HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Committee of the Whole - 05/25/2021 (2)
KENT CITY COUNCIL
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Tuesday, May 25, 2021
4:00 PM
THIS IS A REMOTE MEETING
Due to COVID-19 and Health Safety Requirements,
and by Order of the Governor, this is a remote meeting
A live broadcast is available on Kent TV21,
www.facebook.com/CityofKent, and
www.youtube.com/user/KentTV21
To listen to this meeting,
call 1-888-475-4499 or 1-877-853-5257
and enter Meeting ID 985 4331 3983
Mayor Dana Ralph
Council President Toni Troutner
Councilmember Bill Boyce Councilmember Marli Larimer
Councilmember Brenda Fincher Councilmember Zandria Michaud
Councilmember Satwinder Kaur Councilmember Les Thomas
**************************************************************
Item Description Speaker
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. AGENDA APPROVAL
Changes from Council, Administration, or Staff.
4. DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS
A. Payment of Bills - Authorize Paula Painter
B. U.S. Department of the Treasury Coronavirus Local Fiscal Paula Painter
Recovery Funds - Authorize
C. INFO ONLY: House Bill 1220 Hayley Bonsteel
D. Kent Housing Options Plan - Adopt Hayley Bonsteel
Kaelene Nobis
E. Repeal Ordinance 4399/Chapter 10.03 KCC Which Pat Fitzpatrick
Established 40-Day Additional Notice for Termination of
Month-to-Month Rental Agreement - Adopt
F. INFO ONLY: Closure of 100th Place S.E. to Motorized Terry Jungman
Committee of the Whole Committee of the Whole - May 25, 2021
Regular Meeting
Vehicle Traffic
G. Consultant Services Agreement with Jacobs Engineering Toby Hallock
Group, Inc for the Green River Natural Resources Area
Stormwater Pump Station Project - Authorize
H. 2021 Street Sweeping Services Agreement with Bill Thomas
McDonough and Sons, Inc - Authorize
I. Summit Landsburg Road Puget Sound Energy Electrical Steve Lincoln
Agreement - Authorize
J. Summit Landsburg Road Puget Sound Energy Gas Steve Lincoln
Agreement - Authorize
K. South 212th Street Preservation Puget Sound Regional Drew Holcomb
Council Grant Acceptance - Authorize
5. ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: A copy of the full agenda is available in the City Clerk's Office and at
KentWA.gov.
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 7-1-1.
5/B
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Paula Painter, Finance Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5264
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Payment of Bills - Authorize
MOTION: Approve the payment of bills.
SUMMARY:
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4
5/C
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Paula Painter, Finance Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5264
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: U.S. Department of the Treasury Coronavirus Local Fiscal
Recovery Funds - Authorize
MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor and/or Finance Director to sign
agreements necessary to accept the American Rescue Plan Act funds from
the U.S. Department of the Treasury, which will include, but is not limited
to the Coronavirus Local Recovery Fund Acceptance of Award Terms for the
maximum amount allocated to the City of Kent, subject to final terms and
conditions acceptable to the Finance Director and City Attorney.
SUMMARY: On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) was signed
into law, which provides $350 billion in emergency funding for eligible state, local,
territorial, and Tribal governments to respond to the COVID-19 emergency and
bring back jobs. Title IX, Subtitle M of ARPA establishes the Coronavirus State and
Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program, which provides eligible state, local, territorial,
and Tribal governments with a substantial infusion of resources to meet pandemic
response needs and rebuild a stronger, and more equitable economy as the country
recovers. Recipients may use these funds to:
· Support public health expenditures, by, for example, funding COVID-19
mitigation efforts, medical expenses, behavioral healthcare, and certain public
health and safety staff
· Address negative economic impacts caused by the public health emergency,
including economic harms to workers, households, small businesses, impacted
industries, and the public sector
· Replace lost public sector revenue, using this funding to provide government
services to the extent of the reduction in revenue experienced due to the
pandemic
· Provide premium pay for essential workers, offering additional support to those
who have and will bear the greatest health risks because of their service in
critical infrastructure sectors
· Invest in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure, making necessary
investments to improve access to clean drinking water, support vital
wastewater and stormwater infrastructure, and to expand access to broadband
internet
Within these overall categories, the City will have broad flexibility to decide how
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5
5/C
ARPA Committee has been meeting to propose a framework for the spending
buckets, which will be brought to the Committee of the Whole on June 8, 2021.
The published U.S. Department of Treasury allocation for the City of Kent is
$28,172,327. The City will receive funds in two tranches, with 50% provided in
2021 and the balance delivered approximately 12 months later. The City may use
these funds to cover qualifying expenses incurred during the period that begins on
March 3, 2021 and ends on December 31, 2024.
BUDGET IMPACT: Estimated revenues of $28,172,327 to meet pandemic response
needs and rebuild a stronger, and more equitable economy as the country recovers
from COVID-19.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Innovative Government - Delivering outstanding customer service, developing leaders, and
fostering innovation.
Evolving Infrastructure - Connecting people and places through strategic investments in physical
and technological infrastructure.
Thriving City - Creating safe neighborhoods, healthy people, vibrant commercial districts, and
inviting parks and recreation.
Sustainable Services - Providing quality services through responsible financial management,
economic growth, and partnerships.
Inclusive Community - Embracing our diversity and advancing equity through genuine community
engagement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. US Department of Treasury Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Award
Terms and Conditions (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!6
5/C/b
OMB Approved No.:1505-0271
Expiration Date: 11/30/2021
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
CORONAVIRUS LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUND
Recipient name and address:DUNS Number: 020253613
City of KentTaxpayer Identification Number: 916001254
220 Fourth Avenue SouthAssistance Listing Number and Title: 21.019
Kent, Washington 98032
Sections 602(b) and 603(b) of the Social Security Act (the Act) as added by section 9901 of the American Rescue Plan Act, Pub. L.
No. 117-2 (March 11, 2021) authorize the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) to make payments to certain recipients from the
Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund and the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund.
Recipient hereby agrees, as a condition to receiving such payment from Treasury, to the terms attached hereto.
Recipient:
__________________________________________________
Authorized Representative:
Title:
Date signed:
U.S. Department of the Treasury:
__________________________________________________
Authorized Representative:
Title:
Date signed:
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTICE
The information collected will be used for the U.S. Government to process requests for support. The estimated burden associated
with this collection of information is 15 minutes per response. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and
suggestions for reducing this burden should be directed to the Office of Privacy, Transparency and Records, Department of the
Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20220. DO NOT send the form to this address. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number
assigned by OMB.
Buubdinfou;!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!Usfbtvsz!Dpspobwjsvt!Mpdbm!Gjtdbm!Sfdpwfsz!Gvoe!Bxbse!Ufsnt!boe!Dpoejujpot!!)382:!;!V/T/!Efqbsunfou!pg!uif
1
Qbdlfu!Qh/!7
5/C/b
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
CORONAVIRUS LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUND
AWARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1.Use of Funds.
a.Recipient understands and agrees that the funds disbursed under this award may only be used in compliance with
section 603(c) of the Social Security Act (the Act), Treasury’s regulations implementing that section, and guidance
issued by Treasury regarding the foregoing.
b.Recipient will determine prior to engaging in any project using this assistance that it has the institutional,
managerial, and financial capability to ensure proper planning, management, and completion of such project.
2.Period of Performance. The period of performance for this award begins on the date hereof and ends on December 31,
2026. As set forth in Treasury’s implementing regulations, Recipient may use award funds to cover eligible costs incurred
during the period that begins on March 3, 2021, and ends on December 31, 2024.
3.Reporting. Recipient agrees to comply with any reporting obligations established by Treasury as they relate to this award.
4.Maintenance of and Access to Records
a.Recipient shall maintain records and financial documents sufficient to evidence compliance with section 603(c) of
the Act, Treasury’s regulations implementing that section, and guidance issued by Treasury regarding the foregoing.
b.The Treasury Office of Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office, or their authorized
representatives, shall have the right of access to records (electronic and otherwise) of Recipient in order to conduct
audits or other investigations.
c.Records shall be maintained by Recipient for a period of five (5) years after all funds have been expended or
returned to Treasury, whichever is later.
5.Pre-award Costs. Pre-award costs, as defined in 2 C.F.R. § 200.458, may not be paid with funding from this award.
6.Administrative Costs. Recipient may use funds provided under this award to cover both direct and indirect costs.
7.Cost Sharing. Cost sharing or matching funds are not required to be provided by Recipient.
8.Conflicts of Interest. Recipient understands and agrees it must maintain a conflict of interest policy consistent with 2 C.F.R.
§ 200.318(c) and that such conflict of interest policy is applicable to each activity funded under this award. Recipient and
subrecipients must disclose in writing to Treasury or the pass-through entity, as appropriate, any potential conflict of
interest affecting the awarded funds in accordance with 2 C.F.R. § 200.112.
