905 14,010 24,915 22,720 13,575 107,725 Projects Requested Stormwater Management 1 Green River Levee Repairs 3,200 9,000 1,100 15,300 10,000 38,600 2 Creek & River Tributaries *3,200 8,900 8,500 3,700 7,200 9,500 41,000 3 NPDES 200 205 210 215 220 225 1,275 4 Green River Habitat 700 300 300 1,300 5 Soos Creek & Tributaries 400 800 2,600 2,100 5,900 6 Storm Maintenance & Replacement 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 12,600 7 West Hill Drainage 100 750 850 Drainage 8 Drainage Portion of Street Improvements 200 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 6,200 Total Projects Requested 9,600 22,905 14,010 24,915 22,720 13,575 107,725 Utilities Stormwater Management 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Requested Amounts in Thousands 9 .11 Ben Wolters,Director PLANNING SERVICES -• N. Satterstrom,• Planning Director Charlene Anderson,• Manager Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent, WA 98032-5895 r�r• Responsible Official: Charlene Anderson SCOPE The City of Kent has completed environmental analysis, pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), for an amendment of the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan to include the City's 2015-2020 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). This amendment to the Capital Facilities Element is occurring concurrently with the adoption of the City's 2015-16 operating budget as provided by RCW 36.70A.130. The GMA requires cities and counties to approve and maintain a six (6) year capital facilities plan which includes requirements for specific types of capital facilities, measurable levels -of -service (LOS) standards, financial feasibility, and assurance that adequate facilities are provided as population and employment growth occurs. Kent's biennial budget document and six -year CIP fulfill the GMA requirement for facilities planning. In addition, these documents serve as a foundation for the city's fiscal management and eligibility for grants and loans. The CIP and biennial budget, along with the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan provide coordination among the city's many plans for capital improvements. The biennial budget and six -year CIP contain broad goals and specific financial policies that guide and implement the provisions for adequate public services and facilities. The six -year CIP is a funding mechanism to implement projects and programs identified in the City's Comprehensive . Plan. Specifically, the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains goals and policies related to the provision and maintenance of public services and capital facilities which are necessary.to support the projected growth over the next twenty (20) years. The goals and policies of the Capital Facilities Element are consistent with the Land Use, Transportation and Parks and Open Space Elements. The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement EIS, draft and final, as well as the Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action Supplemental EIS, draft and Comprehensive Plan EIS - Addendum Capital Improvement Program 2015-2020 final, evaluated the growth potential as identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The adoption of the six -year CIP concurrently with the city's biennial budget is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan EIS and Downtown Subarea Action Plan Supplemental EIS analyses as the types of projects and programs identified in the CIP are specifically related to the growth projections in the Comprehensive Plan., EIS and SEIS. SEPA COMPLIANCE On February 13, 2010, the City of Kent issued a Determination of Significance (DS) and Notice of Scoping for the Midway Subarea Plan and Planned Action Ordinance as well,.as different concepts for growth elsewhere in the Kent Planning Area (ENV-2010-3). The City solicited public comment on the scope of the DEIS during the comment period as well as through a February 22, 2010 open house meeting. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued on October 22, 2010 for the Draft Midway Subarea Plan and Draft Planned Action Ordinance, as well as a Proposal for alternative growth strategies at a programmatic level for the Kent Planning Area, The DEIS was distributed to City Council and Land Use & Planning Board 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 September 1, 2011. On October 9, 2012, the. City of Kent issued a Determination of Significance (DS) and Notice of Scoping for the Downtown Subarea Action Plan Update (ENV-2012-30). The City solicited public comment on the scope of the DEIS during the comment period, as well as through an open house meeting. A Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) was issued on June 21, 2013 for the Draft. Downtown Subarea Action Plan, amendments of Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning Districts maps, development regulations, Planned Action and ,,Infill Exemption Ordinances, as well as alternative growth strategies at a programmatic level for the Kent Planning Area and Midway Subarea. The DSEIS was distributed to City Council and Land Use & Planning Board members, adjacent jurisdictions, affected agencies and other parties of interest. After comments on the DSEIS were solicited and reviewed, a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) was issued and distributed on October 4, 2013. This Addendum to the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action ELS and Downtown Subarea .Action Plan Planned Action Supplemental EIS evaluates the.. adoption of the six -year CIP. No additional impacts are identified since the CIP implements projects and programs identified and evaluated in the EIS and SEIS. STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY Future projects associated with. the CIP will be subject to and shall. be consistent with the following: City of Kent Comprehensive Plan, the Kent City Code, International Fire Code, International Building Code, Public Works Page 2 of 5 Comprehensive Plan EIS - Addendum Capital Improvement Program 2015-2020 Standards and all other applicable laws and ordinances in effect 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 the Comprehensive Plan. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and rules established for the act, WAC 19791 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 197-11-06.0(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. SEPIA rules also clearly state that agencies shall use a variety of mechanisms, including addenda, adoption;!, and P incorporation by reference, to avoid duplication and excess paperwork. .Future projects identified and associated with the implementation of the Capital 'Idmprovement Program may require individual and separate environmental review, pursuant to SEPA. Such review will occur when a specific project is identified. Prior Environmental .Documents - The City of Kent issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action on October 22, 2010 (#ENV-2010-3). The DEIS analyzed alternative growth strategies at a programmatic level for the Kent ;Planning Area, as well as adoption of the Midway Subarea Plan and a planned action ordinance to cover a portion of the Midway Subarea, and recommended mitigation measures, which were used in preparing subarea plan policies. A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was issued on September 1, 2011, and the Midway Subarea Plan, Land Use Plan and Zoning Districts Map amendments, and development regulations were adopted by the City Council on December 13, 2011. The City of Kent issued;.:r a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for .the City of Kept Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action on June 21, 2013 (#ENV-2012-30). The DSEIS analyzed alternative growth strategies for the. Downtown Subarea, adoption of the Page 3 of 5 Comprehensive Plan EIS - Addendum Capital Improvement Program 2015-2020 Downtown Subarea Action Plan, amendments of Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning Districts maps, development regulations, Planned Action and Infill Exemption Ordinances, as well, as alternative growth strategies at a programmatic level for the Kent :Planning Area and Midway Subarea. The DSEIS also recommended mitigation measures, which were used in preparing subarea plan policies. A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) was issued on October 4, 2013, and the Downtown Subarea Action Plan, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning Districts maps, and amendments to development regulations within the General Commercial -Mixed Use zoning district were adopted by the City Council on November 19, 2013. The City Council adopted the Downtown Subarea Planned Action and Infill Exemption Ordinances on December 10, 20139 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"City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action EIS and the City of Kent Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action SEIS but does not substantially change the identified impacts and analyses; 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 Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action EIS, draft and final, and the Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action 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 adoption of the six -year CIP implements goals and policies identified in the City's Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the CIP implements the following: Goa/ CF-1 - As the City of Kent continues to grow and develop, ensure that an adequate supply and range of public services and capital facilities are available to provide satisfactory standards of public health, safety, and quality of life. Policy CF1.2 -Ensure that public services and capital facilities needs are addressed in updates to the;. Capital Facilities Plans and Capital Improvement Programs, and development regulations as appropriate. Goa/ CF-4 -Ensure that appropriate funding sources are available to acquire or bond for the provision of needed public services and facilities. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION ��. Page4of5 Comprehensive Plan EIS - Addendum Capital Improvement Program 2015-2020.: 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 Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action EIS and Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action SEIS. DECISION The City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action EIS, draft and final, and the City of Kent Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action SEIS, draft and final, provided analyses with regard to the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan elements, goals and policies. This includes the implementation of the Capital Facilities Element and Capital Improvement Programs. The City has reviewed the 2015-2020 CIP and has found it to be consistent with the range, types and magnitude of impacts and corresponding mitigation outlined in the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action EIS and the City of Kent Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action SEIS. The adoption of the six -year CIP does not substantially change any identified related impacts in the EIS or SEIS. This analysis and subsequent addendum did not identify any new significant impacts associated with the adoption of the 2015-2020 CIP. Therefore, this addendum, combined with the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Review and Midway Subarea Planned Action EIS and the City of Kent Downtown Subarea Action Plan Planned Action SEIS adequately evaluate potential adverse environmental impacts and provide..appropriate mitigation for this nonproject action. Based upon this analysis;: a separate threshold determination is not required. This document and corresponding environmental record may be utilized in the future in conjunction with environmental review for future projects identified in the CIP in accordance with the guidelines provided by WAC 197-11. Dated: October 6, 2014 Signature: CA/pm: S:\Permit\Plan\Env\2014\CIPaddendum2015-2020.doc Charlene Anderson, AICP, Responsible Official Page 5 of 5 This page intentionally left blank. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, amending section 3.28.130 of the Kent City Code, entitled “Limitation of revenue received,” reallocating the distribution of Business and Occupation tax revenue received. RECITALS NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. – Amendment. Section 3.28.130 of the Kent City Code is amended as follows: Sec. 3.28.130. Limitation of revenue received. Revenue received from the tax imposed by this chapter shall first be applied to the actual cost ofto staff and operate the business and occupation tax division; including one information technology position dedicated to support that division, but not to exceed the amount budgeted for that division by the City Council.administering this tax, which shall not exceed three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) per annum. This allocation for administrative 1 Amend KCC 3.28.130 Ordinance costs shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the applicable inflation factor listed in the consumer price index. One hundred (100) percent of the remaining revenue shall be allocated to the design, construction, maintenance, improvement, operation, and repair of the city’s transportation infrastructure and appurtenant improvements including, without limitation, streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, bicycle and pedestrian lanes and paths, street trees, drainage, lighting, and signalization up to a total annual allocation of four million seven hundred thousand dollars ($4,700,000). Any remaining revenues received shall be applied to the capital improvement fund and allocated according to the direction of the city council. SECTION 2. – Severability. If any one or more section, subsection, or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and that remaining portion shall maintain its full force and effect. SECTION 3. – Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the city attorney, the city clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; ordinance, section, or subsection numbering; or references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations. SECTION 4. – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage and publication as provided by law. 2 Amend KCC 3.28.130 Ordinance SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of , 2014. APPROVED: day of , 2014. PUBLISHED: day of , 2014. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\B&O Tax 3.28.130.docx 3 Amend KCC 3.28.130 Ordinance This page intentionally left blank. ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, relating to budgets and finance and adopting the final 2015-2016 biennial budget. RECITALS A. The tax estimates and preliminary budget for the City of Kent, Washington, for the 2015-2016 biennial years have been prepared and filed as provided by law, and the budget has been printed and distributed. B. Notice has been published in the official paper of the City of Kent setting the time and place for public hearings on the budget. The notice also stated that all taxpayers calling at the Office of the City Clerk would be furnished a copy of the 2015-2016 biennial budget. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. - Budget Adoption. Pursuant to RCW 35A.34.120, the budget for the 2015-2016 biennial, as summarized in Exhibit “A” and as set forth in the 2015-2016 biennial Preliminary Comprehensive Budget, 1 2014-2015 Biennial Budget Adoption Ordinance which is on file with the city clerk and which is amended by Exhibit “B,” all of which are incorporated into this ordinance by this reference, is hereby adopted in the amounts and for the purposes established in that budget as the final budget for the City’s 2015-2016 biennium. SECTION 2. - Transmittal. The finance director shall transmit a complete copy of the final adopted budget to the Division of Municipal Corporations in the Office of the State Auditor and to the Association of Washington Cities. SECTION 3. - Adjustments. City administration shall administer the Annual Budget and in doing so may authorize adjustments pursuant to RCW 35A.34.200 and as otherwise provided by law. SECTION 4. - Severability. If any one or more section, subsection, or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 5. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force January 1, 2015, which is more than five (5) days from and after the date of passage and publication, as provided by law. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK 2 2014-2015 Biennial Budget Adoption Ordinance APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of , 2014. APPROVED: day of , 2014. PUBLISHED: day of , 2014. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Ordinance Biennial Budgetadoption 2015-2016.Docx 3 2014-2015 Biennial Budget Adoption Ordinance 2015 2016 Beginning 2015 2015 2016 2016 Ending Balance Revenues Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Balance GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS GENERAL FUND 12,918,790 80,511,899 81,011,899 81,593,555 83,753,555 10,258,790 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Street Operating 613,910 9,647,034 9,556,734 9,670,416 9,569,841 804,785 LEOFF 1 Retiree Benefits 970,860 1,085,460 1,085,460 1,164,516 1,125,877 1,009,499 Lodging Tax 243,840 208,145 188,500 210,226 188,500 285,211 Youth/Teen Programs 161,140 907,028 932,000 912,600 942,000 106,768 Capital Improvement (5,381,230)13,624,231 11,007,484 13,296,032 10,690,646 (159,097) Criminal Justice 1,357,641 2,654,327 3,085,451 2,675,992 3,138,302 464,207 Community Block Grant 914,731 914,731 914,731 914,731 Other Operating Projects 214,764 120,005 120,005 116,115 116,115 214,764 ShoWare Operating 959,325 528,003 965,808 535,923 861,207 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS LTGO Debt 9,622,341 9,622,341 9,183,774 9,183,774 Special Assessment 5,817,051 2,041,207 2,967,844 1,709,756 2,607,743 3,992,427 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Street Projects 4,700,000 4,700,000 4,700,000 4,700,000 Parks Projects 810,000 810,000 810,000 810,000 Technology Projects 1,697,000 1,697,000 1,697,000 1,697,000 PROPRIETARY FUNDS ENTERPRISE FUNDS Water 5,995,080 18,828,692 18,932,058 18,871,858 18,918,474 5,845,098 Sewerage 11,316,312 45,482,299 46,276,385 46,125,921 46,811,963 9,836,184 Golf Complex (2,954,800)2,699,286 3,069,372 2,737,450 2,724,421 (3,311,857) INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Fleet Services 3,005,770 4,448,514 4,799,002 4,674,233 4,848,310 2,481,205 Central Services 1,488,050 7,343,409 7,709,740 7,683,855 8,065,597 739,977 Facilities 1,450,955 5,170,397 5,745,439 5,255,641 5,278,482 853,072 Insurance 13,145,710 13,424,648 15,814,765 13,780,742 16,390,807 8,145,528 TOTAL GROSS BUDGET 50,363,843 226,899,978 230,574,213 228,750,221 233,012,061 42,427,768 LESS: Internal Service Funds 27,012,523 27,012,523 28,042,192 28,042,192 Transfers 23,482,908 23,482,908 22,521,838 22,521,838 TOTAL BUDGET 50,363,843 176,404,547 180,078,782 178,186,191 182,448,031 42,427,768 CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON 2015 - 16 Biennial Budget Exhibit A 2015 2016 Beginning 2015 2015 2016 2016 Ending Balance Revenues Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Balance GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS GENERAL FUND 12,918,790 81,364,217 81,612,479 83,646,836 84,080,815 12,236,549 B&O Tax (3,000,000) (3,000,000) Sales Tax to 4%954,250 1,338,137 ECD Permits/Plans Review 136,000 136,000 Property Tax 999,170 1,119,050 $20 Car Tab Fee (1,660,000) Utilities Repayment (168,842) (168,842) Historical Society 10,000 10,000 Tax Mgr change to IT PMBA (15,000) (15,000) Equity/Social Justice Training 40,000 25,000 Supported Employment 44,730 44,730 Police Officers - 3 333,050 Parking Enforce to 1.0 FTE 13,532 13,532 13,532 13,532 PW Alloc B&O Costs (400,000) (400,000) Tech Corr-Vegetation Crew (125,000) (125,000) 12,918,790 80,511,899 81,011,899 81,593,555 83,753,555 10,258,790 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Street Operating 613,910 9,647,034 9,556,734 9,670,416 9,569,841 804,785 LEOFF 1 Retiree Benefits 970,860 1,085,460 1,085,460 1,164,516 1,125,877 1,009,499 Lodging Tax 243,840 208,145 188,500 210,226 188,500 285,211 Youth/Teen Programs 161,140 907,028 932,000 912,600 942,000 106,768 Capital Improvement (5,381,230) 13,190,231 10,682,484 12,722,532 10,290,646 (441,597) Sales Tax to 4%409,000 573,500 ShoWare Debt Svc 300,000 400,000 Neighborhood Council 25,000 25,000 (5,381,230) 13,624,231 11,007,484 13,296,032 10,690,646 (159,097) Criminal Justice 1,357,641 2,654,327 2,974,433 2,675,992 3,027,284 686,243 Bullistic Vest Replacement 22,600 22,600 Taser Replacements 36,450 36,450 Pursuit Equip & Training 12,000 12,000 Professional Services 6,913 6,913 Existing Costs from GF 33,055 33,055 1,357,641 2,654,327 3,085,451 2,675,992 3,138,302 464,207 Community Block Grant 914,731 914,731 914,731 914,731 Other Operating Projects 214,764 120,005 120,005 116,115 116,115 214,764 ShoWare Operating (2,655,000) 959,325 528,003 965,808 535,923 (1,793,793) Trf from GF in 2014 2,655,000 959,325 528,003 965,808 535,923 861,207 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS LTGO Debt 9,622,341 9,622,341 9,183,774 9,183,774 Special Assessment 5,817,051 2,041,207 2,967,844 1,709,756 2,607,743 3,992,427 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Street Projects 4,700,000 4,700,000 4,700,000 4,700,000 Parks Projects 810,000 810,000 810,000 810,000 Technology Projects 1,697,000 1,697,000 1,697,000 1,697,000 CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON 2015 - 16 Biennial Budget Exhibit B 2015 2016 Beginning 2015 2015 2016 2016 Ending Balance Revenues Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Balance CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON 2015 - 16 Biennial Budget Exhibit B PROPRIETARY FUNDS ENTERPRISE FUNDS Water 5,995,080 18,895,204 18,887,223 18,938,370 18,985,845 5,955,586 Utilities Repayment (66,512) (66,512) Dump Trailer/Zipper 113,600 Tech Corr-Vegetation Crew (68,765) (67,371) 5,995,080 18,828,692 18,932,058 18,871,858 18,918,474 5,845,098 Sewerage 11,316,312 45,584,629 46,067,281 46,228,251 46,606,018 10,455,893 Utilities Repayment (102,330) (102,330) Tech Corr-Vegetation Crew 209,104 205,945 11,316,312 45,482,299 46,276,385 46,125,921 46,811,963 9,836,184 Golf Complex (2,954,800) 2,699,286 3,069,372 2,737,450 2,724,421 (3,311,857) INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Fleet Services 3,005,770 4,448,514 4,799,002 4,674,233 4,848,310 2,481,205 Central Services 1,488,050 7,343,409 7,709,740 7,683,855 8,065,597 739,977 Kent FM Radio (169,000) (169,000) (134,000) (134,000) 1,488,050 7,174,409 7,540,740 7,549,855 7,931,597 739,977 Facilities 1,450,955 5,170,397 5,745,439 5,255,641 5,278,482 853,072 Insurance 13,145,710 13,424,648 15,814,765 13,780,742 16,390,807 8,145,528 TOTAL GROSS BUDGET 50,363,843 226,899,978 230,574,213 228,750,221 233,012,061 42,427,768 LESS: Internal Service Funds 27,012,523 27,012,523 28,042,192 28,042,192 Transfers 23,482,908 23,482,908 22,521,838 22,521,838 TOTAL BUDGET 50,363,843 176,404,547 180,078,782 178,186,191 182,448,031 42,427,768 Agenda Item: Other Business – 4C TO: City Council DATE: December 16, 2014 SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Update to Kent City Code Regarding School Impact Fees, Ordinances – Adopt SUMMARY: Kent City Code provides for imposition of school impact fees on behalf of any school district that provides the City with annual updates of their capital facilities plan; the plans are adopted by reference as part of the Capital Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan. The City Council held the required public hearing for the plans and fees on October 21, 2014, at the same time as the second public hearings for the budget and the City’s six-year Capital Improvement Plan. EXHIBITS: (1) Ordinance; (2) Capital Facilities Plans, and (3) Exhibits RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee YEA: NAY: BUDGET IMPACTS: None MOTION: Adopt Ordinance Nos. and updating the Capital Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 12.13 of the Kent City Code to incorporate the 2014/15 – 2019/20 Capital Facilities Plans for the Kent, Federal Way, Auburn and Highline School Districts updating School Impact Fees. This page intentionally left blank. ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, amending Section 12.13.160 of the Kent City Code to adjust the school impact fee schedules (CPA-2014-2). RECITALS A. The City of Kent has adopted a school impact fee program as authorized by the State Growth Management Act (GMA) and RCW 82.02.050. B. Chapter 12.13 of the Kent City Code (KCC) requires that the Capital Facilities Plans of school districts be submitted to the City of Kent on an annual basis for City Council review, and that such review shall occur in conjunction with any update of the Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. C. The Kent, Federal Way, Auburn and Highline School Districts have requested amendments to the text of the Comprehensive Plan to reflect proposed changes to impact fees. D. On October 6, 2014, the City provided the required sixty (60) day notification under RCW 36.70A.106 to the State of Washington of the City’s proposed amendment to the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 12.13 of the KCC. The sixty (60) day 1 School Impact Fees – 2014-2015 notice period has passed. E. After a public hearing before the City Council on October 21, 2014, the City Council on December 16, 2014, approved Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2014-2 to include the Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal Way, Auburn and Highline School Districts, which include changes in proposed impact fees as follows: (1) for the Kent School District, maintaining the school impact fee for single-family units at $5,486, and for multifamily units at $3,378; (2) for the Federal Way School District, decreasing the school impact fee for single-family units to $5,171, and for multifamily units to $1,834; (3) for the Auburn School District, decreasing the school impact fee for single-family units to $4,137.21, and an increase for multifamily units to $3,518.17; and (4) for the Highline School District, decreasing the school impact fee for single- family units to $6,328 and an increase for multifamily units to $3,761. F. In order to implement the Comprehensive Plan amendment that established the new impact fee schedules referenced above, it is necessary to amend section 12.13.160 KCC. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. – Amendment. Section 12.13.160 of the Kent City Code is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 12.13.160. Base fee schedule. The following fee shall be assessed for the indicated types of development: 2 School Impact Fees – 2014-2015 School District Single-Family Multifamily Multifamily Studio Kent, No. 415 $5,486.00 $3,378.00 $0.00 Federal Way, No. 210 $5,171363.00 $1,834924.00 0.00 Auburn, No. 408 $5,398.934,137.21 $3,387.843,518.17 0.00 Highline, No. 401 $7,4126,328.00 $3,2513,761.00 0.00 SECTION 2. - Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; ordinance, section, or subsection numbering; or references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations. SECTION 3. – Severability. If any one or more section, subsection, or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and that remaining portion shall maintain its full force and effect. SECTION 4. – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage and publication, as provided by law. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR 3 School Impact Fees – 2014-2015 ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of December, 2014. APPROVED: day of December, 2014. PUBLISHED: day of December, 2014. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. ________, passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Schoolimpact-2014-2015 Amend 12 13 Ordinance.Docx 4 School Impact Fees – 2014-2015 ORDINANCE NO.________ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, amending the Kent Comprehensive Plan and its Capital Facilities Element to include the Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal Way, Auburn and Highline School Districts (CPA-2014-2). RECITALS A. The State of Washington Growth Management Act (GMA) requires internal consistency among comprehensive plan elements and the plans from other jurisdictions. B. To assure that comprehensive plans remain relevant and up to date, the GMA allows amendments to the capital facilities element of comprehensive plans concurrently with the adoption or amendment of a city budget. RCW 36.70A.130(2)(a)(iv). C. The City of Kent has established procedures for amending the Comprehensive Plan in Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code (KCC), allowing amendment of the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the City budget and allowing the City Council to hold the public hearing instead of the Land Use and Planning Board. KCC 12.02.010. 1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2014 School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans D. The Kent, Federal Way, Auburn and Highline School Districts have submitted proposed amendments to their Capital Facilities Plans to be included in an amendment of the City’s Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. E. After providing appropriate public notice, the City Council of the City of Kent considered the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment and held a public hearing on the same on October 21, 2014. F. On October 6, 2014, the City provided the required sixty (60) day notification under RCW 36.70A.106 to the State of Washington of the City’s proposed amendment to the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan and the sixty (60) day notice period has passed. G. On December 16, 2014, the City Council of the City of Kent approved the Capital Facilities Element amendment CPA-2014-2 to include the Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal Way, Auburn and Highline School Districts, as set forth in Exhibit “A” attached and incorporated by this reference. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. - Amendment. The Kent Comprehensive Plan, and its Capital Facilities Element, are hereby amended to include the Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent, Federal Way, Auburn and Highline School Districts, as set forth in Exhibit “A” attached and incorporated by this reference (CPA-2014-2). 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2014 School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans SECTION 2. – Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; ordinance, section, or subsection numbering; or references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations. SECTION 3. – Severability. If any one or more section, subsection, or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and that remaining portion shall maintain its full force and effect. SECTION 4. – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage and publication, as provided by law. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY 3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2014 School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans PASSED: day of December, 2014. APPROVED: day of December, 2014. PUBLISHED: day of December, 2014. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\CompPlanAmend-SchoolDistCapitalFacilitiesPlans-2015-2020.docx 4 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2014 School Dist. Capital Facilities Plans Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 201 - 2015 2019 - 2020 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Kent School District SIX -YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014-2015 - 2019-2020 April 2014 Kent School District No. 415 12033 SE 256`h Street Kent, Washington 98030-6643 (253) 373-7295 A Ob KENT `_ti.Ct17�. DISTRICT BOARD of DIRECTORS Ms. Debbie Straus, President Ms. Karen DeBruler, Vice President Ms. Agda Burchard, Legislative Representative Mr. Russ Hanscom, Director Ms. Maya Vengadasalam, Director ADMINISTRATION Dr. Edward Lee Vargas Superintendent of Schools Dr. Richard A. Stedry, Chief Business Officer Ralph Fortunato, CSBS, Director of Fiscal Services Fred Long, Director of Facilities Services Gwenn Escher-Derdowski, Planning Administrator Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Kent School District '[ 6f ofContents Section Page Number I Executive Summary 2 11 Six -Year Enrollment Projection & History 4 III District Standard of Service 8 1 V Inventory, Capacity & Maps of Existing Schools 11 V Six -Year Planning & Construction Plan — Site Map 14 V I Portable Classrooms 17 V I I Projected Classroom Capacity 18 V I I I Finance Plan, Cost Basis and Impact Fee Schedules 23 I X Summary of Changes to Previous Plan 31 X Appendixes 32 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan DRAFT April 2014 I Executive Summary This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent School District (the "District") as the organization's capital facilities planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act, King County Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac. This annual Plan update was prepared using data available in the spring of 2014 for the 2013-2014 school year. Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the soile planning document lor all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long a longer or shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and Renton and included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. This Plan has also been submitted to cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac for their information and inclusion in their Comprehensive Plans. In order for impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of Kent School District, the Metropolitan King County Council must adopt this Plan and a fee -implementing ordinance for the District. For impact fees to be collected in the incorporated portions of the District, the cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances. This Capital Facilities Plan establishes a standard of service in order to ascertain current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for local program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act, King County and City codes and ordinances authorize the District to make adjustments to the standard of service based on specific needs for students of the District. (continued) Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 2 I Executive Summary (continued) The capacity of each school in the District is calculated based on the District standard of -and the existing inventory of permanent �l 'a ,a - • a•,..:. a. Kent School District is the fourth largest district in the state. Enrollment is electronically reported monthly to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction ("OSPI") on Form P-223. Although funding apportionment is based on Annual Average Full Time Equivalent (AAFTE), enrollment on October 1 is a widely recognized "snapshot in time" that is used to report the District's enrollment for the year as reported to OSPI. The Board of Directors approved Full Day Kindergarten ("FDK') for all Elementary Schools in 2011-12 and FDK projections are used to forecast Kindergarten enrollment in future years. The District received authorization from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction to temporarily re -open the former Kent Elementary School at 317 Fourth Ave South in Kent. This facility will be used to house the kindergarten and early child education classes for both Kent and Neely -O'Brien Elementary to alleviate overcrowding at those schools. This building will re -open in fall 2014 as the Kent Valley Early Learning Center. The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of transitional facilities are reviewed in detail in various sections of this Plan. The District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the transitional use of portables. A financing plan is included in Section V I I I which demonstrates the District's ability to implement this Plan. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, this Plan will be updated annually with changes in the impact fee schedules adjusted accordingly. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 3 For capital facilities planning, enrollment growth projections are based on cohort survival and student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years. (see Table 2) The student generation factor is the basis for the growth projections from new developments. (see Page S) King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see Table 1) 8.67% of 25,057 King County live births in 2009 is projected for 2,172 students expected in Kindergarten for October 1, 2014. This is an decrease of 165 live births in King County over the previous year. (see Table 2) Full Day Kindergarten ("FDK") programs at all 28 elementary schools require an adjustment to the Kindergarten forecast for projecting FDK at 1.0 FTE for capital facilities planning. P-223 Reports will continue to include FDK students at 1.0 for twelve schools with FDK funded by state apportionment, and all other kindergarten students will be reported at .50 FTE for state funding in 2013-2014. Early Childhood Education students (also identified as "ECE"), "Preschool Inclusive Education ("IE") students are forecast and reported to OSPI separately on Form P-223H for Special Education Enrollment. Capacity is reserved to serve students in the ECE programs at elementary schools. The first grade population of Kent School District is traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten population due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens. Cohort survival method uses historical enrollment data to forecast the number of students projected for the following year. Projections for October 1, 2014-2019 are from OSPI Report 1049 — Determination of Projected Enrollments. Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact to schools. Information on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed developments in all jurisdictions will be considered in the District's future analysis of growth projections. The Kent School District serves eight permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County, the cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, and Auburn and smaller portions of the cities of SeaTac, Black Diamond, and Maple Valley (Continued) Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 4 I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection (Continued) "Student Factor' is defined by King County code as "the number derived by a school district to describe how many students of each grade span are expected to be generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual student generated rates for developments completed within the last five years. Following these guidelines, the student generation rate for Kent School District is as follows: Single Family Elementary .484 Middle School .129 Senior High .249 Total .862 Multi -Family Elementary .324 Middle School .066 Senior High .118 Total .508 The student generation factor is based on a survey of 2,163 single family dwelling units and 1,478 multi -family dwelling units with no adjustment for occupancy rates. Please refer to Appendix E on Page 36 of the Capital Facilities Plan for details of the Student Generation Factor survey. The actual number of students in those residential developments was determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation System which provides a count of enrolled students in identifiable new development areas. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 5 w: N M c O m N F N o m N vp�_ wo ci N r c O Lu S O N c ! O r N 0 a Z Z N o LU m N Z O m m N ® J ® 0 $ - 0 mo (V oUSU r N cm m N o o en N Q Y ® m' N IL `... y C Q m N Ix LU CD ® m E O ® W J o 11 mJ T W (O Ip N n 00 01 (O M (D M W N N N O N N N N N N N r N N N N N N N *� M O oa O et N M M � O M N N N N N N N N N N M M O M N V M N tSl D3 W N n O n ti O W a7 O M O QI r CN N O N N N N N N N M O N pN fD (O LL� N M O N cp r OOi W O N O M O � V N O N N N N N N N N 6Oi 0Oi W On1 O O O � n V N O N N N N N N N N M W n <O O N N OJ O W m 001 r m O N N O N V N O N N N N N (N N N N 00 W O O N O O M N N N N N N N N N O O O O O 0 N N nc° N to N N N N N N N N N N N O 0 n n M (O n Q O O m w m m o o" N N n n nro N N N N N N N (p N n M O D7 N n LO O) V O O N N eM- M (V N N N hl N N N - N m v LQ q N r N M N N O N � M N M M M m N W M M N O rn r � o N N 0 rn m r � N O N N � V @ N N 1 a a a a a a a a a a a ro a ;a C 'B^ 'yN^ �N0 V Vry N I(q0 �/N) ♦1�0 >l`q Ip �pN� N` N � Y V V V V V V N KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SI% - YEAR ENROLLMENT PROJECTION Full Dav Kinderoarten at all Elam LR in 2008 LB in 2009 L8 in 2010 I R in 2011 1 R in 9019 1 R Fst 9013 ! R Fsi MU ACTUAL P R O J E C T 1 O N October 2013 1 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 King County Live Births' 25,222 25,057 24,514 24,630 25,032 25,890 26,490 ' Increase / Decrease 323 -165 -543 116 402 858 600 Kindergarten / Birth % 2 8.40% 8.67% 9.08% 9,26% 9,33% 9,23% 9.23% FD Kindergarten @ 1.0 2119 2,172 2,227 2,281 2,336 2,390 2,445 Grade 1 2186 2,179 2,234 2,291 2,346 2,403 2,459 Grade 2 2055 2,208 2,201 2,256 2,314 2,369 2,427 Grade 3 1922 2,101 2,257 2,250 2,306 2,366 2,422 Grade 4 2087 1,920 2,098 2,254 2,247 2,303 2,363 Grade 5 2008 2,108 1,940 2,120 2,277 2,270 2,327 Grade 6 2079 2,048 2,150 1,979 2,162 2,323 2,315 Grade 7 2046 2,088 2,057 2,160 1,988 2,172 2,333 Grade 8 2121 2,069 2,111 2,080 2,184 2,010 2,196 Grade 9 2483 2,438 2,378 2,426 2,391 2,510 2,310 Grade 10 2046 2,175 2,134 2,081 2,123 2,093 2,197 Grade 11 1873 1,830 1,945 1,908 1,861 1,898 1,872 Grade 12 1538 1,532 1,497 1,591 1,561 1,522 1,553 Total Enrollment Projection 3 26,563 26,868 27,229 27,677 28,096 28,629 29,219 Yearly Increase/Decrease 3 305 Yearly Increase/Decrease % 1.15% 361 448 419 533 590 1.34% 1.65% 1.51% 1.90% 2.06% Total Enrollment Projection 26,563 1 26,868 1 27,229 27,677 28,096 28,629 29,219 1 Kindergarten enrollment projection for 2014 is based on Kent SD percentage of live births in King County rive years previous. 2 Kindergarten projection is calculated by using the District's previous year percentage of King County births five years earlier compared to actual kindergarten enrollment in the previous year. (Excludes ECE - Early Childhood Education preschoolers) 3 Headcount Projections for 2014 - 2018 from OSPI Report 1049 - Determination of Projected Enrollments 4 Oct. 2013 P223 Headcount is 26,563 & FTE 25,745. Full Headcount with ECE Preschool & Running Start students = 27,945. G R O W T H P R O J E C T I O N S - Adjustments for current economic factors For facilities planning purposes, this six -year enrollment projection anticipates conservative enrollment growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 April 2014 Page 7 In order to determine the capacity of facilities in a school district, King County Code 21A.06 references a "standard of service" that each school district must establish in order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the district which would best serve the student population. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as "impact" schools and the standard of service targets a lower class size at those facilities. Portables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. (See Appendix A, s & C) The standard of service defined herein will continue to evolve in the future. Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service. This process will affect various aspects of the District's standard of service and future changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans. Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students Class size for Kindergarten is planned for an average of 23 or fewer students. Class size for grades 1 - 3 is planned for an average of 23 or fewer students. Class size for grades 4 - 6 is planned for an average of 27 or fewer students. Class size for Kindergarten and grade 1, for schools that qualify for high poverty funding (18 elementary schools for 2014-15) is planned for an average of 20 or fewer students. All elementary schools meet the criteria required to provide full day kindergarten programs (FDK = Full Day Kindergarten) with the second half of the day funded by state apportionment or the Educational Programs and Operations Levy. Twelve schools with FDK Programs have state apportionment funding. Some special programs require specialized classroom space and the program capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced. Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of time to receive instruction in special programs and space must be allocated to serve these programs. Some students have scheduled time in a computer lab. Students may also be provided music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 8 Some identified students will also be provided educational opportunities in classrooms for special programs such as those designated as follows: English Language Learners (E L L) Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I) — Federal Program Learning Assisted Programs (LAP) — State Program Highly Capable Students -State Program Reading, Math or Science Labs Inclusive Education Service for Elementary and Secondary students with disabilities may be provided in a separate or self-contained classroom sometimes with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program: Early Childhood Education (ECE) -3-4 yr. old students with disabilities Tiered Intervention in Inclusive Education Support Center Programs Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance) Self-contained Inclusive Education Support Center Programs (SC) School Adjustment Programs for students with behavioral disorders (SA) Adaptive Support Center for Mild, Moderate & Severe Disabilities (ASC-DD) Speech & Language Therapy & Programs for Hearing Impaired students Occupational & Physical Therapy Programs (OT/PT) The Outreach Program (TOP) for 18-21 year old secondary students Some newer buildings have been constructed to accommodate most of these programs; some older buildings have been modified, and in some circumstances, these modifications reduce the classroom capacity of the buildings. When programs change, program capacity is updated to reflect the change in program and capacity. Current Standards of Service for Secondary Students The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect the capacity of the school buildings. Class size for grades 7 — 8 is planned for an average of 28 or fewer students. Class size for grades 9 — 12 is planned for an average of 30 or fewer students. Similar to Inclusive Education Programs listed above, many other secondary programs require specialized classroom space which can reduce the program capacity of the permanent school buildings. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 9 Identified secondary students will also be provided other educational opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows: Computer, Multi -Media & Technology Labs & Programs Technology Academy at Kent -Meridian High School & Mill Creek Middle School Science Programs & Labs — Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Oceanography, Astronomy, Meteorology, Marine Biology, General Science, etc. English Language Learners (E L L) Music Programs — Band, Orchestra, Chorus, Jazz Band, etc. Art Programs — Painting, Design, Drawing, Ceramics, Pottery, Photography, etc. Theater Arts — Drama, Stage Tech, etc. Journalism and Yearbook Classes Highly Capable (Honors or Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs International Baccalaureate ("I B") Program JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps Career & Technical Education Programs (CTE - Vocational Education) Family & Consumer Science — Culinary Arts, Sewing, Careers w/Children/Educ., etc. Child Development Preschool and Daycare Programs Health & Human Services — Sports Medicine, Sign Language, Cosmetology, etc. Business Education — Word Processing, Accounting, Business Law & Math, Marketing, Economics, Web Design, DECA, FBLA (Future Business Leaders). Technical & Industry — Woodworking, Cabinet Making, Building Trades, Metals, Automotive & Manufacturing Technology, Welding, Drafting, Drawing, CAD (Computer -aided Design), Electronics, Engineering & Design, Aviation, ASL, etc. Graphic & Commercial Arts, Media, Photography, Theater & Stage, Ag & Horticulture. Kent Phoenix Academy — Performance Learning Center, Gateway, Virtual High School & Kent Success program with evening classes for credit retrieval Space or Classroom Utilization As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of regular teaching stations at secondary schools. Based on the analysis of actual utilization of classrooms, the District has determined that the standard utilization rate is 85% for secondary schools. Program capacity at elementary schools reflects 100% utilization at the elementary level. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 10 Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 27,475 students and transitional (portable) capacity to house 1,143. This capacity is based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section I 11. Included in this Plan is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current capacity. (see Table 3 on Page 12). The ratio between permanent capacity and portable capacity is 96%-4%. The program capacity is periodically updated for changes in programs, additional classrooms and new schools. Program capacity has been updated in this Plan to reflect program changes implemented in the Fall of 2013. For the 2014-15 school year and beyond the state has mandated lower class sizes in 18 elementary schools that are classified as high poverty. The new class size in grades K-1 will be 20 students for every teacher. This is a reduction of 3 students per class from the district's current standard of service. The overall effect for those schools is to reduce capacity districtwide by 342 students (see Table 3A on Page 12A). Calculation of Elementary, Middle School and Senior High School capacities are set forth in Appendices A, B and C. The calculation for Elementary School capacity for 2014-15 is shown in Appendix A-1. A map of existing schools is included on Page 13. For clarification, the following is a brief description of some of the non-traditional programs for students in Kent School District: Kent Mountain View Academy serves Grades 3 — 12 with transition, choice and home school assistance programs. It is located in the former Grandview School in the western part of the district in Des Moines. This school was originally designed as an elementary school and is included in the elementary capacity for this Plan. Kent Phoenix Academy is a non-traditional high school which opened in Fall 2007 in the renovated site and building that formerly served Sequoia Middle School. Kent Phoenix Academy has four special programs including the Performance Learning Center, Gateway, Virtual High School and Kent Success. iGrad - In partnership with Green River Community College, Kent School District has pioneered the Individualized Graduation and Degree Program or "iGrad". iGrad offers a second chance to students age 16-21 who have dropped out of high school and want to earn a high school diploma, iGrad is not included in this Capital Facilities Plan because it is served in leased space at the Kent Hill Plaza Shopping Center. Over the past two years, enrollment in the iGrad program has averaged over 400 students. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 11 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415 INVENTORY and CAPACITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS 2013-14 Year SCHOOL opened ASR ADDRESS Program Capacity Carriage Crest Elementary 1990 CC 18235 - 140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 452 Cedar Valley Elementary 1971 CV 26500 Timberlane Way SE, Covington 98042 380 Covington Elementary 1961 CO 17070 BE Wax Road, Covington 98042 504 Crestwood Elementary 1980 CW 25225 - 180th Avenue BE, Covington 98042 432 East Hill Elementary 1953 EH 9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031 490 Emerald Park 1999 EP 11800 SE 216th Street, Kent 98031 504 Fainvood Elementary 1969 FW 16600 - 148th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 408 George T. Daniel Elementary 1992 DE 11310 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 456 Glenridge Elementary 1996 GR 19405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 456 Grass Lake Elementary 1971 GL 28700 - 191st Place SE, Kent 98042 452 Horizon Elementary 1990 HE 27641 - 144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 504 Jenkins Creek Elementary 1987 JC 26915 - 186th Avenue BE, Covington 98042 404 Kent Elementary 1999 KE 24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032 480 Lake Youngs Elementary 1965 LY 19660 - 142nd Avenue BE, Kent 98042 510 Martin Sortun Elementary 1987 MS 12711 BE 248th Street, Kent 98030 480 Meadow Ridge Elementary 1994 MR 27710 - 108th Avenue SE, Kent 98030 476 Meridian Elementary 1939 ME 25621 - 140th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 524 Millennium Elementary 2000 ML 11919 SE 270th Street, Kent 98030 504 Neely -O'Brien Elementary 1990 NO 6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032 480 Panther Lake Elementary 2009 PL 20831 - 108th Avenue BE, Kent 98031 524 Park Orchard Elementary 1963 PO 11010 SE 232nd Street, Kent 98031 486 Pine Tree Elementary 1967 PT 27825 -118th Avenue BE, Kent 98030 514 Ridgewood Elementary 1987 RW 18030 - 162nd Place BE, Renton 98058 504 Sawyer Woods Elementary 1994 SW 31135 - 228th Ave SE, Black Diamond 98010 504 Scenic Hill Elementary 1960 SH 26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98030 476 Soos Creek Elementary 1971 SC 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031 380 Springbrook Elementary 1969 SB 20035 - 100th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 418 Sunrise Elementary 1992 SR 22300 - 132nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 504 Elementary TOTAL 13,206 Cedar Heights Middle School 1993 CH 19640 SE 272 Street, Covington 98042 895 Mattson Middle School 1981 MA 16400 SE 251 at Street, Covington 98042 787 Meeker Middle School 1970 MK 12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058 832 Meridian Middle School 1958 MM 23480 - 120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 792 Mill Creek Middle School 2005 MC 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 916 Northwood Middle School 1996 NW 17007 SE 184th Street, Renton 98058 926 Middle School TOTAL 5,148 Kent -Meridian High School 1951 KM 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98030 1,904 Kentlake Senior High School 1997 KL 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent 98042 1,957 Kentridge Senior High School 1968 KR 12430 BE 208th Street, Kent 98031 2,277 Kentwood Senior High School 1981 KW 25800 - 164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 2,159 Senior High TOTAL 8,297 Kent Mountain View Academy 1997 MVILC 22420 Military Road, Des Moines 98198 410 Kent Phoenix Academy 2007 PH 11000 SE 264th Street, Kent 98030 414 DISTRICT TOTAL 27,475 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 April 2014 Page 12 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415 INVENTORY and CAPACITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS 2014-2015 Year SCHOOL Opened ABR ADDRESS Program Capacity Carriage Crest Elementary 1990 CC 18235 -140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 456 Cedar Valley Elementary 1971 CV 26500 Timberlane Way BE, Covington 98042 364 Covington Elementary 1961 CO 17070 BE Wax Road, Covington 98042 488 Crestwood Elementary 1980 CW 25225 - 180th Avenue BE, Covington 98042 432 East Hill Elementary 1953 EH 9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031 466 Emerald Park 1999 EP 11800 BE 216th Street, Kent 98031 484 Fairwood Elementary 1969 FW 16600 - 148th Avenue BE, Renton 98058 408 George T. Daniel Elementary 1992 DE 11310 BE 248th Street, Kent 98030 428 Glenridge Elementary 1996 GR 19405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 436 Grass Lake Elementary 1971 GL 28700 - 191 st Place BE, Kent 98042 438 Horizon Elementary 1990 HE 27641 - 144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 477 Jenkins Creek Elementary 1987 JC 26915 - 186th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 459 Kent Elementary 1999 KE 24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032 460 Lake Youngs Elementary 1965 LY 19660 - 142nd Avenue BE, Kent 98042 510 Martin Sortun Elementary 1987 MS 12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 452 Meadow Ridge Elementary 1994 MR 27710 - 108th Avenue BE, Kent 98030 440 Meridian Elementary 1939 ME 25621 - 140th Avenue BE, Kent 98042 524 Millennium Elementary 2000 ML 11919 SE 270th Street, Kent 98030 484 Neely -O'Brien Elementary 1990 NO 6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032 460 Panther Lake Elementary 2009 PL 20831 - 108th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 504 Park Orchard Elementary 1963 PO 11010 BE 232nd Street, Kent 98031 476 Pine Tree Elementary 1967 PT 27825 - 118th Avenue BE, Kent 98030 477 Ridgewood Elementary 1987 RW 18030 - 162nd Place BE, Renton 98058 504 Sawyer Woods Elementary 1994 SW 31135 - 228th Ave BE, Black Diamond 98010 486 Scenic Hill Elementary 1960 SH 26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98030 448 Soos Creek Elementary 1971 SC 12651 BE 218th Place, Kent 98031 342 Springbrook Elementary 1969 SB 20035 - 100th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 418 Sunrise Elementary 1992 SR 22300 - 132nd Avenue BE, Kent 98042 543 Elementary TOTAL 12,864 Cedar Heights Middle School 1993 CH 19640 BE 272 Street, Covington 98042 895 Mattson Middle School 1981 MA 16400 SE 251st Street, Covington 98042 787 Meeker Middle School 1970 MK 12600 BE 192nd Street, Renton 98058 832 Meridian Middle School 1958 MM 23480 - 120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 792 Mill Creek Middle School 2005 MC 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 916 Northwood Middle School 1996 NW 17007 SE 184th Street, Renton 98058 926 Middle School TOTAL 5,148 Kent -Meridian High School 1951 KM 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98030 1,904 Kentlake Senior High School 1997 KL 21401 BE 300th Street, Kent 98042 1,957 Kentridge Senior High School 1968 KR 12430 BE 208th Street, Kent 98031 2,277 Kentwood Senior High School 1981 KW 25800 - 164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 2,159 Senior High TOTAL 8,297 Kent Mountain View Academy 1997 MV/LC 22420 Military Road, Des Moines 98198 410 Kent Phoenix Academy 2007 PH 11000 BE 264th Street, Kent 98030 414 DISTRICT TOTAL 27,133 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3-A April 2014 Page 12-A f If J � ®02 Yu+ ,c u ca m 04) o�° to W cn ` U 0� WE 632 � O �0 w ©•E Xy ��m •. 0g o(D ' a t�Lu m Ew v°� u2i i Cq 03 ® N os >go a m ® U LU 4 WS'2. C � ® 0 Z-6 C6 r $? P m o 02 oC, E ®s RS and' qf':7 � ac Q a t C (3 uw rvC t!�'•-i Dun! CN C t �0 X 9� ail: 1 E f4 u� t0c4' m 0R 'Ia� -C O1c E j am a) C aE M 000 0 7d / \r. �e • �S endSb3! �D r: Wuj eAv losiva-D IN c �0 �0 N Q% E N 70 70 01 Q r!l �ry fU to O c7 x -C -C c �Uon� O c E 0 ua�cn22 co `O N Kcimi School DiSfrici Sqi,L-fear Capital FacliiYies Plan April 20-13 Page 13 V Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring of 2014, the following projects to increase capacity are in the planning phase in Kent School District: ® The District received authorization from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction to temporarily re -open the former Kent Elementary school at 317 Fourth Ave South in Kent. This facility will be used to house the kindergarten and early child education (ECE) classes for both Kent and Neely -O'Brien Elementary to alleviate overcrowding at those schools. This building will re -open in fall 2014 as the Kent Valley Early Learning Center. This district will fund this project without the use of impact fees. ® Planning is in progress for a replacement school for Covington Elementary School in 2016 or beyond. The project is pending satisfactory financial resources to fund the project. ® Planning is in progress for additional classroom space for Neely -O'Brien Elementary School. This addition will add approximately 25% to building capacity and is expected to come online in fall of 2017 pending satisfactory financial resources to fund the project. ® Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the elementary school level. Future facility and site needs are reflected in this Plan. ® Some funding for lease or purchase of additional portables may be provided by impact fees as needed. Sites are based on need for additional capacity. As a critical component of capital facilities planning, county and city planners and decision -makers are encouraged to consider safe walking conditions for all students when reviewing applications and design plans for new roads and developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety to and from school and bus stops as well as bus pull-outs and turn-arounds for school buses. Included in this Plan is an inventory of potential projects and sites identified by the District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future. (see Table 4 on Page 15 & Site map on Page 16) Voter approved bond issues have included funding for the purchase of sites for some of these and future schools, and the sites acquired to date are included in this Plan. Some funding is secured for purchase of additional sites but some may be funded with impact fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction requirements and some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs. 2006 voter approval of $106M bond issue for capital improvement included the construction funding for a new elementary school, replacement of Panther Lake Elementary, and classroom additions to high schools. Some impact fees have been utilized for those projects. In March 2013 the Board of Directors reallocated the funding for the new elementary school to capital projects for safety and security. The Board will continue annual review of standard of service and those decisions will be reflected in the each update of the Capital Facilities Plan. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 14 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No.415 Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity SCHOOL / FACILITY / SITE I LOCATION I Type I Status I�!Et111��4R111��YII_1:�- Projected Projected % for Completion Program new Date Capacity Growth Elementary Kent Valley Early Learning Center- Addition 317 Fouth Ave. S Avenue S, Kent Addition In Process 2014-15 270 100% 14 Classrooms added to provide New Capacity Kindergarten Students from Neely O'Brien Funded for 270 students. and Kent Elementary -No Impact Fees Replacement 5 Replacement for Covington Elementary (U) SE 256th Street & 154th Ave BE Elementary Planning 2016-17 600 16% Covington Elem - Capacity to be replaced 17070 BE Wax Road, Covington Elementary Utilized -504 Neely -O'Brien Elementary School - Addition (U) Classrooms added to provide New Capacity MIDDLE SCHOOL &SENIOR HIGH Elementary 6300 S 236th Street, Kent 98032 Addition Planning 2017-18 Current Capacity 480 + 120 New = 600 Planning 600 25% No new projects required for Secondary Schools at this time & Secondary Schools are excluded from Impact Fee formula. TEMPORARY FACILITIES Atlditional Capacity Portables TBD - For placement as needed New Planning 2013 + 24-31 each 100% #on 0_ I s OTHER SITES ACQUIRED 4 Covington area North (Near Mattson MS) 7 Covington area South (Scarsella) 5 Covington area West (Halleson-Wikstrom) 3 Ham Lake area (Pollard) 8 BE of Lake Morton area (West property) 2 Shady Lk area (Sowers, Blaine, Drahota, Paroline) 1 So. King Co. Activity Center (former Nike site) 12 South Central site (Plemmons-Yeh-Wms) SE 251 & 164 SE, Covington 98042 SE 290 & 156 SE, Kent 98042 SE 256 & 154 BE, Covington 98042 16820 SE 240, Kent 98042 SE 332 & 204 SE, Kent 98042 17426 SE 192 Street, Renton 98058 BE 167 & 170 BE, Renton 98058 BE 286th St & 124th Ave BE, Auburn 98092 Land use Land Use Designation Type Jurisdiction Urban Elementary City of Covington Rural Elementary King County Urban Elementary City of Covington Rural Elementary King County Rural Secondary King County Urban Elementary King County Rural TBD 2 King County Urban TBD 3 King County Notes: ' Unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future. 2 TBD - To be determined - Some sites are identified but placement, timing and/or configuration of portables has not been determined. s Numbers correspond to sites on Site Bank Map on Page 16. Other Map site locations are parcels identified in Table 7 on Page 26. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 April 2014 Page 15 Pill s g oR con CAD a �A fo vi :3S19AVgt�,Q� Nga 3S alb 4dQ�� m� 0 r'�n 0 n oT v37 D il] m 0 3S GI^V PU f c o c 3S and � �tpu CCU oil � �6 C use 9A ER < o � OO Q Ofil �� 3gal Diu . i'i p 911 x� �� — �•� 6Y�y C ^ham any 10 uec� %3 YQ �: -9 hnrtitu P A010n 4seM r ph s Kent School District ft.-Y'aas Capftj Facilities Dian Aril 2013 Page 16 The Plan references use of portable as interim or transitional capacity and facilities. Currently, the District utilizes portables to house students in excess of permanent capacity and for program purposes at some school locations. (Please see Appendices A B C D) Based on enrollment projections, implementation of full day kindergarten programs, program capacity and the need for additional permanent capacity, the District anticipates the need to purchase or lease additional portables during the next six -year period. During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that all of the District's portables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During the useful life of some of the portables, the school -age population may decline in some communities and increase in others, and these portables provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community. Portables may be used as interim or transitional facilities 1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school facilities. 2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand. 3. To meet unique program requirements. Portables currently in the District's inventory are continually evaluated resulting in some being improved and some replaced. The Plan projects that the District will use portables to accommodate interim housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of portables, their impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the interrelationship between portables, emerging technologies and educational restructuring will continue to be examined. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 17 Jill - y. n - As stated in Section IV, the program capacity study is periodically updated for changes in special programs and reflects class size fluctuations, grade level splits, etc. As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 12, the program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts. (See Tables 5 & 5 A-B-Con pages 19 - 22) Enrollment is electronically reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis and funding apportionment is based on Annual Average FTE (AAFTE). The first school day of October is widely recognized as the enrollment "snapshot in time" to report enrollment for the year. Kent School District continues to be the fourth largest district in the state of Washington. P-223 Headcount for October 2013 was 26,563 with kindergarten students counted at 1.0 and excluding ECE and college -only Running Start students. A full headcount of all students enrolled in October 2013 totals 27,942 which includes ECE and college -only Running Start students. In October there were 760 students in 11th and 12th grade participating in the Running Start program at 10-21 different colleges and receiving credits toward both high school and college graduation. 392 of these students attended classes only at the college ("college -only") and are excluded from FTE and headcount for capacity and enrollment comparisons. Kent School District has one of the highest Running Start program participation rates in the state. Based on the enrollment forecasts, permanent facility inventory and Capacity, current standard of service, portable capacity, and future additional classroom space, the District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the transitional use of portables. (See Table 5 and Tables 5 A-B-C on Pages 19 - 22) This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There may be a need for additional portables and/or new schools to accommodate growth within the District. New schools may be designed to accommodate placement of future portables. School attendance area changes, limited and costly movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational restructuring will all play a major role in addressing overcrowding and underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 18 SCHOOLKENT DISTRICT SCHOOL YEAR 2013-14 2014-15a 2015-16 2016-77 2017-18 2018-19 2099-20 Actual P R O J E C T E D Permanen4 Program Capacity t 27,475 Changes to Permanent Capacity Kent Valley Early Learning Center z Capacity Increase (F) Replacement school with projected increase in capacity: Covington Elementary Replacement (u) 3 To Replace current Covington Elementary capacity 27,133 27,403 27,403 27,499 270 Neely -O'Brien Elementary Addition - Capacity Increase (u) 4 600 -504 120 27,619 27,619 Permanent Prog am Capac y subto al 27,475 27,403 27,403 27,499 27,619 27,619 27,619 Interim Portable Capacity 5 Elementary Portable Capacity Required 936 1,200 1,584 1,800 2,232 2,670 3,000 7 Middle School Portable Capacity Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Senior High School Portable Capacity Required 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 936 1,200 1,584 1,800 2,232 2,670 3,000 TOTAL CAPACITY t 28,411 28,603 28,987 1 29,299 1 29,851 30,289 30,619 TOTAL ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION a 126,566 126,868 1 27,229 127,677 128,096 ( 28,629 I 29.219 I DISTRICT AVAIL ASLE CAPAClTY7 1,845 1,735 1,758 1,622 1,755 1,660 1,400 t Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Kent Valley Early Learning Center will open in the former Kent Elementary School. This is designed to house Kindergarten and ECE programs at Neely O'Brien and Kent Elementaries to ease overcrowding 3 Replacement school for Covington Elementary will increase capacity and will be built on a different existing urban site. 4 Addition to Neely -O'Brien Elementary will increase capacity approximately 25%. 5 2013-2014 total classroom portable capacity is 936. Some additional relocatables used for program purposes. 6 Actual October Headcount Enrollment with Projections from OSPI Report 1049 - Determination of Projected Enrollments. Enrollment counts and projections have been adjusted for Full Day Kindergarten at all Elementary Schools. 7 School capacity meets concurrency requirements and no impact fees are proposed for secondary schools. a In 2014-15 capacity will decrease by 342 because of change in standard of service in grades K-1 to 20:1 in 18 high poverty schools Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 April 2014 Page 19 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 416 SCHOOL YEAR 2013-14 2014-167 1 2015-16 1 2016-17 1 2017-18 1 2018-19 1 2019-20 Actual P R 0 J E C T E D Elementary Permanent Capacity' 13,206 Kent Mountain View Academy 2 410 Changes to Elementary Capacity Kent Valley Early Learning Center Capacity Increase (F) Covington Elementary Replacement (U) 4 Will replace current Covington Elementary capacity 13,274 13,544 13,544 13,640 13,760 13,760 270 Neely -O'Brien Elementary Addition Capacity Increase (u) 5 600 -504 120 subtotal 13,616 13,544 13,544 13,640 13,760 13,760 13,760 Portable Capacity Required' 936 1200 1584 1800 2232 2,670 3,000 TOTAL CAPACITY ' 2 14,552 14,744 15,128 15,440 15,992 16,430 16,760 Adiusted for FULL Dav Kinderoarten ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION 01 14,456 14,736 15.107 15.431 1 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 96 8 21 9 4 6 2 Number of Portables Required 39 50 66 75 93 111 125 125 Classroom Portables required in 2019-20. Some additional portables used for program purposes. 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Kent Mountain View Academy is a special program at the former Grandview School serving students in Grades 3 - 12. The school building (formerly Kent Learning Center & Grandview Elem.) was designed as an elementary school. 3 Kent Valley Early Learning Center reflects 12 classroom capacity increase for Kindergarten and ECE programs from Neely O'Brien and Kent Elementaries. 4 Replacement school for Covington Elementary will increase capacity and is planned for a different existing urban site. 5 Addition to Neely -O'Brien Elementary will increase capacity approximately 25%. 6 Actual October Headcount Enrollment with Projections from OSPI Report 1049 - Determination of Projected Enrollments. Enrollment & Projections reflect FULL Day Kindergarten at ALL Elementary schools @ 1.0 & exclude ECE Preschoolers. 7 In 2014-15 capacity will decrease by 342 because of change in standard of service in grades K-1 to 20:1 in 18 high poverty schools. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 6 A April 2014 Page 20 SCHOOLKENT DISTRICT PROJECTED• MIDDLE SCHOOLGrades SCHOOL YEAR 2013-14 2014-15 1 2015-16 1 2016A7 1 2017-18 1 2018-19 1 2019-20 Actual P R O J E C T E D Middle School Permanent Capacity' 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 No Changes to Middle School Capacity Subtotal 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 Portable Capacity Required' 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 & 3 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION z 4,167 4,157 4,168 4,240 4,172 4,182 4,529 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 4 981 991 980 908 976 966 619 Number of Portables Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Classroom Portables required at middle schools at this time. Some Portables used for classroom and program purposes. 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Actual October Headcount Enrollment with Projections from OSPI Report 1049 - Determination of Projected Enrollments. 3 Surplus capacity due to grade level reconfiguration - All 9th grade students moved to the high schools in Fall 2004. 4 Middle School capacity meets concurrency requirements and no impact fees are collected for middle schools Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B April 2014 Page 21 SCHOOLKENT DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENTand CAPACITY SENIOR HIGH Gradesn SCHOOL YEAR 2013-14 201415 2015-16 2016-17 1 2017-18 1 2018-19 1 2019-20 Actual P R O J E C T E D Senior High Permanent Capacity' 8,711 8,711 8,711 8,711 81711 8,711 Includes Kent Phoenix Academy 2 No Changes to High School Capacity Subtotal 8,711 8,711 8,711 8,711 8,711 Portables Capacity Required 1 0 0 0 0 0 8,711 8,711 8,711 0 0 TOTAL CAPACITY t 1 8,711 8,711 8,711 8,711 8,711 8,711 8,711 ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION s 7,940 7,975 7,954 8,006 7,936 8,023 7,932 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 1 771 736 757 705 775 688 7 99 Number of Portables Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Classroom Portables required at this time. Some Portables used for classroom and program purposes. Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Kent Phoenix Academy opened in Fall 2007 serving grades 9 - 12 with four special programs. s Actual October Enrollment with Projections from OSPI Report 1049 - Determination of Projected Enrollments. ° High School capacity meets concurrency requirements and no impact fees are collected for high schools Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 6 C April 2014 Page 22 The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to finance improvements for the years 2014-15 through 2019-20. The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact fees. The plan is based on voter approval of future bond issues, collection of impact fees under the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act. In February 2006, voters approved a $106 million bond issue that included funds for replacement of Panther Lake Elementary School with increased capacity, as well as construction of a new Elementary School to accommodate growth. The new Panther Lake Elementary School replaced the previous Panther Lake Elementary in Fall of 2009. The bond issue also funded Phase II of the renovation for Mill Creek Middle School and renovation of Sequoia Middle School for reconfiguration as a non-traditional high school, Kent Phoenix Academy, which opened in September 2007. 2006 construction funding also provided for additional classrooms at Kentlake High School and two projects at Kent -Meridian HS. The projects at Kent -Meridian provide additional capacity with several new classrooms and gymnasium space. The projects at K-M are completed and the new Main Gym added capacity for two more PE classrooms. Some impact fees were utilized for new construction that increased capacity. Originally, the district designated $16 million of the 2006 bond authorization toward the construction of an additional elementary school, identified as Elementary #31 in previous Plans. Due to a change in circumstances, the Board of Directors reallocated the $16 million for capital projects for safety and security. The District received authorization from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction to temporarily use the previous site of Kent Elementary School at 317 Fourth Ave South in Kent. This facility will be used to house the kindergarten and early child education (ECE) classes for Kent and Neely O'Brien elementary school to alleviate overcrowding at those schools. This building will re -open in fall 2014 as the Kent Valley Early Learnig Center. This district will fund this project without the use of impact fees. Replacement of Covington Elementary School in 2016-17 or beyond will increase capacity of ther current school by approximately 16%. Some impact fees will be utilized as part of the Finance Plan. A building addition is also planned to provide approximately 25% additional classroom capacity at Neely -O'Brien Elementary School in 2017-18. Some impact fees will be utilized as part of the Finance Plan. The Finance Plan includes new portables to be purchased or leased to provide additional capacity and some may be funded from impact fees. Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the elementary level and unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future and reported in annual updates Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 23 of the Capital Facilities Plan. No impact fees are requested for secondary schools in this Plan. For the Six -Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from Kent School District Facilities Department. Please see pages 26-27 for a summary of the cost basis. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 24 O O O O o r E m E vo n @ ' M — w w e» e> 0 0 0 ° J � YJ O YJ C m @ O W O O � etj O O � V M J � O O O r Q O O F yOy W .O- r O � r F CJ P fN0 Y3 49 U3 N N O N 0 N p^ N g N d w V v w Z E @ ° 0 o m o E E w O o y O 3 O N 0 N w N = 0 0 0LV.. 0 c m o @ O N N m M N y O C d N Y w N c JR O iD M1 y h @ U w N M n in E w E w @ @ @ ,75 a N y w @ c C4. N» N a E 2 m m 0 E a O O N M b d 2 3 N �5 @ LL x N w C E o ° E @ w d w m o w o 00 Z g m m 0a °°- U m Z a c = c N N LL a Y 0 ¢ 2 V N 6 Q T or linpac elementary school, adjusted for inflation, and projected cost of the next elementary school. - Elementary School Cost Projected Cost Cost of Panther Lake Elementary $26,700,000 Replacement (Opened in Fall 2009) Projected cost - Covington Elementary $31,840,000 Replacement (Projected to open in 2017) Projected cost of Neely -O'Brien Addition $14,100,000 (Projected to open in 2018) Elementary Cost based on $31,840,000 Covington Elementary Replacement on within the last ten years. Please see Table 7 on page 27 for a list of site acquisition costsand averages. The impact fee calculations on pages 29 and 30 include a "District Adjustment' to reduce the fees calculated by the impact fee formulas. For the past four years the district has not increased its impact fees and based on current economic conditions, the District has adjusted the impact fees to keep the same rates as those currently in place and made no adjustment for increase in the Consumer Price Index. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 26 > m a U M m V m cq Q ER E a = () V o H m W a N � m N 03 j 0 CO m N ON V N M ~ O r• CP EA O FA f!> 4p, Ed3 fR > Q O 0-0 r m M O 6J O co O O O 0m N tf> w U (O m M CDr• m �O (t') V V m M (p M O rl CO N O O> o U O (O to mm O) Iq M M V ot} Id MM dD m _M S a VN' N M O O ate- O Q o LO m m Q "t O) O Oi N r M � (O M ~ M O m O N o � m m U O a L m in m p c Y > U wN O _ N O m W my g TJ � O t0ll N N N g W m g N M N Vi 0 (n a N N N d _ v W M N � O N m m m rn rn U s o o rn m o rn m m m m m m m y � m m m rn w i N N N N Q w Y¢ E N L O 0— 6 Q o O c C W N i m N O m m 6 O _T E O C O j O p- m o n O C N N N Y E E 05 (0 O a o m ? a c O U p L 10 N U 0 0 Q (n d ?a0 ? oo to c d m > g n o y �= (Q m ¢ c g a m £ (6 lA o s m m Y S ¢ U > E � O m W m U S (0 N N y C E 'C U N oo R N O = O M w Z m w iT 0 m 'e m a Z j ~� W � N D = O � 1 � m Z •- V m r N N 01 g f •- v 1 .- •, T_T4T-7FW3vM1RMaA=J Elementary (Grades K-6) 0.484 Elementary 0.324 Middle School (Grades 7 - 8) 0.129 Middle School 0,066 Senior High (Grades 9 - 12) 0.249 Senior High 0.118 Total 0.862 Total 0.508 Projected Increased Student Capacity OSPI - Square Footage per Student Elementary 936 Elementary 90 Middle School 0 Middle School 117 Senior High Addition 0 Senior High 130 Special Education 144 Required Site Acreage per Facility Elementary (required) 11 Middle School (required) 21 Senior High (required) 32 New Facility Construction Cost Elementary . $31,840,000 Middle School $0 Senior High * $0 ` See cost basis on Pg. 26 Elementary 70,892 Middle School 16,376 Senior High 22,064 Total 4% 109,332 Permanent Facility Square Footage Elementary (includesKMVA) 1,470,543 Middle School 660,904 Senior High 1,110,415 Total 96% 3,241,862 Elementary 1,541,435 Middle School 667,829 Senior High 1,132,479 Total 3,341,743 Developer Provided Sites / Facilities Value 0 Dwelling Units 0 Average Site Cost / Acre Elementary $287,573 Middle School $0 Senior High $0 Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost Elementary @ 24 $146,000 Middle School @ 29 $0 Senior High @ 31 $0 State Funding Assistance Credit (formerly "State Matcw'> District Funding Assistance Percentage 58.14% CCA - Cost/Sq, Ft. (Effective July 2014) $200.40 District Average Assessed Value Single Family Residence $245,871 District Average Assessed Value Multi -Family Residence $87,880 Apartments 70% Condos 30% Bond Levy Tax Rate/$1,000 Current / $1,000 Tax Rate (1.6842) $1.68 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate Current Bond Interest Rate 4.04"/6 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page28 ; IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Required Site Acreage Average Site Gost/Acrei Facility Capacity I Student Factor A 1 (Elementary) 11 $287,573 600 0.484 $2,551.73 A 2 (Middle School) 21 $0 1,065 0.129 $0 A 3 (Senior High) 32 $0 1,000 0.249 $0 0.862 A r' $2,551.73 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Perm u Construction Cost I Facility Capacity_ 0 Student Factor I Footage Ratio B 1 (Elementary) $31,840,000 600 0.484 0.96 $24,656.90 B 2 (Middle School) $0 900 0.129 0.96 $0 B 3 (Senior High) $0 1,600 0.249 0.96 $0 0.862 B K' $24,656.90 Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary! Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio C 1 (Elementary) $145,000 24 0.484 0.04 $116.97 C 2 (Middle School) $0 29 0.129 0.04 $0 C 3 (Senior High) $0 31 0.249 0.04 $0 0.862 C K' $116.97 State Funding Assistance Credit per Single Family Residence (formerly "State Match') Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor I Cmsrn n Cost Allocabon I SPI Sq. Ft. l Student I Assistance% I Student Factor I D 1 (Elementary) $200.40 90 0.5814 0.484 $5,075.29 D 2 (Middle School) $200.40 117 0 0.129 $0 D 3 (Senior High) $200.40 130 0 0249 $0 D b $5,075.29 Tax Credit per Single Family Residence Average SF Residential Assessed Value $245,871 Current Debt Service Rate / $1,000 $1.68 Current Bond Interest Rate 4.04% Years Amortized (10 Years) 10 TC b $3,258,50 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC b g A = Site Acquisition per SF Residence $2,551.73 B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence $24,656.90 C = Temporary Facility Cost per Residence $116.97 Subtotal $27,325.59 D = State Match Credit per Residence $5,075.29 TC = Tax Credit per Residence $3,258.50 Subtotal - $8,333.79 Total Unfunded Need $18,991.81 50% Developer Fee Obligation $9,496 FC = Facility Credit (if applicable) 0 District Adjustment (See Page 25 For explanation) ($4,010) Net Fee Obligation per Residence - Single Family 1 $6,486 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 29 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Site Acquisition Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre)/ Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Required Site Acreage Average Site Cost/Acre Facility Capacity Student Factor A 1 (Elementary) 11 $287,573 500 0.324 $2,049.82 A 2 (Middle School) 21 $0 1,065 0.066 $0 A 3 (Senior High) 32 $0 1,000 0.118 $0 0.508 A $2,049.82 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent! Total Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost T Facility Capacity I Student Factor I Footage Ratio B 1 (Elementary) $31,840,000 600 0.324 0.96 $16,505.86 B 2 (Middle School) $0 900 0.066 0.96 $0 B 3 (Senior High) $0 1,600 0.118 0.96 $0 0,608 B $16,605.86 Temporary Facility Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost I Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary I Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity I Student Factor I Footage Ratio C 1 (Elementary) $145,000 24 0.324 0.04 $78.30 C 2 (Middle School) $0 29 0.066 0.04 $0 C 3 (Senior High) $0 31 0.118 0.04 $0 0.508 C $78.30 State Funding Assistance Credit per Multi -Family Residence (formerly "State Match") Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor Area Cost Allowance SPI Sq. Ft,I Student Equalization % I Student Factor D 1 (Elementary) $200.40 90 0.5814 0.324 $3,397.51 D 2 (Middle School) $200.40 117 0 0.066 $0 D 3 (Senior High) $200.40 130 0 0,118 $0 D K' $3,397.51 Tax Credit per Multi -Family Residence Unit Average MF Residential Assessed Value $87,880 Current Debt Service Rate / $1,000 $1.68 Current Bond Interest Rate 4.04% Years Amortized (10 Years) 10 TC a $1,164.66 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC b 0 A = Site Acquisition per Multi -Family Unit $2,049.82 B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit $16,505.86 C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit $78.30 Subtotal $18,633.98 D = State Match Credit per MF Unit $3,397.51 TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit $1,164,66 Subtotal - $4,562.17 Total Unfunded Need $14,071.81 50% Developer Fee Obligation $7,036 FC = Facility Credit (if applicable) 0 District Adjustment (See Page 25 for explanation) ($3,658) Net Fee Obligation per Residential Unit - Multi -family 1 $3,378 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 30 The Capital Facilities Plan (the 'Plan") is updated annually based on previous Plans in effect since 1993. The primary changes from the April 2013 Plan are summarized here. Changes to capacity continue to reflect fluctuations in class size as well as program changes. Changes in portables or transitional capacity reflect use, lease or purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement between facilities. The student headcount enrollment forecast is updated annually. All Elementary schools now have Full Day Kindergarten so six -year Kindergarten projections were previously modified to meet the requirements for Full Day Kindergarten programs at all Elementary schools. The district expects to receive some State Funding Assistance (formerly called "state matching funds") for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually. Unfunded site and facility needs will be reviewed in the future. Based on current economic conditions, the District Adjustment results in no change to the current impact fees. Changes to impact Fee Calculation Factors include: :udent Generation Factor Elem 0.484 0.494 Single Family (SF) MS 0.129 0.129 SH 0.249 0.249 Total 0.866 0.862 -.00 Went Generation Factor Elem 0.324 0.324 Multi -Family (MF) MS 0.066 0.066 SH 0.118 0.118 Total 0.522 0.508 -.00 ate Funding Assistance Ratios (-stffie match.) 57,89% 58.14% Per OSPI Website 'ea Cost Allowance (former Boeckh Index) $188.55 $200.40 Per OSPI Website ✓erage Assessed Valuation (AV) SF $228,242 $245,871 Puget Sound ESD V - Average of Condominiums & Apts. MF $85,802 $87,880 Puget Sound ESD ebt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000 $1.86 $1.68 Per King Co. Assessor Report eneral Obligation Bond Interest Rate 3.74% 4.04% Bloomberg Bond Buyer Index ipact Fee - Single Family SF $5,486 $5,486 No Change to Impact Fee ipact Fee - Multi -Family MF $3,378 $3,378 No Change to Impact Fee Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 31 IN W,, Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2014 Page 32 z A Y z i+ z A z? Y z z A Y} z z i a P 14 Q M b Q O m P Ol N N O b b N P W O q P W N m P y N m b H Q � m N 'm0 E O M Q V M e1' V b O Q YI y Q q O b� b f0 b P m m N b Q O M Q Q% �y N W a b O O OS O p N O B O. O m O YJ O O O O O O H M O p b O O uI O p O O O 6 O O M O M N +> N p 0 0 0 o N M iL c LLd N p £ M Q 6) O$ b N b O b d P m (p m O b p N N Q N m m W a a Uo r ° m P YQ m U & i rA mm = N CO O O O M O O O O O Q O N b N e b O O N O M O O O O m V D. d � a°O[ ZK E M W fmp O% b�@ Ob m y VI o O m W P N O m N m O O P m O W QO ro n v m E � N N N O O O O N O N O y V O O N vp m N O O N M® N O N 9 b 0 0 0 N O O N r O O m [O N e m d U a W a � M O m H m o M m O t9 m O O O O gg O O O o O N O a U n 2 N b m eq g I Z d U m > O O V U U U W W z w J LU W Z 7 0 W LU a 6 N F U. N J a 0 IL 6 0 z I W V LU w N of Q Z P Y Z 2>? P X. Z a C M C O m O N N a w O M q r N LLW m E M b O O O O p M O O W O S S 0 b 0 0 O O O O M M O O b O O l O O O O 6 6 W O M O M N N N O 6 O M O N N L W O q N (Np d yq M d M O O W V r N W N b IWO W N� M V N W Of N ONi a w a L' R U Em m 'n R � O a E m � m a a` a° M N E W U b d W N W Q W M M l0 P O O O N O Q d O d W P O �O N W M V O n M@ Yl Q N D U b W E ,B' N d U a W h V b W W Q b N M W d Q N P M P M t0 M M b ID n@ N N W@ 6 N M N R U � an d b M d C W N M W d W t0 d o W M W P b r O W M N O N N n cQi O tp O@ 1p W N N P 1p Q b o M O W N N W O M Q f0 �n M P v U N dO W � a` � O Q WWR Z 9 � u b U > _ W W O E m w V V U c W w ® w ry 3 m m U r (/l W �2 Y U U> L 'g _ O• 'o �' mOi N E O W y® J y m o g Q '� GS 0 Gg •m W C 0 m Q C o m �m m m- m C~ C 9 0 0Q 0 W U U V U W W E O E � m O gs E V � m E U i° m "- p C_ � a Y m p a m n m U O t E2 m q 2 N N O N U + a a d j O d m � W E � m O W O P � K a + 6 a b a � � U m c ui mb Yp O p N O U m_ a- N LL m Y N q m ry � E @ c � o C ry c E E a E amp o Y { > m 1 � q z R O 9 i L N Lyl N _ � u T N `m a r B � R 5 q O O T b 8 E E R m m m c m E E m m m r aww m m G � d r d W = M C w @ O O N O N N LLN E N m O O O r p M H O E N tp N m m m @ m N m m f0 m m r @ a w a O d a V m � o � d m O N j 2 O O O O N O N ° 0 U E $ Q= R N @ O m O O @ a a° � @ E E � d h N n U N E T'q Q N e @ m a U m � c d E E E 01 M m r V N C W `o `c W - N N d N c L U c N @ W V M m a a M1 in r m ro W M N U N m � O N ® a E cN- h fn i/i m N N N 05 M m r E 0 0 g pO o F ro El T N � C d O r O M O O c = L �'O W C N m m N Op d' W O N .G m N (J T @a � U � V�o11 F �fa`fnpi M O V O N d L O ti a md a` 2 � @ r @ m w m m rn N iO W Q n @ N N�@ ppO N a ® x N d d ¢N W N N U m C y N m m N E m m � W D9 w N U N W d a @ o � y L W W L = N m M O B£ m m N O Q M ik w U Y Y Y X N a Z d K Q C7 E 0 ¢ E fn W O d O C e[ U O �-- z m d co 'c c c c I c c W Y Y Y Yd O M r � W c rn Y @ \ : } , } §) § - } ] / Ci 0 ! ; { � = O Q N Q O r N m m N O N m C N N O N 01 O� m M N N N M co M r N O N x uJ M m O M O M m O N dt � y O O O O O G O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ® O O O O O O O O O `O O N` qj O t6 iy rn V N c m r N r r O T m` m O r fO N Q N V o QQ m O m M ¢� � M o Q N (O o o m m 'o � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ® . O O O O O O O O O O m i� C O 3 M p m Q O p V O M N O m (p O v M O m m O N O M m O r Q O r h Cl m 0 6 N 0 v 0 o 0 rn 0 p 0 m 0 M 6 0 ® � � p Q O O O O O O O O O m W W m V N m O M r N :O O OJ m N O N M m m co N N C g N N W t® O r to a h m M t` m m m N m M vi N N N- o v n m tQ- L 3 a m c a m n .N- r OC ONi m N .M- OMi P V O M W crJ M m P N O 1- G � N N m N N N c E¢ m m y a Z x m 2 m y x V C9 U U w v1 U 3 K U m E m @ O x x U O m w w m 0 0 F ti m C w Q ® •� LL W ai !A m 2 b Z> m K sm a m ycm, m o N Q c y m0 U E c a a _@ m c @ N m a y N °5 3w3 O m" m L L m 3¢ m c O U N m Z m @ � U 0 a o, @ 8 m �' c o m .•m• o c o U a Q LL = o U" c m � Y E m 9 aci Y m N d E @ a O� � a Y w m '2 m Y m m¢ Y c a °� o U " M N tI DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE For Kent School District No. 415 2014 Capital Facilities Plan Issued with a 14-day comment and appeal period. Description of Proposal: This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single action: 1. The adoption of the Kent School District 2014 Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District. 2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Kent School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. 3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent to include the Kent School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Kent. 4. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Covington to include the Kent School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Covington. 5. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton to include the Kent School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Renton. 6. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Auburn to include the Kent School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Auburn. 7. This proposal may also involve amendment of Comprehensive Plans of the Cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and/or SeaTac to incorporate the Kent School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities element of that jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. Proponent: Kent School District No. 415 Location of the Proposal: The Kent School District includes an area of approximately 70 square miles. The City of Covington and portions of the cities of Kent, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac fall within the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County. Lead Agency: Kent School District No. 415 is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2) (c). This decision was made after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request. This Determination of Non -significance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by 4:00 p.m., June 13, 2014. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DES is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. 1 ) Responsible Official: Dr( Richard A. Stedry, C�jief Business Officer for Kent School District No. 415 Telephone: (253) 373-7295 Address: 12033 SE 256th Street #A-600 Kent, Washington 98030-6643 Appeals of this determination are governed by Board Policy No. 6890 which can be obtained from Dr. Richard A. Stedry, Chief Business Officer, Kent School District No. 415, 12033 SE 256th Street #A-600, Kent, Washington 98030-6643 and pursuant to WAC 197-11- 680 and RCW 43.21 C.075. Date of Issue: May 30, 2014 Date Published: June 6, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST UPDATED 2014 WAC 197-11-960 Environmental Checklist. Purpose of Checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal Instructions for Applicants This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision -making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements —that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal A. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: The adoption of a six -year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District. The Comprehensive Plans of King County, City of Kent, City of Covington, City of Renton, City of Auburn and possibly Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond and SeaTac have been and/or will be amended to include the Kent School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan for each jurisdiction. A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan is available for review in the Kent School District Business Services Department. 2. Name of applicant: Kent School District No. 415. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Kent School District No. 415 12033 SE 256th Street # A-600 Kent, WA 98030-6643 Contact Person: Dr. Richard A. Stedry, Chief Business Officer Telephone: (253) 373-7295 4. Date checklist prepared: May 12, 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: Kent School District No. 415 Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The 2014 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be forwarded to King County, Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac for possible inclusion in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually. Site -specific projects have been or will be subject to project -specific environmental review. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The Capital Facilities Plan reviews proposed classroom addition at Neely -O'Brien Elementary School, re -opening of the former Kent Elementary School as Kent Valley Early Learning Center and proposed construction of a new school that is intended to replace the current Covington Elementary School. The expanded use of portables is planned to alleviate overcrowding at elementary schools. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The above -referenced projects will undergo environmental review at the time of formal proposal. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. King County and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn will review and approve the Capital Facilities Plan for the purposes of impact fee ordinances and will need to adopt the Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of King County and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn. Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac may also review and approve the Plan for the purposes of any school impact fee ordinances and may adopt the Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilities element of their Comprehensive Plans. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is a non -project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Kent School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the facilities needs of the District and for inclusion in the Capital Facilities Plan element and possible amendment of the Comprehensive Plans for King County, City of Covington, City of Kent, City of Renton, City of Auburn, City of Black Diamond, City of SeaTac and City of Maple Valley. A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the Kent School District Business Services Department office. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The 2014 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Kent School District. The District includes an area of approximately 70 square miles. The City of Covington, and portions of the Cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, SeaTac and parts of unincorporated King County fall within the boundaries of the Kent School District. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The Kent School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and gradients, including all of those listed. Specific topographic characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Specific slope characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Specific soil types will be identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Unstable soils may exist within the Kent School District. Specific soil limitations on individual project sites will be identified at the time of environmental review. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project - specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of fill materials will be identified as appropriate to each project. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of construction projects currently proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. Individual projects and their erosion impacts will be evaluated on a site -specific basis. Individual projects will be subject to environmental review and local approval on the time of proposal. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?) Percentage of impervious cover will vary with each capital facilities project and will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Erosion potential on individual project sites will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction operation and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Various emissions, many construction -related, may result from individual projects. Air -quality impacts will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Off -site sources and necessary mitigation will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Plans for individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to environmental review and relevant local approval processes, including obtaining of any necessary air quality permits, at the time individual projects are formally proposed. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a network of surface water bodies within the Kent School District. The surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and incorporated in the design of each individual project. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Some projects may require work near these described waters. Individual projects in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental review and local approval requirements at the time the project is formally proposed. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Information with respect to placement or removal of fill or dredge material will be addressed at the time of project -specific environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Any surface water withdrawals or diversions have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Each capital facilities project, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Specific information regarding discharges of waste materials, if any, will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact ground water resources. Each project will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Impacts of discharged waste material, if any, have been or will be addressed during site -specific, project -level environmental review. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying storm water runoff consequences. Each project will be subject to environmental review and applicable local regulations. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will have varying environmental impacts and will be subject to appropriate review and local regulations prior to construction. Information regarding waste materials will be presented at the time of such review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying drainage pattern consequences. Each project will be subject to environmental review and applicable local regulations d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts have been or will be developed on a project -specific basis in cooperation with the appropriate jurisdiction. 4. Plants: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Specific impacts to these species from individual projects will be determined at the time of project proposal and will be reviewed in cooperation with the affected jurisdictions. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Impacts on migration routes, if any, will be addressed during site -specific, project - level environmental review. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined at the time of site -specific, project -level environmental review. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. An inventory of invasive animal species observed on or near sites has been or will be developed during project -specific environmental review 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The State Board of Education requires a life -cycle cost analysis of all heating, lighting, and insulating systems prior to allowing specific projects to proceed. Energy needs will be decided at the time of specific engineering and site design planning. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe: Individual projects of this Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated as to their impact on the solar potential of adjacent projects during environmental review. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation measures will be considered at the project -specific design phase and environmental review. Environmental Health: 11 a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area in the vicinity Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Proposed projects will comply with all current codes, standards, and rules and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to environmental review and local approval at the time of formal submittal. b. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? A variety of noises exist within the Kent School District. Specific noise sources have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Normal construction noises would exist on a short-term basis during school construction. There could be an increase in traffic or operations -related noise 12 which would be addressed during project specific environmental review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non -project Actions. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Project noise impacts have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during the project -specific environmental review. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations. S. Land and Shoreline Use: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? There are a variety of land uses within the Kent School District, including residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, agricultural, forestry, open space, recreational, etc. b. Has the site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: This question will be addressed during site -specific, project -level environmental review. c. Describe any structures on the site. Structures located on proposed sites have been or will be identified and described during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Structures to be demolished, if any, will be identified as part of the project -specific environmental review process. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? There are a variety of zoning classifications within the Kent School District. Site specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? An inventory of comprehensive plan designations has been or will be completed during project -specific environmental review. 13 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Any shoreline master program designations have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by city or county? If so, specify. Environmentally sensitive areas, if any, will be identified during project -specific environmental review. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? This information has been or will be provided at the time of project -specific environmental review. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? It is not anticipated that proposed projects will displace any people. Displacement of people, if any, will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project - specific environmental review and local approval at the time the project is formally proposed. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project -specific environmental review. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project -specific environmental review. 9. Housing: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided. 14 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Any impact of project proposals on existing housing has been or would be evaluated during project -specific environmental review procedures. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts have been or will be addressed during site -specific, project -level environmental review. 10. Aesthetics: a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site -specific, project - level environmental review. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site -specific, project - level environmental review. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Appropriate measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project -specific environmental review. 11. Light and Glare: a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project -specific environmental review. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project -specific environmental review. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off -site sources of light or glare have been or will be evaluated at the time of project specific environmental review. 15 tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project -specific basis. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project -specific basis 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Impact on public streets and highways has been or will be assessed during project - specific environmental review. b. Is site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The relationship between specific projects and public transit has been or will be assessed during project -specific environmental review. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? An inventory of parking spaces and the impacts of specific projects on parking spaces have been or will be conducted during project -specific environmental review. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The development of new schools may require new access roads or streets. This issue will be fully addressed during project -specific environmental review. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Use of water, rail or air transportation has been or will be addressed during site - specific, project -level environmental review. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts 17 g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Mitigation of impacts on transportation has been or will be addressed during project - specific environmental review. 15. Public Services: a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will substantially increase the need for other public services. Impacts have been or will be evaluated on a project -specific basis. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any, Schools are built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors and sprinkler systems. 16. Utilities: a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Utilities available at project sites have been or will be identified during project specific environmental review. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility revisions and construction needs will be identified during project -specific environmental review. W. C. SIGNATURE The above wers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the jerad abency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: chard A. Stedry Business Officer Date Submitted: May 30, 2014 19 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? To the extent this Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be constructed, and/or renovated or remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access roads and playgrounds will increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground water. Emissions to air could result from heating systems, emergency generators and other equipment, and from additional car and bus trips to and from the school for students and faculty. Any emissions resulting from this Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, with the possible exception of storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for emergency generating equipment. Noise may result from additional traffic and from concentrating several hundred children at a new facility, especially before and after school and during recesses. To the extent this proposal allows additional residential development to occur, these impacts would also increase somewhat, but it is not possible to quantify those impacts at this time. The impacts would depend on the type, location and distribution of housing, for example, whether single or multiple family and the location of the school. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Facilities implementing the Plan have been or will be evaluated at the project specific level and impacts will be mitigated accordingly. Storm water detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and, depending on the date of actual construction, may be subject to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will be minimal, and will meet any applicable requirements of the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Authority. Fuel oil will be stored according to local and state requirements. 20 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. Depending on the particular site, construction of facilities may require clearing sites of plants and loss of animal habitat. To the extent residential development is allowed, additional area may be cleared and eliminated as habitat for animals. There are not likely to be any impacts on fish or marine life, although some water quality degradation in streams and rivers could occur due to increased residential development. These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Individual projects will be evaluated and mitigated appropriately on a project -specific basis, but specific mitigation proposals cannot be identified at this time. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Any actual projects resulting from this Plan would consume heating fuel and electrical energy. Increased traffic resulting from the construction of additional facilities would consume petroleum based fuels. Reduced traffic resulting from construction of another neighborhood school may also reduce amounts of fuel consumed, but it is not possible to quantify such reduction in consumption at this time. These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Facilities would be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency standards. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Plan and facilities constructed pursuant to the Plan should have no impact on these resources. It is not possible to predict whether other development made possible by this Plan would affect sensitive areas. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project -specific review. Annual updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County, Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, SeaTac, and Maple Valley as part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the School District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected. 21 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None are proposed at this time. Actual facilities constructed to implement the Plan will be sited and constructed to avoid or reduce land use impacts. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? This proposal should not create substantial new demands for transportation. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create an increase in traffic near new District facilities but also reduce traffic by creating the opportunity for more students to walk to a closer school. The construction of the facilities included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in minor increases in the demand for public services and utilities, such as fire and police protection, and water, sewer, and electric utilities. None of these impacts are likely to be significant. The impacts on transportation and public services and utilities of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level review when appropriate. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 22 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Adopted June 24, 2014 BOARD OF EDUCATION Carol Gregory Geoffery McAnalloy Claire Wilson Danny Peterson OPEN INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT Sally D. McLean Prepared by: Tanya Nascimento FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 2-3 SECTION 1 THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Introduction 4 Inventory of Educational Facilities 5 Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities 6 Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities 7 Needs Forecast - New Facilities 8 Six Year Finance Plan 9 SECTION 2 MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Introduction 11 Map - Elementary Boundaries 12 Map - Middle School Boundaries 13 Map - High School Boundaries 14 SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Introduction 15 Building Capacities 16-17 Portable Locations 18-19 Student Forecast 20-22 Capacity Summaries 23-27 King County Impact Fee Calculations 28-30 SECTION 4 SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2014 PLAN 31-33 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2 INTRODUCTION In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act (SHB)2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee Ordinances of King County Code 21A, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249 effective December 21, 1995 as amended, City of Kent Ordinance No.3260 effective March 1996, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its 2015 Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2014. This Plan is scheduled for adoption by King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal Way and the City of Auburn and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction by reference. This plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Des Moines has not adopted a school impact fee ordinance. The City of Des Moines collects school impact fees as part of the SEPA process. The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the Federal Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries. King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to meet the region’s need for housing, jobs, services, culture, and recreation. This Plan’s estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption. This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies or management need. Currently, the District plans to replace Federal Way High School and to increase capacity by approximately 200 students. Federal Way High School was built in 1938. The estimated cost to rebuild Federal Way High School is $106 million. The District will begin Phase I in Summer 2014. Phase I consists of site work and preparation for the portable village that will house students during the construction of the new building. Placement of the portables should be complete by December 2014 and will be in use in January 2015. Phase II, demolition of the existing classrooms and rebuild, will begin in January 2015. The existing cafeteria, gymnasium, and kitchen will continue to be in use during construction. The District continues to monitor factors that may have an impact on enrollment and capacity at our schools. One such factor is SHB 2776, reinforced by the McCleary decision, which will phase in full-day kindergarten for all students and decrease K-3 class size from 20 to 17. This is proposed to be fully funded by 2017-18. Using projected enrollment for the 2017-18 school year, the decrease in class size would create the need for an additional 80 classes for K-3 students. The District currently has 530 classrooms, in our 21 elementary schools & two K-8 schools and an additional 64 classrooms housed in portables. This is an average of 26 classrooms per school. The 80 additional classrooms is the equivalent of 3 elementary schools. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 3 Another factor that will impact capacity is E2SSB 6552. The intention of this bill is to improve student success by modifying instructional hour and graduation requirements. One of the ways to improve student success described in this bill is to decrease the class size for laboratory science in grades 9-12. Current class size for grades 9-12 is 26 students. With the adoption of this bill, laboratory science classes will be decreased to 20 students per class. Using projected enrollment for the 2014-15 school year, this decrease in class size would require an additional 124 classes offered and 25 additional classrooms. We will also continue to study school boundaries as new housing and fluctuating populations impact specific schools. Some shifts in boundaries may be required in the coming years. The maps included in this Plan reflect our current boundaries. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 4 SECTION 1 - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing community. This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. A Financial Plan that shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed follows this. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5 INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (K-5) Adelaide 1635 SW 304th St Federal Way 98023 Brigadoon 3601 SW 336th St Federal Way 98023 Camelot 4041 S 298th St Auburn 98001 Enterprise 35101 5th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Green Gables 32607 47th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Lake Dolloff 4200 S 308th St Auburn 98001 Lake Grove 303 SW 308th St Federal Way 98023 Lakeland 35827 32nd Ave S Auburn 98001 Mark Twain 2450 S Star Lake Rd Federal Way 98003 Meredith Hill 5830 S 300th St Auburn 98001 Mirror Lake 625 S 314th St Federal Way 98003 Nautilus (K-8) 1000 S 289th St Federal Way 98003 Olympic View 2626 SW 327th St Federal Way 98023 Panther Lake 34424 1st Ave S Federal Way 98003 Rainier View 3015 S 368th St Federal Way 98003 Sherwood Forest 34600 12th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Silver Lake 1310 SW 325th Pl Federal Way 98023 Star Lake 4014 S 270th St Kent 98032 Sunnycrest 24629 42nd Ave S Kent 98032 Twin Lakes 4400 SW 320th St Federal Way 98023 Valhalla 27847 42nd Ave S Auburn 98001 Wildwood 2405 S 300th St Federal Way 98003 Woodmont (K-8) 26454 16th Ave S Des Moines 98198 MIDDLE SCHOOLS (6-8) Federal Way Public Academy (6-10) 34620 9th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Illahee 36001 1st Ave S Federal Way 98003 Kilo 4400 S 308th St Auburn 98001 Lakota 1415 SW 314th St Federal Way 98023 Sacajawea 1101 S Dash Point Rd Federal Way 98003 Saghalie 33914 19th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Sequoyah 3450 S 360th ST Auburn 98001 Totem 26630 40th Ave S Kent 98032 TAF Academy (6-12) 26630 40th Ave S Kent 98032 HIGH SCHOOLS (9-12) Decatur 2800 SW 320th St Federal Way 98023 Federal Way 30611 16th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Thomas Jefferson 4248 S 288th St Auburn 98001 Todd Beamer 35999 16th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Career Academy at Truman 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003 ADDITIONAL SCHOOLS Internet Academy (K-12) 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Merit School (6-12) 36001 1st Ave S Federal Way 98003 Employment Transition Program (12+) 33250 21st Ave SW Federal Way 98023 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 6 CURRENT INVENTORY NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES Developed Property Central Kitchen 1214 S 332nd Federal Way 98003 Federal Way Memorial Field 1300 S 308th St Federal Way 98003 Educational Services Center 33330 8th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Support Services Center 1211 S 332nd St Federal Way 98003 Surplussed Space MOT Site 1066 S 320th St Federal Way 98003 Notes: In January 2012, the Administrative Building, Community Resource Center, and Student Support Annex were combined into the Educational Services Center. Central Kitchen will be relocated to this site in during 2013. The MOT Site has been surplussed and are being marketed for sale. Undeveloped Property Site # Location 75 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW – 9.2 Acres 65 S 351st Street & 52nd Avenue S – 8.8 Acres 60 E of 10th Avenue SW - SW 334th & SW 335th Streets - 10.04 Acres 73 N of SW 320th and east of 45th PL SW – 23.45 Acres 71 S 344th Street & 46th Avenue S - 17.47 Acres 82 1st Way S and S 342nd St – Minimal acreage 96 S 308th St and 14th Ave S – .36 Acres Notes: Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed to house students in the District. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 7 NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS Purchase and Relocate Portables Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is Impact Fees. Federal Way High School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity Capital levy request As part of the multi-phase plan, the District intends to increase capacity for high school students with expansion at the Federal Way High School site. Increased capacity at Federal Way High and Decatur High in later phases, supplant the need for construction of a fifth comprehensive high school. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 8 NEEDS FORECAST - ADDITIONAL FACILITIES NEW FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS No current plans for additional facilities. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 9Six Year Finance PlanSecured FundingSourcesImpact Fees (1) $303,161Land Sale Funds (2)($11,596,565)Bond Funds (3) $4,709,857State Match (4) $13,153,110TOTAL $6,569,563Projected RevenueSourcesState Match (5) $27,200,000Bond or Levy Funds (6) $70,000,000Land Fund Sales (7) $10,000,000Impact Fees (8) $800,000TOTAL $108,000,000Actual and Planned ExpendituresTotal Secured Funding and Projected Revenue $114,569,563NEW SCHOOLS Estimated and Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total Total CostPrior Years 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2015-2021MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSIONFederal Way High School (9)$50,000,000$45,000,000 $11,000,000$56,000,000$106,000,000SITE ACQUISITIONNorman Center $785,000$205,000 $215,000 $220,000 $225,000 $235,000 $235,000 $1,335,000$2,120,000 (Employment Transtion Program) (10)TEMPORARY FACILITIESPortables (11) $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,400,000$1,400,000TOTAL $50,785,000 $45,405,000 $11,415,000 $420,000 $425,000 $435,000 $435,000 $200,000 $58,735,000 $109,520,000NOTES:`1. These fees are currently being held in a King County, City of Federal Way and City of Kent impact fee account, and will be available for use by the District for system improvements. This is year end balance on 12/31/13. 2. These funds are expected to come from the sale of the current ESC & MOT sites and bond interest. This is year end balance on 12/31/13.3. This is the 12/31/13 balance of bond funds. This figure includes interest earnings.4. This represents the balance of State Match Funds which will be used to to support the rebuilding of Federal Way High School. This is the balance on 12/31/13.5. This is anticipated State Match for the rebuilding of Federal Way High School. Application for funds was made in July 2013.6. These include $10m of voter approved, but not issued and a $60m six-year levy approved in November 2012.7. Projected sale of surplus properties. These funds will be used to retire debt incurred for the acquisition of a replacement Educational Support Center.8. These are projected fees based upon known residential developments in the District over the next six years. This figure assumes $25,000 per month for the next six years. This figure has been adjusted to reflect the current economy.9. Project budget has been adjusted to match current project cost estimates.10. Norman Center was purchased in 2010 to house the Employment Transition Program. The $2.1m purchase has been financed through a state approved LOCAL program through 2020.11. These fees represent the cost of purchasing and installing new portables. The portable expenditure in future years may replace existing portables that are not functional. These may not increase capacity and are not included in the capacity summary. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 10 This page has been intentionally left blank. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 11 SECTION 2 - MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Federal Way Public Schools has twenty-one elementary schools (grades K-5), two schools with a K-8 grade configuration, seven middle school schools (grades 6-8), four high schools (grades 9-12) and three small secondary schools. The Federal Way Public Academy serves students in grades 6-10. The TAF Academy serves students in grades 6- 12 who reside in the Totem Middle School service area. The programs at Career Academy at Truman High School serves students in grades 9-12. The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school, by school type. (Career Academy at Truman High School and Federal Way Public Academy serve students from throughout the District). The identified boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of programs that affect school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas. The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to that development. School Districts are different. If the District does not have permanent facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries can be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding facilities. Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken lightly. It is recognized that there is a potential impact on students who are required to change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school. It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth throughout the district and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the district, not just around a single development. This page intentionally left blank. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 12 This page intentionally left blank. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 13 This page intentionally left blank. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 14 This page intentionally left blank. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 15 SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Building Capacities - The Education Program Portable Locations Student Forecast – 2015 through 2021 Capacity Summaries King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi-Family Units FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 16 Building Capacities This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District’s “standard of service” in order to ascertain the District’s current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not take into consideration the education program needs. In general, the District’s current target class size provides that the average class size for a standard classroom for grades K through 2 should be 20 students. Due to current economic conditions, the target class size for K through 2 has been temporarily increased. With the legislative compliance with McCleary, we intend to decrease K though 3 class sizes to 17 by the 2017-18 school year. In grades 4-5 the target is 25 students. For grades 6 to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated at 12 seats per classroom. Using the OSPI square footage calculation as a base line, the District has calculated a program capacity for all schools. The following list clarifies the adjustments to the OSPI calculation. Music Rooms: Each elementary school requires a standard classroom for music instruction. All Day Kindergarten: Every elementary school operates only all day Kindergarten programs. These all day Kindergarten programs require additional capacity because the standard classroom is available for one all day session rather than two half day sessions. The District will operate 76 sections of all day Kindergarten in 2014-15. Special Education Resource Rooms: Each elementary and middle school requires the use of a standard classroom(s) for special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. English as a Second Language Programs: Each elementary, middle school and high school requires the use of a standard classroom for students learning English as a second language. Middle School Computer Labs: Each middle school has computer labs, except Totem Middle School. Wireless access has been installed at all secondary schools. If additional classroom space is needed, these computer labs may be converted to mobile carts. High School Career Development and Learning Center (Resource) Room: Each high school provides special education resource room and career development classrooms for students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. Preschool/ECEAP/Headstart: Our district currently offers preschool programs for both special needs & typically developing students at 8 elementary schools. We also have the ECEAP and Headstart program at 6 schools (4 elementary & 3 high schools). These programs decrease capacity at those sites. Alternative Learning Experience: Federal Way offers students the opportunity to participate in an Alternative Learning Experience through our Internet Academy. These students have never been included in the capacity calculation of unhoused students. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 17 BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES ELEMENTARY BUILDING MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY PROGRAM CAPACITY School Name Headcount School Name Headcount FTE Adelaide 361 Illahee 835 843 Brigadoon 258 Kilo 804 812 Camelot 238 Lakota 732 739 Enterprise 427 Sacajawea 659 666 Green Gables 446 Saghalie 800 808 Lake Dolloff 415 Sequoyah 564 570 Lake Grove 352 Totem 759 767 Lakeland 361 Federal Way Public Academy 199 201 Mark Twain 327 Technology A ccess Foundation Academy** Meredith Hill 425 Merit School** Mirror Lake 337 TOTAL 5,352 5,406 Nautilus (K-8)319 Olympic View 340 *Middle School Average 736 744 Panther Lake 410 Rainier View 401 HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING Sherwood Forest 395 PROGRAM CAPACITY Silver Lake 402 Star Lake 345 School Name Headcount FTE Sunnycrest 391 Decatur 1189 1,272 Twin Lakes 309 Federal Way 1471 1,573 Valhalla 401 Thomas Jefferson 1289 1,379 Wildwood 312 Todd Beamer 1103 1,180 Woodmont (K-8)318 Career Academy at Truman 153 164 TOTAL 8,290 Federal Way Public Academy 109 117 Employment Transition Program 48 51 Technology A ccess Foundation Academy** Elementary Average 360 Merit School** TOTAL 5,362 5,735 *High School Average 1,263 1,351 Notes: * Federal Way Public Academy, Career Academy at Truman High School, and Employment Transition Program are non-boundary schools. These schools are not used in the calculated averages. ** Technology A ccess Foundation Academy is housed entirely in portables on the Totem Middle School site. Merit School is housed entirely in portables on the Illahee Middle School site. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 18 Portable Locations The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic education. It is not an efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity for 500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates throughout the year and from year to year. Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students when increasing population impacts a school attendance area. Portables may also be required to house students when new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also provide temporary housing for students until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s) is either used for other purposes such as storage or child care programs, or moved to another school for an interim classroom. Some portables may not be fit to move due to age or physical condition. In these cases, the District may choose to buy new portables and surplus these unfit portables. It is the practice and philosophy of Federal Way Public Schools that portables are not acceptable as permanent facilities. The District is investigating alternatives to portables. We are currently in the planning phase of designing buildings that would require shorter construction time and provide permanent classroom space for our students. These buildings may replace the need for portables in the future. The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for temporary educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 19 PORTABLES LOCATED PORTABLES LOCATED AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AT HIGH SCHOOLS NON NON INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL Adelaide 12Decatur 54 Brigadoon 1 Federal Way 1 3 Camelot 1 Thomas Jefferson 91 Enterprise 21Todd Beamer 8 Green Gables 1 TAF Academy 82 Lake Dolloff 1 1 TOTAL 33 7 Lake Grove 11 Lakeland Mark Twain 3 Meredith Hill 3 Mirror Lake 6 PORTABLES LOCATED Nautilus 1 AT SUPPORT FACILITIES Olympic View 11 Panther Lake 2 MOT Rainier View 3 TDC 5 Sherwood Forest 2 2 TOTAL 5 Silver Lake 4 Star Lake 31 Sunnycrest 4 HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES Twin Lakes 12 Valhalla 4 Sherwood Forest 1 Wildwood 4 Woodmont 3 Total 1 TOTAL 40 23 PORTABLES LOCATED AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS NON INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL Illahee 3 Kilo 7 Lakota Sacajawea 8 Saghalie 13 Sequoyah 2 Totem Merit 3 TAF Academy 82 TOTAL 22 15 1 In the 2014-15 school year, students at Federal Wa y HS will be housed in a portable village during construction of the new classrooms. PORTABLE LOCATIONS FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 20 Student Forecast Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development. Enrollment projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget preparation. The majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the forecasted number of students. Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are also made on the basis of projected enrollment. Other expenditures and certain revenue projections are directly related to enrollment projections. Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department. Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school-building totals, grade level and program level to include vocational and special education students. The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis of a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time. In a stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This method does not trace individual students; it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out of the school system are common, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The district collects information on birth rates within the district’s census tracts, and treats these statistics as a cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years. The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting student enrollments. The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated below. The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts. These are forecast of enrollment for one year. The projections vary depending on the number of years of historical information and how they are weighted. A second method is a projection using an enrollment projection software package that allows the user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these projections for the district level. The Enrollment MasterTM software provides statistical methods including trend line, standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of these methods. This software produces a five-year projection of school enrollment. In December 2012, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the Federal Way School District. The report was complete in March 2013. The model used to forecast next year’s enrollment uses cohort survival rates to measure grade to grade growth, assumes market share losses to private schools (consistent with county-wide average), assumes growth from new housing or losses due to net losses from migration. This forecast was provided as a range of three projections. The long-range forecast provided with this report used a model with cohort survival rates and growth rates based on projected changes in the 5-19 age group for King County. Most of the methods used for long range enrollment reporting assume that enrollment is a constant percent of something else (e.g. population) or that enrollment will mirror some projected trend for FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 21 the school-age population over time. The report included 5 different calculations to provide a range of possible projections for the District to the year 2022. This model produces a projection that is between 23,000 and 24,000 when applied to the low, medium and high range modes. This provides a reasonable range for long-range planning and is consistent with estimates from various models. Long-range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the cohort survival method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther out the projections are made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections are studied annually. The study includes information from the jurisdictional demographers as they project future housing and population in the region. The long-range projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the State of Washington. Near term projections assume some growth from new housing, which is offset by current local economic conditions. The District tracks new development from five permitting jurisdictions. Currently there are three new multi-family complexes planned within the District. These three complexes have a total of 819 units. Two of the three developments will be open and ready for occupancy within the 2014-15 school-year. Long range planning assumes a student yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth patterns. Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions comprising the school district geography. These projections create a vision of the school district community in the future. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 22 Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections Simplified FTE (K Headcount = .5 FTE; Middle School FTE=.99 Headcount; High School FTE = .935Headcount) Total K -12 Percent Calendar Yr School Year Elementary Middle School High School FTE Change 2009 2008-09 8,865 5,155 6,456 20,476 2010 2009-10 8,738 5,119 6,594 20,451 -0.1% 2011 2010-11 8,753 5,142 6,544 20,439 -0.1% 2012 2011-12 8,800 5,134 6,448 20,382 -0.3% 2013 2012-13 8,914 4,963 6,367 20,244 -0.7% 2014 2013-14 9,230 4,801 6,354 20,384 0.7% 2015 B2014-15 9,319 4,811 6,261 20,391 0.0% 2016 P2015-16 9,282 5,041 6,092 20,415 0.1% 2017 P2016-17 9,398 5,145 5,950 20,493 0.4% 2018 P2017-18 9,477 5,154 5,911 20,542 0.2% 2019 P2018-19 9,575 5,130 6,063 20,768 1.1% 2020 P2019-20 9,645 5,264 6,107 21,016 1.2% 2021 P2020-21 9,723 5,359 6,243 21,325 1.4% Elementary K-5 Middle School 6-8 High School 9-12 15,000 16,000 17,000 18,000 19,000 20,000 21,000 22,000 School Year Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast FTE FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 23 Capacity Summaries All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim measures. The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summarizing the entire District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle school, and high school levels individually. The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in place each year. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 24 CAPACITY SUMMARY - ALL GRADES Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 CAPACITY School Year 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 19,004 19,004 19,004 19,204 19,204 19,204 19,204 FTE CAPACITY 19,431 19,431 19,431 19,631 19,631 19,631 19,631 Add or subtract changes to capacity Increase Capacity at Federal Way HS 200 Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 19,004 19,004 19,204 19,204 19,204 19,204 19,204 Adjusted Program FTE Capacity 19,431 19,431 19,631 19,631 19,631 19,631 19,631 ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 20,391 20,415 20,493 20,542 20,768 21,016 21,325 Internet Academy Enrollment (AAFTE)(315) (315) (315) (315) (315) (315) (315) Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy 20,076 20,100 20,178 20,227 20,453 20,701 21,010 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM FTE CAPACITY (645) (669) (547) (596) (822) (1,070) (1,379) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY Current Portable Capacity 2,125 2,375 2,375 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 Deduct Portable Capacity (75) Add New Portable Capacity 250 Adjusted Portable Capacity 2,375 2,375 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 1,730 1,706 1,753 1,704 1,478 1,230 921 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 25 CAPACITY SUMMARY - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 CAPACITY School Year 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 BUILDING PROGRAM HEAD COUNT CAPACITY 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 FTE CAPACITY 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 Add or subtract changes in capacity Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 Adjusted Program FTE Capacity 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 8,290 ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 9,319 9,282 9,398 9,477 9,575 9,645 9,723 Internet Academy (AAFTE)1 (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy 9,283 9,246 9,362 9,441 9,539 9,609 9,687 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY (993) (956) (1,072) (1,151) (1,249) (1,319) (1,397) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY2 Current Portable Capacity 750 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Add/Subtract portable capacity Add portable capacity at Panther Lake ES,250 Sunnycrest ES, & Valhalla ES Adjusted Portable Capacity 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 7 44 (72) (151) (249) (319) (397) NOTES: 1 Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2 Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 26 CAPACITY SUMMARY - MIDDLE SCHOOLS Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 CAPACITY School Year 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 FTE CAPACITY 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 Add or subtract changes in capacity Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 5,352 Adjusted Program FTE Capacity 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 5,406 ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 4,811 5,041 5,145 5,154 5,130 5,264 5,359 Internet Academy (AAFTE)1 (74) (74) (74) (74) (74) (74) (74) Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy 4,737 4,967 5,071 5,080 5,056 5,190 5,285 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY 669 439 335 326 350 216 121 RELOCATABLE CAPACITY2 Current Portable Capacity 550 550 550 550 550 550 550 Add/Subtract portable capacity Adjusted Portable Capacity 550 550 550 550 550 550 550 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 1,219 989 885 876 900 766 671 NOTES: 1 Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2 Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 27 CAPACITY SUMMARY - HIGH SCHOOLS Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 CAPACITY School Year 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 5,362 5,362 5,362 5,562 5,562 5,562 5,562 FTE CAPACITY 5,735 5,735 5,735 5,935 5,935 5,935 5,935 Add or subtract changes in capacity Add capacity to Federal Way HS 200 Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 5,362 5,362 5,562 5,562 5,562 5,562 5,562 Adjusted Program FTE Capacity 5,735 5,735 5,935 5,935 5,935 5,935 5,935 ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 6,261 6,092 5,950 5,911 6,063 6,107 6,243 Internet Academy (AAFTE)1 (205) (205) (205) (205) (205) (205) (205) Basic Ed without Internet Academy 6,056 5,887 5,745 5,706 5,858 5,902 6,038 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY (321) (152)190 229 77 33 (103) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY2 Current Portable Capacity 825 825 825 750 750 750 750 Add/Subtract portable capacity Subtract portable capacity at Federal Way HS (75) Adjusted Portable Capacity 825 825 750 750 750 750 750 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY3 504 673 940 979 827 783 647 NOTES: 1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2 Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 3. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and no planning time in some classrooms. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 28 King County, the City of Federal Way, and the City of Kent Impact Fee Calculations Single and Multi-Family Residences Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees to help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities. To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was established. This formula can be found in King County Code 21A and was substantially adopted by the City of Federal Way and Kent. The formula requires the District to establish a "Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be added to a school district by each new single or multi-family unit and to gather some standard construction costs, which are unique to that district. - STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for single-family units and multi-family units. The factors used in the 2015 Capital Facilities Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single-family units that were constructed in the last five (5) years. - IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee Calculation for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 21A and the Growth Management Act. Temporary Facility Cost is the average cost of a portable purchased within the last 5 years. Plan Year 2014 Plan Year 2015 Single Family Units $5,363 $5,171 Multi-Family Units $1,924 $1,834 Mixed-Use Residential1 $781 $917 City of Federal Way SF – $4,464 MF – $1,562 SF - $5,171 MF -$1,834 1 In accordance with the City of Federal Way Council’s changes to Ordinance No. 95- 249, which authorizes the collection of school impact fees. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 29 STUDENT GENERATIONNEW CONSTRUCTION IN PRIOR 5 YEARSSingle Family Student GenerationNumber of Number of Number of Number of Number of Elementary Middle School High School TotalSingle Family Multi-Family Elementary Middle School High School Student Student Student StudentDEVELOPMENT Dwellings Dwellings Students Students Students Factor Factor Factor Factor(14) North Lake Rim 36 4 3 9 0.1111 0.0833 0.2500 0.4444(14) Wynstone 43 12 7 7 0.2791 0.1628 0.1628 0.6047(13) Saghalie Firs 34 8 4 4 0.2353 0.1176 0.1176 0.4705(13) Lakepoint 22 4 2 4 0.1818 0.0909 0.1818 0.4545(12) Ming Court 15 4 3 4 0.2667 0.2000 0.2667 0.7334(12) Sunset Gardens 12 12 0 1 1.0000 0.0000 0.0833 1.0833(11) Brighton Park 25 10 7 6 0.4000 0.2800 0.2400 0.9200(11) The Greens 20 4 9 4 0.2000 0.4500 0.2000 0.8500(10) Creekside Lane 53 14 10 8 0.2642 0.1887 0.1509 0.6038(10) Grande Vista 31 10 1 7 0.3226 0.0323 0.2258 0.5807Total291 0 82 46 54Student Generation*0.2818 0.1581 0.1856 0.6254 * Student Generation rate is based on totals.Multi-Family Student GenerationElementary Middle School High School TotalAuburn 0.223 0.091 0.092 0.406Issaquah 0.165 0.052 0.051 0.268Kent 0.324 0.066 0.118 0.508Lake Washington 0.055 0.017 0.012 0.084Average 0.192 0.057 0.068 0.317 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 30 IMPACT FEE School Site Acquisition Cost:Student Student Facility Cost / Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Acreage Acre Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary 0.2818 0.1920 $0 $0 Middle School 0.1581 0.0570 $0 $0 High School 4.85 $216,718 51 0.1856 0.0680 $3,821 $1,400 TOTAL $3,821 $1,400 School Construction Cost:Student Student % Perm Fac./ Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Total Sq Ft Cost Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary 94.98% 0.2818 0.1920 $0 $0 Middle School 96.87% 0.1581 0.0570 $0 $0 High School 96.65% $13,780,000 200 0.1856 0.0680 $12,359 $4,528 TOTAL $12,359 $4,528 Temporary Facility Cost:Student Student % Temp Fac. Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Total Sq Ft Cost Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary 5.02% $183,020 250 0.2818 0.1920 $10 $7 Middle School 3.13% 0.1581 0.0570 $0 $0 High School 3.35% 0.1856 0.0680 $0 $0 TOTAL $10 $7 State Matching Credit Calculation:Student Student Construction Cost Sq. Ft. State Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Allocation/Sq Ft Student Match SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary $200.40 0.2818 0.1920 $0 $0 Middle School $200.40 0.1581 0.0570 $0 $0 High School $200.40 130 66.10% 0.1856 0.0680 $3,196 $1,171 Total $3,196 $1,171 Tax Payment Credit Calculation SFR MFR Average Assessed Value (February 2014) $214,952 $88,900 Capital Bond Interest Rate (February 2014) 4.38% 4.38% Net Present Value of Average Dwelling $1,710,935 $707,610 Years Amortized 10 10 Property Tax Levy Rate $1.55 $1.55 Present Value of Revenue Stream $2,652 $1,097 Single Family Multi-Family Residences Residences Mitigation Fee Summary Site Acquisition Cost 3,821$ 1,400$ Permanent Facility Cost 12,359$ 4,528$ Temporary Facility Cost 10$ 7$ State Match Credit (3,196)$ (1,171)$ Tax Payment Credit (2,652)$ (1,097)$ Sub-Total 10,343$ 3,668$ 50% Local Share 5,171$ 1,834$ Calculated Impact Fee 5,171$ 1,834$ 2015 Impact Fee 5,171$ 1,834$ FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 31 SECTION 4 SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2014 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The 2015 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 2014 Capital Facilities Plan. The changes between the 2014 Plan and the 2015 Plan are listed below. SECTION I - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 2015-2021 and adjusted for anticipated Federal Way High School construction schedule. The plan is found on page 8. SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION CAPACITY Elementary capacity includes space for All Day Kindergarten programs at every elementary school. Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on page 15. PORTABLES The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on page 20. STUDENT FORECAST The Student Forecast now covers 2015 through 2021 Enrollment history and projections are found on page 20. CAPACITY SUMMARY The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 22-25. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION - KING COUNTY CODE 21A The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The adjustment made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee between the 2014 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2015 Capital Facilities Plan can be found on page 30 and 31. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 32 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2013 TO 2014 STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation. The changes in student Generation factors between the 2014 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2015 Capital Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age of the developments and the year placed in the survey. The Student Generation worksheet is found on page 27. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COSTS The anticipated cost based on 2013 estimate for replacing Federal Way High is $106,000,000. The replacement will add 200 additional seats. The current capacity of Federal Way High is 1538. The addition of 200 seats will increase capacity by 13%. Total Cost $106,000,000 x .13 = $13,780,000 SCHOOL ACQUISITION COSTS The district purchased the Norman Center to house the Employment Transition Program and to allow for the expansion of the ECEAP program. The purchase and use of this site increased our high school capacity by 51 students. Total Cost $2,100,000 / 2 = $1,050,000 Cost per Acre $1,050,000 / 4.85 = $216,718 The District will use the above formulas created as a base for the 2015 Capital Facilities Plan. The capacity of Federal Way High may vary from year to year as programs are added or changed and construction cost may increase over time. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2015 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 33 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2014 TO 2015 IMPACT FEE Item From/To Comment Percent of Permanent Facilities Percent Temporary Facilities 95.65% to 95.23% 4.35% to 4.77% Report #3 OSPI Updated portable inventory Average Cost of Portable Classroom $185,012 to $183,020 Updated 5-yr rolling average of portables purchased and placed in 2013 Construction Cost Allocation $188.55 to $200.40 Change effective July 2014 State Match 65.18% to 66.10% Change effective July 2013 Average Assessed Value SFR – $208,480 to $214,952 MFR – $80,075 to $88,900 Per Puget Sound Educational Service District (ESD 121) Capital Bond Interest Rate 3.74% to 4.38% Market Rate Property Tax Levy Rate $1.61 to $1.55 King County Treasury Division Single Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School .3271 to .2818 .1487 to .1581 .1896 to .1856 Updated Housing Inventory Multi-Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School .1710 to .1920 .0490 to .0570 .0690 to .0680 Updated County-Wide Average Note: The last district multi-family development, built in 2008, generates a higher student yield than the county- wide average. Impact Fee SFR – $5,363 to $5,171 MFR – $1,924 to $1,834 SFR based on the updated calculation MFR based on the updated calculation GLOBAL END Each student will graduate with the skills and academicEach student will graduate with the skills and academic knowledge to succeed as a responsible, contributing member of a global society. STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT Each student at every grade level will perform at or above the state or district standard in all disciplines. Each student’s progress shall be measured annually by academic growth. RESPONSIBILITY Each student will take responsibility for their academic success; exhibiting positive and ethical personal behaviors; treating th ith t t d di itothers with respect, courtesy, and dignity. PARENT ENGAGEMENT Each student will benefit from the relationship each school willEach student will benefit from the relationship each school will establish with each parent, guardian or advocate. Federal Way Public Schools 33330 8th Avenue S Federal Way, Washington 98003 This document is published by the Business Services Department of the Federal Way Public Schools. May 2014 y g (253) 945‐2000 DETERMINATION OF N®NSIGNIFICANCE Issued with a 14 Day comment and appeals period Description of Proposal: This threshold determination analyzes the enviromnental impacts associated with the following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single action: 1. The adoption of the Federal Way Public Schools' 2015 Six Year Capital Facilities Plan by the Federal Way Public Schools for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District. 2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan by King County to include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2015 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. 3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Federal Way, City of Kent and the City of Auburn to include the Federal Way Public Schools' 2015 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City of Federal Way's, City of Kent's and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan. This proposal may also involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Des Moines to incorporate the Federal Way Public Schools' 2015 Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities Element of the City of Des Moines' Comprehensive Plan. Proponent: Federal Way Public Schools Location of the Proposal: The Federal Way Public Schools District includes an area of approximately 35 square miles. Areas of the cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines and Auburn fall within the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County. Lead Agency. Federal Way Public Schools is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse environmental impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the leaA agency. This information is available to the public upon request. This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by 4:30 p.m., May 16, 2014. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. Responsible Official: Telephone: Address: Ms. Tanya Nascimento Enrollment and Demographics Federal Way Public Schools (253) 945-2071 33330 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 You may appeal this determination in writing by 4:30 p.m., May 16, 2014 to Tanya Nascimento, Federal Way Public Schools, 33330 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Date of Issue: Date Published: May 2, 2014 May 27 2014 WAC 197-11-"O Environmental Checklist. Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not .know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of all Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Use of checklist for nonproject proposals. Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply" In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject actions (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project"applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. 2 1►►J1 hk,Ilk A. 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: The adoption of a Six -Year Capital IF Plan by the Federal Way School District No. 210 for the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. The King County, City of Federal Way, City of Kent and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan will be amended to include the District's 2015 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element. This project may also involve the amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the city of Des Moines to incorporate the District's 2015 Capital Facilities Plan. 2. Name of applicant: Federal Way School District No. 210. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Federal Way School District No. 210 33330 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA (253) 945-2000 Contact Person: 98003 Ms. Tanya Nascimento Enrollment and Demographics Telephone: (253) 945-2071 4. Date checklist prepared: May 2, 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: Federal Way School District No. 210 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The Federal Way School District's 2015 Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the District in June 2014. The Capital Facilities Plan will be forwarded to King County, the City of Federal Way, City of Kent and the City of Auburn for inclusion in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. It will also be forwarded to the city of Des Moines for possible inclusion in this jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plans. The District will continue to update the Capital Facilities Plan annually. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to )roject-specific environmental review. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or fiu-ther activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 3 The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the .District is currently implementing. This includes construction of Federal Way HS. Additionally the plan covers the purchase and siting of temporary facilities at various locations. Current plans are for all the projects to be complete by 2016 with athletic fields to be completed by 2017. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will undergo additional environmental review, when appropriate, as they are developed. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Permits will be applied for with the appropriate jurisdiction for minor projects during the 2015 calendar year. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The District anticipates that King County, the City of Federal Way, the City of Kent and the city of Auburn will adopt this Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plan. The city of Des Moines may also adopt this Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities Elements of their Comprehensive Plans (when issued). 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is anon -project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Federal Way School District's 2015 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District's facilities needs. The District's Capital Facilities Plan will be incorporated into King County's, the City Federal Way's, the City of Kent's and the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plans. It may also be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plans of the city of Des Moines. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project -specific environmental review. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Federal Way School District. The District includes an area of approximately 35 square miles. The City of Federal Way, parts of the cities of Kent, Des Moines and Auburn, parts of unincorporated King County, fall within the District's boundaries. A detailed map of the District's boundaries can be viewed at the District's offices. B. ENVIKUNMENTAL ELEMENTS a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other . The Federal Way School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified during project4evel environmental review when appropriate. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Specific slope characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Specific soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Unstable soils may exist within the Federal Way School District. Specific soil limitations on individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project -level environmental review when appropriate. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when appropriate, to project -specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of any fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of the construction projects currently proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects have been or will be evaluated on a site -specific basis at the time of project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be subject to local approval processes. • ,� g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?) The proposed renovation projects will require the construction of impervious surfaces. The extent of any impervious cover constructed will vary with each capital facilities project included in the Capital Facilities Plan. This issue has been or will be addressed during project - specific environmental review when appropriate. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and appropriate control measures have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Various emissions, many construction -related, may result from the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The air -quality impacts of each project have been or will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project -specific environrruental review when appropriate and relevant local approval processes. The District will be required to comply with all applicable air regulations and air permit requirements. Proposed measures specific to the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a network of surface water bodies within the Federal Way School District. The surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. When necessary, the surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and incorporated into the designs of the individual projects. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan lnay require work near the surface waters located within the Federal Way School District. Applicable local approval requirements have been or will be satisfied. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material as a component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project - specific environmental review when appropriate. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? if so, note location on the site plan. Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Ground: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on groundwater resources has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the projects included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have storm water runoff consequences. Specific information regarding the storm water impacts of each project has been or will be provided during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local storm water regulations. 0 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of waste materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of each project on ground and surface waters have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to all applicable regulations regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 4. Plants: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture _ crop or grain _ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Federal Way School District. Inventories of the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Some of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 10 5 d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local landscaping requirements. Animals: a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other. An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 11 6. Energy and Natural Resources. a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life cycle cost analysis of all heating, lighting, and insulation systems before it will permit specific school projects to proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site design planning when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe: The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar potential of adjacent projects have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project -specific environmental review Olen appropriate. 7. Environmental Health: a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will comply with all current codes, standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to project -specific environmental review and local approval at the time they are developed when appropriate. 12 b. Noise: 1} What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? A variety of noises from traffic, construction, residential, commercial and industrial areas exists within the Federal Way School District. The specific noise sources that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, constriction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. The District does not anticipate that the projects will create long -teen increases in elated or or operations -related noise levels. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? There are a variety of land uses within the Federal Way School District, including residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The project sites covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have not been used recently for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. The structures located on the proposed sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified and described during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 13 l►j-_' d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The remodeling and renovation projects will require the demolishment of school structures. The structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site -specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be completed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the Plan have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The Federal Way School District currently serves approximately 22,200 students. The student population is expected to increase to 232000 by the year 2021. This projection has been adjusted to reflect the current economic conditions. The District employs approximately 3,200 people. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of the projects contained therein, will displace any people. 14 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project -specific environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed mitigating measures will be proposed at that time, if necessary. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 9. Housing: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? h�dicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will eliminate any housing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on existing housing have been or will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 10. Aesthetics: a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials) proposed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 15 NV -7� " -_ b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project -specific basis when appropriate. 11. Light and Glare: a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. What existing ofF site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off -site sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 12. Recreation: a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Federal Way School District. �i b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed renovated school and support facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to mitigation during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. A school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields and gymnasiums. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for such registers on the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and cultural resources on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in more detail during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project -specific basis when appropriate. 14. Transportation: a. Identify public streets and 1ighways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The impact on public streets and highways of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. 17 15 bI Is site currently served by public transit? nearest transit stop? If not, what is the approximate distance to the The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public transit has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? An inventory of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability has been or will be conducted during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity oi) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Use of water, rail, or air transportation has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peals volumes would occur. The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Public Services: a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will substantially increase tl�e need for other public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. 18 Remodeled/renovated school or facilities will be built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems. 16. Utilities: a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities are available at the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The types of utilities available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed in more detail during project - specific environmental review when appropriate. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility revisions and construction needs have been or will be identified during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relyiig on them to ma its decision. Signature: Date Submitted': May 2, 2014 19 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be constructed and/or renovated and remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access roads, and playgrounds could increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters. Heating systems, emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed pursuant to the Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for emergency generating equipment. The District does not anticipate a significant increase in the production of noise from its facilities, although the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will increase the District's student capacities. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above have been or will be addressed during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. Storm water detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be stored in accordance with local and state requirements. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. These impacts have been or will be addressed in snore detail during project -specific environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Plan are not likely to generate severe impacts on fish or marine life. 20 i; ,HECKLIST Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are. Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be identified at this time. Specific mitigation proposals have been or will be identified, however, during project - specific environmental review when appropriate. 3. 1 How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the consumption of energy. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency standards. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no impact on these resources. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project -specific envirornnental review when appropriate. Updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County and the cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines, and Auburn as part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans. The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained therein are proposed at this time. 21 rIII,Lim 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary increases in the District's need for public services and utilities. Upon the completion of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, however, the District does not anticipate that its need for public services and utilities will increase substantially beyond existing levels. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demands) are: No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. M U* ENGAGE • EC7UCATE • EMPOWER 915 Fourth Street NE Auburn, Washington 98002 (253) 931-4900 Serving Students in: Unincorporated King County City of Auburn City of Algona City of Kent City of Pacific City of Black Diamond Ray Vefik Lisa Connors Carol Seng Laurie Bishop Dr. Dennis Kip Herren, Superintendent Table of Contents Section I Executive Summary ....................... Page 1 Section II Enrollment Projections ..................... Page 6 Section III Standard of Service ........................ Page 8 Section IV Inventory of Facilities ...................... Page 15 Section VI Capital Construction Plan ................. Page 22 Section VII Impact Fees .................................. Page 26 Section VIII Appendices ................................... Page 30 Appendix A.1 -Student Enrollment Projections Page 31 Appendix A.2 -Capital Facilities Plan Projections Page 45 Appendix A.3 -Student Generation Survey Page 50 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 I. Executive Summary This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Auburn School District (the "District") as the District's principal planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act and the adopted ordinances of the counties and cities served by the District. This Plan was prepared using data available in the spring of 2014. This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the District. However, this Plan is not intended to be the sole plan for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic long-range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies and actions, taking into account a longer or a shorter time period; other factors and trends in the use of facilities; and other needs of the District as may be required. However, any such plan or plans will be consistent with this Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan. To enable the collection of impact fees in the unincorporated areas of King County and within the City of Auburn and City of Kent; the King County Council, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent will adopt this Plan by reference as part of each jurisdiction's respective comprehensive plan. To enable the collection of impact fees in the Cities of Algona, Pacific and Black Diamond, these municipalities must also adopt this Plan and adopt school impact fee ordinances. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act and the local ordinances, the Plan will be updated on an annual basis, and any changes in the fee schedules) adjusted accordingly. The Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs of the District. The Growth Management Act and the school impact fee ordinance authorize the District to define its standard of service based on the District's specific needs. In general, the District's current standard provides that class size for grades K-2 should not exceed 25 students and 20.3 students for school designated as serving high poverty areas; class size for grades 34 should not exceed 27 students; class size for grade 5 should not exceed 30 students. When averaged over the six elementary grades, this computes to 24.8 students per classroom. Class size for grades &12 should not exceed 30 students, with some subject areas restricted to lesser numbers. (See Section III for more specific information.) The capacity of the schools in the District is calculated based on this standard of service and the existing inventory of facilities including transitional classrooms. The District's 2013-14 capacity was 13,203. The actual number of individual students was 14,971 as of October 1, 2013. (See Section V for more specific information.) 2 The Capital Construction Plan shown in Section VI addresses the additions and proposed modernization to the District's existing facilities. This provided for a new high school, Auburn Mountainview, approved by the voters in February 2003 and opened in September 2005; and the addition of two new elementary schools approved by the voters in February 2005; with Lakeland Hills Elementary opening in the Fall of 2006 and Arthur Jacobsen Elementary opening in the Fall of 2007. The plan includes the construction of a new middle school and a new elementary school, as well as the acquisition of a future school site to accommodate growth. The new facilities are required to meet the projected student population increase to be generated from the large development areas within the Auburn School District. Three areas that have significant impact on the school district are the Lakeland South, the Lea Hill, and the north Auburn valley areas of the district. There are other pockets of development that impact the District as well. The City of Kent has an area of approximately 158 acres that was sold to developers in 2004. The economic downturn has slowed development in these areas, but recent new construction is beginning to pick back up. The District completed a comprehensive review of all district facilities and in October 2008. A Steering Committee made recommendations to the Board for capital improvements to existing facilities and replacement of seven schools over the next ten years. These recommendations led to a capital improvements levy and a bond issue that was placed on the ballot in March 2009. Both ballot measures were unsuccessful in March. The board determined to rerun only the capital improvements levy in November 2009, which the voters approved. In the Fall of 2011 the school board determined to move forward with the Auburn High School Modernization and Reconstruction Project and placed the project before the voters in February of 2012. The bond issue was supported by the community at nearly 57% approval rate, but was short of the super majority requirement of 60%. In March of 2012 the school board determined to rerun the bond again in November of 2012. In November 2012, the bond passed at 62% and construction for the Auburn High School Modernization and Reconstruction Project began on February 25, 2013. Phase 1 of the three phase project is nearing completion. Approximately 60% of the total new building area will be occupied by Auburn High School students and staff in the fall of 2014. The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent provide for the assessment of impact fees to assist in meeting some of the fiscal impacts incurred by a district experiencing growth and development. Section VII sets forth the proposed school impact fees for single family and multi -family dwelling units. The student generation factors have been developed using the students who actually attend school in the Auburn School District from single family and multi -family developments constructed in the last five years. There have been dramatic changes in the student generation factors for multi -family in 2013 and 2014. The District plans to carefully monitor the numbers over the next several years to determine if this is a trend or an anomaly. The method of collecting the data is with the use of GIS mapping software, data from King County and Pierce County GIS; and to integrate the mapping with student data from the District's student data system. This method gives the District actual student generation numbers for each grade span for identified developments. This data is contained in Appendix A.3. 3 Aubum School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes from the 2013 Capital Facilities Plan that are a part of the 2014 Plan. The changes are noted by Section for ease of reference. Section I Executive Summary A. Updated to reflect new information within the Plan. B. Summary level list of changes from previous year. Section 11 Enrollment Projections Updated projections. See Appendices A.1 & A.2. Section 111 Standard of Service A. Increase of 11 full -day kindergarten classrooms at elementary level. B. Reduction of maximum K-2 class size from 25 to 20.3 students at 11 elementary schools designated as serving high poverty areas. Section IV Inventory of Facilities A. Add 2 portables at Lakeland Hills Elementary. B. Remove 7 portables at Auburn High School due to the Auburn High School Modernization and Reconstruction Project. C. Add 2 portables at Alpac Elementary. D. Add 1 portable at Dick Scobee Elementary. E. Add 1 portable at Evergreen Heights Elementary. F. Add 2 portables at Gildo Rey Elementary. G. Add 2 portables at Hazelwood Elementary. H. Add 2 portables at Ilalko Elementary. I. Add 2 portables at Pioneer Elementary. J. Add 1 portable at Terminal Park Elementary. K. Add 1 portable at Washington Elementary. Section V Pupil Capacity Removal of seven portable classrooms from Auburn High School results in a reduction in student capacity of 210 students (7 classrooms x 30 students per classroom). No change in student capacity results from the 16 additional elementary school portables which meet facility needs resulting from transition to full day kindergarten and class size reduction rather than increased enrollment. Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Impact Fees CHANGES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2013 to 2014 DATA ELEMENTS CPF 2013 CPF 2014 EXPLANATION Student Generation Factors Single Family Consistent with King County Ordinance 11621, Elementary 0.2270 0.1650 Student Generation Factors are calculated Mid School 0.0850 0.0760 by the school district based on district Sr. High 0.1290 0.0890 records of average actual student generation MultkFamily rates for new developments constructed Elementary 0.1720 0.2230 over the last five years. Mid School 0.0700 0.0910 Sr. High 0.0960 0.0920 School Construction Costs Elementary $25,000,000 $29,800,000 Updated estimates for 2014. Middle School $48,800,000 $52,800,000 Updated estimates for 2014. Site Acquisition Costs Cost per acre $308,155 $356,728 Updated estimate on land costs. Area Cost Allowance Boeckh index $200.40 $200.40 Updated to projected SPI schedule. (July 2013) Match % - State 59.19% . 62.31 % Updated to current SPI schedule. Match % - District 40.81 % 37.69% Computed District Average AV Single Family $199,919 $210,210 Updated from March 2014 King County Dept of Assessments data. MultkFamily $75,278 $78,449 Updated from March 2014 King County Dept of Assessments data using weighted average. Debt Sery Tax Rate $2.11 $2.12 Current Fiscal Year GO Bond Int Rate 3.74% 4.38% Current Rate (Bond Buyers 20 Index 3-14) Section VIII Appendices Appendix A.1 -Updated enrollment projections from October 1, 2013 Appendix A.2 -Updated enrollment projections with anticipated buildout schedule from March 2014. Appendix A.3 - Student Generation Survey April 2014 5 Aubum School District No, 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS The Auburn School District uses a modified cohort survival model to project future enrollment for all of the District's operations. Table 11.1 is an extract from the comprehensive projection model found in Appendix A.2 titled "CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections". This Table shows the anticipated enrollment for the next six years based on the previous 6 year history of the District under the assumptions set forth in the comprehensive projections, Appendix A.1, and the projection for additional students generated from new developments in the district as shown in Appendix A.2. TABLE ASD ENROLLMENT 11A PROJECTIONS March 2014 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 201 &17 2017-18 201 &19 2019-20 GRADE Actual Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected KDG 1170 1215 1258 1300 1342 1381 1417 1 1188 1230 1272 1315 1357 1397 1432 2 1124 1211 1250 1293 1335 1375 1410 3 1125 1142 1227 1266 1308 1348 1384 4 1123 1163 1178 1263 1302 1341 1377 5 1075 1147 1185 1200 1284 1321 1357 K - 5 6805 7108 7370 7637 7928 8163 8377 6 1076 1088 1157 1195 1210 1292 1324 7 1072 1106 1116 1186 1224 1236 1314 8 1116 1083 1115 1125 1194 1229 1238 6 -8 3264 3277 3388 3506 3628 3757 3876 9 1159 1301 1267 1300 1310 1378 1409 10 1229 1171 1312 1277 1311 1319 1381 11 1240 1221 1160 1300 1266 1296 1299 12 1274 1313 1291 1232 1371 1335 1360 9 -12 4902 5006 5030 5109 5258 5328 5449 TOTALS 14,971 15,391 15,788 16,252 16,814 17,248 17,702 GRADES K-12 Actual Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected K-5 6805 7108 7370 7637 7928 8163 8377 6-8 3264 3277 3388 3506 3628 3757 3876 9A 2 4902 5006 5030 5109 5258 5328 5449 Kw121 149971 15,391 159788 16,252 16,814 17,248 17,702 Note: The District is currently operating Full Day Kindergarten in fourteen elementary schools. This includes State funded Full Day Kindergartens at ten elementary schools. The State projects to fully implement Full Day Kindergarten by 2018. 0 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 thrdu§h 2020 STANDARD OF SERVICE The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent indicate that each school district must establish a "Standard of Service" in order to ascertain the overall capacity to house its projected student population. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage "capacity" guidelines for computing state funding support. The fundamental purpose of the SPI guidelines is to provide a vehicle to equitably distribute state matching funds for school construction projects. By default these guidelines have been used to benchmark the district's capacity to house its student population. The SPI guidelines do not make adequate provision for local district program needs, facility configurations, emerging educational reform, or the dynamics of each student's educational program. The Auburn School District Standard of Service addresses those local considerations that require space in excess of the SPI guidelines. The effect on the space requirements for both permanent and relocatable facilities is shown below for each grade articulation pattern. Conditions that may result in potential space needs are provided for information purposes without accompanying computations. OVERVIEiJV The Auburn School District operates fourteen elementary schools housing 6,805 students in grades K through 5. The four middle schools house 3,264 students in grades 6 through 8. The District operates three comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school, housing 4,902 students in grades 9 through 12. CLASS SIZE The number of pupils per classroom determines the number of classrooms required to house the student population. Specialists create additional space needs. Class sizes are subject to collective bargaining agreements. Changes to class size agreements can have significant impact on available space. The current pupil/teacher limit across all elementary programs is an average of 24.8 students per teacher. Consistent with this staffing limit, room capacities are set at 24.8 students per room at grades K - 5. At grades 6 - 12 the limit is set at 30 pupils per room. The SPI space allocation for each grade articulation level, less the computed reduction for the Auburn School District Standard of Service, determines the District's capacity to house projected pupil populations. These reductions are shown below by grade articulation level. ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS STRUCTURED LEARNING FOR DEVELOPMENTALLYDISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a structured learning program for students with moderate to severe disabilities at the elementary school level which currently uses ten classrooms to provide for 96 students. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of capacity is expected unless population with disabilities grows at a disproportionate rate compared to total elementary population. ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR The Auburn School District operates an adaptive behavior program for students with behavior disabilities at the elementary school level. The program uses one classroom to provide for seven students. The housing requirements for this program exceed the SPI space allocations by one classroom. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 room @ 24.8 each = Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = Total Capacity Loss 0 (25) 0 (25) Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 STANDARD OF SERVICE SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the elementary level for special education students requiring instruction to address their specific disabilities. Fourteen standard classrooms are required to house this program. The housing requirements for this program exceed the SPI space guidelines by seven standard classrooms. Continued loss of capacity is expected as growth in program is larger than the total elementary population. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 24.8 each = (174) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (174) NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCE ROOM The Auburn School District operates two resource rooms to support the education of Native American students at the elementary level. Two standard classrooms are fully dedicated to serve these students. Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 24.8 each = (50) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (50) HEAD START The Auburn School District operates a Head Start program for approximately 114 pre-school aged children in six sections of 1/2 day in length. The program is housed at three elementary schools and utilizes three standard elementary classrooms and auxiliary office spaces. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 24.8 each = (74) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (74) EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates apre-school program for young children with disabilities below age five. This program is housed at seven different elementary schools and currently uses 10 standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 24.8 each = (248) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (248) READING LABS The Auburn School District operates a program for students needing remediation and additional language arts instruction. These programs utilize non-standard classroom spaces if available in each elementary school. Four elementary schools do not have non-standard rooms available, thus they are housed in a standard classroom. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 24.8 each = (99) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (99) 10 Auburn School District No, 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 STANDARD OF SERVICE MUS►C ROOMS The District elementary music programs require one acoustically modified classroom at each elementary school for music instruction. The housing requirements are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @ 24.8 each = (347) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (347) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the elementary school level for students learning English as a second language. This program requires fourteen standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @ 24.8 each = (347) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.85 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (347) SECOND GRADE TOSA PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides a TOSA reading specialist program for eight highly impacted elementary schools. This pullout model provides direct instruction to students who are not at grade level and do not receive other services. This program requires eight standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 24.8 each = (198) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (198) ELEMENTARY LEARNING SPECIALIST PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides a learning specialist program to increase literacy skills for first and second graders. This program model was originally created from the I-728 funds and currently has the specialist going into existing teacher classrooms, as well as pulling out students into designated classrooms. The district is utilizing classrooms at all fourteen elementary schools. Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @ 24.8 each = (347) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (347) FULL DAY KINDERGARTEN The Auburn School District provides Full -Day Kindergarten programs to increase academic skills.for kindergarten students. This program model has been created from tuition, Titled funds, LAP funds, and currently there are ten schools receiving state funding for 2013-14 school year. The district is utilizing 50 classrooms at all fourteen elementary schools. Housing requirements exceed the OSPI space guidelines for this program by 25 classrooms. Loss of Permanent Capacity 25 rooms @ 24.8 each = (620) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.$ each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (620) 11 Auburn School District No, 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 STANDARD OF SERVICE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides an Early Childhood Education program to meet local needs for disadvantaged students. The State has fund an increase of 12 ECEAP seats. This program will require one new classrooms for 2014-15. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 rooms @ 24.8 each = (25) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 24.8 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (25) SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program for each grade at the middle school level. This is to accommodate special education students needing remedial instruction to address their specific disabilities. Eight classrooms are required at the middle school level to provide for approximately 316 students. The housing requirements for this program are not entirely provided for in the SPI space guidelines. ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District offers a self-contained program for students with moderate to severe behavior diabilities. The program is housed at one of the middle schools and uses two classrooms. One of the two classrooms for this program are provided for in the SPI space allocations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 rooms @ 30 each = (30) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (30) STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates five structured learning classrooms at the middle school level for students with moderate to severe disabilities and one developmentally disabled classroom for students with profound disabilities. Two of the five classrooms for this program are provided for in the SPI space allocations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 30 each = (90) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (90) MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School District operates a minimum of one computer lab at each middle school. This program utilizes a standard classroom per middle school. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120) Loss of Temparary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (120) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the middle school level for students learning English as a second language. This program requires four standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (120) 12 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 STANDARD OF SERVICE ROOM UTILIZATION The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive middle school program that includes elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 12/14/11 identifies 148 teaching stations available in the mid -level facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 8 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 30 each = (240) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (240) SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SENIOR HIGH COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School District operates two computer labs at each of the senior high schools. This program utilizes two standard classrooms at comprehensive high schools and one at West Auburn. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 30 each = (210) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (210) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at three comprehensive high schools for students learning English as a second language. This program requires three standard classrooms that are not provided for, in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 30 each = (90) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (90) ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District offers aself-contained program for students with moderate to severe behavior diabilities. The program is housed at one of the high schools and uses one classroom. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space allocations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 rooms @ 30 each = (30) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (30) STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates nine structured learning center classrooms for students with moderate to severe disabilities. This program requires five standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 5 rooms @ 30 each = (150) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (150) 13 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 STANDARD OF SERVICE SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the senior high level for special education students requiring instruction to address their specific learning disabilities. The current high school program requires 10 classrooms to provide program to meet educational needs of the students. The SPI space guidelines provide for one of the 10 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 30 each = (300) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (300) PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS Auburn High School includes 25,000 square feet used exclusively for a Performing Arts Center. The SPI Inventory includes this space when computing unhoused student capacity. This space was not intended for nor is it usable for classroom instruction. It was constructed to provide a community center for the performing arts. Using SPI capacity guidelines, 25,000 square feet computes to 208 unhoused students or 8.33 classrooms. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8.33 rooms @ 30 each = (250) ROOM UTILIZATION The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive high school program that includes numerous elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available teaching stations. There are 185 teaching stations available in the senior high facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 10 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 30 each = Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = Total Capacity Loss STANDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS ELEMENTARY Loss of Permanent Capacity = (21554) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (21554) MIDDLE SCHOOL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (600) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (600) SENIOR HIGH Loss of Permanent Capacity = (11330) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (11330) TOTAL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (414$4) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (41484) 14 (300) 0 (300) Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES Table IVA shows the current inventory of permanent district facilities and their OSPI rated capacities. Table IV.2 shows the number and location of each portable unit by school. The district uses relocatable facilities to: 1. provide interim housing in school attendance areas uniquely impacted by increasing school populations that would otherwise require continual redistricting, 2. make space available for changing program requirements and offerings determined by unique student needs, and 3* provide housing to cover district needs until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. Relocatable facilities are deemed to be interim, stop gap measures that often place undesirable stress on existing physical plants. Core facilities (i.e. gymnasiums, restrooms, kitchens, labs, lockers, libraries, etc.) are not of sufficient size or quantity to handle the increased school population served by adding relocatable classrooms. Table Permanent Facilities ®istrict Scho®I Facilities IV.1 @ OSPI Rated Capacity (December 2013) Buildin Ca acit Acres Address Elementary Schools Washington Elementary 486 5.40 20 E Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Terminal Park Elementary 408 6.70 1101 D Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Dick Scobee Elementary 477 10.50 1031 14th Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Pioneer Elementary 441 8.30 2301 M Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Chinook Elementary 440 8.75 3502 Auburn Way South, Auburn WA, 98092 Lea Hill Elementary 450 10.00 30908 124th Avenue Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Gildo Re Elementary551 10.00 1005 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Evergreen Heights Elem. 456 8.09 5602 South 316th, Auburn WA, 98001 AI ac Elementary497 10.60 310 Milwaukee Boulevard North, Pacific WA, 98047 Lake View Elementary559 16.40 16401 Southeast 318th Street, Auburn WA, 98092 Hazelwood Elementary 580 12.67 11815 Southeast 304th Street, Auburn WA, 98092 Ilalko Elementary 585 12.00 301 Oravetz Place Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Lakeland Hills Elementary 594 12,00 1020 Evergreen Way SE, Auburn WA, 98092 Arthur Jacobsen Elementary 614 10.00 29205 132"d Street SE, Auburn WA, 98092 ELEM CAPACITY 7,138 Middle Schools Cascade Middle School 829 17.30 1015 24th Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Olympic Middle School 921 17.40 1825 K Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Rainier Middle School 843 26.33 30620 116th Avenue Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Mt. Baker Middle School 837 30.88 620 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 MS CAPACITY 3,430 Senior High Schools West Auburn High School 233 5.10 401 West Main Street, Auburn WA, 98001 Auburn Senior High 21101 18.60 800 Fourth Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Auburn Riverside HS 1,387 33.00 501 Oravetz Road, Auburn WA, 98092 Auburn Mountainview HS 1,443 40.00 28900 124d' Ave SE, Auburn WA, 98092 SH CAPACITY 51164 TOTAL CAPACITY 15,732 16 This page intentionally left blank. mofgAoI /� SE rd . ✓ - ._,— - sue. oil IF AS .�. Col\•s 1 °w :�' T ,aa ) -- ii - { .1 -_ _ "t r`� ;L e., x� �A✓e aFN•e t 4 d _-- .,y- _:..J047-0°: Amass W y11 a :, �.•.: ' ` L U abOf ._..y.._ al 6 W' r I ./ t`, p+ ' . `of is N' a L far go N� ,. \. a M , , • rJscw.\.K�nSrn \.r±off - l ,e ' I� - • f i P: p'.i„ b4 N, Il _I' �,!!b .> f R •f. 2.F 1 • - /,of 'r--V i r, MI _t; ILL •.i-. t� �1 - .��l �Vb ^'y �� ��e .� �Qr. \ r'\°° m ia, ,. • 4 F, �yy�t�,n. e r l "h+ ter} I a >•• - Ca ' n.� . ,t,: p(�o ,r d \I " 'a \ � -•� - p i y '6 % �;. _ F-32-- - _:7iI % 'emu r;:3 s ` • Ia - 11��, -`� .' �, - e'rS ; Ti I:' �a ,..t' ' -a l�I • - - - tea- - _ o,.t�•• �, vr,- i. „�-- y K _>Ly�y _ - - .R- I : , .""! °z' >y offor ad i" I ` 41 IFt�t't1S! JCt:. A. j`).+ - J _�� r. _ _P i__'+,7 -�i �°'w... _ ..� a`:j A e • t e� x I �s*r', .a ��- >;�1. i , * �•••• ,�' _dk --.- -j / 1036- - @•1 Fi�-- - 'i .•ar _ n jj ` r f �Y , `'��: - t a r III! i .,� � Is „ s: ra�''t! Ix Ana I �wv cP� -b�, is '•I /-.� t ` tea-- •Ls-� 'a�` i �t �y n _ ! —of-3rar ` aaa r ,Nu,:✓ s ire `.g to Y.°`Se m e "f'e 1 al x ' s`+ t t I Y /� r l a\`p ._. ',,�.-°f '�;' C.. a'I% i a +,sA''!' '�'i'Sg-. 14, f _t- w % u, tc 9 t x_w s � e( s'' ,a t • jylr�`i i '� or �� _'. Y° - /. { •MYr s kM>:n E ,erg 'j`" 4 _—� IN — ° t i J'a r$� 1tr. of, -� i e �� tt e �P i £ `'y 1 A iT l» 6 _ �8;ffj 8�1._ k. - � $-has o r sz °• I y ,Q �° ter.. :c qq \ J` �� _�_ �^ t $ 'V .,t, , s-? - ,). %, ' d \"I "To i { _ a:l E� •-t ta- _i•",4q�`.`.J7 i P�\ , •t \ ;, ��` ! I 1 a�lye_ c.�, j �a...t r i t! i y.,nITT�r /;• Syr, i\ - \ Y qa (( r'- .. i...1"doh ..� ''fCoo,a y / J ' i I Y I ems- g- 1 : �. ' s �. •-+ l : t�t�3, 40i , r I 3T rR �. ..- '7 e .1�-aF ; .g I - - ii r ni.r ]�.� ;p[I$I jet ", ,;� I ams r- art.` - I i I - / 1 i 8 4 - - - - - gI -S j` --•1-..a.� . ` �.")}, . r f4• t 1AN I i �gy _ a / r.11c f: Fa y n , _ s - _ r.��=�°.•`- S.. a<a o _3- , ?vyx / i%r t .=e t- ? t �� i sa.r late _ r- ._. .. - r - c" _ Face%■lleiptlaT�'1 CIn•• L --- : "' I r \ i �• --; q .. 't' le+� a 4 a I "�..� v flrildL (ilea y I l• ` 'a+- roaoo I •: PA }I Getr E u" �� •i a u { ) N-m J Cwlf CeslrN d' tkJ - rr ,1.D"'— 4 at 75 R 1 Rac�ia �s at ■ ,a l Galt ceu"I , III m T'' p \+ �, a t ' -- `sE ' ° 4 Nt . e t,• v.—� ^Feo ! a ` 5, sty. \ r sn w t V n a ar ' F • •'tI , q o- N�'` •� ,,.y �,. • _ -- -- -\8r- t _ ` 'j-t- =� ..•. j, � j or ' 7� `a+,.'- l g o• i y • 4 , C a 3T • _._ - 'r- s- ` I a IE ,/ I f E. ?3 f / =0 e yjtLft v a < ,t ! Ge-r 1 •_ , / 1'', '�'�''.,� l I � , J ; ,�33,�n ' _ - �''- - - -- -mil''" �^' • .8.�,j _ t, -� �a. t ° .e „�` 3°`- �� i _.ti>1,,, / f'� _ �f ' a- I � j^-�•--�- i :`�-a ep t'Oia•�'-Pork u osal . s '�. .,;� _� i;: iA I•,1.�� tt a* r 8 �� :F\ er 3a, a ""1.1 I5r'o, ;IA •f go, ewae. s _ % Ez°°w> ` i I _. $. i I � ! % x , ! I _4 • saws ®-,a N- E... - a ' I$OYb ,n ylr �� _ I$o 2x t• j 'a r � i /1 - - -///-cam- ! _7t.off-b-I - -i -- '9-. t r�; a%S i d > yam. ' r tmar' �r a,r^ J _ lr a'&rr_�__ 11-"Y- - --a.- Jaia. �i-Z•�••� •f^ A I: ` _ a sr-4 \F: •{ �� J; ]' Ai — aE a " J,J %2a—Ilt— ° , I� I i i 1 t — I r` i r illeul - �sj`4 Y.+t _ _..i'1•�"% >r of! �'-� ¢t�s " e- >�. /-la.gla I r-.----, n sF,aY -If. ,,1�ar\. I , ?;P,Ird. ; �:\e+, .}s a• P e �J / aua d j ' y.s�_'ti - ' I ] 1 �_� i `)E t i :�st /orl. - jlYior�GGu81e..� ' C� f � : k t _ 1 - • J = y rU�°� `lIZIfoor ty\�i~ _ r SdiR Il I_ i ' _ to `' Y-- ire 'f— tom`. r r �' > r r,..r..a • . ! I L ab .T ." I r — —! f l:_ - _ , raj: M n Y I f tP - t I K '� 1 ��i I• q o m 1 f4'l�b ai r / ac xa. 1— ' y5` lt4yt ryI Iz �s�di s g?3 I ;/ /1i l Uoff yu -11 °' e yM` , -` IH. .y—�1..thy &a^,!� nNo, of �., .s _" n F-` : _,__„ .� j 1r f �:t JJ %.r •` ! ai.uo ; nY �.;.., £� e t ,Y 1_'.°, pyg�'1s { c1». Iler--' -- -17- - - -x'ss3ri - - `poi ra+-5• go 'JT% '.`al ` 1 `F t�fp W `t C� .a V c'bce /r-a _ _ 15. _ _ _ _ 14-tdl` ! 7 _ y \ % ' !�`sita� al( f r J y y �1 r f m 'r j ;t +t . ti ._► ` I y � i .s � I It � _ ,- . LACK DIAi�IONO �1 of !_i ` : {,l r "ia ' ^S° •`�, :Lt ,� 1• " s7�'-' _ 3. I : d' t (':'t9O Ii i Yt I "�AMx. ' Jrde aR.tl ': j c"u a r s Il711oLm �. �. S e� -„ or oea- wBiA '_ $ �+ - $.iax Y !g i =-_----%! srltof c..Im —_._. _ 1 cS=--A— — - m'aq t' I - _ `s`9==•'�.-;3e' " r i J•i i {._ �D \ /% Black Dldmont" - of3 �' "I e st 'sE Aueuali offI we11 "t_' /- 1,a4e t/ l o✓lM 1 I, • M k j� i SL-. F§ eu I ,+ \ __r- 1 I " f .�:'"i r +' __s? t t� t 111 vt._ i } ., I`�yfl 2 -_ - -aE ' f�:« 5... rAS v_, s a6 = _ ; a ao �... ojj1.NUCK1 - - R Q 44 G of i 'I. •`I -- - •1,5 i I I`"+...` `.•>�C.y13_ � N, t Y4a�:y 1" �•S:�--tUfBjQjR+YEf"' 1•• .j am• ! t 1"tC. Qt'Bg �. 4' ., .._, `'�. at ��� r z' :_ "�...:I Ifs J r ,r• �i "J' „-' t uJ I ` .. - - •`, - ._._ i t , ' { y 3 i $ titor / [ _ t t . 1.-I _/ 11/ •{J _g -r nE �aIirvlr ' v { -;� ��.y�� - E er `t a� z tv a+ e I _ I �\ + l i1. i -1 6�T '� L t t` .s i 7 'x ia3 y a I -� is t� i s� sus ssw o /I loe J hr �l t 4 Y it s a� 2i .�. ,.. �` l y �1 yr '' ._ !' } 'S' qr l xmal t� a. • �..x •I. � Imo, i fh.fi �_= f' •�% oa rl+ a �y !' li :, a ',rO'Grady•. yh .;•\ ` z:i { I:t- 3 p9Ylr' `�':\k..sue'`.: - - -.i _l..e,.A 2T- '![y J. s , .1. ;� 1 So- Ana.. a °"P.`.°� ,� INDIAN.i' °- -� - - -- - - I_ _- -- t } lr JS <i tt III -to ` i ereti frl f 19 i \ `� f I f�� , MIA IT�� t ; t State r / r' s e t i tl lr i �. �' ! _ i II /~ ' - �$ " tiro I t.� ✓ i`,' j jM ,/v AN ✓' ��. ti t s� _� •i Mill a \ { 4 •_-v-� }r a, p., ' 'yd E ✓.t•1:`v:, , ff'ep;'1 L 1 ,.ITT-JJ,'• '<- Wo drgCY� L'ir' -tt3� .! ! 7�� % , .�gip• f.J E I.,. l3Y :�, ?^ �_ rS�n" •'.L "r 1 �•...; �',���.���+��� ,� �_ -- --- t4• y-- �6 . u r:,xaw f,t K.=,F ,..^-z -- --- -_ 10 311 to ry f . t `c '� •p ._ � ` "" t r \I ,� r `! y �' ` + ;. t ,1 3i R E lei/ � � i .=rr 11.1t.4I.s t • ia "'ta. a r .Lt t�a�-n:1 l a r smoo t I i_....,' ` t r :h w...�.. f,y;eA.. I I I 1 ,� 0 lat I nem I i4 4 a - 'AI 1 •�'s-'� _ ! a - Ne I�"q ` tit �• I aE Esc ,:i,REiCAlAT10f� . a a t I a' t \ - ---- - -- - - -- - ` _ ' II ` 7-; - -it - - - - - -� N -+ - -I poo 0 1 -�a BURN SCHOOL DISTRICT 408 p _-: • w AU a e aPaid tT i I I i , °° g. / ! E i % ' N I ` ala * : ° \ ot �I zi a& DS ? 1 f ! '. / ' ! I ",•r:n._.r._ ti as m; ! rurspAto Rn -f1 s Y I 6. �`"t ilr I ge I l allege le. an" A�baaarrud ` i 1 r . P (r - / ! '' - t% �� , esrra3 NE s, Ad uM rr I':.., sr. rav r:rc act seov o, / !'a1 .. :,i! rye _ .. \ �- -- -- I ---r - -+ rtaa �i$ s 9`"I �. !� S� Rrrr,E„11� arrs�rwW m�o..�itosE� go a.� i L, SPAC'I�IC , '''�. rat 'r�l� J /+nwsm Y.wswe w �s j e" 6 I a r • u "l^ ' j y„� 3 : �y .I �`! fool. ' S ese�a.�icao.r -1 sr�s>a5.�+.r t a I g 'I -�Jl - 6 I A+..w wot Aer.w Isom y \ i •" e aei° ,7 . g _ _ - a „F ; ; r of ! e dss=stl.wws - stll0aa.r./W sae�m.r�wtsw`ar.srM3wr 1 \ -, - ^ T MUCKLESNOOT a INDIArJ _ i o sooaa..aE " �sHCAm.tE ,el,.tw�oe 11 -�- 'y„r' {„ \ �• 22 s wr.F= I $� ,Im.wam Ar.waeov y_ j T `,16T t2 r' 6•nAeTr ,• I '� - t "2 }}r y , I O Irina�Y(/hi G1�fIVtl �WerW �OA�EL IIr� iI \ S'.J¢ 1 L- /�' U,j �J1J71• }� Siy,- {I �i ,/ 100 81 516o9�LNE iRI tMAs1aE hWEB ImtI 4 1 j1e if ly y • . - . tof £�J Jdrodor• ` , 1 a1J'°1 p6T r Mal WA Y® AIRw l�Pt ` \ � 1 �e� { ►' b ,,,j _ _ _ • OiMKobOad O r1.a.n.3t a1 . ,iW i \C•II). 9d mUtl3aaE a11Y9ad SE ' _ _ -.� � '\ lIM },aMrm rea - -_ `� --- AYnW� NDtlw/m Altalw { ♦ - - �' IT, - I 'LTi .. _ - _ ui a • . ' A { ' -go. Y�dWlidarlV W Mhl'�rab/W • I�di■�r1� �I I' \ ti I 1 11 IRa11431r Imf Ya9d3L BEa*npaE [f •, I i i _. ...! - f.� •fie }.. .srt.+n RESERVAof TNTN s mem retlreml Aa<nnwlot oo - 1 :.t E � • °' 7 'a'� ' 8 omaadrW Twrrrwa..�rato ■Iral.r■al..araar r,sa� 11 `H 14 I Ysslnal.ar. ursraE msesa.sl..sE J y i K ti _ Net -10- - t. �ttr_w• u-f� C I �a �. ww,rgoal AnanwlsoQ Ama� 7t--1-•-A- " LL I' d \� t j ! 1 . 1 . Eyglerrad.s Wrsy_Yaetl+sW • rlr..wro Irl [' �•' 1. e� �-I i � E, � ! IAivIM>� E:bwlw Eat t�EAr,m�3E i>r "bAa• -- ' �'"\,cz _ ' ` • t `t' _ t • `� 1 1 SE 416 �b a Rdww �14 W li Nw9�YI W a rwI W i 3 i w � I �r.t'„ca: •of -- ffi imuwa NTSETtlSbI ILmYEawmsi LE t ! #■ ry Fyl' _ ') _ _ I �• ^ - - ` '� A.,csn emst rnr.r am Mn.w wo t ! rrm, I"Jf r i , _ 000� ME" - FT?�. a. off .. rr� , essEsaaar wa.ua�.rr.r se.x This page intentionally left blank. Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES TABLE TEMPORARY/RELOCATABLE IV.2 FACILITIES INVENTORY (March 2014) Elementary Location 2014-15 2015-16 2016A 7 2017A 8 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Washington 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 Terminal Park 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 Dick Scobee 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 Pioneer 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 Chinook 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 Lea Hill 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 Gildo Rey 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 Evergreen Heights 1 2 3 3 4 4 4 Alpac 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 Lake View 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 Hazelwood 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 Ilalko 4 5 6 6 6 6 6 Lakeland Hills Elementary 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Arthur Jacobsen Elementary 0 0 1 1 2 2 2 TOTAL UNITS 46 51 58 63 66 66 66 TOTAL CAPACITY 11141 11265 11438 1,562 1,637 11637 11637 Middle School Location 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Cascade 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 Olympic 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 Rainier 5 7 7 8 8 8 8 Mt. Baker 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 TOTAL UNITS 13 15 19 20 20 20 20 TOTAL CAPACITY 390 450 570 600 600 600 600 Sr. High School Location 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 West Auburn 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 Auburn High School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Auburn High School - *TAP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Auburn Riverside 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Auburn Mountainview 2 2 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 TOTAL UNITS 16 16 19 19 19 19 TOTAL CAPACITY 480 480 570 570 570 570Lt *TAP -Transition Assistance Program for 18-21 year old students with special needs. COMBINED TOTAL UNITS 75 $2 96 102 105 105 105 COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY 2,011 2,195 2,578 2,732 2,807 2,807 2,807 *Note: Reduction of portables at Auburn High School is due to the Auburn High School Modernization and Reconstruction Project. m 1/ Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 PUPIL CAPACITY While the Auburn School District uses the SPI inventory of permanent facilities as the data from which to determine space needs, the District's educational program requires more space than that provided for under the formula. This additional square footage is converted to numbers of pupils in Section III, Standard of Service. The District's capacity is adjusted to reflect the need for additional space to house its programs. Changes in the capacity of the district recognize new unfunded facilities. The combined effect of these adjustments is shown on Line B in Tables V.1 and V.2 below. Table VA shows the Distict's capacity with relocatable units included and Table V.2 without these units. Table V.1 Capacity WITH relocatables 2013-14 2014-15 2015A 6 2016A 7 2017A 8 A. SPI Capacity 15,732 15,732 15,732 15,732 15,732 A.1 SPI Capacity -New Elem A.2 SPI Capacity- New MS B. Capacity Adjustments 21529 21473 21289 1,906 11752 C. Net Capacity 13,203 13,259 131443 131826 13,980 D. ASD Enrollment 14,791 15,391 15,788 16,252 16181d 1 E. �ASD Surplus/Deficit ( (1,588)� (2,1 CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS Include Relocatable 1,955 2,011 2,195 Exclude SOS pg 14 41484 4,484 4,484 Total Adjustments (2,529) (2,473) (2,289 Table V.2 Capacity WITHOUT relocatables A. SPI Capacity A.1 SPI Capacity -New Elem V2 SPI Capacity- New MS B. Capacity Adjustments C. Net Capacity D. IASD Enrollment E. DASD Surplus/Deficit 013-14 2014-15 2015-16 15,732 15,732 15,732 11,248 � 11,248 � 11,248 018-19 2019-20 15,732 16,532 550 800 1,677 1,677 551 15,405 17,248) 17,702 2,578 � 2,732 ( 2,807 � 2,807 84 016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 15, 732 15, 732 15, 732 16, 532 550 800 1,248 11,248 12,048N (44 98 14,791 15,391 15,788 16,252 (31543) (41143) (41540) (51004 16,814 1 17,248 1 17,702 (5,566)1 (51200)1 (51104 CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS Exclude SOS 14 41484 4,484) k4,484 4,484 t4,4841 kZ Total Adjustments (4,484) (4,484) (4,484) (4,484) (4,484) (4,484) (4 1/ New facilities shown in 2017-18 and 2018-19 are not funded under the current Capital Facilities Plan. 2/ The Standard of Service represents 26.61 % of SPI capacity. When new facilities are added the Standard of Service computations are decreased to 24.51 To of SPI capacity. 3/ Students beyond the capacity are accomodated in other spaces (commons, library, theater, shared teaching space). Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PERMANENT FACILITIES @ SPI Rated Capacity (March 2014) A. t Elementary Schools 2014 through 2020 PUPIL CAPACITY Building 2013A 4 2014-15 2015-16 1 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Washington 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 Terminal Park 408 408 408 408 408 408 408 Dick Scobee 477 477 477 477 477 477 477 Pioneer 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 Chinook 440 440 440 440 440 440 440 Lea Hill 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 Gildo Rey 551 551 551 551 551 551 551 Evergreen Heights 456 456 456 456 456 456 456 Alpac 497 497 497 497 497 497 497 Lake View 559 559 559 559 559 559 559 Hazelwood 580 580 580 580 580 580 580 Ilalko 585 585 585 585 585 585 585 Lakeland Hills 594 594 594 594 594 594 594 Arthur Jacobsen 614 614 614 614 614 614 614 Elementary #15 550 ELEM CAPACITY 7,138 71138 71138 71138 71138 71138 71688 Building 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Cascade 829 829 829 829 829 829 829 Olympic 921 921 921 921 921 921 921 Rainier 843 843 843 843 843 843 843 Mt. Baker 837 837 837 837 837 837 837 Middle School #5 800 800 MS CAPACITY 3,430 31430 3,430 3,430 3,430 41230 41230 enior High Schools S Building 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 COMBINED CAPACITY 15,732 15,732 15,732 15,732 15,732 16,532 17,082 PSI Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN The formal process used by the Board to address current and future facility needs began in 1974 with the formation of a community wide citizens committee. The result of this committee's work was published in the document titled 'Guidelines for Development.' In 1985 the Board formed a second Ad Hoc citizens committee to further the work of the first and address the needs of the District for subsequent years. The work of this committee was published in the document titled 'Directions for the Nineties.' In 1995 the Board commissioned a third Ad Hoc citizens committee to make recommendations for improvements to the District's programs and physical facilities. The committee recommendations are published in the document titled 'Education Into The Twenty -First Century - - A Community Involved.' The 1995 Ad Hoc committee recommended the District develop plans for the implementation, funding, and deployment of technology throughout the District's programs. The 1996 Bond proposition provided funding to enhance the capacity of each facility to accommodate technological applications. The 1998 Capital Levy provided funding to further deploy technology at a level sufficient to support program requirements in every classroom and department. In 2005 and 2014, replacement technology levies were approved to continue to support technology across all facets of the District's teaching, learning and operations. In addition to the technology needs of the District, the Ad Hoc committee recognized the District must prepare for continued student enrollment growth. As stated in their report, "the District must pursue an appropriate high school site as soon as possible." The Ad Hoc recommendation included commentary that the financing should be timed to maintain consistent rates of tax assessments. A proposition was approved by the voters on April 28, 199$ that provided $8,000,000 over six years to address some of the technology needs of the District; and $5,000,000 to provide funds to acquire school sites. During the 1997-98 school year, a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the Auburn and Dieringer School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the school population from an area that includes a large development known as Lakeland South. Lakeland South at that time was immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the Auburn School District. On June 16, 1998 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a joint meeting of the Auburn and Dieringer Boards of Directors. On June 22, 1998 the Auburn School Board adopted Resolution No. 933 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On June 23, 1998 the Dieringer School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 24-97-98 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from Dieringer to Auburn containing most of the Lakeland South development and certain other undeveloped properties. Property for the third comprehensive high school was acquired in 1999. The Board placed the proposition on the ballot four times prior to passing in 2003. Each election was extremely close to passing. After the fourth failure a community meeting was held and from that meeting the Board determined need for further community study. In April of 2002,.the Board formed a fifth citizen's Ad Hoc committee to address the following two items and make recommendations to the Board in the Fall of 2002: a. A review of the conclusion and recommendations of 1985 and 1995 Ad Hoc Committees related to accommodating high school enrollment growth. This included the review of possible financing plans for new facilities. b. Develop recommendations for accommodating high school enrollment growth for the next 10 years if a new senior high school is not built. 23 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN This committee recommended the Board place the high school on the ballot for the fifth time in February 2003. The February election approved the new high school at 68.71 % yes votes. The school opened in the Fall of 2005. In the Fall of 2003 the school board directed the administration to begin the planning and design for Elementary #13 and Elementary #14. In the Fall of 2004, the Auburn School Board passed Resolution No. 1054 to place two elementary schools on the ballot in February 2005. The voters approved the ballot measure in February of 2005 at 64.72%. Lakeland Hills Elementary (Elementary M3) opened in the Fall of 2006. Arthur Jacobsen Elementary (Elementary #14) is located in the Lea Hill area and opened in the Fall of 2007. These two elementary schools were built to accommodate the housing growth in Lakeland Hills and Lea Hill areas of the school district. In the 2004-05 school year, the Board convened a sixth Citizen's Ad Hoc committee to again study and make recommendations about the future impacts in the District. One of the areas of study was the need for New Facilities and Modernization. The committee made a number of recommendations including school size, the need for a new middle school, and to begin a capital improvements program to modernize or replace facilities based upon criterion. During the 2005-06 school year, a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the Auburn and Kent School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the school population that will come from an area that includes a number of projected developments in the north Auburn valley. On May 17, 2006 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a joint meeting of the Auburn and Kent Boards of Directors. On June 14, 2006 the Kent School Board adopted Resolution No. 1225 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On June 26, 2006 the Auburn School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 1073 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from the Kent School District to the Auburn School District effective September 29, 2006. In October of 2008, after two years of review and study, a Steering Committee made recommendations to the school board regarding the capital improvements program to modernize or replace facilities as recommended by the 2004-05 Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee. These recommendations, based on specific criteria, led to the school board placing a school improvement bond and capital improvements levy on the ballot in March 2009. Voters did not approve either measure that would have updated 24 facilities and replaced three aging schools. The board decided to place only a six -year Capital Levy on the ballot in November of 2009, which passed at 55.17%. The levy will fund $46.4 million of needed improvement projects at 24 sites over the next seven school years. Planning for the replacement of aging schools has started with educational specifications and schematic design process beginning in 2010 for Auburn High School. A future bond issue will be necessary to fund these projects. The school district acquired a site for a future middle school in 2009 and will need to consider possibilities for a site for elementary school #15. The Special Education Transition Facility opened in February of 2010. This facility is designed for students with disabilities that are 18 to 21 years old. In the November 2012 election, the community supported the $110 million bond issue for the Auburn High School Modernization and Reconstruction Project at 62%. The groundbreaking occurred in February 2013 and construction began. This phased project is scheduled to be completed within the next three years. Phase I is nearing completion. Approximately 60% of the total new building area will be occupied by Auburn High School students and staff in the fall of 2014. 24 1/ 1/ 1/ Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 through 2020 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN Within the six -year period, the District is projecting 2,172 additional students mostly from new development in the Lakeland, Lea Hill, and north Auburn valley areas. This increase in student population will require the construction of a new middle school and acquiring a new elementary school site and constructing an elementary school during the six -year window. Based upon the District's capacity data and enrollment projections, as well as the student generation data included in Appendix A.3, the District has determined that approximately eighty-six percent of the capacity improvements are necessary to serve the students generated from new development, with the remaining additional capacity required to address existing need. The table below illustrates the current capital construction plan for the next six years. The exact timelines are wholly dependent on the rate of growth in the school age population and passage of bond issues and/or capital improvement levies. 2014-20 Capital Construction Plan March 2014 Projected Fund Project Timelines Project Funded Cost Source 13A 4 14A 5 15-16 16A 7 17A 8 18A 9 19-20 All Facilities - 2013 Technology Yes $22,000,000 6 Year XX XX XX XX XX XX XX Modernization Cap Levy Portables Yes $211001000 Impact Fees XX XX XX XX XX XX XX Property Purchase Impact New Elementary No $3,500,000 Fees XX XX XX XX Multiple Facility Yes $46,400,000 Capital XX XX XX XX Improvements Levy Bond XX XX XX Middle School #5 No $52,800,000 Impact Fee plan const open Bond XX XX XX Elementary #15 No $29,800,000 Impact Fee plan const open XX XX XX AHS Modernization Yes $110,000,000 Bond Issue const const o en 1/ These funds may be secured through local bond issues, sale of real property, impact fees, and state matching funds. The District currently is not eligible for state assistance at the elementary school level for new construction. The district is eligible for state matching funds for modernization. N COCD 0 00 LL LO 00 O M U:ar•oo e f!� r� E ca ce)e� O O CD co to � O m LLld; NI10. U»� up) aao Ga ass irs m ULO cr) N s- ea Cfs N O O N V' Cn 0 O m mot' N Ln 0 N M M O (OG W LL d' O O d' (n LL O p M N LL M N CO N N LL q' O O !} V N co O o N V ) COO co O V' U coo rer- U 0000 0 0 0) _ Ef3 N3 ,i: 01 Coo V' (F3 Cti m (A EtT ff) tR m _ 0s CV C c K3. t` C CGS 69� W� 69 to (n to to E o o O E O o o E o o o 0 E o o o m CO N a) m CM s- N m M N O m co N LL N (A m m LL N CA CA LL N m m m LL N m m _ N O O a) ._ N O O _ N O O LL N O O 0 06 c U O O O O U 0 0 0 G:3 G O O CD cc ILL U tm :a LL O m ca m o n o 0 m c is >% m m >, m m > > m E o 0 0 0 � E 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 Cl c Cc 0 0 0 a) LL to CO m O N LL to CO m O N LL to co O N LL Cn co m co C7 (o r- co LL C9 co r. 0o LL C9 m r o -o m n ao O N r- 0 0 O N .- O O N N O O a) �- O O rrp_ rn000 rn000 m rn000 (n M00o c c c fi� c Z vi N (n =O' � (n 0' � CD AWN �U) F S 0 �6 �LL _ h0-LL � _ V o � Z o o• m m m $) crU) cr c o 0 0 �m �° �mmmLLE VrLL�) rnrnrn m°ao�000 $ a)0000�LL W mao~ ��mcNo ° EE N F' a CL a e Uj~ o X ¢¢ F �x xxma v `o C o ca a) w N m co I- m u m o F- m a) 00 _ m x to U r= 0 O (n LL' V N 0 0 CO LL V N d: O O ` LL .m+ O r M Q N U Q� vs V o LL �n co 'n (m in N M M W N to Cp o) �- co in Z 3 2 1 Z V x V xca m O o N N (n O F" a) I„ U) o0 00 (n o 0 o W u Q n Cl) W¢ rn Oo Z_�Tin000 �p Y xvvo .7 N Cq U '.. N OV O '(J U 0 0 0 0 O 'U 'U O O O O W (n a) 0 0 >+ m Z a)(n o U m mU0000(� cJ m mUin)nLo 0, x o c000 �+ CL LL N N CA C C to N ¢ N LL N LO LL 4H Cfl H3 I� m tfs C/-? Q c c (A O J O (» (ss = O W v V 3 w cm) V V V V W "' rY aoi ao LL LL a = ZN o (nri W o a° m r I" E � m E V o _ �. ¢_ LOs W—LL" Co , co Qv LLLOm Qm LOC CJ (q CU O a I in 2 iu a) Y r �' i 9 m s 0 4 s Q d m U= rn n w o rn q� c o m ti Y o t n, v ro ti E`o a)v= W U) o= W € U) aEi�x ti € a) w CO LL Lu Cl) C LL whin F-LL w�c`n Co LL 1w U) �ca U LL x co e- U LL O N ca ca o v a 0 co N Z LU 0 0 N N J rn x 2 m o V ° D o 0Qw _ > Sao LL st to m M � J C N C C V E N x m Q O a a x Q Cl) (� >. m C >wo U) m c Cc m tin o n W c to 0 x Ci Mva m 0 m U > > m m > a � o m at to 0 0 Vo a (1) m Z D :3 U > N N W m ° Q N ol to c 0 M mot' ~ x (U m N 0 W C LL LL V :3 LL m k E u ti U �C m C 3 0 0 m U E Z_ Z, V �U LL LL W0 O O � O C to w>_ ca LL S CIO O a a LL LL N — 01 � c in � t0 V' t0 co N CO co O >. M tO M N r- CM EH e h d' 60 W co O O ti7 H E .- r= cn v r cri c$ g ti d' co CO V' r• d' r- O O t%Z CD CO CO CO "t r• M E9 ER M pt T N et 60. CA t0 N !• CO cA ti 6% v to 0 cn C 0 0 0 U U coi Z i V .O cu O U m W Q¢ CL IJ.. LL L W O t00 S] W U U) c Z w p o p O LL O N O Sc d Z Lo Q .�_`, CV U U E cL W W to li. m y inCLF-U)�LL LL J LLZ O 00 n' eh.. O ° cT m N N O O n M Op N fp O d. ° m V' qct � o r m p O O LO p N V' � O co O W N Ci O fA O r q in MIn Lf) L6 CD M (0 co h D7 M cq O c04 hM � FA V' cg ff3 r r h h CD O O N O \ ° O) ILL Cl) ap 00 O O O U') r lf) cr)O N O V' r V, r m 00 O O) r N O M (() cr) E- CO (O O O M LOO N M m m M r N m m � � V' i D LLO �} cid r r (f> c><J + 07 O O p ti co Op N( o VO' o ' NT eN- O NO N c� O O � LO O r N �' p C) (M c0 �. O O m U') O O 00 N 1 N Cl V' p h O) M W Y p LO N 10 M LO C0 CO M coNM hfl3 Efl V N cyr. Gel r r 00 h o D) r 0 0 00 Ih c 1 p N O c o d. e- m N N o LLOj M O dO• m Lo LOO^ N r CO OO (M CO O NCO M � co c0 (0 h_ m M N co ce)) N ul It (fl .= r F» co h h Q U O O N r p o p o o Or CN o LL- U) OI � O f0 O O U') r^ c0 O N N V' r O M 0) CV O co W '0 0 0 0 co O N O O1 CO h r p O N M O O O ce) I co T W M N co ce)j � O Z N � s Of E t0 m p 00 Op N CO O N C\lc°\O o VO•' s°— N o •.1 N UP) O mot' p" O L° O N n m O m c0 O coft ems- W Y p O( N O c`') cc O� m M N co chM N cr p N � (f1 r r 69 N � 0) C O) O) 0 N ro ca N C) LL_ LL O LO N C M 0 0 t a m U) U) U) E d ° F¢ oo m m N c Z v 0 r m L,LL C) O M N i- •� N F- f O N E x rd C O N N E O : �+ A �, N r U) '00 O a) LL1 0 N= ` 'C N O1 0) m '° m N N C w 0 'C O. U r O � Nt a) O 'O 'O '° N O W 'm ¢ 2 2 1 3 a� w E ¢ N W w Co a) co d m o E '> > co) E o W m a E U o N U W r CD v v O a)) o o c o m m m CD M ro m V c LL "0 t0 c '0 0 m C cca cca C O N c6 O 'O 0) 0 N O 0 0 O O a) 'C C wo CD Cc 0 m W O C "Zr U C 'O O a) LL_ L.OL a) O ca O. a) m inU m c o a� c �v a ° } ° U) (n is m CO a• o- m Cc a ❑ 00 O coO m U) (n a) O : >. N ..Or E �' -C = Cl) 3 Co a) a) N .0 C c0 .LO-1 N Y O) y 0 cc d C N d d �. N =O LL. c o ❑' m ca p a) CL C p m `o U) U) U) U c c rn E CL v ❑ v o ❑( n. E E E E E E rn v C m 'O (n N U) 0) d O O N a) O O O 0 C > j in uw 2 < 0 W ¢ CO w h U) IL F- LL_ LL LL U Y U U :? U) o CY) tu 0) °= a (D � � o a U m U o o° .o N m e N U --> U V N¢ LL LL (L tt LL- U) C U) 0 Q H O w° •0 E m m y o°° E E W o o ro o m LL. LL. O O Q ci O U) N a) or Y C a Q U) m Q)12 U) Z Z F- I— U) U) CL H F- O O U) m M 2 ❑ ❑ ' co N O N U h CD O O LO co w C N ❑ cA h N Q' O a) O N (0 O O N �_ Oy = U) 0 E CD a) W m L � O G U G o tL 0 C p q) O O a aoi ca o c a — 0 Co h O h r ❑ h M (O ti _ a) m N M N v cM N M N 05 64 cfi# u-i n. N t0 O) O O U N N h M N' 0 O N N CO N o rn o m o U U °) O O O) O7 IL r (O C) n N(9 hK3 CD Ea m cN0 N 00 O) N = 1' N N N a 0) O O O O N O O O O r um) N ti �U . o o c 0 w n .N ro m c 'o 0 C c. N co H U 0 J c0 ,J O 1 a J OV N O N 1 • •. . •, 1. •'... •.I I'� ,••, Auburn School District #408 Student Enrollment Projections October 2013 Introduction The projective techniques give some consideration to historical and current data as a basis for forecasting the future. In addition, the�`projector' must make certain assumptions about the operant variables within the data being used. These assumptions are "judgmental" by definition. Forecasting can be defined as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to the future, or from the known to the unknown. The attached tabular data reviews the history of student enrollment, sets out some quantitative assumptions, and provides projections based on these numerical factors. The projection logic does not attempt to weigh the individual sociological, psychological, economic, and political factors that are present in any demographic analysis and projection. The logic embraces the assumptions that whatever these individual factors have been in the past are present today, and will be in the future. It further moderates the impact of singular factors by averaging data over thirteen years and six years respectively. The results provide a trend, which reflects a long (13-year) and a short (&year) base from which to extrapolate. Two methods of estimating the number of kindergarten students have been used. The first uses the average increase or decrease over the past 13 and 6-year time frame and adds it to each succeeding year. The second derives what the average percentage Auburn kindergartners have been of live births in King County for the past 5 years and uses this to project the subsequent four years. The degree to which the actuals deviate from the projections can only be measured after the fact. This deviation provides a point of departure to evaluate the effectiveness of the assumptions and logic being used to calculate future projections. Monitoring deviation is critical to the viability and credibility of the projections derived by these techniques. Tables Table 1—Thirteen Year History of October 1 Enrollments —page 3 The data shown in this table is the baseline information used to project future enrollment. This data shows the past record of enrollment in the district on October 1 of each year. Table 2 —Historical Factors Used in Projections -page 4 'This table shows the three basic factors derived from the data in Table 1. These factors have been used in the subsequent projections. The three factors are: ® Factor 1— Average Pupil Change Between Grade Levels This factor is sometimes referred to as the "holding power" or "cohort survival." It is a measure of the number of pupils gained or lost as they move from one grade level to the next. ® Factor 2 -Average Pupil Change by Grade Level This factor is the average change at each grade level over the 13 or 6-year period. ® Factor 3 — Auburn School District Kindergarten Enrollment as a Function of King County Live Births. This factor calculates what percent each kindergarten class was of the King County live births in the five previous years. From this information has been extrapolated the kindergarten pupils expected for the next four years. 