9.Compliance with Applicable Law and Regulations.
a.Recipient agrees to comply with the requirements of section 602 of the Act, regulations adopted by Treasury
pursuant to section 602(f) of the Act, and guidance issued by Treasury regarding the foregoing. Recipient also
agrees to comply with all other applicable federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders, and Recipient shall
provide for such compliance by other parties in any agreements it enters into with other parties relating to this
award.
b.Federal regulations applicable to this award include, without limitation, the following:
i.Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 2
C.F.R. Part 200, other than such provisions as Treasury may determine are inapplicable to this Award and
subject to such exceptions as may be otherwise provided by Treasury. Subpart F – Audit Requirements of
the Uniform Guidance, implementing the Single Audit Act, shall apply to this award.
ii.Universal Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM), 2 C.F.R. Part 25, pursuant to which the
award term set forth in Appendix A to 2 C.F.R. Part 25 is hereby incorporated by reference.
iii.Reporting Subaward and Executive Compensation Information, 2 C.F.R. Part 170, pursuant to which the
award term set forth in Appendix A to 2 C.F.R. Part 170 is hereby incorporated by reference.
iv.OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement), 2 C.F.R.
Part 180, including the requirement to include a term or condition in all lower tier covered transactions
(contracts and subcontracts described in 2 C.F.R. Part 180, subpart B) that the award is subject to 2 C.F.R.
Part 180 and Treasury’s implementing regulation at 31 C.F.R. Part 19.
Buubdinfou;!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!Usfbtvsz!Dpspobwjsvt!Mpdbm!Gjtdbm!Sfdpwfsz!Gvoe!Bxbse!Ufsnt!boe!Dpoejujpot!!)382:!;!V/T/!Efqbsunfou!pg!uif
2
Qbdlfu!Qh/!8
5/C/b
v.Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters, pursuant to which the award term set forth in 2 C.F.R. Part
200, Appendix XII to Part 200 is hereby incorporated by reference.
vi.Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace, 31 C.F.R. Part 20.
vii.New Restrictions on Lobbying, 31 C.F.R. Part 21.
viii.Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4601-4655) and
implementing regulations.
ix.Generally applicable federal environmental laws and regulations.
c.Statutes and regulations prohibiting discrimination applicable to this award include, without limitation, the
following:
i.Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq.) and Treasury’s implementing
regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 22, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin
under programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance;
ii.The Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq.), which
prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status,
or disability;
iii.Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. § 794), which prohibits discrimination
on the basis of disability under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance;
iv.The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 6101 et seq.), and Treasury’s implementing
regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 23, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities
receiving federal financial assistance; and
v.Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.), which
prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability under programs, activities, and services provided or made
available by state and local governments or instrumentalities or agencies thereto.
10.Remedial Actions. In the event of Recipient’s noncompliance with section 602 of the Act, other applicable laws, Treasury’s
implementing regulations, guidance, or any reporting or other program requirements, Treasury may impose additional
conditions on the receipt of a subsequent tranche of future award funds, if any, or take other available remedies as set forth
in 2 C.F.R. § 200.339. In the case of a violation of section 602(c) of the Act regarding the use of funds, previous payments
shall be subject to recoupment as provided in section 602(e) of the Act and any additional payments may be subject to
withholding as provided in sections 602(b)(6)(A)(ii)(III) of the Act, as applicable.
11.Hatch Act. Recipient agrees to comply, as applicable, with requirements of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1508 and
7324-7328), which limit certain political activities of State or local government employees whose principal employment is
in connection with an activity financed in whole or in part by this federal assistance.
12.False Statements. Recipient understands that making false statements or claims in connection with this award is a violation
of federal law and may result in criminal, civil, or administrative sanctions, including fines, imprisonment, civil damages
and penalties, debarment from participating in federal awards or contracts, and/or any other remedy available by law.
13.Publications.Any publications produced with funds from this award must display the following language: “This project \[is
being\] \[was\] supported, in whole or in part, by federal award number \[enter project FAIN\] awarded to \[name of Recipient\]
by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.”
14.Debts Owed the Federal Government.
a.Any funds paid to Recipient (1) in excess of the amount to which Recipient is finally determined to be authorized to
retain under the terms of this award; (2) that are determined by the Treasury Office of Inspector General to have
been misused; or (3) that are determined by Treasury to be subject to a repayment obligation pursuant to sections
602(e) and 603(b)(2)(D) of the Act and have not been repaid by Recipient shall constitute a debt to the federal
government.
b.Any debts determined to be owed the federal government must be paid promptly by Recipient. A debt is delinquent
if it has not been paid by the date specified in Treasury’s initial written demand for payment, unless other
satisfactory arrangements have been made or if the Recipient knowingly or improperly retains funds that are a debt
as defined in paragraph 14(a). Treasury will take any actions available to it to collect such a debt.
15.Disclaimer.
Buubdinfou;!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!Usfbtvsz!Dpspobwjsvt!Mpdbm!Gjtdbm!Sfdpwfsz!Gvoe!Bxbse!Ufsnt!boe!Dpoejujpot!!)382:!;!V/T/!Efqbsunfou!pg!uif
3
Qbdlfu!Qh/!9
5/C/b
a.The United States expressly disclaims any and all responsibility or liability to Recipient or third persons for the
actions of Recipient or third persons resulting in death, bodily injury, property damages, or any other losses
resulting in any way from the performance of this award or any other losses resulting in any way from the
performance of this award or any contract, or subcontract under this award.
b.The acceptance of this award by Recipient does not in any way establish an agency relationship between the United
States and Recipient.
16.Protections for Whistleblowers.
a.In accordance with 41 U.S.C. § 4712, Recipient may not discharge, demote, or otherwise discriminate against an
employee in reprisal for disclosing to any of the list of persons or entities provided below, information that the
employee reasonably believes is evidence of gross mismanagement of a federal contract or grant, a gross waste of
federal funds, an abuse of authority relating to a federal contract or grant, a substantial and specific danger to public
health or safety, or a violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a federal contract (including the competition for
or negotiation of a contract) or grant.
b.The list of persons and entities referenced in the paragraph above includes the following:
i.A member of Congress or a representative of a committee of Congress;
ii.An Inspector General;
iii.The Government Accountability Office;
iv.A Treasury employee responsible for contract or grant oversight or management;
v.An authorized official of the Department of Justice or other law enforcement agency;
vi.A court or grand jury; or
vii.A management official or other employee of Recipient, contractor, or subcontractor who has the
responsibility to investigate, discover, or address misconduct.
c.Recipient shall inform its employees in writing of the rights and remedies provided under this section, in the
predominant native language of the workforce.
17.Increasing Seat Belt Use in the United States. Pursuant to Executive Order 13043, 62 FR 19217 (Apr. 18, 1997), Recipient
should encourage its contractors to adopt and enforce on-the-job seat belt policies and programs for their employees when
operating company-owned, rented or personally owned vehicles.
18.Reducing Text Messaging While Driving. Pursuant to Executive Order 13513, 74 FR 51225 (Oct. 6, 2009), Recipient
should encourage its employees, subrecipients, and contractors to adopt and enforce policies that ban text messaging while
driving, and Recipient should establish workplace safety policies to decrease accidents caused by distracted drivers.
Buubdinfou;!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!Usfbtvsz!Dpspobwjsvt!Mpdbm!Gjtdbm!Sfdpwfsz!Gvoe!Bxbse!Ufsnt!boe!Dpoejujpot!!)382:!;!V/T/!Efqbsunfou!pg!uif
4
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:
5/C/b
OMB Approved No. 1505-0271
Expiration Date: November 30, 2021
BTTVSBODFT!PG!DPNQMJBODF!XJUI!DJWJM!SJHIUT!SFRVJSFNFOUT
ASSURANCES OF COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964
As a condition of receipt of federal financial assistance from the Department of the Treasury, the recipient named below
(hereinafter referred to as the “Recipient”) provides the assurances stated herein. The federal financial assistance may include
federal grants, loans and contracts to provide assistance to the Recipient’s beneficiaries, the use or rent of Federal land or property
at below market value, Federal training, a loan of Federal personnel, subsidies, and other arrangements with the intention of
providing assistance. Federal financial assistance does not encompass contracts of guarantee or insurance, regulated programs,
licenses, procurement contracts by the Federal government at market value, or programs that provide direct benefits.
The assurances apply to all federal financial assistance from or funds made available through the Department of the Treasury,
including any assistance that the Recipient may request in the future.
The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 provides that the provisions of the assurances apply to all of the operations of the
Recipient’s program(s) and activity(ies), so long as any portion of the Recipient’s program(s) or activity(ies) is federally assisted in
the manner prescribed above.
1.Recipient ensures its current and future compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, which
prohibits exclusion from participation, denial of the benefits of, or subjection to discrimination under programs and
activities receiving federal financial assistance, of any person in the United States on the ground of race, color, or national
origin (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.), as implemented by the Department of the Treasury Title VI regulations at 31 CFR Part
22 and other pertinent executive orders such as Executive Order 13166, directives, circulars, policies, memoranda, and/or
guidance documents.
2.Recipient acknowledges that Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English
Proficiency,” seeks to improve access to federally assisted programs and activities for individuals who, because of national
origin, have Limited English proficiency (LEP). Recipient understands that denying a person access to its programs,
services, and activities because of LEP is a form of national origin discrimination prohibited under Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and the Department of the Treasury’s implementing regulations. Accordingly, Recipient shall initiate
reasonable steps, or comply with the Department of the Treasury’s directives, to ensure that LEP persons have meaningful
access to its programs, services, and activities. Recipient understands and agrees that meaningful access may entail
providing language assistance services, including oral interpretation and written translation where necessary, to ensure
effective communication in the Recipient’s programs, services, and activities.
3.Recipient agrees to consider the need for language services for LEP persons when Recipient develops applicable budgets
and conducts programs, services, and activities. As a resource, the Department of the Treasury has published its LEP
guidance at 70 FR 6067. For more information on taking reasonable steps to provide meaningful access for LEP persons,
please visit http://www.lep.gov.
4.Recipient acknowledges and agrees that compliance with the assurances constitutes a condition of continued receipt of
federal financial assistance and is binding upon Recipient and Recipient’s successors, transferees, and assignees for the
period in which such assistance is provided.
5.Recipient acknowledges and agrees that it must require any sub-grantees, contractors, subcontractors, successors,
transferees, and assignees to comply with assurances 1-4 above, and agrees to incorporate the following language in every
contract or agreement subject to Title VI and its regulations between the Recipient and the Recipient’s sub-grantees,
contractors, subcontractors, successors, transferees, and assignees:
Uif!tvc.hsbouff-!dpousbdups-!tvcdpousbdups-!tvddfttps-!usbotgfsff-!boe!bttjhoff!tibmm!dpnqmz!xjui!Ujumf!WJ!pg
uif!Djwjm!Sjhiut!Bdu!pg!2:75-!xijdi!qspijcjut!sfdjqjfout!pg!gfefsbm!gjobodjbm!bttjtubodf!gspn!fydmvejoh!gspn!b
qsphsbn!ps!bdujwjuz-!efozjoh!cfofgjut!pg-!ps!puifsxjtf!ejtdsjnjobujoh!bhbjotu!b!qfstpo!po!uif!cbtjt!pg!sbdf-
dpmps-!ps!obujpobm!psjhjo!)53!V/T/D/!¨!3111e!fu!tfr/*-!bt!jnqmfnfoufe!cz!uif!Efqbsunfou!pg!uif!Usfbtvszt!Ujumf
WJ!sfhvmbujpot-!42!DGS!Qbsu!33-!xijdi!bsf!ifsfjo!jodpsqpsbufe!cz!sfgfsfodf!boe!nbef!b!qbsu!pg!uijt!dpousbdu
)ps!bhsffnfou*/!Ujumf!WJ!bmtp!jodmveft!qspufdujpo!up!qfstpot!xjui!Mjnjufe!Fohmjti!Qspgjdjfodz!jo!boz
qsphsbn!ps!bdujwjuz!sfdfjwjoh!gfefsbm!gjobodjbm!bttjtubodf-!53!V/T/D/!¨!3111e!fu!tfr/-!bt!jnqmfnfoufe!cz!uif
Efqbsunfou!pg!uif!Usfbtvszt!Ujumf!WJ!sfhvmbujpot-!42!DGS!Qbsu!33-!boe!ifsfjo!jodpsqpsbufe!cz!sfgfsfodf!boe
nbef!b!qbsu!pg!uijt!dpousbdu!ps!bhsffnfou/
6.Recipient understands and agrees that if any real property or structure is provided or improved with the aid of federal
financial assistance by the Department of the Treasury, this assurance obligates the Recipient, or in the case of a subsequent
Buubdinfou;!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!Usfbtvsz!Dpspobwjsvt!Mpdbm!Gjtdbm!Sfdpwfsz!Gvoe!Bxbse!Ufsnt!boe!Dpoejujpot!!)382:!;!V/T/!Efqbsunfou!pg!uif
transfer, the transferee, for the period during which the real property or structure is used for a purpose for which the federal
5
Qbdlfu!Qh/!21
5/C/b
financial assistance is extended or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits. If any
personal property is provided, this assurance obligates the Recipient for the period during which it retains ownership or
possession of the property.
7.Recipient shall cooperate in any enforcement or compliance review activities by the Department of the Treasury of the
aforementioned obligations. Enforcement may include investigation, arbitration, mediation, litigation, and monitoring of
any settlement agreements that may result from these actions. The Recipient shall comply with information requests, on-site
compliance reviews and reporting requirements.
8.Recipient shall maintain a complaint log and inform the Department of the Treasury of any complaints of discrimination on
the grounds of race, color, or national origin, and limited English proficiency covered by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 and implementing regulations and provide, upon request, a list of all such reviews or proceedings based on the
complaint, pending or completed, including outcome. Recipient also must inform the Department of the Treasury if
Recipient has received no complaints under Title VI.
9.Recipient must provide documentation of an administrative agency’s or court’s findings of non-compliance of Title VI and
efforts to address the non-compliance, including any voluntary compliance or other agreements between the Recipient and
the administrative agency that made the finding. If the Recipient settles a case or matter alleging such discrimination, the
Recipient must provide documentation of the settlement. If Recipient has not been the subject of any court or administrative
agency finding of discrimination, please so state.
10.If the Recipient makes sub-awards to other agencies or other entities, the Recipient is responsible for ensuring that
sub-recipients also comply with Title VI and other applicable authorities covered in this document State agencies that make
sub-awards must have in place standard grant assurances and review procedures to demonstrate that that they are effectively
monitoring the civil rights compliance of subrecipients.
The United States of America has the right to seek judicial enforcement of the terms of this assurances document and nothing in
this document alters or limits the federal enforcement measures that the United States may take in order to address violations of
this document or applicable federal law.
Under penalty of perjury, the undersigned official(s) certifies that official(s) has read and understood the Recipient’s obligations as
herein described, that any information submitted in conjunction with this assurances document is accurate and complete, and that
the Recipient is in compliance with the aforementioned nondiscrimination requirements.
City of Kent
Recipient
_________________________________
Date
_________________________________
Signature of Authorized Official
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTICE
The information collected will be used for the U.S. Government to process requests for support. The estimated burden associated
with this collection of information is 30 minutes per response. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and
suggestions for reducing this burden should be directed to the Office of Privacy, Transparency and Records, Department of the
Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20220. DO NOT send the form to this address. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number
assigned by OMB.
Buubdinfou;!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!Usfbtvsz!Dpspobwjsvt!Mpdbm!Gjtdbm!Sfdpwfsz!Gvoe!Bxbse!Ufsnt!boe!Dpoejujpot!!)382:!;!V/T/!Efqbsunfou!pg!uif
6
Qbdlfu!Qh/!22
5/D
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Kurt Hanson, Economic and Community Development Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5454
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: INFO ONLY: House Bill 1220
SUMMARY: During the regular legislative session of 2021, the state legislature
passed House Bill 1220, supporting emergency shelters and housing through local
planning and development regulations.
The bill makes changes to the Growth Management Act, specifically through
increasing the requirements of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. It
also defines new parameters for the zoning of indoor emergency shelters,
permanent supportive housing, and transitional housing.
Staff will provide an overview of the bill, including known and unknown
characteristics of the relevant types of housing/facilities, and discuss the potential
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Thriving City - Creating safe neighborhoods, healthy people, vibrant commercial districts, and
inviting parks and recreation.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!23
5/E
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Kurt Hanson, Economic and Community Development Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5454
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Kent Housing Options Plan - Adopt
MOTION: Move to Adopt the Kent Housing Options Plan.
SUMMARY: In the summer of 2019, the Washington State Legislature passed
House Bill 1923. This bill authorized funding to Washington State jurisdictions to
complete a Housing Action Plan, with the intent of increasing housing availability.
The Kent Housing Options Plan (KHOP) has been developed over the last two years
to meet the requirements of the grant-funded program as administered by
Department of Commerce, with significant data collection, adopted policy analysis,
community engagement, strategy evaluation, and new policy development, to
address the comprehensive housing needs of Kent.
KHOP takes a unique approach to not just build more housing, but to diversify the
housing options
just more apartments or more single-family homes, but more types of housing and
more variety in available housing to meet the diverse needs of existing and future
residents, while increasing overall affordability and reducing displacement.
The four strategic policy objectives are:
1. Preserve the affordable housing options in Kent while minimizing and
mitigating displacement.
2. ng housing variety
and choice.
3. Leverage and expand partnerships to further housing-related goals.
4.
subregion.