1 Table 3 — Proiection Models — pages 5-13 This set of tables utilizes the above mentioned variables and generates several projections. The models are explained briefly below. ❑ Table 113 (pg 5) — shows a projection based on the 13-year average gain in kindergarten (Factor 2) and the 13-year average change between grade levels (Factor 1). The data is shown for the district as a whole. ❑ Table 3.6 (pg 5) — shows a projection using the same scheme as Table 3.13 except it shortens the historical data to only the most recent 6 years. ❑ Table 3.13A and 3.6A (pg 6) —uses the same factors above except Factor 3 is substituted for Factor 2. The kindergarten rates are derived from the King County live births instead of the average gain. ❑ Tables 3E.13, 3E.6, 3E.13A, 3E.6A (pg 7) —breaks out the K-5 grades from the district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. ❑ Tables 3MS.13, 3MS.6, 3MS.13A, 3MS.6A (pg 8) —breaks out the 6-8 grades from tl�e district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. ❑ Tables 3 SH.13, 3 SH.6, 3 SH.13A, 3 SH.6A (pg 9) —breaks out the 9-12 grades from the district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. ❑ .Table 4 (pg 10) —Collects the four projection models by grade group for ease of comparison. o Table 5 (pgs 11-13) —shows how well each projection model performed when compared with actual enrollments. Data is provided in both number and percent formats for the past 13 years. Summary This year is the second consecutive year of an increase in enrollment after three consecutive years of declining enrollment. The increase of 375 students changes our historical average gain/loss in students. Over the past 6 years the average gain is now .48% annually, which equates to an average annual gain of 69 students. Using the cohort survival models, the data below is a summary of the range of variation between the four models. This data can be used for planning for future needs of the district. The models show changes in the next six years: ® Elementary level show increases ranging from 342 to 1328. (page 7) ® Middle School level show increases ranging from 489 to 538. (page 8) ® High School level show increases ranging from 353 to 410. (page 9) The models show these changes looking forward thirteen years: ® Elementary level show increases ranging from 2341 to 2773. (page 7) ® Middle School level show increases ranging from 442 to 1248. (page 8) ® High School level show increases ranging from 795 to 1401. (page 9) This data does not factor new developments that are currently under construction or in the planning stages. 2 M O N La so O V 0 U) Z 0 Fm 0 W i w Q. H Z W J J w z W Z W 0 D U_ 0 J 0 0 V Z m D a O.CO d' O'.M U) CD N O m:m OV' n ° 00 M m M U) m •N--eN— OO Oar �.N-�N M CV O o Cf)tb m CO r� O r `CD 1h O 00 �t r m M W 00 r M h V 00 r O h c0 O m CMM N O O O r O 0 0 0 0 N N r CNr� �'. N r � o M N m 00 h N co co N CD co O M co CD CD i N CD m co N M V' h M M N r r 0 00o m 0 0 o 0 'O O N. N co 00 r i2 N N N N o `O T O co CD M V' m O CO CO co O r CO r r N h V' CD T N CO to V'.- n T O O D O O O O O O r N N N co CO N Ca t6 w ° C oco dN M M M M O O tO r V h CO O CO O M M h M [t N co h O tD. 00 ro O. N Or Or m m 0 0 0 O N M h Cn iN-- erV-. V-. a � m t0 V' M �} m O V' O O O N p o Ot OJ O� co N V' :V CD m m h O V' U? tO h m t0 c m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N co 00 m rm- T Q r N N Q < co m h 00 h h Ch CD N M LD o ` ttl M r r' O h O tD CO CO O to CD t0 a0 �" cm CO 0O N OO m m O m 0 0 0 0 0 M co co m V' co T O r r r r r r r r r V; 0 r r ,i..: r T M co r O h N N m M V• N N O N h COo O w- C 0 r O CM V' O tO h h O N� d' O v- O O O O m O 0 0 :. O r V' N r/1 C sM- CD o d 0 00 M Oco \ (0 T tO M CM O m In O N M M -CNO 0M0 CD O Ot CD m m m O m 0 0 0 O O �' >' m C6 fro O er- rM- T V; m n G C0 o O �- O N C oamornrnma 0 =`rTN0�Oryc��� r r CD CD w r 0C14.; o _ CL `.. p N N m O h O r h N O o N tT _O m M LO Vm' tD tl� 0 m m m m 0) r m M N N m er- rN., w ¢...... O h o CO n CD NON"OOONr N V' M N to 'd' tq CD V M et o m m m m m m m M o m } h CO 00 h V' to CM CD CD O(D 00 CD qct w Oi 0 0 O m0 W 00) m O O 0 MT OMj M = . .:, 0 r r r r m F� C9 OrNMV' C co U7 co h CD moN~ r O d d u O N U) r h t0 V' 00 h N M co 00 co 00M h` T wVM' m ti N m r co h C+M U) coM N co V' M N 0 co MD OOi h m M 00 m m �t 0 C CMD IrT M M M coc r M tm w co N C Vm' m N m M W CD O CNO V' h to m M M M CND ti M tN CoN M N Vm' O O N N O N N r M O CO M co h co O CO M N M O M N m m m V' h h CD CO O V' O M O U) m N N O m t0 O M m M co h M in CO M N co tND m O M OO1 6�1 Oh0 O QO7 O � COD m VM' m M ti M j N M V CD tC CND co tt! m n. m N O h M to O M N M M M a0 W O) N M m m M � tOD tt tmL) m N tOO W N 'd m M N M m M N tD O O M m V' V' tD M N m� IMF. ti �� m N N h COD N N M� m m m m N O O COD CMD C m N O CO N V' tD M N M V' M O .m c a O um) It00 co 0) COD V' V' O COM V' O CC) co U m N tC O VM' m M N VO' M tJ M V' N M aD CD m CO co M m m -omhrnm moo 0o V• �o N N U7 CD N M O m N M M C7 J N Lo Co M to CD co co m m Q r t r r r mo W O U FM S (D m W¢ j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M W m O N 9 O Z z J LO tOOO N 00 TT LO h cnW Y�wvvvv�f�Pv Z:dWJ� W = Oim U 0 Z Q W ID W W J N � (6 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO O O CO 00 m O M O M M m h N V' CD h M N m O o tO m O to M m N 00 coOO V• h h co W N M O M O N M 00 (O m CD m CO h h r r O N N tO M V' LO LO V' V' V� V' V� V' V' V' ri m c� d' (+i (+i c+i ri d� d' V• V' V' t V� V' � C.9 M O M a0 O CD N m m h W m O O h V• M M �!' m N O O N N t() r m M Z: J O O O M m (D N m N CO h IO O N M N tt7 CD h to V• V' O N m tO V• m m W Y �-' CO CD O (O (D h h tb h aD Ln aD m m m m m m m ap O� aD O m W m m m m P' n W N CA o d tl' �.. o M tO tO .M-� Ch J J J J � 1 •o •o a •o = N U U U U O (6 d I. d d c 0 w N m (Np N 'a O O 00 � Co. c m « � � W w? f•- Cl) M V• h to m aD 00 O O h O M N N m r to O t9 �.0 W W S h N M h to C) O O V• (D N m W N O M r h h N r N N h N M N N V' N co O O m m m W CO M O O h O N CO 00 tO 00 00 CO O M r m LO r O h (D O O M O OD N h h h CD O r O to M UJ ❑ . (� '� J M M M d• V• (fl CD h a0 00 co cr V• O V• O N V' N N N N N N N N co) V• Lo tt) CO Z Z O m r r r r r r r r r r �- �- �- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y Y Q rn Uu- J N M V' tf) O h M m O r N M_ T tO M h 'C O O N M V' tO CD h M m m N M m m m h m m O OO O OO O O O O O r r r r r °O m LL O a0 a0 `0 W 00 00 00 W CO W m m� m m m� m m m O O �' r rcc ZO O CA O r C� e`o V to (O 1` w m O r N M V• tC) (p Ih 00 6> O r "N M V' to (D ti 00 O� O r (� M V to (O �:,, 00 U W t• 00 o o 00 00 Oo 00 o 00 m m m m m m m m m m m 0 0 0 O O O 0 a O O r r r r r r r r tp O J Z to U) N 'O S MmM hMMOONONM o m O O O O0 o ar- N O O M M m� O M m M M r N (OD OO o(M O LL pj V O M W O M 0� N r M LO CO (0 O O m M M M M r N V M V N N cr O O O M M M r N M U:..0) r m V• � V• v v w w m O CD w(O (D wr r W ob h CO h h CO n W CO CO OC) W W 00 w U N •Np = 0 LO 00 m h V' w M O O O V' MVmto ' M O O N M M n Oho M r M M O h 0� h f V' N (MD O m O M N co V' M N N O O N V_ M CO (D r CO N 0 000 r M co to (0 fM cr M CO m LO O m N r r co r r v (D �o N m N 00 00 � to D) O r � vw � N N m CC) t(j V• � � LO m V• V• O T T V' V• V• V• v v to tO CO CD CD co co co CD � tm9 Q... m r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r as -� w m M O N M V' O O r M V' M M V• M m m O O m O M M N h h 00 M V' O d• N O h "t O N U Q W S m V o W m N O O r M h h t(i O M h V m O (M N O h V• O M h M M h 00 V O m tO M M co M O O N 00 r CO M m h m CO O In h t• O M O O to (D N O V_ r N V' N O N m r O tO O O L O JW C6 sM- T tO CO lD h W to OO m m N N N CO N N N N LO N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N o m r r r r r r r r r O!� Q CK co V• to (D h CO m O N M V• U7 (D h 00 m O N M V' LO CO h CO CA O N CO V' tO CD h CO m O r N 0 co Q O to h h h h h h t` 00 00 co co 00 OO 0o co m m CD CA 0o m rn CD rn m m (MO o O o 0 o 0 0 0 O m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o LLcc U iZ M O r CD tp r r CO O M CD tO 00 mV- aD M N O O yy r N N N M N W Cf) M' m U) m CD (p r m m �' `0 C � N M It LO O h 00 m � C• LL O O O O O O O O O O O O O uj m toY r N M V• W CD h 00 m 0 co c N a m cu O oc O L " U c $ 0 t9 Cl m U) t9 d N N CO O h 00 LO N h (`') O CO m 0).> t6 N O tO w O N m co M O co OD (Op N M C'7 V• r CA V• CA CO N M O h > co .�.. N. LO r r N N ,> w ��U) cO m m �[ N r W O r '= O N r N M vm (O h co m O O (V CL LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C] 0 M r Y r N M V' to CO h co m LL E J U) y N m O Q Y r N M V' tO CO h 00 mC) LIJ � m � m � G L C U m L Q O m O co co to co O co co o 0 0 r` o O M tO N W I� O O M tt7. O tLS fD � N � � M C7 � V' V' (A N N co eM-• eN-• t�?6 Q Q C O m N N 0 � N � O N Q W Y r N m V• tO O h 00 m O p o LL '�E M ILL .= '� h OO N W O r M O M M M M t0 00 0 MV (p to M M tO 0M T V M 0 0 41T m W m O N m N O 6� M ao O O M tD M aD O O CO O Ul) Wit V' v � V' lD t0 V' V 00 (mo D_ N r r r r r r r r r r O) r o (VO Os tO0 4 V v dh- VO 4O1 V dN CMO v r O *N� N <WYNrr j M r CO t1 VN' M n. N ate- ram- sue- ♦M-- r r r 00 N O N N O O a0 h t0 a0 m et M M m M a N r r r r CO N co � N CO M h M O a0 tO W O O O W j t o N 4t M O) CO O CO V' D7 M N M GD CA W o O N O OD h O t0 tt M r m h O O M O M h ( I� I Nv M w h M N M h M 0 ro a0 h O h N (raj o <t r t(') M N C 00 O CA O M O tOfi o N O M CO h O O O M N M t1') d• O ti r O Nlh M O o�0 h• tj N O h O 0 N MIM ILO N E O M 00 CO O M N O O N h N h h o M M h O V N 0 h d' M si' M r p� W d' tlt7 tO M tS) r { I 4 t0 Nr t0 N N r r r al0- st0- r r O N r N� v m v r o ao to a v to m cD Um O N N O M h tSJ N O h r h N 0 0) ao m d' (7 O tO LO V't It � It m m � � v V Lo p N e r dD N r � M p tO M h O W h M m CD h O7 N N o co r V' M V' O N V � N tO O CO N t0 t0 M M ti7 CO O N N� o O N �s�h O M O M t!) M O c��• h V' h p V N R rt y r eM r r aM— m M h IT (V � O N N O h 1� O r O h h CO O N M�� M M� M M M� a N r � r r N � p CO O M h CO d' M h M M O T o O N h p� h V' M a0 h O O M t0 O N DD N � Q) N h t0 m N N M CO O M O O p � o O v tO M O O a0 O m 0) M h t0 W h O O N O h CO O h a0 O h h N N p7 h CO � h M M CD O h d' m O W O CO Cn OD � a O �' h 00 O V' M !�• tD O CA h e!' CO O) 00 h N OA 7 N O O h O) h h O CA QI aD M o O M O M O O fi) M m O) V' a0 M CD U7 DD O h 0 tO V' O N M O (0 O h t0 V O N M h h CO M O O 00 O h o M T" � O M t(Y M h O h aO t(') O O N O h U O Q 'V' O co d• tO (M O (O N CO m 0) O tl' �:,, w •w O Q �!' O M d' MMLOWNMM O O a' ^ M co 'O D M h 00 N N N h h h r t0 N rY h 0� O O W O �'" h co N N N h h h r to N v r. o C9 CD Ol r r O O O� r N N �.- I- N Fw M r' (a•Q (q W U r r r r r r 0 0 0 r r r 0ca 'Gl m Q r O mCO CO Q N U � O W W J 0 W W a. CO—� � Q Y r N M d' tO O h co m r f Q (r1 g Y 0 r N M 'd' CO co h 00 0) M ar- eN- h O Fm � � pp M a O N Oi rq V V d N r O N n r O to r p. N OI N EN cq N N V EN t tov � ms- r4t e O O st 6) N M h Q N r •m- N r T T M n N r ctCJ- r N r m r � N r r eM— r O h N � a00 O V O ONO O W M M r r r r r r eN— O Cp M W N m CD O O M M � 00 to CO N M M O) N M M t0 st M CO 0) o O r r 1C7 O n O m O n CD O eY pp O) _ � N O O w n M 0 aD W h M h N pMj o �I(fl GO O M M O O O M d to r r r rlr � t0 m h O t0 'd' O N M M (fl O) p o O O O M0 U � c c @@ O O w- (n rn U r r r r r r V' O •n Q r m a U Lll w J N CO M Y r N M sf' to CO n 00 Q) r {Q- (L M (� O O N N m n r p. N O N � Nr qcr r N 7 N VO' M sue- M �f 000 � r r p. N h O N N �0- V t00 h V 0 N d r r r OO O� M O O N pOp pOj � O� N h O M 00 n lA CO M 4� O T r r N � � � � r .N- r r •M" .m- O O O n N Cx1 � O O M n lCi W mto o �I� O M O hI'O TIC O o�aovmhm�rnnvmrn,00 Ir CDcN7 OO 04 � O O COO Cho M m m � a00 M C CrNj d' I ( O� o M M O U � J c c O Q r0 M V' t0 M tt7 (D N O O m O V N t9 h co N NN h h h r O N V h W O O 'm Q r m d ui J Q O (D O r T Q n- QI- � O � u �hr00N00D r 0' 0 to r r MO to � N r M �O V"rtn m et O � in '�i' itj tO et et COv N �Lyrrrrr r L. d .Q 0t0 h O et c00 rD h N CO 0) h co(fl CD tt') O n.Nr L N m�'Ohrhtn O O O cV to LO m m c'M Q�ce)4ervvv yr EL N r r r r r V 7 O N m O N 0 O O O�Nf4t rretOtt a Z�N(omhMr O W CL M f CL N `- J J m ONinwhtnn ot°t`t� O MN N N N N Z W O W NO)MO)h N ONMtn etNN N Q ELmmNr NN N r U) m 6) O N Co N o to V �Mmm-.m-mm N � p. r F N 0 CO tb to OLn M m Q r'h0w 00hl�• to ��:.NNNNN N J <Lr rrr O O (� Oe- tnhmvmao N Q'CpNNNNN CL Z D m0d' to MN m +Or NLOM 0 ice• �Ln NNNNar- Q all ELrr —�Lnhet t7)ho Lo N r r r r r n M r OQe}'000 et tnM 0 Ln aONeN aN— O N LLJ m ¢ r r oo c LLI �prN Coet Lo ~ m 0 Y , hh No Mth ;D zwmwo Mn U t( CL N m'.. O m w w o m N N N0 N00mh Ln et N h LntotoLf)U)U'j M CO LD m Cf) N M m c0 LO tNo NLoul)ttorttoo v O CL N r r r r m d'etmh et v' rn CO to � m M a N r r W m OtnMhD m M avWt Q.Nr N ONO((0 CO" 0 CO V m t�rRt co Lo N r r ao r(D et CO CIO ONrN o1h m r �N��s`r-rm-� M CO O CD O M t` CO M CNo OCO N CO CO th0(MOM CO m r �O rrrr r 00 _ �Nhus) 0) cm N h ctmm00 00 N h 00 m{M NN N O7 r r h �COM LOCO o a O O 0NOhto (n N N ohmm mcm N- N � r r �MmOOt•, et M O re O N N N N N r V et' MONNt r C\ N a.'tnNNNN� r h CDro Z N et 6) N m h (c �O d'NNN O O�ON-am-o N C � N U,' .— W >- •(O Rom . O QetO w et m m to w �LD NI—CY1�a�DNeN--N O c co •a L to rrer-r r CC d Y m J t0 QM to �OrNMet �- C9 ON V CLN ON V am N to D w 4 N d N ON N CL N M MEN) co w N N 0. N co to N � NN CL N O O N � N N N aN r � O O O N M 00 N N N r r r rn 0) h CO h CO mo Or o(O mN N N d m r r r r m to (o N CM m 0) t` N ����rNN sN- h mhNO0 o0h m 0 W O r O (o 0) co 00 N N ,p m, rrraN-N r h c '2 t6m(TOWLo MN r tt: et r0 OTmrto h (c N M.CLtnrrNNar- ar- r r O.. r Z'm �VNm Mo Ln D: rsr Ur�,o W ._ M •LO (f GOQ<t O CO v hm in Lt: •�,a cn rrrrr� r (C cu a e m Q w ftj m M �Yr NMct Ln � f— M C7 h N N N to N N N N c� N N t� N N N V) co r N r NN r W N 0000 m p r N N m ah- N N 4[) et (o N N CDOhN 00 0`p r N N r r r r �CO� O � r inCnrnCO otnCOo r oOh to et �hNw 'O e-O tow 9 t o NN o� ; S t'� �pe!'Nm0 h w > n�- f d'm NM h W `;C D] .� O Q d' o w et Lo M Lo tn' ) M�mNNaN- O CL Y m Q ui Q']� QQrNMet to H m (�Y M r 0 N W (M r M O m 00 CD co (0O co 0 0 roo W W CMD cpM (D O N N p lh.. N Vt M O N O N Of et � et W 00 W' M w r d' m M O O_ CO Q' GO r 0. N r N r 0_ N 0. N o � 7 O !� 0 m m m O O N m r N 0 0 (� O N 1M O N LO O et V 4t CO M 00 w to r �t 4 v v o � N I cq N 0_ N r r V' r 0_ N r r r 'V' N 0_ N r 0_ N L d .QWon)C M LO m CO m M o t0 (fl N N t0 0 t0 M O 0) COS) ,N Q N M N O h M O N t0 O O CD M O N (Dt0 O N (� a �}' v 4 v N M 00 0_ 4 V' V' .d. M "t O [if N N a N O a C%t r r r <! r a N r r r V cq r a N r a N C Z O N N rn m ON7 I� O N N O IMF• O N co O N w4t w CEO (DV p) O N N M <) co to O IX CO et M M r Cn co a' M "t• It co N t0 O a M N N N h N Of Co N N N h N 0_ N r r r ct• r 0_ N r r r �t N a N r r r CO Q 0_ N r r r M U 7 M M m N CO r o M h co m m o co O �t N N° co t0 O m mO N O h CO r O N a0 h M m M co O N co CO Co h w co O M Q a a M co M O Op a a M M M O t0 O a `CJ N N N h CD tY N N N N h M CD a N r r r et c"i a N r r r <}• Cq r a N r r r CO r a N a N co CO 00 O o M N co co CO (O o O N O N Co O ° M N O W t0 M Z Q N t0 tt• N M co p O` to M O m h 0 O Q A h N v N W N N O O w LO N w a' M CM M O N CA a' r M M m m O O a N N co co h N r• w m cq a a N r r M p "' a N r r r M p J 0 M 00 N r o co st co O o M �' Oo w N co o M r co d• co co o CO Q N Cvt D� !t• 00 O N r O h m m N O N M m O M (D O N co O h r (0 N N a p co M N m to M p M M N co h <t !Y p N M N ao r: Cp a O N M N CO O O Z 0_ N r r r M M r a N r r r M C7 �"' 0_ N r r r CO a N r r r M a W CL O �}' N h N o M CD M h M o M O mot' N h N o M O mot' CO h CO o N r M (N CO h m 0 h t0 O N O W O t0 (� Q W O O 0o 0 CO O N 00 h m t0 h m a m MCNI N co M N a' m cq N r hN N OD M N 0: m N N r h r r C' r a r r M C6 r a r r CO C6 �- a M m 0o h 'd• m o (A M (O O co o M m co r• qt• m o m M CD O CO o V Q r CD O O h O d' Q r t0 m m M N lot r O O O h O d' O r' O m m M N et _ a M N f M CN7' r a M N M M r a Op N N m m r a W N r m CN6 r N M N t0 w m o M co CD m O O o co N (O co to 0 co (D m O t0 0 0 Q m m h CD M M Q h M fD N 00 m O m m h fD M O Q h 00 CD N aD m a' r r t0 r O t;, r r to a0 m r r to r O a r r t0 CO m J a r r M Ch a r r r M tV a r r r r M M r a r r r M Cv O M h o co co r. o 'm m M (D 0 co co h •r m rm m (D o O D OrW O O QCO O m COOr0o (D O t0 aONM (D hCT> a M aC,a CV)V' (� (n m U N in 0 Z Z Z =. Z en Q-' O O O O CO V' OD O N o M (O m h h M o F� pOj fD st M O N O f"' (D m h h M o aj U Q �- m m O tO tO o U Q M m m M m h U y 0 �- to m O tO to o U at O r M m m (n m t. W a tf') �' O r C') m CA uj : a 11i r O O M CD 00 w a to r O r M m m W i' a Cn �- O O co O M Q O CL r r CON a r r r co N O a r r M CV O(D a r r r r M CV 0 y r 0 o r o r 0 a_ O �I' O N O J S M t0 h (D CM CD d M ((� V' O N co .i M tL'7 h O CO CO O a O o m cw to v O O �- h m h Itr m w O O oo m m m v O 0_ O h m h v to w O 1) oM No Q `mavoo oM 0v OsaToo oCN� o Qua o0 om p >W ELr } r •C r U� U U m U m [n C J C C U% r; C q G Ct ri)C G (�C JW o m mW o m m W o co 'ca W o Q mm Q CD N CD ct J �pO N (O v WQ (O N O 'C• _t cD N (D stN H M h0 O N Q r N O O r N Q ••pp = h h r CD Q Q a h h r O ❑ :.lU �— C+`� O O r N 4- ❑ -0 HM� U r r r r M 0 •Q ❑ .; � r r r M 0 •a ❑.� U r r M Od_.to U r r M 0[0 C a 2,: m Q w a �. m Q w a J �"' ❑ Q 0_ J w a)O ❑ Q a Lij (D J M ❑ O L J O ❑ O 0_ m¢ �(Dh oo00 Q� 99cnh o� Q� �tOh co00 Q� �CDh m0 ~ M (g fD ~ M (0 co ~ co O ~ M (� (D CY) Q M O N d 0 0 U) Z 0 F U W i 0 w a Z W J J w z W Z W im F U) FM U H 0 J 0 0 U U) Z w m Q >. TO Tn DM) ^��`0) M M M co 00 co h r r M co r N O 0 M T T Lo m T d. m Lo T V. M M O (DcoCO f`' M M M tO Co c f`• tC) CD r ct o n o M U) N_ O n' M O %r h O N m r oo O V' M O N o0 N O n V• M O CV CO CO O) O co U) O C�1 N M h M Lo Cp CO CO t0 V• m n O CO CO M LO to N N co (if CD LO V• M V' M M 10 �' CD � V' M V' CO M d N r r r r (0 r r IL N r r r r to NCL N N co Co CO CD 00 m o CO h N h Co o O CO M CO M tO ° O m V' N h N Q N CO co M tO M N h O Nt po d• m M v M O N CD to M m N O N O r LO :; 2 ttS (D CO V V• r 0) Q' C}) M O V to N M to LO V d V M LO co w ui rt et V u) n Co CV CD r Q. N r r �- r CD N r a CV r r r r tO (L C.4 r r r r O N4 m tO tO N h O uo � CO 4 M m d N r a r �PO N M N O M M I (D � � (Y) � 0) CO I N N W ao m V• M CD h o � a tO V � M n CO � a Nr r r to N � N m 0 LLo M N o M M CO a (VtO r � � r M to m r O N n O O M N M Cl0 d N r r to LC) N �- � O N M O N o O N Cp M M M O M d M N r N M O� CMD O VM' N 00 O co IO rlt! V MIN a � � M O M m n OMNM tO V' CO T IL r st O n �. tcltj tl) V CDo a N r r r O tj r M lO m IN ItO I Q_ tq N ���n V• hm nuo M M to N h d N r r r to Ch U) r N � M M CO O n LOO OMO ct 0 d r r r tO N r m� 0 CD m Co M o �M., �' Cp N N N rn W W d• M M co co M V' h o to m n � co a m r. = C J C G Q '•pp Q m m o V' N m m r eN- N m i� CD�Ur rV o•a tAJm Q aa)) W W ~O a) m= m O t N 0 O O st M M CO V' C N N 00 to N [C) Cp LO O O Q CV LO M N V• V• O M d N . r m CO M LO V4 n tO m h CD N N M O O M N o N sM- eM- U*) CMO. M M M M M CD [O o O N n O O M N m O r 0 O N Cp ONO M M N M M a MI<D O m �INIv m M T n (O h N N o O tD M v m N to u� d r tO m h CD N N M O O M N o N sM- eM- U*) CMO. M M M M M CD [O o O N n O O M N m O r 0 O N Cp ONO M M N M M a MI<D O m �INIv m M T n (O h N N o O tD M v m N to u� d r N M O O M N o N sM- eM- U*) CMO. M M M M M CD [O o O N n O O M N m O r 0 O N Cp ONO M M N M M a MI<D O m �INIv m M T n (O h N N o O tD M v m N to u� d r M M M M CD [O o O N n O O M N m O r 0 O N Cp ONO M M N M M a MI<D O m �INIv m M T n (O h N N o O tD M v m N to u� d r 0 O N Cp ONO M M N M M a MI<D O m �INIv m M T n (O h N N o O tD M v m N to u� d r a MI<D O m �INIv m M T n (O h N N o O tD M v m N to u� d r M T n (O h N N o O tD M v m N to u� d r ON Mtn MM n to o O N m n N 0 V•CN M p h U') N V• V' V' CO V' LO cq r nm n� �N�nV• M tO N � tO M M OIM M OI IO �. Nlh r tf) m m d m O N M O CMO to 7 O � M M_ (O I� tOO oOo V• d to o 7{ O co m M M o �- �' CT O m m M N iO V• N [O T M r r O N V' M ct O M Ci W�� m m m M O m o U') N MLo 0 Q' d• N t� J CO M � J C C N m m h M •' N N N m Q O n Q r U d O m O N F d Q r O) Cr M O N 1r d .0 0 0 t z 0 U w n w a IMM W J J w Z w low Z W U_ Q' H W 0 J 0 0 U U) z few M Q M O N CO mOi R�T U) NMh v O N N O N V' N N c0 6) O M O M N Lo h T CD O T O r T tM � T d' ct0t) V' M T N N (0r N CO CO CD CO M M h g O N N sh- O N N (o O N N N O N O n O m Q N M M d N r ll�am CO N h CL N Vu M N CMD t00o to d N 0) N (D !} Co '.I CD O a) M (D V' m t0 to c0 U) N � O M h O NO)0o O C�CDm O Ntoo O N0)m UR)(n O Nt0rn N r r N h h d N V' 4 d N (D O U) U) d N O LO h W U) tf) h M U) LO [O N h CD Lo Nvta m co w 4Nccoo 0 �0000co� Ll N r r d N r r D- N V V d N CO CO LO LO a Cu CA r M V' O V' M V' o U) �' N N M M �' N to O co �' coE(00 D Q N O N N c}� O N m O CD O 0 N rn allo 0`co d' CI 00 CC) n. N d N n EL N 'lr NV M M [L Cr) to LO LO (o d N r r O N eM 000 O N coo ti O co r 0) tN� ") O N (No �� N 0 N co u C� d' r � o N �' f� r o h h w C� h CD h co 0' C� CD CD M M a. N (O M LO CO d N r N O tO M N O M N O CO O M M N N r N r M N h Q N m O N to O O N m O) v co O N Cr) M O N O) O dN eM- jr N COO h d N V• CO co M d N too LO t0O LO d N r 00 O co V' O Co m O 0) 00)0 00 ao p 7 m VN' M 0 t U0)j Cu r r CV CD CO CL Cu cr) M CM M d N LO U) tD tO d N M 0 N t0 M O O h M O N M N M M O N in N tc) M O co N r O N M h O N m U) O N O O O to O C` r U) to Q N L CA j m C(00 Cho (LM M co M d O to � LOtco t) d 0) tO N O in U) O 0) CO 0) c0 M O O O O t3) M 0) h r O r o 4 Q r 9cr 00 O `' h m h M O LO LO r 0) co 0) co 0 r aO M ao w cc) (D (D00 m af 00 CO Co L r r r d r co co d r M m m m 1L r iD to to to n_ r Co Co CO to tD M CD O N (N co U) to tO to M co 00 U) 00 Co M CO N m 0) to h 0 Q r 0 co M Q r CO N O N Q N C'7) N m Q `- co M 0000 N r h N CO �' r, v V' O O 1L' 1:, to to U) U) �' n, r O O Q' h CD CD U) U) L r r r r 0.. �- (D CD W CO CL r CO M M CO jL r to U) U) U) a. r r r r r M h m N N �`' 0) U) 0) N M h h cD h cD M h N m N M '� eh- Co h m N Q �' to h 0 0 O rr„ O O O O �' to N U) N O r N M N CD Q CMo 00 tl' up) Q.' Cp N N r r of Cp N N O 0) w (O V' V' V' V' of cp 0) m 0) m 11' (D Uj in to U) L r r r d (D CD O to d r CO CO CM Co M r V' V' V• V' (L r r r M CD V' 0) CD CO M O N O M co N C') N CM M CO Ih N h N M CC) tt j M MM0 N O r N M O O O r M N U) V' O �" tO m tc') co O r V• V• V• st O V• to N M y t!') N N De. in cm co m cm to 00 m m 0) toLO Ui a d r CO CD to LO 1L r M M M M CL r V• V' V' V• CLr r r r N 00 m Co M tO h `7 V' V' M to LO N U) N M CO CD co CO M V' tD V' O M CD V' O O O rno NN 0 U) It to V Q to V tDV O �-tn.tohtr) Q N rr V' r Q' m 00 CD CO w 4 N N N N tY V' M m CD 0) � � tt7 T � � � r r r d �- to to CO M ( r M CO m CO (L r V' V' v v d r r Q V' 0 0 0 0 Q d' tD tD U) U) Q V' V V' V' V' Q V' N N N N U) ¢ V' h h h h S r ce) m m m S r O to cD co S `' O O O O F— M r F- fo cD cc)to co F' M N N N N E- M 0) m 0) m U M U r r r r V r to U) UM)tD U r m coM (o U r V V V V r r r r <( 0 OQ Q �<t �Q C9 C7 C9 U �M mQ �M M<L 0 ��cn M(¢D pI �caMm QCDCDCD r� 0 CD (D CD M XSS � Q em"CO � CdDu.l ui ui LLI C� w w w w C7 � 2 M m OCO (n (1) m co m m N (U N N N� d U U C C OMMOOF m m (U (T (D c t6 'C N N CO m Q ¢> Z, CD m U U N G C C ❑ ❑ Y �e od 06 ca of 0 0 0 Q _Q = Q2 = } } m co r (O � CO M m CV) of m co .c.O .O.^ 0,0 a C O _ (a _ co 3 .O p aj Q Q N > p O Q. 0 O Z t ¢ c o > > 0 N V C C 0OR O � U U N < O O OV- a. a` 0on N = ` v p (U 0 z a_ a: a. II II II [6 Q o H Omi in Lo E- C o 0 o Zi M CO M tf) c( R M 4o M f+ N r .Nr 0 O 0❑ X 0V') N m 0 N �I+o Lo a Oct '6 :U) m to M cotp t- to to to to to L V; Cii V_ Ci O 00***O O Ual N ❑I N co co N N) o Do r {- to to U) tt) 0 0 0 0 o rn rn 0 i� O N_ Q� Cf, Op ❑ R +... vClCOOO N m V' tC) N - to �' r to m O (n O I` (O co (D (O I- to tp t0:. to Lo 0 0 O O iS O MOirOOO Q M OrOOOO O (O C] O O O co O �x�xcc co_ O❑ X v O N M O N F"I%rOOOIrl, (n (n (n � Lo 0 0° o 0 N 0m v v O xx � x N o❑' m v r`o. N co V N m ZO N m co co N oo I- to to W) to to Q � Q CO O D w w w w F- M M M CV) a o 0 o I r 00 CO O I� N N O ❑ co ce) O N �0 O N 1� N 1� CO M M M M a F- M M M M m o 0 0 0 0 It m CR TOO: q7 O �- O <- O O O❑ N M N M N O N N M N {- M M CM M C 0 0 0 0 CM I� PJ i+ y <t co V C V N 0 E ZS C) 000 o ❑ R 00 C000 N �V V•(ov(o O N N N. N N I- M co M M m o 0 a0 I O co O I c O co O co M O O ❑ 0 Lo 00 ti 0 0000 O N OMJ� t0 N to N to CO m CO m O Ot- 1- M CM m m co o 0 o 0 %OgQ �$ r N N 10--, O v O v O 00 4t ccn o ❑ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 I— M m M m M Q N.:. Q i- CO To: O (n D W W ui w N.. co '.. i-- M M (M M to < m (L iL nO 0 0 0 0 % �$ M N (D N R 0 O CO O v v i co O O ❑ n�) M N o 0 0 0 c N N t7 Vn N N N N to O �j O O 0 0 0 T O N wM M M CO M w 00 w 00 co O (O t- mil' d' d• V' V' ov o I O � a\ � (� O O O O I No ❑( v t0 v to l �Ivvvvvl O 0 o O 0 M O co O O M (J) M C) Ot- O � Ico N ❑I tmO) w to C` V' N Oil,mu.m O tf U Lo t0 h- IT V' V' V• V' p p O 0 (mrnm (n V; rn O O O O ZS M N Cr N J co M W cn TOO: O a N D w W W W "COO � M m CM cM ( U .c (D 0) ¢ a_ a_ a. a_ ( 0 0 o rn to rn c) i (O O O CO O O❑ co �N...M... N 00 O N O s- (ro 0 0 00 00 o 0 0 0 c N OR (Q N CD O r C:) ❑ CnO N co N Or- <- N N (r �ar.Mocom O CO 00 (3) I� 00 E- M co M c( CM 0 0 0 00 ul qF CO M 0 + C) to t 00 Lr) C) NC) N N 00 h v Lo „V:lqT coOro'O � � TM TM o 0 C 0 u M O CO s- Rp V 1� M O O O O s- Ioco N ❑I to I O 1� M •- to N 00*000 w N 00 N O (fl V' V' U) tC) to F2 M C M CM CAM o 0 t SON O In rn rn CO •p-' � M N co M O F- M CO' M C M � J � CT CO CQO (u D W W W LOU m co M m D<CLmali (U cu a ► o CO) C, a (U N N N N N N N U U en 5 c O cu (U Y (Y cu N N •= 'C 7 (U m m rn Q U U N C C C D Y �1- 02S 06 06 06 O O O _ = M = r O Cf) O CO cc) Q CD C6 ri c+i (LCL N C O _ O _ ttl U �aa N > 7 11 O O p N vN U o c U U V N N r (L. (L � � N O E U Ozn. 0000 o °' ul 00 oorm r r 0 O � xx �I• CO N M 00 N CO N m Ln O N' N> M N N I- CO CD (D CD CD 0 0 0 0 e r N ti U�)• r CV r O r m LO o 00 'n 00 m Cl) lh 0 to O N N N N f co CO co O CD 0 m v CO O O r O m OD '•`�— M m M C.0 M CD N O N N co m r 0) m r M N h ca I- cn cn 0 (ro cm O OO O O 0 cr) n LO co m O M I'h O O r CO Oco u _ 0 N N in co m Act o O 0 0 f CD CD co CD O 0 o co co IN• N N N h O ,.... ... �.. rN- N ca N ccn r: N CCDD 0 C) co m N m h to Ln to U) in Q N' Q�mrm a) D w wLLI LLI F M M M M N C9'YQn`Mmm 0000 a LO C14 LO N co r CO 1r O O O O O N N N CO N O CO co M M O N N N N N f m M. m m M OR�}• 0 0�• 0 o X 4 d: 4 I}; O N C0rnvvvv I- CM Co M Cr) M 0 0 0 0 M M co co ci 6 O O O 4= N N r r N o0rmr-m f- M CM M CO): M O O O 0 C N r N r Cl) O M O O O O CO M 0 x )5 O m O m O Q x O N CD 0 O O 0 I- 0) co co ce) co co 0 0 0 0 v O o R v O O O O r M O t7 N v N O N O cc}} CO CO' M O I- m co m r M m Q co � m y Q m m LLI LLI LLI LLI f- CO CO M Cf) C� c� Q a. cL m cL 0 0 0 0 o n I� n cD r c4 N O N 0 X O O d Co t6 N N CO : N N O O.m O m O i- Lo et to th um) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N M N O o CO 0 LO o p o O CD o ca99rvmvm r0;. N rp N O N f U7 U) cn U) cO 0 0 0 0 0 N ti N r Yi N cts N p 0 0 R M m U7 m U) M N CO N" U) I- 0 n u) a in p1_y. O O O V. t qT qqt N N N N O x 0 00 0 00 O O X Co N� N N ca O O N O N m m m m o M Fw U) in w n o 0 0 0 0 00 cn c0 m 0 m m m m N N N N h M LO (D LO O Q X li) lO U) U) N U) CO U) CO O N O O O O {- U) UM L) in U) Q m Q�corm v � D LLI LLI LLI W H M M m U •c ^ U m Q IL d d d 00 00 M CO r ccM 00 0 0 O xx if) 404 LO ^ N UO e0- Nrc N;ti c0 r N �p M M. 00 O M r r r 0 0 0 0 0 m N U7 N U) N M O O O O O r d) 0) c0 eD r 000 N m O U) CO c0 �p 00 r . CO O CM O LO c0 U) CD o 0 0 0 co O N cmD L6 CD cci t0 O 25LnU)cno _ cr° no O 00 m o` N ip ti co N M: N E- M 'd' V�. d• r 0 # co CD v x N 07 CD N r CO h h dD O C�1 O Uj N N ',r O O CO O �Nyy� U7 v M C6 r M r 0 0 0 0 0 ov' 0 co 00 co m N � N r co Nt O N v N X coIn O N _ co r co: U)ca CO M CO 4 r T r Q N Q TM cD Tw: CQD D w LLI w LLI ro f- M M M M a C IL IL a a ►y (U N N (n m cu d C U C N Cr 6/ N t7) w Y 3 CD O L L t9 N m m Q ¢ .m Z46 m rn N C 06 06 06 Q 00 S = S = co Cf) m Q r CO co CQD 0� m (7 oM a a C to C O _ N � U U �U N .O 0 O O O p D C p N N U C 0 O O � r a a SOO N O E U U O N O Z a O G ca N (p N U Dy O m O N O E a Co o p n O E (u O t0 (0 cN UCL O U E O � Y c (U o 0 0 0 mo 00CDon Q O O v 0 N ?S n o0 Q 0 0 0 0 o � nt LO Lo Cm') oo N N N N i0 O M N CO r O 000 coO coM (co co F- O CD CD CD co O O O OO OW 00 N m r N N M N �0 (D N 00 (0 O) 00o h O tt m F- (cc CD (MD to m 0 0 0 0 o N m 00 00 I+ u? LO V O O C; O N ❑ O h co O M X V Co m N Co O LO h to O co h co CD CO N N N Cq N F- (D CO to to (D J � m CD D w W w W t0 �' U ccc^ U Y Q iL (L a M o 0 o 0 0 (O O u1 O o O O Q O O O O co LO ❑ S2 Q v 0 0 0 0 c CO O LO v m ❑ X v LO co LO O N O N N N N N F- M M CM M m O O O O o co m M co O m O m O O O O ❑ vc v � N :u (M N m N `r v O r F- m eo M (7 M o a o 0 to m UP)cm c (O N O N N N CV cV N �5 0 C) C) 0 R(Dhmh op N cu r s- r r 0 N N N: N F- m CM CY) M - m J � M co orbbbb a U w W W W m m co m p00{- �.cLa.. ¢a n N co o 0 0 0 m o � 0) r m Q v o V o N m p co V co to Q a o 0 0 ZS M V' co V' c Q CD M CO C7i N O v O �t m m R N N Cp N m (D M.. (D O h (O h (O O m h 00 h 00 V' V : V' O O O O o N � N t(j O O r C6 r M r M y� r` t00 h" ❑ ac r O O Ora M m co M co O DO) co N co m o C 0 o co co (tn U) v O v O N r0 ❑ _ N _� m N N M CD o h rO h O CD CD btbbbb O m bvbbbb O F- V V u) V' (O Q m Q CO N S W W W W (- m m co m N (� CA.. Q (L n. d d N a o 0 0 m 25 ro v 0) to QO O O O N m_ �5 } ❑ S2 u) ti Q 0 o O o ZS CO O 0 c R O 0) O N v N V' � ❑ o � �• N O N brbbbb N r m O <0 h co O V' CO D) CD h (D.'.. (D ow V' � V 4-. V O O o 0 c W M brbbb C) O tIn N M N N m _ tD ❑ 0) rp N. �N..N N co a0 to cm Ih 6 CD N O O K (O M V' m M O I- V' V V' mot. V' o 0 0 0 o N ON) .h- CO O O O O N r Cf m O N � ❑ M N r N P') h ':. LO co co m mrnrn00m M M V'- M V' r r Q D E W W W W ~ m m (^ M. N`. C9 ¢ CL li li d Enrollment Projections T M N COO E N m m O M N O O rt; U_ O O O O M COO N O m E CO t� CO M O tp T O O M V fn U_ LL 0 0 0 0 O t3. O ` m C � w O N LL' N O c E U. w U t3 CC1 R* `O E ma Q N _O N W Cn C01 ,N d T C N N a N O¢ O � _ Q ,w tomeq ., > C C d Na o � m c m 2 y m �. d O, C Q)a) Q O E d N Q F O O C = R W R N W 42 m m d CO p (II Q •� t6 N w O C O C a o VT W d a a O c y N W co W at 'ate Q «s LL tic i F• C J IM > H O m Z a O E E W Q O , C co co QG~. m OL7 aNi aNi m Q V� N co) d up) HIO O Nn co COO T NImILO NIN O OIti T T N NIN OT NIM O LED >% ? C U- E E to U. m C cu i O CD � �> a 0)U) L a: �¢in co e. m co _ j j O M�t_IL 1� M O N t0 N T T �' T d m T N N co CO r m T N N co CO cY CNO N co N N coCD 6� Y U) o Q .CL d IL m o c c wo C7� C{7[n tilti m u_ C � Cn CEO N N O O O O O O C7 O N O CON ti h CY) Ln LO.:N l!i In N N N CO m Y Y m oIL C' o m cn m O T O O O to O N O M CO M N '" m M Ln Co N T T Ltd aD d d Mr l NmTON ON m0TO NCtiTT,NOpONOm N n00c OmNooNWNNNTou`�MTTT�t NTTTeO %� M Ln cOrHwo to mtiLn N d CDO NM00 m Nt n CDT1�4 M CD M m M mt``n0 LntoLnN tiM M qe O coCo M w U)ai 0 00 m Co Cc Cc dOC�CD d Co —°o o, aa) U S 0 co aa) 'c W U) v d' 0 N C�6 M 0 m r p' N(Y) N N N N N N N O O O M 00 N d �t d rt �t m m p O N O 6) r N r O r r r r r 1` 00 m N M ch rt d V �t rt d d' d Ott It �t LO tO r O N O co O O O O O O O O (0 t� ti O� r d' ch Ct M �t d' 'd' V 4 d d �t UN) Cn O N co ti d CO d d ch Ottd' m CO 0 r r M� d' d' V' I. O N t` (0 ti � (� Co r- ti 1` I` r N N *'dot` ' M r N N N N N N N N N M M M M M 0 N CO Lj M O 00 p OD CO 00 O O r N N M M r r r r r r r r r r N N N N N O 'C N 'fl Ln yL. r � O r O O O O O r r N N N M It (A O N a It N O 00 d' CO M Cn Cfl N (fl m 0) O �t h. M r 00 '. N N N h 1` r- r M N rt ti 0 O r r r r r r 0 O O r r N N N Q p uj N o 0 0 man rn d N M 0 Z m m C T O O O M O o O o\\\\ O O O O O e O \ O \ O \ o O C Q G CO) M f Cl) M V > N N N M N LO CEO Tm ci � � hh r• r• r: ti ra 1h r; r 00 00 no O) O N _1 v no RS m - CO I` r- 00 q;h- r� O 00 Cfl C9 O O O ti p. l N 2 o,nl`�w;FLomCflCOCONwmm } O c O O O O 00 O O O N N N M �. W r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Z J3 J W m N 0 (� �- N M d CO CO h CO CA 0 r N Co Y r r r O 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 a 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 o p N M p N M N N N N M LOO 0 00 h- r- ti t` t•• ti N ti w w M O r MO M O t co O IMO CCOO O OMO MM CM C') CO 0 O I� ti rt CO 0 CO CO tO 00 0 rr M M M W co N tO tO M r c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N M CO CO r N r 0 00 d' m M CO CO N CO J0 r- ao N N N h h ti r CO NLO m pj s- rr c r r O 0 0 N N N, L m d r :r r r r t- r r r r r r,. r CV ,,Lnn V r 00 m M r CO 0 r CO ti O 00 ch r N o .fl M M 00 r M h d' CO r O h CO N N m •C N O O O r O 0 0 0 0 N N r M c0 N d r r r r r r r r r r r r r r w N N O) 00 N N M M N O M O M CO CMOog 0 `- N co 0)toN r CO M d' ti ti M `- M CO �- 0 0 0 N O 0 0 0 0 N r N d Z31 T r r r r r r r r r r r r r p a+ G, O CO CO M d' 0) r O N r 00 co d' M M ti y T r CO r r N r d CO r N M Ln d d O IL O O O O O O O O O r N N N co : Q d O N M M O O M r d' r M O O o �' M M M M h M` N M 4t ` 0 r M 00 f0 m O O N N 0 0 0 r O N N M LO V C; O � 0 L W --, = N _0� M c + co CO " t' 00 rt 0) CD d� CO (0 O N M ti. O r N c1' c7' CO CD Co h lO d ' LO LO cc Co N O O O O CD O CD N C9 M co Mgt 0 c O r r r r r r r r r r r r r O= Cp Q o 0 J N � m M Q r N CO �t tO CO 1` CO 0 0 r N Co L Y r r r 0 F 8 N w N O N m mil• w r r` Co wt r LO cY d Ott ID 0 0� r V w O ti Lo �t N w m t` �t �-. M ch O O O LO V' p N ch m d• lit 0t' rh h• M M M r �P �P Cr) M CO to � N p O r r r r r �- M r r r �• r r r r to co TO: N d. r N �mmNCoOMaCONr W gltMMMOM o N N "; "t' co � d• ' co d VO' COo M M co O dM• � M M CNO O p -O r r r r r r CO r r r r r r r LO N O rO((QD) mNNCorCOM Od•t`NOomrON o N V M OCOmMNNOCOCOmCoMMM1 O N r m m m N t` O M CO N tO m M r, top Ln O d' r r m m Co d• r N r r COO O M 'd' d• d• M M M d' M M M O t0 ch M N CO [O d' �}• N d' d• �' ct' d• M tO M M M O. d• d• M M m �: CO rrrrrrO r r r �' �- r r r Lo N p - r O r r r �}"�- r r r M N d M O C• O 00 N r' LO M N O w O M N w r o N O h M 0 d• ti t%- m M "• m N O N m r r 0 c Lo M, C) ti O O tom• CD Co In M tr N tO N O M m w O 0 t0 N m r M r 00 N LO ti N �- M H. �- M O Co LO N CO r. M.. d• M M M M N M M N m Cn d• N N O CD %zr may r- d• fit' C' M M M M M M N O' d' M N M ch ti. CO d• N Ly O m a tO N Co N m d' M n t` d• 00. r m 00 N O r' o r O Co O M O O ti t.C) m CNC> c co V "I* r` .0) d• co co co CD d' d• m' w m 1ti w w N 0) co m (` �)' rt' N O m M N CO ti r O M N N' CO CO r� M M M M M M O M N N ti mot' M N N M N. d• d• r M M M M M M r. N N N ti M M N M M r•, � d' N O r r r r r r M r r r M r �- r r LO Cy M r r r r LO r N N CL r O N00 00 U N O V' m r` co LO t� O M m LO to d• O M o O N CO Lo m N LO O. O fit' d• 00 r r CO N O 00 o n, r ';h N O O O CO N N r Co O Nt• LO CO O). co �. �, N sit LO M O O 00 CO N m N Cfl r r r � Co co Co co 0- r(D M M M M M N 00 N N N CO d• M N N N, CD 0) CO r co M Mn co N m N N r CO M M N MN Co: d• to Q p O r �- r r CO r r �- r LO r M p O r r r r r r t� r r r M r r r r LO r. M N d N d C O t r O co LO m LO Ott O O ti LO LO t� 00 ti m CO O CD o `- O O LO M t� M O 00 LO O LO CD CO O N O LO o a) C,p V h 0 CO ti Co r N O m Co M CO r t- CO LO N CO 0t`j Cp V O r m CO Co O M m Co N O O ti O M �- N to CO 'Q co N M N N N N CO N r r LO M C'M N O 0 CO r d• �- M M N N N N CO r r r LO M N cr) N �- Co N may N Q r r r r r r ti r r r M �- r r r LO �. M p O r r r r r r (�• �- r r M �- r r r Lo r CL d N a. C a) CO a O E O N O d• �- O O CO N h m CO O N M CO LO o �. a) th M 0 tom- co LO O t� Co LO m. r- r r r 0 o n• Q N co co N N N M r r r d0' M C O co L j p�j N N N N s~- Mr N CO LO N M N O, L j LO m �- p O r r r r r r tom-, r r r CO �- r r r cr r N p O r r r �- r r r r r r CM �- r r �- LO r M W N d N 0 N LO LO O O tom• LO O t` O LO 't LO r N CO M m co N d• N o LO U LO O r N M ti M CO ti M r' �- N r M CO N o cp a) N N N Oct (0 LO r O O N M r r N N M M qqt a) N N N p 0 CO O N ce) CD r N CO O tm ap N Q p 0 r r r r �- r tom{ r �- r Ce) �- r r r Cj' r N p O r r r r r r N �- r r M r r r r LO r N d N 0. N � N t�6 r w O w d• m M LO m Co N Co 'd0. m m O d• N .. c N `- Ca O 00 d• LO co LO tO CO N CO d' m m O �t N r c C O O t� 00 N N N ti O ti r Co LO N �t f` O t9 O C`) O t� M N N N h•• O t� tom• r CO LO N d• r- O N t0 m m O N U r r r r r 0 CC) O O r N r N N N m qr v C 3 N r U r r r r r O C0 0 0 r: N r N N N m d•. v� p ¢. r r r. r r r O r �- r M r r r r d' _ '` N'. ,Q r s- r r r r CO �- r s-. CO r r r r ct O O o C) 12 o U o �a =a N o mw 00 C\I o m w oo r m «. d Q I co N CO act LO In CO t� co O m CD r m 0 v Q r N CO d' LOm h coO m m O o:Q� Y Y �H O CL Y Y CD �E- CL M ti C CL v_ k Ln o `D 4. k U) o a) n- =CL o "Cr N Q I°)Dot > Q oQ C t aC) a)i w > to cna))n > "C ON M .Q M J s CSVft CO m a) O U CO a) o= O -p to a) y" U� O O CL m c c a) c c Eo 0 0. i = c° m o as° Cc`a a`)c�L°n ��,ac54)i°.4 o`m c�in °) Z M p Lo �, 4) () a) cn Cn Ca to M Ln 0) as U)) '�) v c�a y ayi a�i ca Ln °) �u US Wj Crj N d N O > �L' J M y d � ". a) a) O L- > 'L m a�oa o; �-o o min0)0% c t) -> Loo�o F Z N° i C i C �� � o `� FQ- Z j� OL aa)) i Y a v) C O M Co CO I Ln I Cl 0 d' I Lo I N M M r O. N tom- r 0 O Co Co M N M M M p M "Ittom- LO tom -CD M O N LO LO O M p N 'IT M rt r g r T M M N N N N (� M M M M O 41' M N Co N N N N N C M M M ' d' M M N n N !1 O O O N Ln M aD 0 m O 00 N 00. N O co N to h• - to d' M H O N M T N Lo M OD ci' N m N O M OD 00 Cl p� r N N N N M. M M N M m d' N N LO T N N N N M M N M d' M N M d'. p O T r r r� r r T M. r r T T Ln p O r T T T r r r M T r r T Lo N N a M M �_ N O ti d' ti d' T h- h d' M T O M N O: CU LO Co Co N co, V TONMMd'Od'd'MwQ%)r COw CO V OOTCON MMNLor� MMN' N N N N M N N N 1� M M N M M T O T T T r T Co. r r r M T T T r LID p O T T T r r T T T M T T r T Ln d N N T O a 'a aD N T 0 0 Co h h- M C'7 h M M M tC) Ln d' M M o O Co M M N to ct O cY d' M T r Co N O T: o N N T O O d' M M co �- U Ln ao O N O 00 LO r N M N T r Co 1• Co �' �h N N M N M N N N M d' M N N N Co, N NCO N M N N r Co M M N M N CO U) CO Cl O T T T r r r T r r M T T T T LO r N Cn N N C O O 73 C) r(D ap t- Co Ln V' O O. h m Ln ti CA ti M Co O f o r U DO M M h. M O V' to CO Ln O T M O N O T o\' Ili O CD U N N r h• (o T 00 O M M M M r Imo• co Ln co 9T �Y Cp N 00 T co Co O Ln M M N O O h- O M T co �'',.. 'p T r r N N N N N N T r Lit M M N O O �'. N M T r T N N N N N r r r Lo M N M N T Lo co N' N O` r T r T T T I� T r r M T T r T Ln T N N O r T T T T T r� r T r M r T T T LO T a n- MOMMOME c � 'a Lo E M r. d' r O O CO N t� M M O N LO M LO c o V co LC') CO O 1�- M Lo O ti CO Lo 6) ti r r T O� c O cam- CD r N co t00 m ~- r d0' Cr)pM 0 c~- co LO� N LO CD r N N sr� 00 Lo UOIT- cM7 N co N O LL ti N 2 p O r T T T T T Imo. T r r co T T r T� r. r O O r r T T r r (� r T T CO r r T T LO �, r C N A N CL W O Lo Lo O In m O r- C) Lo N U') r N N LID 00 N d' Co o T LO O r NM P� M 00 1� C+') N r N r Mco 4 Co N o r CO N O: O O N co T N ON) � 000, N r O r co N �� sue- O co � O N M � N M O � N m NOMPOM T T T T Cj' T O O r T r T T T T T T M r T T T LO T. N + SWOONSN a N d C > CD o Lj r T @ 0 co 4 t' LID co to Ln CO N Cfl Oct M M O. d' N r Oct c + m TM � 0 00 'd' Lo Cf) LO LO CO N co d' M M O '�t: N a CD fi t- co N: N N f- O h- Imo• r CO Ln N C' ti O r' Cb O C h O N N.. N h. O h- I� T (o Ln N d' ti O CO Do C N sM- U T r T O CO O O r N r N N N M� U C N (� r T r r O CC) O O T N T N N N M� V .40+ ..�L N r T T T T T CO T T r M r T T r V' T O L = .L N¢ T r T T r T Co r T T Cr> T T T [� "' r,. O= C> Q o U V CL o U d O 'G W ,000 o 'C w Offigow (. MOOSE cf) tLCo r00 TC64 C') %LCfl OD M C) I p MOONSCIO M Y I— Q Q Y 1— aa D MOURNE lmom w +r c rL +r c Oft O a> SO allow Q;n �����>caoc Nc �0 CI) U) —� o�0) >c �v�o0 oa J- d> } �o �ooe- co �ta 0 m a� aEo > o� — a 0CO m ro a o ooa0 a> 0 G N a> N �— ,� d C a> 4) c t— O vuoiyv>> cua) �tt>cOn� 1`�utyoyaia'i ma> CY) M R> G O O Co w Lao m d" `c �- .2 C QZN�i�i cC °��u> 4zyo��� ���>�En Nc E' ��Q.�L7> Yfl Uo 4Ca -U) s 0 " 0 a ; . _ u r Uo � T U) QU C N O O N O C: U M C E O a m O > Q o 0 cn M O O M O O N CO 0 M M T M O O O f` O CO M LO M T h•. M T N d' N LM 4t M �t CO d M ti T rt O O M to T CO Cr 'RT M Bi O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 O to O U U.. a N O M N CC) O d' (A tom• M O h to tl' O O M O CO d' ti CM T N O co N CO) N N CO 00 .O CO T N O O M O T O T O T O T T T O •- o 0 0 0 o d o 0 0 o ci o 0 0 0 0 U) m Wo m a) c a) o O) O M M O O C) a) C7 d O 0 CO T O O d rt O T O O M tM CO d f` 'p T T N O T O T O N O O O N O O O d O O O O O O O O 'O O O O O O O O M N O 00; 00 CO (A 00 O O O C,4 00 O O O 117 M M N M O N M T f` O to T � O M tM LM N T M CO O LM N CO N c1 N CO r T T d O O G O O O O O O O O O O O C) O CO M O OD N CO C� CO N CM CO ti LM CO �- O is e} O F- O T ch T CO (M M O M T O (�• T T �' N ..U. N N T a) 'O = M a) CO m d' N CO rP co N W;T O N r` N T T CO (a T T T T T O � V T O M N CM M t� OD "t Cf) mot' O M N V' O CM T T T T T M M T C}' N N WWrWWW "a LM O O N O O � O co O � O � O O 0 0 O O v t� O tM tM �t d' CO O d' ti O O CC) T 00 0 tM d' U Cn tM O N •- CO T d' O T N 0 Co N CO a+ = T M T T [� r V 1?. ci v O O CM CO d' CO CO O co CO T LO (� 00 l� tM M N (O LO 00 N T O CO Imo• � 00 N CO CO N h N 0) co T T CO T N T 00 T w V = L a 0 H a) c a) cc in E W CP m (n a) a) a) O � C_ a) Co ca C O co O to C — to Y 'C U a) E m n. U) .o w W n. >> CO d o a) Q at°i c o a) o o o o U CDOW O L to N — C C C C C N 0) N •p N C C C6 (6 N (6 C6 C6 co' N Co m :0 Y 2� o 0 m m m U () Y J J J J J (n I— i O v tt) LL N O C N M c 0 0 m m 0] C NIL O O (0 .N W N O to m M O C) N tto T r _ a3 dw FM (A O m U m O N T N T O d' N to C w o = M m CU o c O N U Cn T M M M d' N T CO d' E LO T 00 a) W u N O H C y T T T t() 'C = a) CD M O N O ti sue- to Q � O N t` CO d' CM mot' M M E T T T T M T r T W 'a tM N Imo- O CO O tM M CA tl) d M T T N T CO mil' m 0 CO N v O CO d O mt CO (O T N CM CO OD T d' CO T CA d' w T CO T M L O y 0 O CO O co CO T m T O 0 ~ M CM r CO N dam' = L a 0 H m co � � W Z CL m U ¢ %w ttj to 10 a)CD Cn wo C so O cn c c c c > a) '—@O CB CO Cif t6 'C7 Y � l6 C G m m� J J J J O 0 ti m W CD C a) U) C O m m O a -o 2 cc E N w C)m CD CD MOMr- r 0 tLOtY mNMd'd'd OCDMMr r N Mr rOD r M r N(0 O O N O U N Mrrr NOMrNNMNrrrMrrO)rMNr�T C CM O Cl) O fn N a) N NrrCDrh NrNNNOrrrMrrOprN�-r-to0 (L a LO "I rCf) M C D t 0 r d co � t) N� N N r CD r N1� N C o Co Co O h to E r N AI w Q to O m O � F- d' 'a r C O R1 N L o O (6 O 'C rcj'f�•Op000)rOpNOOCDd'd'O)t�OOrd'MOOOCDI`r � d Mr r-rOM NN MLC')rr M rOrNrr00 m r N r 00 H v O 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 C M L Q U � O r cj• r- 00 OO 0)r M N O O Co d' d' O r- OO r d' M O) OO CD r- N Mr r`rOM NNMED M r0rNrr00 fn N N r M ++ v = L m IL' a o O cn — U) d W U O E (' Z3 O Nm CD N a) N o w N E L L > aQ�=cn CV CU6 J N — O O UO+ _ f�0+ YYe �LLdw :> O C�� ,r O. p C= O N O O O C C C FL fn 'C Cl J �- n' f6 O C�i O w n- =_ � ffi O CL t�0 Cn N L co cu c6 O O C6 C = U [= Cll ) CO) co ca N YCC cu N N 0 Y fll Y N Y O }r =O N G O= 0 0 d •V C co O t0 Co lNV N coj N N N G �C Q co U) m 0 w = = = J J J 2 z (L � CA CA � i- N tp i Ri O N P- 00 00 00 is r N Cf� t r 0 0 0 0 & O O F L CO r P. CO ti N N C) Cfl CO r 0) L o o r r CD 0 O= 0 0 0 0 0 C5 L N d' N Co Cn to d m 00 00 d" t r m Ur o r O r 0 c 'a 0 0 0 O 0 O N O O f7 r� N CD co O C0 ti N E Cl O CO CMO r N d 0 0 0 0 0 W � 2 N N O H Cfl r N N m to y co N r w LO � O d Er N ii r LU .a000000 d m •Q• 0 H V 0 A r N N CO d V N r r 0 .�+ C CO L Q. 0 V 0 Q N d r N N d .�, Cr) r r CO r 0 N d N ce) r P- v L a Cu a � o aD tn > Cn a m E c�a o E aa)) 3: Z O p O �+ L- DO C Q J C O E > O ~ onO 0 t4 C v o cjl� O1 0 CO .O O J J d (n f -- t� ow () O CO t0 r N T T O M d N cy, N F�- NINIOIN O C7 d' 00 C7C�]C DE'TEPO INATION Off' NONSIGNIRUANCE Issued with a 14-day comment and appeals period Description of Proposal: This threshold determination -analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single course of action: l . The adoption of the Auburn School District's 2014-2020 Capital Facilities Plan by the Auburn School District No. 408 for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District; and 2. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of King County and the cities of Auburn and Kent to include the Auburn School District's 2014-2020 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The cities of Algona, Pacific, and Black Diamond may also amend their Comprehensive Plans to include the Auburn School District's Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. Proponent: Auburn School District No. 408 Location of the Proposal: The Auburn School District includes an area of approximately 57 square miles. The Cities of Auburn, Algona, Black Diamond, Kent, and Pacific and parts of unincorporated King County fall within the District's boundaries. Lead Agency: Auburn School District No. 408 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse environmental impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request. This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by 4400 p.m., June 6, 2014. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. Responsible Official: Mike Newman Deputy Superintendent, Business and Operations Auburn School District No. 408 Telephone: (253) 9314930 Address:. Auburn School District 915 41h Street N.E. Auburn, WA 98002 You may appeal this determination in writing by 4:00 p.m., June 6, 2014, to Mike Newman, Deputy Superintendent, Auburn School District No. 408, 915 41h Street N.E., Auburn, WA 98002. Date of Issue: May 19, 2014 Date Published: May 23, 2014 WAC 197-11-VUU Environmental Checklist. Purpose %d Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts.' If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply". In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for non - project actions (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. - A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: The adoption of the Auburn School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan ("Capital Facilities Plan") for the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. The cities of Auburn and Kent and the King County Comprehensive Plans will be amended to include the Auburn School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The cities of Algona, Black Diamond, and Pacific Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Auburn School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. A copy of the District's Capital Facilities Plan is available for review in the District's offices. 2. Name of applicant: Auburn School District No. 408. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Auburn School District No. 408 915 411 St. N.E. Auburn, WA 98002_ Contact Person: Mike Newman, Deputy Superintendent, Business/Operations Telephone: (253) 9314900 4. Date checklist prepared: May 12, 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: Auburn School District No. 408. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the District on June 9, 2014. After adoption, the District will forward the Capital Facilities Plan to the cities of Auburn, Algona, Black Diamond, Kent, and Pacific, and to King County for inclusion in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually. Site -specific projects will be subject to project -level environmental review. 7. Do you have. any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the District plans to implement over the next six years. The District plans to purchase property for and construct a new elementary school and construct a new middle school over the next six years to meet projected student population increases. The District may also add portable facilities at existing school sites. The District will also modernize Auburn High School. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. -.The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have undergone or will undergo.:., additional environmental review, when appropriate, as they are developed. 