A public hearing was held on May 10, 2021, before the Land Use and Planning
Board, at which the Board unanimously recommended approval. A SEPA
Determination of Non-Significance was issued on May 14, 2021. Staff will provide
an overview of the plan and comments made during and after the hearing. The
deadline for completion of this grant-funded effort is June 30, 2021, before which
time the Department of Commerce must receive the final adopted plan in order to
reimburse the City for the remaining expenses related to the grant.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!24
5/E
BUDGET IMPACT: None.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Thriving City - Creating safe neighborhoods, healthy people, vibrant commercial districts, and
inviting parks and recreation.
Sustainable Services - Providing quality services through responsible financial management,
economic growth, and partnerships.
Inclusive Community - Embracing our diversity and advancing equity through genuine community
engagement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Kent Housing Options Plan (PDF)
2. Kent HOP_Commerce Comments (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!25
5/E/b
Tibqjoh!uif!Gvuvsf!pg!Ipnf
Bepqufe!cz!Djuz!Dpvodjm!po!YY-!pse!$
Qbdlfu!Qh/!26
5/E/b
This plan was written by City of Kent staff Hayley Bonsteel, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager, and
Kaelene Nobis, AICP, Long Range Planner.
Acknowledgements
The City of Kent is grateful to the numerous staff, elected officials, and community members who
participated in this draft and provided feedback to shape this plan. A special thanks to:
City Staff: Administration and City Council:
Merina Hanson, Human Services Director Dana Ralph, Mayor
Lori Guilfoyle, Senior Human Services Toni Troutner, Council President
Coordinator Bill Boyce
Dinah Wilson, Senior Human Services Brenda Fincher
Coordinator Zandria Michaud
Kurt Hanson, Economic and Community Satwinder Kaur
Development Director Marli Larimer
Erin George, AICP, Current Planning Manager Les Thomas
Katie Whaley, Rental Housing Inspection Derek Matheson, Chief Administrative Officer
Program Coordinator
Matt Gilbert, AICP, Economic and Community
Focus Groups:
Development Deputy Director
Sustainability Ambassadors
Paula Painter, Finance Director
Kent Community Development Collaborative
Michelle Ferguson, Budget Manager
Cambridge Neighborhood Association
Adam Long, Assistant City Attorney
Josh Maasberg, Communications Coordinator
SoKiHo and SKHHP Staff:
Josh Gonzalez, Art Direction Coordinator
Angela San Filippo, AICP, Executive Manager of
April Delchamps, AICP, Senior Transportation
SKHHP
Planner
Anthony Avery, AICP, CNU-A, former Senior
Rob Brown, P.E., Transportation Engineering
Planner for City of Auburn
Manager
Doc Hansen, former Planning Manager for City
of Federal Way
Consultants:
Chaney Skadsen, Associate Planner, City of
Berk Consulting
Federal Way
Dawn Couch, Project Manager
Thara Johnson, former Senior Planner for City of
Lisa Johnson, Inventory Analyst
Burien
Jonathan Morales, Policy Analyst
Meredith Sampson, Associate Planner, City of
ECONorthwest
Tukwila
Tyler Bump, Project Director
Minnie Dhaliwal, AICP, former Deputy Director
Madeline Baron, Project Manager
of Community Development for City of Tukwila
Hannah Bahnmiller, Housing Programs
Manager, City of Renton
And to all the members of the public who commented, came to meetings, and made this
possible
THANK YOU!
1 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!27
5/E/b
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 1
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Glossary of Terms.......................................................................................................................................... 5
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 7
Chapter 2: Gathering Data About Housing Need ........................................................................................ 16
Chapter 3. Housing Policy Analysis ............................................................................................................. 29
Chapter 4: Community and Stakeholder Engagement ............................................................................... 50
Chapter 5: Evaluating and Prioritizing Housing Strategies ......................................................................... 59
Chapter 6: Funding Mechanisms ................................................................................................................ 81
Chapter 7: Strategic Policy Objectives and Actions .................................................................................... 85
Chapter 8: Implementation Plan ................................................................................................................. 90
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 101
2 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!28
5/E/b
Executive Summary
Housing is a complex issue with many stakeholders and perspectives
sometimes a contentious one. The Kent Housing Options Plan (KHOP) aims to demystify some of the less
well understood aspects of housing development and planning in South King and
sets the community on a path toward a future with more housing options for all. Extensive input and
collaboration ensure that the steps identified are actionable, meaningful, and worthwhilegiving the
City a roadmap to follow for years to come.
The four strategic policy objectives identified in KHOP are:
1. Preserve the affordable housing options in Kent while minimizing and mitigating displacement
2. e
3. Leverage and expand partnerships to further housing-related goals
4.
The plan explores a comprehensive list of actions the City can take to achieve better housing outcomes.
A comprehensive list of strategies is evaluated for potential efficacy with a focus on near-term code
changes that can be implemented to help increase housing options, particularly middle housing (those
housing types between a single-family detached home and a larger apartment building). Other
promising strategies include increasing density around planned future transit, strengthening
partnerships with community-based organizations, and calibrating the zoning code to remove
unnecessary barriers. An analysis of funding sources, particularly new and emerging sources, details how
leveraging funds by pooling with other jurisdictions can maximize benefits for the subregion.
While the ability to engage the community in a robust discussion about housing was severely impacted
by the ongoing global pandemic, COVID-19, the planning effort employed various strategies to reach as
many Kent residents as possible to gather input on diverse housing perspectives, experiences, and
needs. The results of public meetings, an online survey, and focus groups point to a wide variety of
priorities for housing in Kent and speak to the need for more attainable and diverse housing options and
resources.
It's widely understood that housing costs in South King County are quickly outpacing incomes, resulting
in high cost burdening amongst lower-income earners. Long known as the more affordable part of an
increasingly unaffordable King County, lower income people could be increasingly priced out of living in
Kent. At the same time, perhaps less widely known is the growth in households earning more than 100%
of Area Median Income (AMI which in 2021 is $113,125 for a family of four). This segment of the
population saw the largest increase of any income segment, an increase even greater than that of the
South King County subregion as a whole; therefore a considerable number of new units needed are in
the 100%+ AMI affordability range. With demand for higher income housing growing, Kent lags behind
in producing supply to meet this demand, partially due to the prices commanded by housing
development elsewhere in the region. Without intervention, the City is likely to see down-renting
pressure on the existing housing stock, reducing the availability of units that should otherwise be
affordable to more moderate income earners.
3 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!29
5/E/b
The plan calls for proactive collaboration with for-profit and non-profit housing providers to ensure
housing needs are being communicated clearly. Without such proactive collaboration, the risks of
physical, economic, or cultural displacement are significant and fall particularly hard on vulnerable
residents. The research also demonstrated the extent to which the moderate income (60% AMI) level is
subsidized beyond any other income level. Subsidized housing at this moderate income level of
affordability has been developed in Kent and South King County without any specific city intervention
in fact, nearly half of units in Downtown Kent are subsidized to serve 60% AMI households. The plan
therefore lays the groundwork for a cohesive story of the need for housing that serves all income
segments of the community by prioritizing city policies that incentivize those housing types least likely to
develop on their own in Kent (0-30% and 100%+ AMI).
The City of Kent received a grant from the Washington State Department of Commerce through House
Bill (HB) 1923 to develop this plan to increase residential building capacity. The overarching aims for
KHOP, in compliance with the statute authorizing the grant, are to build more housing, diversify the
-family homes, but more types of
housing and more variety in available housing to meet the diverse needs of existing and future
residents.
The project started with Kent leading the way to form a collaborative with other South King County
cities for a housing needs assessment that cut across jurisdictional boundaries. This approach ensured
consistency and a shared understanding of housing needs for the subregion, as well as providing a
framework for developing strategies appropriate for the South King County submarket. This framework
forms the substructure for much of this Plan; it also created a natural collaboration that continues
amongst the staff workgroup. This collaboration is emblematic of one of the many kinds of partnership
KHOP envisions as being central to achieving better housing outcomesthrough working with the
development community, regional players, various governing bodies, and community groups, Kent can
grow into a place where housing options are available to all.
4 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:
5/E/b
Glossary of Terms
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): ADUs are also referred to as mother-in-law apartments. An ADU is a
self-contained residential unit that is an accessory use to a single-family home. An ADU is located on the
parcel with the primary single-family home and is subordinate in nature. An ADU contains all the basic
facilities needed for living independently from the primary residence such as a kitchen and bathroom.
An ADU can be configured in different ways such as being attached to a single-family home, above a
garage, or detached from the primary residence.
Affordable housing measures individual housing costs as a percentage of personal income. Housing is
term often refers to housing affordable to households below median income. This term does not mean
subsidized housing, which is occasionally used interchangeably.
Affordable housing units refer to subsidized units for households making below the median income.
Development and preservation of affordable housing units often require public investments and
incentives.
Area Median Income (AMI) measures the median, or middle, household income in a specific geography.
Annually, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development updates this figure. This number is
the official figure used to determine income limits and maximum rent prices for government-funded
affordable housing programs. In the central Puget Sound, AMI is commonly calculated at the county
and/or Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) geographies.
Cluster developments: Cluster subdivisions or developments confine development to the most suitable
portion of a building site in compact layouts, e.g. smaller lots. This can lead to greater land efficiency,
lower infrastructure development and maintenance costs, lower site grading and drainage costs, and
greater preservation of open space and natural features.
Cottage housing: This refers to a grouping of small, single-family dwelling units clustered around a
common area and developed with a coherent plan for the entire site.
Density bonuses or incentive zoning: These are voluntary incentives that allow developers to build at
higher than allowed densities if a specified number or percentage of affordable units is included in the
development. Such a program may be designed to allow developers to contribute to an affordable
housing fund in lieu of building the affordable units.
Displacement: The involuntary relocation of current residents or businesses from their current
residence. This is a different phenomenon than when property owners voluntarily sell their interests to
capture an increase in value.
Physical displacement is the result of eviction, acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition of
property, or the expiration of covenants on rent - or income-restricted housing.
Economic displacement occurs when residents and businesses can no longer afford escalating
housing costs.
Cultural displacement occurs when people choose to move because their neighbors and
culturally related businesses have left the area.
5 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!31
5/E/b
Housing affordability is a neighborhood or region-wide measure of housing prices compared to the
general level of household or family incomes. Housing affordability is shaped by many factors in the real
estate and rental market, and a variety of regulatory and financing tools can be used to provide housing
for all income groups.
Market-rate housing units: Units whose price is determined by market factors like supply and demand,
as opposed to price limits imposed by state or local affordable housing programs.
Mixed-use: Mixed-use development is an example of flexible zoning where various land uses are
combined within a single building, development, or district. For example, residential dwellings may be
located vertically above retail stores, or located horizontally on the same site as commercial uses.
Moderate Density Housing (Missing Middle): A range of housing types from duplexes to townhomes to
low-rise multifamily developments that bridge a gap between single-family housing and more intense
multifamily and commercial areas. The relatively small share of these housing types is sometimes called
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH): A term used to denote unsubsidized rental housing,
generally older housing stock in established neighborhoods.
Planned Unit Development (PUD): PUD regulations allow for flexibility in the design of residential
communities in exchange for public benefits. PUDs may offer a mix of dwelling types (detached, duplex,
or multifamily), a mix of land uses (residential and neighborhood commercial), and density bonuses to
help underwrite the cost of low-income housing.
Special needs housing: Housing arrangements for populations with special physical or other needs. These
populations include the elderly, disabled persons, people with medical conditions, homeless individuals
and families, and displaced people.
Subsidized Housing Units have a portion of their cost offset through federal, state, or local funds and/or
financial support that ensure long-term rent or income restrictions. These subsidies provide affordable
housing that the private market does not.
The following agencies were utilized for the glossary: Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington; PSRC; VISION 2050; and U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
6 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!32
5/E/b
Chapter 1: Introduction
HB 1923 Background
On May 9, 2019, the Governor signed into law Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1923 (HB 1923),
encouraging cities to increase residential building capacity. The bill lists a series of actions cities may
take, including a housing action plan. Cities seeking to develop a housing action plan were made eligible
to apply for planning grants through the Department of Commerce, for up to $100,000. This plan, the
Kent Housing Options Plan (KHOP), serves as the housing action plan for the City of Kent in accordance
with HB 1923.
Housing affordability and the regulations that may impact it have increasingly come under the scrutiny
of Puget Sound legislators in recent years, as it has become a challenging quality of life issue for many
residents in the region. While Kent has long been and continues to be, a more affordable alternative to
the higher-cost parts of King County, that does not mean Kent has been immune to these challenges. To
ion
for increasing residential building capacity in Kent.
The other actions listed in HB 1923, such as authorizing cluster zoning, adopting subarea plans, and
adopting increases in categorical exemptions for residential development, largely represent milestones
already passed in Kent (Ord. 2656 in 1986, Ord. 4131 in 2014). Kent continues to make progressive
changes towards affordability and livability including the formation of one of the first Rental Housing
Inspection Programs in the state created in 2018, a program that ensures the quality and safety of rental
housing (Ord. 4272). While some aspects of the specific actions encouraged in the bill may be distinct
from what Kent has adopted, the combination of state guidance and this plan will result in the ability for
the City to continually refine and iterate on adopted codes, policies, and regulations to assure better
housing outcomes in the future. While the City has been proactive about zoning for residential density,
within the codified framework of
Regional Growth Strategy, this plan represents an opportunity to dial regulatory efforts up a significant
notch to better address the affordability crisis and meet the public will as translated by the legislature.
1
Originally incorporated on May 28, 1890, Kent started small with the downtown core housing less than
800 families.
inance 784
which established four districts: Residential, Residential and Light Commercial, Commercial Use, and
-
(which required a public hearing to ens
2
Large minimum site areas and open space requirements characterized this
early attempt at zoning, as well as a parking ratio of one parking space per unit.
1
https://kenthistoricalmuseum.org/history-of-kent.
2
7 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!33
5/E/b
After the 1950s, Kent began to grow rapidly, including annexing large portions of first the valley, then
adjacent areas, followed by portions of East and West Hill, followed by the Ramstead/Meridian
annexations in the 1990s and Panther Lake in 2010.
F IGURE 1: A NNEXATION M AP
Land was annexed unzoned, and after annexations, Kent City Code required the Planning Commission to
study and make a report to the City Council recommending how the annexed land should be zoned.
Throughout the decades, increasingly fine-tuned zoning and land use regulations were adopted and
amended. Today there are over two dozen individual zoning districtswith five to six districts each
devoted to single-family residential, multifamily residential, and mixed-use.
Now home to over 130,000 people, Kent has largely been built of single-family neighborhoods in
addition to the industrial valley, with periods in the 1980s seeing more significant multifamily
construction. The result is that 56 percent of the land area today is zoned single-family, 13 percent is
zoned to allow multifamily, and 31 percent is zoned for commercial/industrial; meanwhile, according to
the 2019 American Community Survey about 64 percent of residents live in single-family versus 36
percent live in multifamily. In other words, Kent has significant land devoted to a housing type that is
relatively inefficient in terms of accommodating growth.
8 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!34
5/E/b
F IGURE 2: M ULTIFAMILY VS S INGLE-F AMILY ZONED AREAS COMPARISON
Housing Stock in Kent Today
Housing in Kent has generally distributed in three geographic areas: the valley (which includes
Downtown), West Hill, and East Hill.
F IGURE 3: K ENTS D ISTINCT R EGIONS
9 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!35
5/E/b
Housing in the valley neighborhoods is considerably older than in the plateau neighborhoods. A few
examples of new construction are generally of good quality, and the size of these new homes reflects
strong confidence on the part of investors and owners and bodes well for the continued viability of the
surrounding area. In addition, the area shows signs of owner investment in the older housing stock,
demonstrated by improved condition and recent rehabilitation of some homes. While there are some
exceptions, most blocks contained a mix of both well-maintained and poorly maintained units. Homes in
the West Hill area have experienced deterioration due to several factors: an increase in the number of
rental units owned by out-of-state landlords, an increase in the number of low-income families living in
the area, and deferred maintenance on many units. Poor economic conditions may signal continued
deterioration. East Hill neighborhoods contain a greater number of well-maintained housing, except for
some neighborhoods with deteriorating units. The overall condition of housing in the East Hill
neighborhoods is much better than in the valley (and West Hill). Some manufactured/mobile home
parks on the East Hill show signs of poor maintenance (see Chapter 5 for more detail on the state of
mobile home parks in Kent). There is one Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty (as defined by
the US Department of Housing and Urban Development) in Kent, where more than half the population
of a census tract is non-White and 40% or more of the population is in poverty OR where the poverty
rate is greater than three times the average poverty rate in the area
3
primarily multifamily area. Most subsidized housing is on East Hill.
Role in the Seattle Housing Market
Kent is a part of a regional housing market heavily influenced by the metropolitan cities of Seattle and
Bellevue. Major business expansions in one city affect another tens
of thousands of jobs to Seattle in recent years. Housing developers in the region aim to deliver product
population ebbs, flows, and changes.
As a suburb of Seattle, Kent has a push-C
streamlined construction timelines due to efficiencies of scale combined with high rents in the City may
3
-2024 CDBG Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development and Participation Plan- Approve -
https://kentwa.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=4191&MediaPosition=4160.179&ID=2033&CssClass=
10 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!36
5/E/b
cause builders to keep suburban locations in the back pocket, or invest in safer, more proven product
types that are more well establishedsuch as single-family homesin the suburbs.