9. Do you know whefiher .applications are pending for governmental , approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The cities of Auburn and Kent will review and adopt the Capital Facilities Plan for the purposes of updating the cities' school impact fees and incorporating the updated Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Elements of both the Auburn and Kent Comprehensive Plans. King County will review the Plan for the purposes of implementing the County's impact fee ordinance and incorporating the Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. The cities of Algona, Black Diamond, and Pacific Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Auburn School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's 3 Comprehensive Plan and each jurisdiction may adopt a school impact fee ordinance to implement school impact fees. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is a nonproject action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Auburn School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District's facilities needs. This proposal also involves the amendment of the cities of Auburn and Kent Comprehensive Plans and the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Auburn School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of each jurisdiction's Capital Facilities Element of their Comprehensive Plans. The cities of Algona, Black Diamond, and Pacific Comprehensive Plans may be amended to include the Auburn School District 2014 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan and each jurisdiction may adopt a school impact fee ordinance to implement school impact fees. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range A area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The 2014 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Auburn School District. The District includes an area of approximately 57 square miles. The cities of Auburn, Algona, Black Diamond, Kent, and Pacific, and parts of unincorporated King County fall within the District's boundaries. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The Auburn School District is comprised of a variety of topographic landforms and gradients. Specific 'topographic characteristics of the sites at which theprojects included in the Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Specific slope characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Specific soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Unstable soils may exist within the Auburn School District. Specific soil limitations on individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project -level environmental review when appropriate. e. Describe the purpose, type, and `approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. - Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when appropriate, to project -level environmental review and local approval at the time ofproposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of any fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of the construction projects currently proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects have been or will be evaluated on a site -specific basis at the time of project -level environmental review when appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be subject to local approval processes. 5 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?) The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have required or will require the construction of impervious surfaces. The extent of any impervious cover constructed will vary with each project- included in the Capital Facilities Plan. This issue has been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and appropriate control measures have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements have been or will be met. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Various emissions, many construction -related, may result from the individual projects included in`the Capital Facilities Plan. The air -quality impacts of each project have been or will be evaluated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Are .there any off -site sources. of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project - level environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, IT any: The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project -level environmental review and relevant local approval processes 0 when appropriate.: ,The District has been ,or will be required to comply with all applicable air regulations and air permit requirements. - Proposed measures specific to the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project4evel environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3. Water a. Surface: -1) Is there any surface.. water.;body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a network of surface water bodies within the Auburn School District. The surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. When necessary, the surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and incorporated into the designs of the individual projects. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The projects included in the Capital- Facilities Plan may require work near the surface waters located within the Auburn School District. Applicable local approval requirements have been or will be satisfied. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material as a component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided during project4evel environmental review when appropriate. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied. 7 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area, has been or will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Ground: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on groundwater resources has been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Each project has been or will be 'subject to applicable local regulations. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions, 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the projects included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have stormwater runoff consequences. Specific information regarding the stormwater impacts of each project has been or will be provided during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Each project has been or will be subject to applicable local stormwater regulations. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of waste ; materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of each project on ground and surface waters have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Each project has been or will be subject to all applicable regulations regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. d._ Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 4. Plants: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants water lily, eelgrass,'milfoil, other other types of vegetation A' variety of vegetative zones are located within the Auburn School District. Inventories of the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. What kind and amount of vegetafiion will be removed or altered? Some of the projects inc]Arlo the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local landscaping requirements. m 5. Animals: a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project - level environmental review when appropriate. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Is the site part of a migration router If so, explain. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 6. Energy and Natural Resources: a. What kinds of energy (electric,. natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life -cycle cost analysis of all heating, lighting, and insulation systems before it will permit specific school projects to proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site design planning when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe: The impacts of the projects included in the 'Capital Facilities Plan on the solar potential of adjacent projects have been or will be addressed during project4evel environmental review when appropriate. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 7. Environmental Health: a. Are there any environmental healfih hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan comply or will comply with all current codes, standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to project4evel environmental review and local approval at the time they are developed, when appropriate. b. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? A variety of noises from traffic, construction, residential, commercial, and industrial areas exists within the Auburn School District. The specific noise sources that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when .appropriate. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create normal construction noises that will exist on short-term bases only. The construction projects could increase traffic around the construction sites on a short-term basis. Because the construction of additional school capacity will increase the capacity of the District's school facilities, this project may create a slight increase in traffic -related or operations -related noise on a long-term basis. Similarly, the placement of portables at school sites will increase the capacity of school facilities and may create a slight increase in traffic -related or operations -related noise. Neither of these potential increases is expected to be significant. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? There are a variety of land uses within the Auburn School District, including residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc. 13 b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The known sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have not been used recently for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. The structures located on the sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified and described during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d.. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if any, have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site -specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be completed during project - level environmental review when appropriate. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 14 h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project4evel environmental review. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The Auburn School District currently serves approximately 14,971 students. Enrollment is expected to increase to approximately 17,702 students by the 2019-2020 school year. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be evaluated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of the projects contained therein, will displace any people. k: -Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project -level, environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed mitigating measures have been or will be developed at that time, when necessary. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 9. Housing: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. 15 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will eliminate any housing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on existing housing have been or will be evaluated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 10. Aesthetics: a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project - level basis when appropriate. 16' 11. Light and Glare: a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? - The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project4evel environmental review, when appropriate. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off -site sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated during project4evel environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during project level environmental review when appropriate. 12. Recreation: a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Auburn School District. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 17 The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed new school facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to mitigation during project -level environmental review when appropriate. School facilities usually provide recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields and gymnasiums. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: a. Are fihere any: places or objects listed on, or proposed. for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for, such registers for the project sites included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and cultural resources on_or,next to the sites has been or will be addressed in detail during project -level environmental review when appropriate._ b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Appropriate measures will be proposed on a project -level basis when appropriate. 14. Transportation: a. Identify public streets. and highways .serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. ....The impact on public: streets and highways of the individual. projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan .have been or will: be ' addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. i� D. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public transit has been or will be addressed during project4evel environmental review when appropriate. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Inventories of parking spaces located at .the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability have been or will be conducted during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. e. WIII the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Use of water, rail, or air transportation has been or will be addressed during project - level environmental review when appropriate. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project=level environmental review when appropriate. 19 15. Public Services: a. Would the project result in an increased need Tor public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will significantly increase the need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. New school facilities have been or will be built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems. 16. Utilities: a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities are available at the known sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The types of utilities available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed in more detail during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility provng the service, and the general construction = activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility revisions and construction needs have been or will be identified during project- levelenvironmental review when appropriate. C. 61UN/ATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agen y is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Sub jtd: 21 {; D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for projecf actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be' helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be_aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? life? To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities, including new middle school and elementary school capacity and a high school modernization, will be constructed, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, access roads, and sidewalks could increase stormwater runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters. Heating systems, emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed pursuant to the Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances,. with -the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for emergency generating equipment. The District does not anticipate a significant increase in the production of noise from its facilities, although the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will increase the District's student capacities. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when .appropriate. Stormwater detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination' System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be stored in accordance with local and state requirements. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants,. animals, fish, or marine The Capital Facilities Plan .itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require clearing plants off of the project sites and a loss to animal habitat. These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project -level environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Plan are not likely to generate significant impacts on fish or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be identified at this time. Specific mitigation proposals will be identified, however, during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the consumption of energy. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency standards. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no impact on these resources. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures would be proposed during project -specific review. Annual updates of this Plan will be coordinated with the cities of Auburn, Algona, Black Diamond, Kent, and Pacific, and King County as part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the School District's facilities planning process is part of the overall Growth Management planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? 23 The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans. The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are. No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained therein are proposed at this time. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary increases in the District's need for public services and utilities. The new school facilities will increase the District's demands on transportation and utilities. These increases are not expected to be significant. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demands) are: No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 24 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 - 2020 Board Approved: August 20, 2014 BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS Michael Spear, Board President Tyrone Curry Sr., Board Vice President Angelica Alvarez Bernie Dorsey Susan Goding SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Susan Enfield Prepared by: Highline School District No. 401 The Robinson Company August 11, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1 Pages 2 — 3 SECTION I CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Pages 4 —13 INTRODUCTION Page 4 INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES Pages 5-7 INVENTORY OF NON -EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES Pages 8-9 NEEDS FORCAST— EXISTING FACILITIES Pages 10 —11 NEEDS FORCAST—NEW FACILITIES Page 12 SIX -YEAR FINANCE PLAN Page 13 SECTION 2 MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Pages 14 —16 INTRODUCTION Page 14 MAPS — ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BOUNDARIES Page 15 MAPS —MIDDLE & HIGH SCHOOL BOUNDARIES Page 16 SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Pages 17 — 30 INTRODUCTION Page 17 BUILDING CAPACITIES Pages 18-23 PORTABLE LOCATIONS Pages 24-25 ENROLLMENT FORECAST Pages 26 —29 SIX -YEAR SUMMARY Page 30 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Page 31 Page 1 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act (SHB) 2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991) and under the King County School impact Fee Ordinance, the Highline School District No. 401 (District) has updated its Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) as of June 1.6, 2014. This CFP is being presented for adoption by King County before December 31, 2014. In addition, the District will be presenting a request to the City of Kent and may to other cities where school impact fees are made available. To (late King County and the City of Kent are the only jurisdictions within Highline School District No. 401 that collect impact fees for schools. To collect impact fees on behalf of the District, these jurisdictions must adopt the District's CFP by reference as part of their comprehensive plans and adopt a school impact fee ordinance. Other cities within the District currently collect other impact fees (primarily for transportation impacts). To collect impact fees on behalf of the District, these jurisdictions must also adopt the District's CFP by reference as part of their comprehensive plans. Highline School District No. 401 has experienced relative low enrollment growth over the last 15 years. However, recent enrollment projections identify a significant increase in the District's enrollment between October 2012 and October 2020. This increase in enrollment will increase the demand on schools that are currently near, at or over capacity. These increases are primarily due to the anticipated growth in the unincorporated areas of King County and in the City, of Kent. Page 2 Over the last 11 years Highline School District No. 401 has embarked on a major capital improvement effort to enhance its facilities to meet current educational and life -safety standards. Since 2002 the District has passed two major capital bonds: one in 2002 for approximately $189,000,000 and one in 2006 for approximately $148,000,000. The schools which were built were for replacement of existing facilities and not to accommodate increased enrollment. With these funds and reimbursements from the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the State of Washington, the Port of Seattle, the Federal Aviation Administration and private donations for a new Aviation High School the District has designed, permitted and constructed 13 new elementary schools, 2 new high schools (one of which is currently in construction), renovated 3 schools as interim facilities and renovated portions of Memorial Field and Camp Waskowitz. All of this work has been done since March 2002. As the District looks ahead it recognizes that anticipated enrollment growth, some of which will be caused by new development, will require the District to either add new facilities, add additions to existing facilities, renovate existing facilities, add portables to existing facilities re -open Beverly Park Elementary School. This CFP identifies the current enrollment, the current capacity of each educational facility, the projected enrollment over the six -year planning period and how the District plans to accommodate this growth. It also includes a schedule of impact fees that should be charged to new development. Based on current projections, the District will have a shortage of space by 2020. To accommodate this growth the District will need to add a new elementary and middle school accommodate the majority of the future growth. The District may also need to revise boundaries for some elementary schools. In addition, new portables may need to be added at individual elementary schools to accommodate future enrollment. At this time it has been assumed that land will not need to be purchased to accommodate the new schools. Page 3 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION I - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INTRODUCTION The State Growth Management Act requires that information be gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the enrollment demands of each school district. This section provides information about Highline School District No. 401's current facilities, its existing facility needs, its future facility needs and its financing plan to accommodate designs, permitting costs, construction costs and norr- construction costs (often referred to as "soft costs" such as sales tax, furnishings, insurance, project management fees, etc.) required to accommodate future growth. The finance plan in this section shows how the District plans to finance improvements for the years 2014 through 2020. The plan is based on all approved bond issue (approved no later then 2016) by election and collection of impact fees under the State's Growth Management Act. Page 4 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401. CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION 1 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (see Maps section for specific addresses) NAME OF SCHOOL BUILDING SF PORTABLE SF TOTAL SF Beverly Park at Glendale 58145 1700 59845 Beverly Park 28048 9900 37948 Bow Lake 76108 76108 Cedarhurst 68916 1650 70566 Des Moines 41766 800 42566 Gregory Heights 65978 1650 67628 Hazel Valley 65346 1792 67138 Hilltop 51532 4200 55732 Madrona 69240 1650 70890 Marvista 68462 68462 McMicken Heights 69979 69979 Midway 66096 66096 Mount View 67783 3300 71083 North Hill 65665 65665 Parkside 68857 68857 Seahurst 59967 1792 61759 Shorewood 60326 60326 Southern Heights 32942 2800 35742 White Center 65654 65654 SUBTOTALS 1150810 31234 1182044 Page 5 MIDDLE SCHOOLS (see Mans section for specific addresses) NAME OF SCHOOL BUILDING SF PORTABLE SF TOTAL SF Cascade 90582 2358 92940 Chinook 87476 5256 92732 Pacific 73941 3584 77525 Sylvester 92617 3144 95761 Big Picture MS (currently at Manhattan) 4400 4400 Choice (currently at Woodside) 2000 2000 SUBTOTALS 346616 18742 365358 HIGH SCHOOLS (see Maps section for specific addresses) NAME OF SCHOOL BUILDING SF Mount Rainier 205159 Highline 214919 Highline PAC (25%) 7580 Tyee 143101 Evergreen 161456 Aviation 87934 Big Picture HS 29141 (currently at Manhattan) PORTABLE SF TOTAL SF 205159 214919 7580 1848 144949 5776 167232 87934 29141 New Start 1.5374 4797 20171 (at Salmon Creek) Pudet Sound Skill Center 70894 70894 Choice 3600 3600 (at Woodside) Marine Tech 1800 1800 (at Woodside) SUBTOTALS 940958 12421 953379 GRAND TOTALS 2438384 62397 2500781 Percent of Total SF 97.50% 2.50% 100% Page 6 OTHER EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES (see Maps section for specific addresses) NAME OF SCHOOL BUILDING SF PORTABLE SF TOTAL SF Valley View Early Education Center 28902 2304 31206 White Center Heights Early Learning Center 3584 3584 Camp Waskowitz 38162 38162 Performing Arts Center (at Highline HS 75%) 22739 22739 TOTALS 89803 5888 95691 All square footages taken from 2008 Study and Survey Page 7 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION 1 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INVENTORY OF NON - EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES DEVELOPED PROPERTY ERAC See maps for site location and address MOT/Facilities Office See maps for site location and address Information Technology See maps for site location and address (at Woodside) Security See maps for site location and address (at Woodside) Storage (Glacier) See maps for site location and address Page 8 LEASED SPACES N. Shorewood Salmon Creels (50%) Burien Heights See maps for site location and address See maps for site location and address See maps for site location and address UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY Zenith See maps for site location and address Lake View See maps for site location and address Crest View See maps for site location and address Boulevard Park See maps for site location and address CLOSED SCHOOLS Maywood See maps for site location and address Sunnydale Elementary (2) See maps for site location and address Beverly Park Elementary (1) See maps for site location and address Olympic Middle School (2) See maps for site location and address (1) Can be re -opened (2)To be used as interim schools during construction Page 9 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION I - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES 2013 - 2020 Increased Enrollment ELEM. SCHOOLS Beverly Park at Glendale + 26 Bow La Ice + 24 Cedarhurst + 65 Des Moines + 15 Gregory Heights +104 Hazel Valley +108 Hilltop +154 Madrona + 17 Mai -vista + 18 McMicken Heights + 44 Midway +101 Mount View +100 North Hill + 47 Parkside + 29 Seahurst + 79 Shorewood + 95 Southern Heights - 8 White Center +149 NET CHANGE +IJ67 Page 10 2013 - 2020 Increased Enrollment JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS Cascade +140 Chinook +112 Pacific +217 Sylvester +161 Big Picture + 20 Choice + 17 NET CHANGE +667 2013 - 2020 Increased Enrollment HIGH SCHOOLS Mount Rainier + 31 Highline + 98 Tyee - 2 Evergreen - 12 Aviation - 17 New Start - 4 Big Picture HS + 13 Puget Sound Skills Center - 61 Choice HS + 8 Other - 22 NET CHANGE + 32 Page 11 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION 1 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST — NEW FACILITIES To accommodate the anticipated added elementary and middle school enrollment the Highline School District plans to add additional capacity to the new Des Moines Elementary School replacement and build two new new middle schools to accommodate 750 students each. The District will also change from a K-6, 7-8 model to a K-5, 6-8 model which will help relieve some of the overcrowding at the elementary school level. Revising individual school boundaries will also be required. At this time the District has assumed the elementary school and new middle schools will be built on land the District currently owns. The design and construction of the new elementary school and two new middle schools will be dependent upon voter approved capital bonds. A portion of the costs for the school will also be paid by impact fees. The plan calls for the voters to decide on the new capital bond measure in November 2014 with construction of the new projects to start no later than 2016 and be completed no later than August 2018. The District may also need to add portables to specific schools to accommodate increased enrollment. At this time there are no plans to add new facilities to the district except those required to accommodate future growth listed in this plan (see Needs Forecast -- Existing Facilities section of this document). Page 12 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014-2020 SECTION 1 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST — SIX —YEAR FINANCING PLAN (values listed in millions $$) 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 PROJECTED REVENUE Sources: Impact Fees (1) 0.200 0.200 1.095 2.712 2.891 2.891 2.891 Land Sale Funds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Bond for New Schools 0 385.00 0 0 0 0 0 Reimbursements (OSPI/Port/I+AA) 16.60 5.65 56.35 Total Projected Revenue 0.200 385.20 1.095 2.712 19.491 8.541 59.241 PROJECTED EXPENSES Site Acquisition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 New Elementary School 0 4.00 4.00 15.00 30.00 0 0 New Middle Schools 0 15.00 80.00 65.00 0 0 0 Other Projects 0 15.00 15.50 48.50 61.50 58.50 51.60 Total Projected Expenses 0 34.00 99.50 128.50 91.50 58.50 51.60 ENDING BALANCE 0.200 351.400 252.995 127.207 55.198 5.239 12.880 (1)Assumes 1003 single family homes and 568 apartments will be built between 2014 and 2020 (excluding King County Housing Authority Projects. Excludes impact fees from King County Housing Authority for Greenbridge, Seola Gardens and Windrose projects per forma agreement between King County Housing Authority and Highline School District Page 13 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION 2 — MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES INTRODUCTION The following maps show the service area for each school within the Highline School District. The identified boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of new programs that affect individual school populations may necessitate a change of a school's service area. The Growth Management Act requires jurisdictions to evaluate if the public facility infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to new development. However, relative to school facilities, if a district does not have permanent facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries are adjusted by the school district. Adjusting boundaries is a time-consuming and often difficult endeavor. Impacts to individual children and families must be weighed during such a process. Currently the Highline School District will be considering boundary changes that may be required to accommodate future enrollment increases. Page 14 This page intentionally left blank. Copyright 1999 – Highline Public Schools Printed August 2014 • All rights reserved BOULEVARD PARK SITE Tukwila School District ELEMENTARYSCHOOLS BEVERLY PARK 1201 South 104th Street Seattle, WA 98168 206.631.3400 BOW LAKE 18237 - 42nd Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.3500 CEDARHURST 611 South 132nd Street Burien, WA 98168 206.631.3600 DES MOINES 22001 - 9th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.3700 GREGORY HEIGHTS 16201 - 16th Avenue SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.3800 HAZEL VALLEY 402 SW 132nd Street Burien, WA 98146 206.631.3900 HILLTOP 12250 - 24th Avenue South Burien, WA 98168 206.631.4000 MADRONA 20301 - 32nd Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98198 206.631.4100 MARVISTA 19800 Marine View Drive SW Normandy Park, WA 98166 206.631.4200 McMICKEN HEIGHTS 3708 South 168th Street SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.4300 MIDWAY 22447 - 24th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.4400 MOUNT VIEW 10811 - 12th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.4500 NORTH HILL 19835 - 8th Avenue South Seattle, WA 98148 206.631.4600 PARKSIDE 2104 South 247th Street Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.4700 SEAHURST 14603 - 14th Avenue SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.4800 SHOREWOOD 2725 SW 116th Street Burien, WA 98146 206.631.4900 SOUTHERN HEIGHTS 11249 - 14th Avenue South Burien, WA 98168 206.631.5000 WHITE CENTER HEIGHTS 10015 - 6th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.5200 MIDDLE SCHOOLS BIG PICTURE @ Manhattan Site 440 South 186th Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7700 CASCADE 11212 - 10th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.5500 CHINOOK 18650 - 42nd Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.5700 CHOICE ACADEMY 18367 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7630 PACIFIC 22705 - 24th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.5800 SYLVESTER 16222 Sylvester Road SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.6000 HIGH SCHOOLS BIG PICTURE @ Manhattan Site 440 South 186th Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7700 CHOICE ACADEMY 18367 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7630 EVERGREEN CAMPUS 830 SW 116th Street Seattle, WA 98146 ARTS & ACADEMICS ACADEMY 206.631.6250 HEALTH SCIENCES & HUMAN SERVICES 206.631.6200 TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING & COMMUNICATIONS 206.631.6300 HIGHLINE 225 South 152nd Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.6700 MOUNT RAINIER 22450 - 19th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.7000 NEW START 614 SW 120th Street Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.7750 PUGET SOUND SKILLS CENTER 18010 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7300 RAISBECK AVIATION near The Museum of Flight (not located in map area) 9229 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98108 206.631.7200 TYEE EDUCATIONAL COMPLEX 4424 South 188th Street SeaTac, WA 98188 ACADEMY OF CITIZENSHIP AND EMPOWERMENT 206.631.6500 GLOBAL CONNECTIONS 206.631.6550 CENTRAL OFFICE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCE & ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER 15675 Ambaum Blvd. SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.3000 OTHER LOCATIONS (OLD) BEVERLY PARK SITE 11427 – 3rd Avenue South Seattle, WA 98168 BURIEN HEIGHTS SITE 1210 SW 136th Street Burien, WA 98146 CAMP WASKOWITZ (not located in map area) 45505 SE 150th Street North Bend, WA 98045 425.277.7195 CRESTVIEW SITE 16200 - 43rd Avenue South Tukwila, WA 98188 DISTRICT WAREHOUSE 2301 South 200th Street SeaTac, WA 98198 206.878.8216 GLACIER SITE 2450 South 142nd Street SeaTac, WA 98168 LAKEVIEW SITE SW 160th Street & 6th Avenue SW Burien, WA 98166 MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONS, TRANSPORTATION (MOT) SITE FACILITIES SERVICES DEPARTMENT 17810 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 BLDG. A: Capital Facilities Staff 206.631.7500 BLDG. C: Custodial Services Division 206.631.7501 Maintenance Services Division 206.631.7501 TRANSPORTATION 17910 - 8th Avenue South, Bldg. J Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7502 MARINE TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY @ Seahurst Park 13403 - 24th Place SW Burien, WA 98146 206.433.2107 MAYWOOD SITE 1410 South 200th Street SeaTac, WA 98198 MEMORIAL FIELD 420 South 156th Street Burien, WA 98148 NORTH SHOREWOOD SITE 10015 - 28th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 OLYMPIC SITE 615 South 200th Street Des Moines, WA 98198 PERFORMING ARTS CENTER (PAC) 401 South 152nd Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.6795 SUNNYDALE SITE 15631 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 VALLEY VIEW EARLY LEARNING CENTER 17622 - 46th Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.5100 WOODSIDE SITE 18367 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7600 ZENITH SITE 16th Place South & South 240th Street Des Moines, WA 98198 SHOREWOOD EVERGREENCAMPUS MOT VALLEY VIEWELC MADRONA MOUNT RAINIER CEDARHURST NORTHHILL HIGHLINE Tukwila School District MIDWAY MOUNTVIEW DISTRICT BOUNDARY SW ROXBURY STREET NORTHSHOREWOODSITE WHITECENTERHEIGHTS CASCADE SOUTHERN HEIGHTS HILLTOP HAZELVALLEY MARINETECHNOLOGY BURIEN HEIGHTS SITE GREGORY HEIGHTS PAC ERAC SYLVESTER SEAHURST CRESTVIEWSITE McMICKEN HEIGHTS BOWLAKE CHINOOK TYEE EDUCATIONALCOMPLEX MARVISTA DESMOINES PACIFIC PUGETSOUND LAKEVIEWSITE GLACIER SITE SERVICE AREA MAP 2014-2015 PARKSIDE ZENITHSITE MEMORIALFIELD BIG PICTURE NEW START OLD BEVERLY PARK SITE BEVERLYPARK WOODSIDESITE SUNNYDALE SITE OLYMPIC SITE Highline Public Schools boundaryand neighboring school districts Avenues run north and south. If the last digitof the house number is even, a student willattend the school on the east side of theboundary; if odd, the school on the west sideof the dividing line. Streets run east and west. If the last digit ofthe house number is even, a student will attendthe school on the north side of the boundary;if odd, the school on the south side of thedividing line. All school boundaries except one are dividedby the middle of the common street or thenatural geographic terrain where there is nostreet. The one exception is South 175th Streetfrom Military Road South to 51st Avenue South.Both sides of South 175th Street will attendBow Lake Elementary School. CHOICE ACADEMY PUGET SOUND SKILLS CENTER ELEMENTARY SCHOOLSERVICE AREABOUNDARIES MAYWOOD SITE DISTRICTWAREHOUSE This page intentionally left blank. Copyright 1999 – Highline Public Schools Printed August 2014 • All rights reserved BOULEVARD PARK SITE Tukwila School District ELEMENTARYSCHOOLS BEVERLY PARK 1201 South 104th Street Seattle, WA 98168 206.631.3400 BOW LAKE 18237 - 42nd Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.3500 CEDARHURST 611 South 132nd Street Burien, WA 98168 206.631.3600 DES MOINES 22001 - 9th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.3700 GREGORY HEIGHTS 16201 - 16th Avenue SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.3800 HAZEL VALLEY 402 SW 132nd Street Burien, WA 98146 206.631.3900 HILLTOP 12250 - 24th Avenue South Burien, WA 98168 206.631.4000 MADRONA 20301 - 32nd Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98198 206.631.4100 MARVISTA 19800 Marine View Drive SW Normandy Park, WA 98166 206.631.4200 McMICKEN HEIGHTS 3708 South 168th Street SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.4300 MIDWAY 22447 - 24th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.4400 MOUNT VIEW 10811 - 12th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.4500 NORTH HILL 19835 - 8th Avenue South Seattle, WA 98148 206.631.4600 PARKSIDE 2104 South 247th Street Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.4700 SEAHURST 14603 - 14th Avenue SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.4800 SHOREWOOD 2725 SW 116th Street Burien, WA 98146 206.631.4900 SOUTHERN HEIGHTS 11249 - 14th Avenue South Burien, WA 98168 206.631.5000 WHITE CENTER HEIGHTS 10015 - 6th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.5200 MIDDLE SCHOOLS BIG PICTURE @ Manhattan Site 440 South 186th Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7700 CASCADE 11212 - 10th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.5500 CHINOOK 18650 - 42nd Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.5700 CHOICE ACADEMY 18367 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7630 PACIFIC 22705 - 24th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.5800 SYLVESTER 16222 Sylvester Road SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.6000 HIGH SCHOOLS BIG PICTURE @ Manhattan Site 440 South 186th Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7700 CHOICE ACADEMY 18367 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7630 EVERGREEN CAMPUS 830 SW 116th Street Seattle, WA 98146 ARTS & ACADEMICS ACADEMY 206.631.6250 HEALTH SCIENCES & HUMAN SERVICES 206.631.6200 TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING & COMMUNICATIONS 206.631.6300 HIGHLINE 225 South 152nd Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.6700 MOUNT RAINIER 22450 - 19th Avenue South Des Moines, WA 98198 206.631.7000 NEW START 614 SW 120th Street Seattle, WA 98146 206.631.7750 PUGET SOUND SKILLS CENTER 18010 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7300 RAISBECK AVIATION near The Museum of Flight (not located in map area) 9229 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98108 206.631.7200 TYEE EDUCATIONAL COMPLEX 4424 South 188th Street SeaTac, WA 98188 ACADEMY OF CITIZENSHIP AND EMPOWERMENT 206.631.6500 GLOBAL CONNECTIONS 206.631.6550 CENTRAL OFFICE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCE & ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER 15675 Ambaum Blvd. SW Burien, WA 98166 206.631.3000 OTHER LOCATIONS (OLD) BEVERLY PARK SITE 11427 – 3rd Avenue South Seattle, WA 98168 BURIEN HEIGHTS SITE 1210 SW 136th Street Burien, WA 98146 CAMP WASKOWITZ (not located in map area) 45505 SE 150th Street North Bend, WA 98045 425.277.7195 CRESTVIEW SITE 16200 - 43rd Avenue South Tukwila, WA 98188 DISTRICT WAREHOUSE 2301 South 200th Street SeaTac, WA 98198 206.878.8216 GLACIER SITE 2450 South 142nd Street SeaTac, WA 98168 LAKEVIEW SITE SW 160th Street & 6th Avenue SW Burien, WA 98166 MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONS, TRANSPORTATION (MOT) SITE FACILITIES SERVICES DEPARTMENT 17810 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 BLDG. A: Capital Facilities Staff 206.631.7500 BLDG. C: Custodial Services Division 206.631.7501 Maintenance Services Division 206.631.7501 TRANSPORTATION 17910 - 8th Avenue South, Bldg. J Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7502 MARINE TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY @ Seahurst Park 13403 - 24th Place SW Burien, WA 98146 206.433.2107 MAYWOOD SITE 1410 South 200th Street SeaTac, WA 98198 MEMORIAL FIELD 420 South 156th Street Burien, WA 98148 NORTH SHOREWOOD SITE 10015 - 28th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98146 OLYMPIC SITE 615 South 200th Street Des Moines, WA 98198 PERFORMING ARTS CENTER (PAC) 401 South 152nd Street Burien, WA 98148 206.631.6795 SUNNYDALE SITE 15631 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 VALLEY VIEW EARLY LEARNING CENTER 17622 - 46th Avenue South SeaTac, WA 98188 206.631.5100 WOODSIDE SITE 18367 - 8th Avenue South Burien, WA 98148 206.631.7600 ZENITH SITE 16th Place South & South 240th Street Des Moines, WA 98198 SHOREWOOD EVERGREENCAMPUS MOT VALLEY VIEWELC MADRONA MOUNT RAINIER CEDARHURST NORTHHILL HIGHLINE Tukwila School District MIDWAY MOUNTVIEW DISTRICT BOUNDARY SW ROXBURY STREET NORTHSHOREWOODSITE WHITECENTERHEIGHTS CASCADE SOUTHERN HEIGHTS HILLTOP HAZELVALLEY MARINETECHNOLOGY BURIEN HEIGHTS SITE GREGORY HEIGHTS PAC ERAC SYLVESTER SEAHURST CRESTVIEWSITE McMICKEN HEIGHTS BOWLAKE CHINOOK TYEE EDUCATIONALCOMPLEX MARVISTA DESMOINES PACIFIC PUGETSOUND LAKEVIEWSITE GLACIER SITE SERVICE AREA MAP 2014-2015 PARKSIDE ZENITHSITE MEMORIALFIELD BIG PICTURE NEW START OLD BEVERLY PARK SITE BEVERLYPARK WOODSIDESITE SUNNYDALE SITE OLYMPIC SITE Highline Public Schools boundaryand neighboring school districts Avenues run north and south. If the last digitof the house number is even, a student willattend the school on the east side of theboundary; if odd, the school on the west sideof the dividing line. Streets run east and west. If the last digit ofthe house number is even, a student will attendthe school on the north side of the boundary;if odd, the school on the south side of thedividing line. All school boundaries except one are dividedby the middle of the common street or thenatural geographic terrain where there is nostreet. The one exception is South 175th Streetfrom Military Road South to 51st Avenue South.Both sides of South 175th Street will attendBow Lake Elementary School. CHOICE ACADEMY PUGET SOUND SKILLS CENTER MAYWOOD SITE DISTRICTWAREHOUSE SECONDARY SCHOOLSERVICE AREABOUNDARIES This page intentionally left blank. HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION 3 — SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION INTRODUCTION The following information describes the current enrollment, the future projected enrollments and the current capacities for each school. Also included is a list of all the portables within the Highline School District. The final portion of the section defines the Impact Fees for future single-family and multi -family dwellings. The school impact.fee formula ensures that new development only pays for the cost of the facilities necessitated by new development. The fee calculations examine the costs of housing the students generated by each new single family dwelling unit (or each new multi -family dwelling unit) and then reduces that amount by the anticipated state match and future tax payments. Thus, by applying the student generation factor to the school project costs, the fee formula only calculates the costs of providing capacity to serve each new dwelling unit once the District reaches its current capacity. The formula does not require new development to contribute the costs of providing capacity to address existing needs. The Student Generation Factor Rates have been derived by using the actual permit information provided to The Robinson Company from the cities of Kent, SeaTac, Burien, Tukwila, Des Moines, Normandy Park and Unincorporated King County. Page 17 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 — 2020 SECTION 3 — SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION BUILDING CAPACITIES This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the Highline School District's "Standard of Service" in order to determine the district's current and projected future capacities. The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction has established square footage guidelines for capacity, primarily for the purposes of capital funding, but these guidelines often do not meet the additional educational program needs districts often provide. King County Code 21A.06 refers to a "standard of service" that each school district must establish in order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs of special need and other factors (determined by the District) which best serve the student population. Portable classroom units may be included ill the capacity calculation using the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. The standard of service outlined below reflects only those programs and educational opportunities provided to students that directly affect the capacity of the school building. The special programs listed below require classroom space, thus the permanent capacity of some buildings housing these programs has been reduced. While newer buildings have been constructed to accommodate some of these programs older buildings may need to be modified to accommodate these programs. When this occurs there may be a reduction in classroom capacity. At both the elementary and secondary levels, the District considers the ability of students to attend neighborhood schools to be a component of its Standard of Service. Page 18 I The current standard: • Class size kindergarten = average 24 students • Class size grades I - 3 = average 25 students • Class