In addition, social forces at work in Seattle affect Kent in terms of population dynamics and
4
demographics; housing prices, as we
Key Players in Housing Development
The City plays a crucial but perhaps not widely understood role in the landscape of housing
development. Increasing the residential building capacity of Kent is technically within the C
purview
other players, from builders, developers, and property management companies to lenders that finance
construction. Each of these categories contains players who operate in the for-profit/market-rate
housing construction arena and those who operate in the non-profit/subsidized housing construction
arenaand some players may operate in both. For more exploration on subsidized housing in Kent, see
Chapter 2.
Comprehensive Plan, in combination with zoning code and development standards that implement
these policies, lay out the parameters within which development occurs. Therefore, it is incumbent
upon the City to continually observe, monitor, and improve the regulatory landscape to the extent
permissible under state law, in consultation with the community, to ensure that broader housing goals
are being met. This plan serves as the most specific policy direction the City has ever had related to
housing; while comprehensive planning does involve a Housing Element, there has historically been a
more comprehensive housing policy direction from which regulatory changes can then be implemented.
It is the intent of this plan that these regulatory changes increase residential building capacity in the City
of Kent.
t a
general housing policy framework that is relevant and useful to this effort, despite the age of the
document (adopted in 2015) and the rapid acceleration of these issues in recent years. The policies
related to housing are generally supportive of diversity in housing stock, quality design, increasing
options, and allowing flexibility. Many of the policies have been useful in supporting analyses of land use
map amendment requests from the public, multifamily tax exemption (MFTE) program options, and
other land use decisions. Some policies, however, suggest actions the City has either not taken or cannot
meaningfully address within fiscal constraints, such as reducing infrastructure costs for affordable
housing projects. While policy work of necessity combines some practical, actionable directives with
longer-term idealistic goals, this document presents an opportunity to evaluate the adopted policies for
ng
4
P
https://www.seattleweekly.com/news/searching-for-a-new-central-district-in-suburban-king-county/.
11 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!37
5/E/b
Chapter 3; it is anticipated that the next Comprehensive Plan update (scheduled for adoption in 2024)
will adopt the policy direction laid out in this document, with appropriate updates.
Planning and Human Services
structure; historically, the two groups have collaborated on code amendments related to housing
vulnerable populations, as well as planning projects that would be aided by the participation of
community-based organizations (CBOs), which Human Services staff have more connections with due to
funding relationships (see Chapter 5 for more discussion of CBO capacity building opportunities). More
consistent and sustained collaboration between the groups may be warranted given the increasing
interest in the overlap between themhow to ensure people are housed safely and affordably, both in
the near and long term.
Human Services staff run the Home Repair Program, which offers small grants to homeowners to
complete minor improvement projects to address health and safety concerns. The program serves
owner-occupied homes including a large client base of manufactured and mobile homes; for more
discussion on mobile home park preservation, see Chapter 5. The program also funds disabled
households with modifications related to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Human Services staff oversee the disbursement of Community Development Block Grant funds to sub-
recipients such as CBOs. These CBOs utilize this U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
funding to providing decent housing, a suitable living environment, and economic opportunities,
principally for low/moderate-income persons. Examples of uses of this funding include case
management services for youth with intellectual disabilities and their families, rent and utility
assistance, and shelter and transitional housing.
This plan presents an opportunity to better connect the dots between these various programs and the
longer-term vision for housing in the City.
South King Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP)
Kent does not just exist in proximity to Seattle; it also functions as the largest city in the subregion
known as South King County (SKC). Indeed, a fundamental tenet of this project has been the
collaboration with other SKC cities (more on this below). But before HB 1923 was passed, SKC cities
already recognized the need for more broad coordination on housing topics, and, following in the
footsteps of A Regional Coalition for Housing (ARCH) which serves this purpose for Eastside cities,
formed SKHHP in 2019. SKHHP is a joint board formed by an interlocal agreement between the
jurisdictions of Auburn, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Normandy Park, Renton,
Tukwila, and King County. The joint mission is to work together and share resources to increase available
options for South King County residents to access affordable housing and preserve existing affordable
housing stock, and goals include sharing technical information and resources to promote sound housing
policy, coordinating public resources to attract greater private and public investment, and providing a
unified voice for South King County. Kent has contributed funds to SKHHP since 2016; this partnership
provides additional staff capacity for tracking, developing, and implementing policies related to
affordable housing and homelessness to participating cities.
12 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!38
5/E/b
SKHHP hired staff in early 2020 after this grant process had begun. SKHHP staff have been involved in
the work since coming on board (more on this below) but were unable to provide coordinated
leadership at the beginning of the process, hence the South King Housing workgroup.
South King Housing Workgroup (SoKiHo) Phase 1
Seeing the opportunity for subregional collaboration, cost savings, and more consistent land-use
policies, Kent spearheaded the joining of forces with other SKC cities for portions of this planning effort.
data sources exist at a much higher scale than the individual city, a subset of the SKHHP cities (Auburn,
Burien, Federal Way, Kent, Tukwila, and Renton) put a portion of their grant funds toward a first phase
of the project that pooled these resources and produced shared deliverables. The SoKiHo group worked
collaboratively to develop the project scope for this first phase, hire consultants, review, and give input
on deliverables, and share key findings from individual city perspectives.
The deliverables, which are explored more in-depth throughout this document and form the basis or
jumping-off point for much of the content, included Fact Packets of data for each city and the subregion,
plus a data methodology memo (see Chapter 2), an in-depth Policy Assessment (see Chapter 3), a
development community focus group (see Chapter 4), and a Strategy Framework (see Chapter 5), as well
as an interactive online Policy Evaluation Tool (findings from which are sprinkled throughout this plan).
These shared deliverables from SoKiHo ensure that all six SKC cities are working towards their individual
which the regulatory bodies operate.
Bringing it Home to Kent Phase 2
With SoKiHo deliverables in hand, Kent had a head start on meeting the grant requirementsbut the
remaining work had to be tailored to this community. With the findings from SoKiHo pointing toward
some overarching South King County goals, such as increasing middle housing types and transit-oriented
development (TOD) the specific ways such ideas could be pursued in Kent needed to be shaped by this
(see Chapter 5). Broad public policy discussions with City Council, followed by
extensive public engagement (see more below and in Chapter 4) ensured that the overarching concepts
in-
Public Participation
Recommendations made in this plan have been informed by public comment. Since Kent is a unique
placethe 10th most diverse city in the country, with the largest household size in the countypart of
the outreach effort was geared at educating residents about Kent-specific housing needs and
establishing a baseline knowledge between participants.
Multiple methods for engagement were utilized, although the restrictions related to COVID-19
hampered efforts to speak more directly with residents. For this reason, the effort relied more heavily
on a survey, which started with an assumption of growth and asked for feedback on policies the City
could deploy to mitigate that growth, i.e. middle housing typology, design elements, walkability, etc.
Questions asked of participants aimed
housing types, priorities to mitigate growth, and whether respondents would be willing and able to fund
identified priorities. The nexus between incomes, housing need, city roles, development regulations,
13 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!39
5/E/b
and housing cost was an important educational component to establish priorities for city policies and
future resource allocation. While COVID-19 restrictions certainly impacted participation, staff utilized a
variety of methods to engage harder to reach communities, netting 292 survey responses. Engagement
methods, lessons learned, and results are summarized and explored more in Chapter 4.
Centering Equity
While writing this plan the opportunity and responsibility to center the plan around equity
principles became abundantly clear. Housing disparities that burden marginalized communities have
been exacerbated by COVID-19 and continue to disproportionately affect communities of Black,
Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC).
Not all communities are starting on the same footing when it comes to housing issues; for some the
housing crisis is peppered with historic issues like generational wealth, institutional racism, and
discrimination in banking and real estate. Actively working to fix the broken system that created this
issue is a task greater than any City can handle alone; however, acknowledgment of the potential
negative impacts of any policy change, and a plan to negate those risks, is integrated into the
recommendations made in this plan.
Other Related Efforts
Existing adopted policy related to housing exists at several levels including the recently adopted Vision
2050 (and associated Multicounty Planning Policies), the existing adopted King County Countywide
Planning Policies, which are undergoing a major update at the time of this writing (and will be adopted
subsequent to the adoption of this document), and the continued work of the Affordable Housing
Committee (AHC), a regional advisory body of the Growth Management Planning Council. AHC in
particular has been the body steering local housing-related efforts as part of the implementation of the
-Year Action Plan. Kent participates in all these various
groups and processes as both staff and elected representative participants; this plan is well informed by
and compatible with these other efforts. However, the focus or emphasis of this plan may not be as
the
broader needs of the region. In particular, SKC cities in general and Kent specifically have significantly
more naturally occurring affordable housing units (NOAHs) than King County as a whole; focus in this
plan is, therefore, less specifically on the capacity for new affordable units and instead more broadly
encompasses a range of housing issues.
Subarea plans already completed for Kent also inform this plan insofar as they have set geographically
constrained housing policy direction previously: the Midway Subarea Plan, adopted in 2011, and
Downtown Subarea Action Plan, last updated in 2015, both embrace transit-oriented development and
encourage a variety of dense housing types to accommodate growth around high capacity transit
investments. Addition
information related to employment and wages, which informs the ways Kent seeks to balance jobs and
housing within jurisdictional borders. Some of these plans will likely undergo updates in the near future,
and these updates are anticipated to incorporate the broader housing policy direction contained within
this plan.
14 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:
5/E/b
The 2020-2024 Community Development Block Grant Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community
Development and Participation Plan also heavily informs this planboth in providing background
information and in laying the groundwork for further collaboration with CBOs (see Chapter 5).
Of course, all of these plans at every level are also threaded together in Ken
which is scheduled to be updated in 2024.
How This Plan Meets the Grant Requirements
The requirements for this grant are listed below, followed by the chapters in which the requirements are
ope and progress have been monitored by the Department of
Commerce, including specific communication and coordination amongst staff, to ensure compliance.
(a) Quantify existing and projected housing needs for all income levels, including extremely low-
income households, with documentation of housing and household characteristics, and cost-
burdened households Chapter 2
(b) Develop strategies to increase the supply of housing, and variety of housing types needed to
serve the housing needs identified in (a) of this subsection Chapter 5
(c) Analyze population and employment trends, with documentation of projections Chapter 2
(d) Consider strategies to minimize displacement of low-income residents resulting from
redevelopment Chapter 5
(e) Review and evaluate the current housing element adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070,
including an evaluation of success in attaining planned housing types and units, achievement of
goals and policies, and implementation of the schedule of programs and actions Chapter 3
(f) Provide for participation and input from community members, community groups, local
builders, local realtors, nonprofit housing advocates, and local religious groups Chapter 4
(g) Include a schedule of programs and actions to implement the recommendations of the
housing action plan Chapter 8
The end date for the grant is June 30, 2021, before which the plan must be adopted by Kent City Council.
A Note on Scope
The focus of this plan is on residential building capacity, which is primarily a function of land use
regulations. Land use regulations generally function to effect change over a long period, but additional
topics related to housing that may be considered shorter term such as displacement are also considered
relevant. This plan does not, however, deal directly with homelessness, which has a number of root
causes; the availability and affordability of housing is certainly related, as increasing housing options and
reducing cost can have downstream effects on the risk of residents falling into homelessness. The plan
also does not go into depth on the various types of temporary or emergency housing that provides
shelter for those experiencing homelessness, as this effort is more concerned with the long term
capacity to house everyone.
15 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!41
5/E/b
Chapter 2: Gathering Data About Housing Need
Introduction
Understanding the comprehensive housing needs of a community is crucial to crafting a meaningful path
forward and eventually improving housing outcomes. The grant requirements for assessing housing
low-income households, with documentation of housing and household characteristics, and cost-
burdened
that also included locally identified data needs, including research on regulated housing and
development feasibility. The chapter concludes with an analysis and discussion on the topic of
displacement.
South King Housing Workgroup (SoKiHo) Approach
As described in Chapter 1, Kent pooled resources with five other South King County cities for this data-
gathering exercise, and the SoKiHo group collaboratively identified the scope of analysis to include an
assessment of the existing stock, trends, and forecasts for unit type, tenure, affordability, and income
restrictions. The SoKiHo geographical extent for the data analysis included the South King County
County as a whole or neighboring Pierce County were also included.
Data sources included Washington State Office of Financial Management data from 2019, U.S. Census
-
2016 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, King County Assessor, CoStar, and
Zillow.
Key housing needs from the Fact Packet
The pace of growth in Kent must continue to be able to meet projected housing needs.
Housing costs are quickly outpacing incomes, and cost burdening is high amongst lower-income
earners.
Kent gained many two-person households while the number of 1-person households declined
significantly from 2012 to 2018.
n 100% Area Median Income (AMI) saw the largest increase
of any income segment; this increase was greater than the increase in the South King County
subregion.
As a result of changing demographics, the bulk of new units needed are in the 100%+ AMI
affordability range.
The following pages contain key pages from the fact packet for Kent; the full fact packet for Kent can be
found in Appendix A and the South King County fact packet can be found in Appendix B for comparison.
16 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!42
5/E/b
17 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!43
5/E/b
18 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!44
5/E/b
19 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!45
5/E/b
A Note on Units Needed at Varying Household Income Levels in the Future
Generally, demographic changes are outside the C
projects can have an effect on the demographics that can afford housing and/or are interested in living
in Kent. For this reason, the projected housing units needed by income segment takes a straightforward
20 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!46
5/E/b
approach of assuming that the breakdown of household incomes today will be exactly the same in the
futurewhich is unlikely to be true. However, any deviation from that projection would represent a
policy shift that could not be made in the data but rather must be made by the City based on the data as
it stands today.
Specifically, the number of higher-income households is expected to continue to grow as the regi
residents are priced out of Seattle and Kent continues to be an attractive place based on quality jobs and
desirable neighborhoods; significant further investment in the quality of life may increase the rate of
growth of higher-income households while significant disinvestment in quality of life or deterioration of
key assets such as parks or roads may decrease the rate of growth of higher-income households moving
to Kent. On the flip side, lower-income households are unlikely to continue to make up the same
-displacement efforts and policy intervention; rather, the
trend would be expected to continue of lower-income households being priced out of King County
altogether and potentially seeking more affordable options in Pierce County or elsewhere. For this
reason, the precise numbers of units anticipated to be needed at various income levels in the future is
less important than the overall policy thrust they suggest: that the City needs to commit to attracting
100%+ AMI (market rate) development while simultaneously doing everything in its power to minimize
the displacement of 0-30% AMI households (see Chapter 7 for specific policies).
Further Findings
The SoKiHo Methodology Memo (Appendix C) that accompanied the fact packets contains a great deal
more information, often as a result of further questions that were brought up once the initial analysis
was underway. Key findings from this memo include the following:
South King County has a higher share of middle-income households in the 50-80% AMI range
and a lower share of higher-income households over 80% AMI across most race and ethnicity
categories than King County.
In 2018, the South King County Median Household Income (MHI) was $71,442,
somewhat lower than the MHI of $88,868 for King County as a whole.
Households of color disproportionally spend more of their monthly income on housing costs
than non-Hispanic white households in South King County.
Less than five percent of all housing stock in the subregion are condos; Kent has the lowest
percentage of condos as compared to apartments of any city in the subregion.
Compared to the rest of King County, the subregion and Kent specifically has far fewer studios,
and more 2- and 3-bedroom units.
subregion.
Employment Trends and Housing Implications
ust under
$60,000), followed by wholesale trades ($54,000), construction ($53,000), and transportation and
warehousing ($50,100). Management industries have grown significantly in Kent, as have the
construction sector, transportation and warehousing, education, and healthcare (see Fact Packet,
Appendix A for more complete industry breakdown).
21 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!47
5/E/b
locations of large employers in the valley constrain the types of development that specifically make
sense for the employment base. For instance, in the general regional conception of the jobs-housing
balance, jobs and housing would both be tied to transit for optimal dense growth. However, the size and
location of employment in the Kent Valley is not well suited to transit (which necessitates more
significant investment in active transportation to ensure that growth does not come with crippling
congestion). For housing, this means that Transit Oriented Development (TOD) areas are unlikely to be
linked to significant employment and therefore no specific housing type would be more appropriate
than any other to broadly meet the needs of employers.
Regulated Housing Inventory
Any discussion of housing data would be incomplete without an assessment of the regulated housing
inventory available in a jurisdiction. Since housing stock can be regulated to guarantee affordability
through government intervention, this regulated inventory provides crucial information as to how
government intervention plays a role in the overall picture of housing affordability. SoKiHo provided a
partial analysis of regulated housing (data is somewhat scarce and difficult to verify); further internal
research fleshed out this analysis with more detailed information for Kent.
F IGURE 4: S ELECTED S OUTH K ING C OUNTY R EGULATED A FFORDABLE H OUSING U NITS BY INCOME (FROM S O K I H O
M ETHODOLOGY MEMO, SEE A PPENDIX C)
Governments subsidize housing in generally two ways: development subsidies and operating subsidies.
Development subsidies pay for construction or acquisition of housing that is provided to income-
22 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!48
5/E/b
qualified households at a below-market rate, such as tax credits. Operating subsidies supplement the
amount that residents pay for private market housing, such as housing vouchers. The following sections
detail the various subsidies available and their utilization in Kent.
Development Subsidies
National Housing Trust Fund
Federal housing funds, dispersed to states, include National Housing Trust Fund and Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds (which in Kent amount to between one and two million annually
and are generally utilized for the Home Repair program). Although CDBG funds can be used for the
construction of affordable multifamily housing, the amount is too small compared to the cost of
construction, and the other uses for the funds have no alternative sources of fundingnot to mention
page
X).