size grades 4 — G = average 27 students In the elementary standard of service model: • Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in it self- contained classroom • All students will be provided music instruction in it separate classroom • All students will have scheduled time in a special computer lab Identified students will also be provided other special educational opportunities in classrooms designated as follows: • Resource rooms • English Language Learners (ELL) • Education for disadvantaged students (Title 1) • Gifted education • Learning assisted programs • Severely behavior disordered • Transition room • Mild, moderate and severe disabilities • Developmental kindergarten • Extended daycare programs and preschool programs Page 19 Standard of Service for Secondary Students The current standard is: • Class size for grades 7-8 should not exceed 30 students • Class size for grades 9 -12 should not exceed 32 students • Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self- contained classroom Identified students will also be provided other special educational opportunities ill classrooms designated as follows: • English Language Learners (ELL) • Resource rooms (for special remedial assistance) • Computer labs • Preschool and daycare programs Page 20 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BUILDING CAPACITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 2013 Enrollment 2020 Enrollment Current Capacity with Portables 2013 Surplus 2013 Shortage 2020 Surplus 2020 Shortage Beverly Park at Glendale 480 506 530 50 24 Beverly Park 0 0 316 316 316 Bow Lake 658 682 675 17 7 Cedarhurst 703 768 575 128 193 Des Moines 414 429 370 44 59 Gregory Heights 638 742 625 13 117 Hazel Valley 611 719 625 141 94 Hilltop 635 789 525 110 264 Madrona 649 666 575 74 91 Marvista 590 608 575 15 33 McMicken Heights 537 581 575 38 6 Midway 627 728 575 52 153 Mount View 660 760 675 15 85 North Hill 566 613 575 9 38 Parkside 558 587 575 17 12 Seahurst 568 647 600 32 47 Shorewood 477 572 475 2 97 Southern Heights 325 317 310 15 7 White Center Heights 574 723 575 1 148 TOTALS 10270 11437 10326 509 453 3401 1451 Net Shortage or Surplus I 561 1111 PAGE 21 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BUILDING CAPACITIES JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS 2013 Enrollment 2020 Enrollment Current Capacity with Portables 2013 Surplus 2013 Shortage 2020 Surplus 2020 Shortage Cascade 577 717 650 73 67 Chinook 568 680 500 68 180 Pacific 658 875 600 58 275 Sylvester 642 803 700 58 103 Big Picture 65 85 50 15 35 Choice 49 66 50 1 16 TOTALS 2659 3226 2560 132 141 0 676 Net Shortage or Surplus i 9 676 PAGE 22 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2013 BUILDING CAPACITIES HIGH SCHOOLS Enrollment 2020 Enrollment Current Capacity with Portables 2013 Surplus 2013 Shortage 2020 Surplus 2020 Shortage T ee 933 931 950 17 19 Evergreen 920 908 1175, 255 267 Hi hline 1271 1369 1300 29 69 Mount Rainier 1542 1573 1500 42 73 Big Picture 127 140 125 2 15 Choice 61 69 35 26 34 Aviation 426 409 400 26 9 New Start 134 130 150 16 20 Puget Sound Skills Center 392 331 400 8 69 Other 176 164 150 26 4 TOTALS 5982 6014 6185 325 122 3751 204 Net Shortage or Surplus 203 171 PAGE 23 Higli ine Scliool District #401 Portable Iuveutory Location Description S . Ft. Occ type # of class rooms Beverly Park Site 2 Double Portables 3,300 Portable 4 Beverly Park Site M/Portable 207 & 208 1,650 Portable 2 Beverly Park Site M/Portable 205 & 206 1,650 Portable 2 BeverPark Site M/Portable 209 & 210 1,650 Portable 2 Beverlx Park Site M/Portable 211 & 212 1,650 or a e every Park at Glendale oub a Portable 1,700 o a e Cascade Middle School Portable #95 786 Portable 1 Cascade Middle School Portable #99 786 Portable 1 Cascade Middle School Portable #94 786 PortablE Cedarhurst Eiementary School I Double Portagle 1,650 Portable Chinook Middle School M/Portable 213 & 214 1,672 Portable 2 Chinook Middle School M/Portable 215 & 216 1,792 Portable 2 Chinook Middle School M/Portable 217 & 218 1,792 Portable Des Moines Elementary School Portable #86 800 o a e Evergreen High School Portable #22/90 1,664 Portable 2 Evergreen High School Portable #26 832 Portable 1 Evergreen High School Portable #32 816 Portable 1 Evergreen High School Portable #243/244 1,672 Portable 2 Evergreen High School Portable #40 792 Portable Gregory Heights Portable 2 2/2 3 6750 or a e azel Valley Elementary School Portable P1 &P2 1,792 Porta e Hilltop Elementary Portable #41 840 Portable 1 Hilltop Elementary Portable #88 840 Portable 1 Hilltop Elementary Portable #62 840 Portable 1 Hilltop Elementary M/Portable #223 & 224 1,680 Portable Madrona E ementa 1 Double Portable 1,650 or a e Manhattan Learning Center M/Restoom Build #307 360 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #21 832 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #25 832 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #34 816 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #43 792 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #72 792 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #76 792 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #80 792 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #89 792 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #107 786 Portable 1 Manhattan Learning Center Portable #44 792 PortabliF Mountview 1portable P1 &P2 1,650 Portable 2 Mountview I Portable 3 & 4 1,650 1 Portable Page 24 Higli ine School District #401 Portable Lnventory Location Description Sq. Ft. Occ type o e ass rooms Pacific Middle School Portable 251 & 252 1,792 or a e Pacific Middle School Portable 253 & 264 1,792 Salmon Creek Portable #37 816 Portable 1 Salmon Creek Portable #45 792 Portable 1 Salmon Creek Portable #47 792 Portable 1 Salmon Creek Portable #85 768 Portable 1 Salmon Creek Portable #68 792 Portable 1 Salmon Creek M/Portable #113 837 Portable Seahurst 77715ble 0107311 ,7g or T=e Southern Heights Elementary Portable 280 MOT Vacant 925 Portable 1 Southern Heights Elementary Portable 283 925 Portable 1 Southern Heights Elementary Portable 281 950 Portablg S Ivester Middle School Portable #64 792 Portable 1 Sylvester Middle School Portable #71 792 Portable 1 Sylvester Middle School Portable #73 792 Portable 1 S Ivester Middle School Tyee High School Portable #83 Portable 12191220 768 1,848 Portable o a e --7-- Valley View Portable #19 768 Portable 1 Valley View Portable #90 768 Portable 1 Valley View Portable #100 768 PortabliF WCH - Learning Center M/Portable 231 & 232 1,848 Portable 2 WCH- Learning Center Portable 257 & 258 New WCH 1,848 Portable Woodside M/Portable 233 & 234 1,848 Portable 2 Woodside M/Portable 235 & 236 WCH FMC 1,792 Portable 2 Woodside M/Portable 237 & 238 1,792 Portable 2 Woodside M/Portable 229 & 230 1,848 Portable 2 Woodside Portable #31 816 Portable 1 Woodside Portable #54 792 Portable Woodside M/Portable 241 & 242 1,792 or a e ]2d Woodside M/Portable 239 & 240 1,792 Portable Page 25 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2014 - 2020 SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION STUDENT ENROLLMENT FORCASTS The following documents are summaries by school and by grade level of the enrollment projections provided by Highline School District's demographer Les Kendrick. The numbers listed represent Full Time Equivalent counts (FTE). The demographer used cohort survival rates with adjustments for projected future changes in housing and population changes. Page 26 Projection SUmmary by School; Elementary (10 Year) Historical Enrollment OCT10 OCT11 OCT12 OCT13 Beverly Park 517 477 480 504 Bow Lake 640 669 654 658 Cedarinurst 618 637 675 703 Des Moines 455 425 427 414 Gregory Heights 595 557 573 638 Hazel Valley 595 620 598 611 Hilltop 600 580 638 635 Madrottn 591 587 588 649 Marvista 567 577 608 590 McMicken Heig 396 443 437 537 Midway 538 567 580 627 Mounl Vicw 577 610 599 660 North Hill 542 551 556 566 Parkside 514 517 520 558 Seahurst 534 557 554 568 Shorewood 459 485 481 477 Southern Height 321 298 295 325 White Center 530 571 573 574 Other 5 6 8 Totals 9594 9734 9836 10302 Projections (Headcount) OCT14 OCT15 OCT16 OCT17 OCT18 OCT19 OCT20 OCT21 OCT22 OCT23 501 510 512 506 501 496 506 502 503 504 647 659 660 670 674 679 682 681 684 687 719 747 765 769 775 757 768 765 770 774 408 1109 108 419 418 426 429 427 429 430 671 709 731 751 747 755 742 738 739 741 644 668 682 705 723 731 719 709 705 703 634 639 632 702 771 814 789 755 727 701 654 656 662 675 658 662 666 666 671 675 604 612 611 614 625 607 608 605 607 610 566 585 607 624 624 611 581 580 583 586 660 677 704 710 702 719 728 735 747 756 690 736 771 776 776 770 760 740 733 729 578 582 600 593 616 626 613 610 612 613 552 567 583 593 593 603 587 594 604 613 603 627 639 628 642 630 647 644 647 650 495 517 541 561 584 598 572 569 570 572 326 329 336 342 344 343 317 316 316 317 603 637 662 691 703 711 723 711 706 701 9 9 9 9 10 10 II 10 II 10 10563 10875 11115 11338 11485 11548 11448 11356 11363 11372 Ilimorical totnis may not Include schools thol were closed. Projections for the inlial rive years nre bnscd on enrollment treads aural projected growth from housing. Prujections beyond the iotiai fire yent's ore based Isis enrollment trends said expected growth front different neighbo hoods using forecast dnto from Ilse Puget Sound Regional Council. Projections beyaad rive years should be considered less reliable and subject to n higher error rate. Tuesday, June 03, 2014 Notes Numbers may mot add to exact totals duc to rounding, Page i or I �,(7 e Z-/ Projection Summary by School: Middle Schools Total Enrollment Projections (Headcount) OCT09 OCTI0OCTI IOCr12OCT13 OCT14 OCT15 OC'1'16 OCT17 OM OCT19 OCT20 OC1,21 OCT22 OCT23 cmetlde 529 538 560 568 577 579 586 586 605 627 663 717 741 712 692 Chinook 477 525 555 538 568 573 5,13 5,14 569 594 628 680 703 674 656 Pneitic 706 687 683 712 658 675 709 705 735 765 808 875 904 868 844 Sylvester 759 674 594 646 642 646 656 656 685 706 743 803 832 798 776 Big Picture Scho 0 0 37 73 65 67 68 67 70 74 78 85 88 84 82 Choice 18 20 42 47 49 53 53 52 54 57 61 66 68 66 64 Other 1 3 2 0 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 l'utills 2490 2447 2473 2584 2560 2594 2617 2612 2720 2824 2983 3227 3339 3204 3116 ^ I11,009eal lotnls may nor include schools Ihnt were closed. Tuesday, hme 0}, 2914 Note: Numbers unny nol ndd to exnct totnls duc to rnundhtg. Page I of I Projection Summary by School High Schools Historical Enrollment OCT09 OCT 10OC1'110Cr12 CT13 A.C.C. 298 310 359 356 397 Globnl 357 339 372 421 456 Odyssey 211 213 86 85 80 & A.A. 328 332 303 274 269 T.C.C. 338 323 314 296 270 11.S,3. 371 366 394 373 381 Avintion 414 409 421 412 426 Highlhie 1383 1347 1382 1319 1271 Mt. Rainier 1650 1611 1555 1538 1542 Rig Picture Scho 118 126 119 116 127 Choice 37 29 30 46 61 Gnteway to Colle 0 0 21 52 53 New Start 0 0 0 0 134 OSC 375 367 371 448 392 Other 282 285 287 301 176 Totals 6162 6057 6014 6037 6035 " 11Islo:9cal toIII ls may Iat include schools Ihnt were closed. Tuesday, Ame 03, 2014 Projections (Headcount) OCT14 OCI'15 OCT16 OCT17 OCT18 OCT19 OCT20 OCT21 OCT22 OCT23 394 383 388 382 378 387 397 420 452 470 450 140 4,14 439 433 444 455 483 518 541 81 78 78 78 76 78 79 83 90 93 263 257 258 255 254 261 269 285 307 317 263 257 256 255 252 259 266 282 303 315 376 363 362 358 356 364 373 396 426 441 422 414 416 418 410 409 409 414 418 419 1291 1273 1323 1310 1302 1333 1369 1452 1562 1620 1549 1562 1601 1509 1499 1530 1573 1667 1789 1867 130 129 141 136 134 137 140 149 159 167 65 66 66 65 65 67 69 73 79 82 52 50 48 48 45 46 45 48 53 55 132 129 128 127 124 128 130 139 150 158 390 369 356 353 331 338 331 358 389 408 172 167 160 161 151 156 154 165 179 190 6030 5938 6026 5894 5809 5937 6060 6414 6873 7143 Note: Numbers may not add to exact totals due to rounding, Page I Or 1 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 2014 - 2020 Capital Facilities Plan Six - Year Analysis Elementary School K-6 Plan Years: 20161 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Permanent and Portable CapacityCapacIty 10,276 10,276 10,276 10,276 10,506 10,506 New Construction: New Elementary School 0 0 0 230 0 0 Permanent and Portable Capacity Subtotal 10,276 10,276 10,276 10,5061 10,506 10,506 Projected Enrollment 10,875 11,115 11,338 11,485 11,548 11,448 Surplus/ Deficit of Permanent/Portable Capacity: -599 -839 -1,062 -979 -1,042 -942 Junior High School 7-8 Plan Years: 2016 2016 2017 20181 2019 2020 Permanent and Portable Capacity 2,560 2,550 2,550 4,0501 4,050 4,050 New Construction: New Junior High Schools 0 0 1500 0 0 0 Permanent and Portable Capacity Subtotal 2,5501 2,650 4,050 4,050 4,050 4,050 Projected Enrollment 2,617 2,612 2,720 2,824 2,983 3,227 Surplus/ Deficit of Perm anent/Portable Capacity: -67 -62 1,330 1,226 1,067 823 Junior Hi n and Elementary Combined Plan Years: 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Permanent and Portable Capacity 12,826 12,826 12,826 14,326 14,556 14,556 New Construction: New Junior High Schools 0 0 1,500 230 0 0 Permanent and Portable Capacity Subtotal 12,826 12,826 14,326 14,556 14,556 14,656 Projected Enrollment 13,492 13,727 14,058 14,309 14,531 14,675 Surplus/ Deficit of PerlmanenUPortable Ca acit -666 -901 268 247 25 -119 High School 9-12 Plan Years: 20151 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Permanent and Portable Capacity 5910 5910 5910 5910 5910 5910 New Construction: None 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permanent Capacity Subtotal: 5910 5910 5910 5910 5910 5910 Projected Enrollment 5815 5697 5857 5833 5823 5943 Surplus/ Deficit of Permanent/Portable Capacity: 95 213 53 77 87 -33 K-12 Total Plan Years: 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Permanent and Portable Capacity 18,7361 18,736 20,236 20 466 20,466 20,466 Projected Enrollment 19,307 19,424 19,915 20,142 20,354 20,618 Surplus/ Deficit of Permanent/Portable Capacity: -571 -688 321 324 112 -152 Page 30 HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 401 IMuPACT FEE CALCULATION August 11, 2014 Student Student School Site Acquisition Cost: Facility Cost/ Facility Factor Factor Cost/SFR Cost/MFR Acreage Acre Capacity SFR MFR Elementary Schools —Scope $0 0 0.236 0.121 $0 $0 Middle Schools $0 0 0.035 0.024 $0 $0 ,High Schools $0 0 0.093 0.084 $0 $0 TOTALS 1 $0 $0 Student Student School Construction Cost: Facilities Facilities Factor Factor Cost/SFR Cost/MFR Scope % Perm Fac. Cost Capacity SFR MFR Elementary Schools 38.33% 1 site 97.35% $20M 230 0.236 0.121 $19,978 $10,243 Middle Schools 2 sites 94.87% $161 M 1500 0.035 0.024 $3,564 $2,444 High Schools $0 0 0.093 0.084 $0 $0 TOTALS $23,542 $12,687 Student Student Temporary Facilities Cost: Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/SFR Cost/MFR Scope % Perm Fac. Cost Capacity SFR MFR Elementary Schools 0 $0 0 0.236 0.121 $0 $0 Middle Schools 0 $0 0 0.035 0.024 $0 $0 High Schools 0 $0 0 0.093 0.084 $0 $0 TOTALS 1 1 $0 $0 Student Student State Match Credit Calculation: Const. Cost SF/ State Factor Factor Cost/SFR Cost/MFR Scope Allocation/SF Student Match SFR MFR Elementary Schools 38.33% 0 0 $2.2M 0.236 0.121 $3,528 $1,792 Middle Schools 0 0 $10.2M 0.035 0.024 $864 $388 High Schools 0 0 0 1 0.093 0.084 $0 $0 TOTALS $4,392 $2,180 Tax Payment Credit: Credit/SFR Credit/MFR Average Assessed Value $224,864 $74,566 Capital Bond Interest Rate 4.38% 4.38% Net Present Value ofAverage Dwelling $1,789,830 $593,516 Years Amortized 10 10 Property Tax Levy Rate $1.860 $1.860 Tax Payment Credit $3,329 $1,104 Fee Summary Cost/SFR Cost/MFR School Site Acquisition Cost $0 $0 School Construction Cost $23,642 $12,687 Temporary Facilities Cost $0 $0 State Matching Credit Calculation $4,392 $2,180 Tax Payment Credit Calculation $3,3291 $1,104 SUBTOTAL $15,821 $9,403 60% Local Share -$9,493 -$5,642 CALCULATED IMPACT FEE $6,328 $3,761 2014 IMPACT FEE $6,328 $3,761 Page 31 WAC 197-11-970 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS). DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal — This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single course of action: 1. Adoption of the 2014-2020 Highline School District Capital Facilities Plan by the Highline School District for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District; 2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Highline School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The potential amendment of the Comprehensive Plans of the cities of Burien, SeaTac, Normandy Park, Des Moines, Tukwila and Kent to include the Highline School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. Proponent — Highline School District No. 401 Location of proposal: The Highline School District includes an area of approximately 27 square miles (excluding SeaTac Airport). The cities of Burien, SeaTac, Normandy Park, Des Moines, Tukwila and Kent and parts of unincorporated King County fall within the District's boundaries. Lead agency — Highline School District No. 401 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by 4:30 pm August 18, 2014. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. Responsible official — Scott Logan Position/title — Assistant Superintendent of Financ2andd erations, Highline School District No. 401 Phone — (206) 433 -2505 Address — 15675 Ambaum Boulevard SW. Bur' n166 Date: August 1, 2014 Signature ❑ You may appeal this determination to (name) at (location) no later than (date) by(method)................................................................................................................................................ You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. X There is no agency appeal. Date of Issue: August 1, 2014 Date Published: August 4, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAC 197-11-960 Environmental Checklist. Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants - This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply" In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject actions (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: The adoption of the Highline School District No 401's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan ("Capital Facilities Plan") for the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. King County and the City of Kent incorporated the District's 2013 Capital Facilities Plan into their respective Comprehensive Plan and are likely to do the same this year. The cities of Burien, SeaTac, Normandy Park, Des Moines and Tukwila may incorporate the District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plans. A copy of the District's Capital Facilities Plan is available for review in the District's offices. 2. Name of applicant: Highline School District No. 401. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Highline School District No 401 17810 81h Avenue South, Building A Burien, WA 98148 Contact Person: Andrea Johnson, Executive Director of Facilities Telephone: (206) 433 - 2251 4. Date checklist prepared: July 31, 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: Highline School District No 401 2 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the District's Board of Directors on or about August 20, 20144. After adoption, the District may forward the Capital Facilities Plan to King County and the Cities of Kent, Normandy Park, SeaTac, Des Moines, Burien and Tukwila for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plans for each jurisdiction. The District will continue to update the Capital Facilities Plan annually. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project -level environmental review when appropriate. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The Capital Facilities Plan identifies the capital improvement projects that the District plans to implement over the next six years. The District plans to construct one new elementary school and/or additions to existing schools to accommodate future anticipated growth Relocatable capacity may also be added at all grade levels 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will undergo additional environmental review, when appropriate, as they are developed. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The District anticipates that King County and the City of Kent will adopt the Capital Facilities Plan as part of their respective Comprehensive Plan. The cities of Burien, SeaTac, Normandy Park, Des Moines and Tukwila may incorporate the District's Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plans. 3 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is a nonproject action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Highline School District's 2014 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District's facilities needs. King County and the City of Kent will adopt the Capital Facilities Plan as part of their respective Comprehensive Plan. The cities of Burien, SeaTac, Normandy Park, Des Moines and Tukwila may incorporate the District's Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plans. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project -level environmental review when appropriate. A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the District's offices. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Highline School District. The District includes portions of unincorporated King County and all or portions of the cities of Burien, Des Moines, Kent, SeaTac, Tukwila and Normandy Park. A detailed map of the District's boundaries can be viewed at the District's offices. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The Highline School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of the site at which the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan are located will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 4 b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Specific slope characteristics at the site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Specific soil types found at the site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Unstable soils may exist within the Highline School District. Specific soil limitations on individual project sites will be identified at the time of project -level environmental review when appropriate. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when appropriate, to project -level environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of any fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of the construction projects currently proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects will be evaluated on a site -specific basis at the time of project -level environmental review when appropriate. Individual projects will be subject to local approval processes. 5 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?) The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the construction of impervious surfaces. The extent of any impervious cover constructed will vary with each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan. This issue will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and appropriate control measures have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Various emissions, many construction -related, may result from the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The air -quality impacts of each project will be evaluated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project -level environmental review and relevant local approval processes when appropriate. The District will be required to comply with all applicable air regulations and air permit requirements. Proposed measures specific to the individual project C.1 included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a network of surface water bodies within the Highline School District. The surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. When necessary, the surface water regimes and flow patterns will be researched and incorporated into the designs of the individual project. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require work near the surface waters located within the Highline School District. Applicable local approval requirements will be satisfied. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material as a component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan can be provided during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Applicable local regulations will be satisfied. rA 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project - level environmental review when appropriate. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be provided during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Ground: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on groundwater resources will be addressed during project - level environmental review when appropriate. The projects will be subject to applicable local regulations. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the projects included in the Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have stormwater runoff consequences. Specific information regarding the stormwater impacts of each project will be provided during project -level environmental review when appropriate. The projects will be subject to applicable local stormwater regulations. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of waste materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of the projects on ground and surface waters will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. The projects will be subject to all applicable regulations regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 9 4. Plants: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site. - deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Highline School District. Inventories of the vegetation located on the site of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan will be developed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be determined during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plans, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. The projects will be subject to applicable local landscaping requirements. 10 5. Animals: a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan will be developed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be developed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife will be determined during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 6. Energy and Natural Resources: a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life -cycle cost analysis of all heating, lighting, and insulation systems before it will permit specific school projects to proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site design planning when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 11 b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe: The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar potential of adjacent projects will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be considered during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 7. Environmental Health - a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will comply with all current codes, standards, rules, and regulations. The individual projects will be subject to project -level environmental review and local approval at the time they are developed, when appropriate. b. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? 12 A variety of noises from traffic, construction, residential, commercial, and industrial areas exists within the Highline School District. The specific noise sources that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create normal construction noises that will exist on short-term bases only. The construction projects could increase traffic around the construction sites on a short-term basis. Because the construction of a new elementary school will increase the capacity of the District's facilities, they may create a slight increase in traffic -related or operations -related noise on a long-term basis. This potential increase is expected to be insignificant. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated and mitigated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. The projects will be subject to applicable local regulations. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? There are a variety of land uses within the Highline School District, including residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The potential sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have not been used recently for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. The structures located on the site for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified and described during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 13 d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if any, will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site that is covered under the Capital Facilities Plan may have a variety of zoning classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site -specific zoning information will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be completed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Any environmentally sensitive areas located on the site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be identified during project -level environmental review. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The Highline School District currently serves approximately 18,897 students. Enrollment is expected to increase to approximately 20,775 students by October, 2020. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? 14 Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or the projects contained therein, will displace any people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project -level environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed mitigating measures will be developed at that time, when necessary. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing uses and plans will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 15 9. Housing: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will eliminate any housing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on existing housing will be evaluated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 10. Aesthetics: a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 16 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be determined on a project -level basis when appropriate. 11. Light and Glare: a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review, when appropriate. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off -site sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. - Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 12. Recreation - a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Highline School District. 17 b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may enhance recreational opportunities and uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to mitigation during project -level environmental review when appropriate. School facilities usually provide recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields and gymnasiums. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. The existence of historic and cultural resources on or next to the site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed in detail during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. An inventory of historical sites at or near the site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be developed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Appropriate measures will be proposed on a project -level basis when appropriate. 18 14. Transportation: a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The impact on public streets and highways of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public transit will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Inventories of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and the impacts of the specific projects on parking availability will be conducted during project -level environmental review when appropriate. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Use of water, rail, or air transportation will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 19 g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 15. Public Services: a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will significantly increase the need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The new school facility will be built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems. 407. Utilities: a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sewer are or can be made available at the potential site of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The types of utilities available at the specific project site will be addressed in more detail during project -level environmental review when appropriate. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility revisions and construction needs will be identified during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 20 C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature, ZA, zp=� — Date • -•2014 21 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that a new school facility or additions to existing schools will be constructed, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, access roads, and sidewalks could increase stormwater runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters. Heating systems, emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed pursuant to the Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for emergency generating equipment. The District does not anticipate a significant increase in the production of noise from its new facility or additions to existing schools, although the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will increase the District's student capacities. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above will be addressed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Stormwater detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be stored in accordance with local and state requirements. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require clearing plants off of the project site and a loss to animal habitat. These impacts will be addressed in more detail during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 22 The projects included in the Plan are not likely to generate significant impacts on fish or marine life. 3. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be identified at this time. Specific mitigation proposals will be identified, however, during project -level environmental review when appropriate. 4. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the consumption of energy. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency standards. 5. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Capital Facilities Plan and the individual projects contained therein should have no impact on these resources. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Appropriate measures will be proposed during project -level environmental review when appropriate. Updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County and the cities of Des Moines, Burien, SeaTac, Normandy Park, Tukwila and Kent as part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected. 6. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans. The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or 23 the projects contained therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained therein are proposed at this time. 7. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The construction projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary increases in the District's need for public services and utilities. The new school facility will increase the District's demands on transportation and utilities. These increases are not expected to be significant. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time. 8. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 24 Agenda Item: Other Business – 4D TO: City Council DATE: December 16, 2014 SUBJECT: First Amendment to Contingent Loan and Support Agreement between the City of Kent and the Special Events Center Public Facilities District – Authorize SUMMARY: Section 3.1 of the Contingent Loan and Support Agreement Regarding Financing for Kent Special Events Center Agreement, signed in 2008 by the City of Kent and the City of Kent Special Events Center Public Facilities District (PFD), states generally that any monies contributed by the City towards debt service payments for the Special Events Center are to be treated as loans. As such, the PFD is obligated to repay these monies, both principal and interest, to the City. The PFD’s single revenue source is a .037% sales tax credit which generates approximately $700,000 to $800,000 per year. The 2014 annual debt service payment on the Event Center bonds is $3.8M. Economic realities have shown that the PFD has never generated enough revenue to fully pay the annual debt service costs on the bonds and the City will have contributed over $18M by the end of 2014 toward debt service payments on the Special Events Center. Furthermore, there is no basis for expectation that the PFD will earn sufficient revenues to fully cover the annual bond debt service, let alone repay the City for past payments. This amendment changes the language of section 3.3 of the aforementioned agreement by eliminating the loan and repayment requirement language obligating the PFD to repay City contributions and in its place inserting language that discharges and releases the PFD from any obligation to repay previous or future City contributions toward debt service. This proposed change in consistent with GAAP in which accountants are to emphasize economic substance over legal form. Therefore, ‘loans’ made without a reasonable expectation of repayment are not ‘loans’ but a subsidy. EXHIBITS: Agreement RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee YEA: NAY: BUDGET IMPACT: None MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor to sign the First Amendment to Contingent Loan and Support Agreement Regarding Finance For Kent Special Events Center, subject to final terms a conditions acceptable to the Finance Director and City Attorney. This page intentionally left blank. 50853182 FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTINGENT LOAN AND SUPPORT AGREEMENT REGARDING FINANCING FOR KENT SPECIAL EVENTS CENTER BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF KENT AND THE CITY OF KENT SPECIAL EVENTS CENTER PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT C-1 50853182 FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTINGENT LOAN AND SUPPORT AGREEMENT REGARDING FINANCING FOR KENT SPECIAL EVENTS CENTER THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTINGENT LOAN AND SUPPORT AGREEMENT (this “Amendatory Agreement”) is dated as of the ___ day of __________, ___, and is made by and between THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON (the “City”), and THE CITY OF KENT SPECIAL EVENTS CENTER PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT (the “District”); RECITALS WHEREAS, Chapter 35.57.020 of the Revised Code of Washington (“RCW”) provides that a public facilities district may acquire, construct, own, remodel, maintain, equip, repair, finance, and operate one or more regional centers; and WHEREAS, the City previously formed the District pursuant to RCW 35.57, to assist in the design, construction, ownership, operation and/or financing of a regional center as defined in RCW 35.57.020 as a convention, conference or special events center, and related parking facilities, serving a regional population (the “Special Events Center”); and WHEREAS, the City and the District previously entered into an Interlocal Agreement for Development of Special Events Center dated September 14, 2007 (“Interlocal Agreement No. 1”), pursuant to the Washington Interlocal Corporation Act in connection with the development and operation of a Special Events Center; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State law, the District Formation Ordinance and Interlocal Agreement No. 1, the District was authorized to issue revenue bonds or general obligation bonds in principal amounts approved by the City consistent with RCW 35.57.030, 35.57.090 and oth er applicable provisions of state law for the purpose of providing for part of the cost of joint development of the Special Events Center; and WHEREAS, under Interlocal Agreement No. 1 and Resolution No. 2007-1 of the Board of Directors of the District adopted on September 14, 2007 (the “PFD Tax Resolution”), the District imposed the sales and use taxes authorized by RCW 35.57.040(1)(d) and RCW 82.14.390 at the rate of 0.033% of the selling price (in the case of a sales tax) or the value of the article used (in the case of a use tax) (the “Sales Tax”) and agreed to set aside the proceeds of such Sales Tax to be paid to the City for the purpose of providing for part of the cost of designing, constructing, owning and operating the Special Events Center, and/or to provide part of the debt service on District bonds or obligations issued to provide for part of such costs; and WHEREAS, the City requested that the District issue, and the District has issued, (i) its Special Events Center Sales Tax Bonds, 2008, pursuant to District Resolution No. 2008-2 (the “Sales Tax Bond Resolution”) in an original principal amount of $53,150,000 (the “Sales Tax Bonds”) payable from the Sales Tax Revenue and District Revenue, and (ii) its Special Events Center Revenue Bonds, 2008 (Taxable), pursuant to District Resolution No. 2008-3 (the C-2 50853182 Revenue Bond Resolution,” and together with the Sales Tax Bond Resolution, the “Bond Resolutions”) in an original principal amount not to exceed $10,130,000 (the “Revenue Bonds”) payable from District Revenue (collectively, the Sales Tax Bonds and the Revenue Bonds are referred to below as the “2008 Bonds”); and WHEREAS, in connection with the issuance of the 2008 Bonds, the District and the City entered into a Contingent Loan and Support Agreement dated as of February 20, 2008 (the “Support Agreement”). Under Section 3 of the Support Agreement, the City agreed that if the District were unable to timely provide for the payment of principal of or interest on any Bonds, the City shall loan to the District the amount necessary to make such timely payment; and WHEREAS, under Section 3.3 of the Support Agreement, the District agreed that if the City were to lend money to the District, the District would repay the principal amount or amounts loaned when and as revenues became available to the District for that purpose, together with interest set by the City’s Finance Director at rates based on the then-current yield of the City’s pooled investments; and WHEREAS, the City has made Contingent Loan Payments to the District in the approximate amount of $____________ to assist the District in debt service payments on the 2008 Bonds, and those loan amounts are bearing interest; and WHEREAS, the City and the District have determined that, based on costs of operating the Special Events Center and other District costs, it is unlikely that, in the foreseeable future, the District will be able to repay the City for amounts loaned to the District under the terms of the Support Agreement; and WHEREAS, [in order to remove] a substantial long-term obligation from the District’s financial statements and a substantial long-term receivable from the City’s financial statements, and the City and the District desire to adjust the Support Agreement so that District would no longer have an obligation to repay the City for amounts transferred from the City to the District as Contingent Loan Payments in support of the District’s debt service on the 2008 Bonds; and WHEREAS, Section 10.7 of the Support Agreement provides in part that so long as any 2008 Bonds remain outstanding, the Support Agreement “shall not be amended, changed, modified or altered in any manner that would terminate, limit or otherwise impair the District’s right to receive from the City, and the City’s obligation to pay to the District, City Special Events Center Payments and City Contingent Loan Payments when and as required” under the Support Agreement; and WHEREAS, although the 2008 Bond Resolutions need not be amended in connection with this Amendatory Agreement, it is noted that Section 20 of District Resolution 2008 -2 and Section 19 of District Resolution 2008-3 include identical provisions relating to “Supplements and Amendments” to those resolutions. Those sections provide, in part, that the District at any time may adopt a supplemental resolution to add to the covenants and agreements of the District in the 2008 Bond Resolutions, or to cure, correct or supplement any ambiguous or defective provision contained in a 2008 Bond Resolution in regard to matters or questions arising under the resolution as the District’s Board may deem necessary or desirable, which shall not adversely C-3 50853182 affect in any material respect the interests of the owners of the Bonds, or to surrender any rights or power therein reserved to or conferred upon the District; and WHEREAS, the District and the City have determined that the termination of the District’s obligation to repay the City for past or future City Contingent Loan Payments, (1) is in the interest of both the District and the City, (2) will assist in the continued success of the Special Events Center, (3) will not adversely affect in any material respect the interests of the owners of the Bonds, or surrender any rights or power reserved to or conferred upon the District by the Support Agreement, and (4) consequently will not require the consent or approval of the owners of the 2008 Bonds or the Bond Insurer for the 2008 Bonds; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: 1. Section 3.3 of the Support Agreement is amended to read as follows: 3.3 District Repayment to City for Amounts Loaned pursuant to Contingen t Loan Commitment. If the City lends money to the District pursuant to this Section 3, the amount of each City Contingent Loan Payment (whether previously made or made in the future) shall be deemed a transfer to the District in support of the Special Events Center and the District shall be immediately discharged and released from any obligation to repay the principal of or interest on that loan. District shall repay the principal amount or amounts loaned as revenues for that purpose become available consistent with Section 4 below, and the outstanding principal amount of any such loan shall bear interest at a rate set by the City’s Finance Director on the date a loan is made, based on the then-current yield of the City’s pooled investments. The rate of interest on the outstanding principal amount of any loan made by the City pursuant to this Agreement shall be revised each year during the budget process based on the then-current yield of the City’s pooled investments, and effective on the same date that the City’s interfund loan interest rate is adjusted for all City interfund loans. 2. All other terms of the Support Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. Capitalized terms used in this Amendatory Agreement that are not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Support Agreement. 3. All acts previously performed by the District and the City consistent with the terms of this Amendatory Agreement are hereby ratified and confirmed. 4. This Amendatory Agreement shall become effective upon its full execution. ORAL AGREEMENTS OR ORAL COMMITMENTS TO LEND MONEY, EXTEND CREDIT, OR FORBEAR FROM ENFORCING REPAYMENT OF A DEBT ARE NOT ENFORCEABLE UNDER WASHINGTON LAW. C-4 50853182 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the District have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers. CITY OF KENT By Mayor THE CITY OF KENT SPECIAL EVENTS CENTER PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT By _________________________________ Chair This page intentionally left blank. EXECUTIVE SESSION A. Property Negotiations, as per RCW 42.30.110(1)(c) ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION This page intentionally left blank.