Housing Trust Fund dollars can be enough to supplement the development costs of low-income and
special needs housing, although they may not be great. Federal money is filtered through the
Washington State Housing Trust Fund and awarded to non-profit organizations, housing authorities, and
local and tribal governments through a competitive application process. Timing and frequency of project
proposal windows vary as well as the size and nature of the appropriations, meaning there is no yearly
estimate that can be calculated for these dollars in Kent. Properties financed by the program can house
people with incomes less than 80% AMI, but the majority of these properties house households with
special needs or incomes below 30% AMI.
In Kent, recent projects util
Nike Manor, providing housing and services for 30 Kent residents with chronic mental illness, people
with multiple special needs, families with children, and the homeless, and which utilized $640,000 from
the Housing Trust Fund in 2017. Another project utilizing this funding is Catholic Community Services of
, known as Thea Bowman
Apartments, which was awarded $300,000 in capital dollars in 2018 for acquisition and new
construction for the project which provides 80 low-income units and homeless beds for Kent residents
(see more on this project below). The numbers for these projects show that Housing Trust Fund
allocations amount to perhaps a welcome offset of construction costs but must be combined with
potentially several other sources of funding to cover the entire project. The agencies mentioned are
likely well versed in combining multiple sources of funding to manage complex construction projects.
Tax Credits
Other federal housing dollars come in the form of tax credits, namely the Low Income Housing Tax
Credit (LIHTC), overseen by the Washington State Housing Finance Commission (WSHFC). LIHTC makes
the development of low-income housing more financially feasible by providing dollar-for-dollar credit
towards taxes owed by the owner. Credits can be sold or used to back up bonds that are sold, to obtain
financing to develop housing. In exchange, the owner agrees to rent a specific number of units to
qualified tenants at specific rents, usually below-market. There are several types of LIHTC including the
9% Housing Credit and the Bond/Tax credit (4%) program.
Between 1989 and 2011, 18 properties were developed under LIHTC in Kent. Eleven of those properties
were new construction while seven were acquisition and rehabilitation projects. In Kent, both the 9%
tax credit and 4% tax credit were used, with the 4% tax credit being used more commonly. All LIHTC
23 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!49
5/E/b
properties developed in Kent provide housing for residents at 60% AMI and target residents that are
either family, elderly, or disabled. In Kent, over 2,500 LIHTC units have been created that are affordable
to those making 60% AMI.
Other findings include:
5
Kent has between 3,000 and 3,800 units in regulated affordable housing.
Since virtually all the regulated units are rentals, this range can be compared to the number of
multifamily housing
stock is subsidized.
The majority of subsidized housing in Kent is subsidized at 60% AMI.
Geographic analysis of regulated housing shows that nearly half the housing units downtown
are subsidized, and all of the subsidized units downtown are restricted to seniors.
SoKiHo analysis showed a strong preference by the affordable housing development community for
subsidy at the 60% AMI level (see Figure 4, above). Since Kent has seen significant construction of units
subsidized at this level without any city incentive, there is no specific need for policy interventions to
achieve the units needed at this moderate income affordability level.
A Note on Supportive Housing and Related Regulated Housing
It is outside the scope of this plan to delve too deeply into the various models that exist for housing
those who cannot live independentlyincluding seniors and/or those with disabilities. Just as the
various models for senior livingassisted living facilities, nursing homes, etc.provide care on a
continuum (i.e., may serve meals, have on-site medical services, organize rides and outings), so to do
other types of regulated, assistive housing span a gamut. Indeed, many of these housing categories are
changing all the time to keep abreast of trends in best practices, funding availability, and community
needs. For example, neighborhood-based behavioral health treatment centers are currently being
explored by the Washington State Department of Commerce as a fo
may choose to regulate; Kent participated in the stakeholder group developing the model ordinance for
this type of facility. Essentially, a wide range of housing types that may be somewhat institutional or
commercial in nature (depending on the number of on-site staff required, licensure requirements,
planned length of tenancy, etc.) provide an important subset of regulated housing, and need to be
appropriately regulated and welcomed into all cities to ensure those with special needs have adequate
housing. A full analysis of supportive housing types in Kent is not possible within this plan, but
highlighting the Thea Bowman apartments built by Catholic Community Services (mentioned above as
receiving Housing Trust Fund acquisition and construction funding) that recently opened in Kent is
worthwhile as emblematic of a type of housing that Kent seeks to further understand.
Wanting to serve individuals with a long history of homelessness in the area, Catholic Community
Serv
variety of means including not just the Housing Trust Fund, but also low-income housing tax credits and
housing vouchers. The project consists of 80 permanent supportive housing units, and working with the
Department of Veterans Affairs, 36 of these were specifically designated for veterans. The first floor
5
SoKiHo analysis yielded 3,086 units (see Methodology memo, Appendix C); internal city RHIP staff analysis yielded
3,795 units.
24 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:
5/E/b
-purpose room with computer access,
case management, and supportive services. This model is emblematic of permanent supportive housing,
and the project is the first of its kind in Kent.
Development Feasibility Data
The final area of data collection that seems critical to grasp before crafting strategies to move forward is
development feasibility as it stands today. Understanding that land prices and construction costs may
change over time, having a sense of the feasibility of different kinds of development that could be
possible in Kent today helps ground the discussion of the next steps in reality. The SoKiHo Housing Policy
6
Evaluation tool uses broad policy assumptions to estimate development feasibility by parcel-level
proforma analysis for various housing prototypes.
Findings include:
Kent has significant potential for middle housing, as represented by triplex feasibility within
single-family zones.
Podium construction (representative of TOD/urban housing products) does not generally pencil
in Kent and will not become financially feasible until rents are at least 16% higher than they are
today.
Without middle housing or increased rents for TOD, Kent has limited potential to accommodate
growth, given that stick-built apartment units do not show great potential for feasibility on
significant enough land as compared to other South King County cities.
See Chapter 5 for the elaboration of ho
Displacement Risk
Introduction
When considering policy changes, it is essential to review for potential impacts to the existing
community. Specifically, housing policy aimed at increasing building capacity and housing supply has the
potential for negative consequences if passed haphazardly without regard for displacement. However,
displacement, not to be confused with gentrification, is a complicated concept that needs to be
discussed with great care. Displacement occurs when housing or neighborhood conditions force
residents to move, while gentrification describes neighborhood change associated with an influx of
wealthier, college-educated individuals moving into poorer working-class communities, often originally
occupied by communities of color. Displacement can and does occur without gentrificationthis relates
to poverty concentration. Areas with high concentrations of poverty, low levels of homeownership, and
higher percentages of minorities are more likely to see displacement due to the economic instability of
those vulnerable populations. Areas with high levels of homeownership are more resilient to economic
risk, thus more likely to be able to weather economic instability. The root causes of displacement are
important to address, as most mapping and analysis is based on the movement of persons of color from
one census tract to another. For example, if a neighborhood experiences the displacement of 100
6
South King County Policy Analysis Tool. https://econw.shinyapps.io/south-kc-policy-analysis-tool/
25 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!51
5/E/b
families, assuming the same socioeconomic status and racial makeup, but families with similar makeup
7
move in, census data would not identify that neighborhood as changing or experiencing displacement.
To increase residential building capacity, Kent will need to amend its zoning code (see Chapter 5 for
details on possible code amendments, and Chapter 8 for implementation details); increased physical
changes and monetary reinvestment in neglected areas may raise property values and unintentionally
price out original residents who can no longer afford to live in their neighborhood. However, increases
in property values are not actually causally linked with displacement, despite how unintuitive that may
seemindeed, studies now show a causal link between new apartment construction and lower rents in
8,9
nearby existing buildings.
This issue is perhaps best explained by differentiating between physical displacement, when old
buildings give way to new ones, for example, and economic displacement when rising rents force
tenants to move out. While physical displacement is the most visible (an old home is torn down and
replaced by a new buildingcausing one to think that stopping construction would be of benefit),
10
economic displacement is a much bigger issue and is best remedied by facilitating new construction.
Another facet of the issue is cultural displacement, which is caused by culturally related businesses
leaving an area and causing people to move out. This aspect of displacement necessitates close
partnership with community-based organizations to understand and serve the needs of cultural
communities.
Understanding all the nuances of these relationships is integral to drafting goals and policies that
consider all angles of housing insecurity, potential displacement, and the need for neighborhood
investment and rehabilitation. Areas identified as higher displacement risk should not be denied
investment as a means to minimize displacement but should instead focus on increased human services,
government intervention, and resident education to address the root issues causing high levels of
displacement risk.
Risk Mapping
11
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Displacement Risk Tool highlights which areas of the region are
most at risk for displacement. The analysis behind this data is a compilation of 15 indicators
representing five elements of neighborhood displacement risks: socio-demographics, transportation
qualities, neighborhood characteristics, housing, and civic engagement.
The scores were standardized, weighted, and then mapped using three categories:
Higher risk: Census tracts with scores in the top 10% of the score range
Moderate risk: Census tracts with scores in the next 40% of the score range
Lower risk: Census tracts with scores in the bottom 50% of the score range
7
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/8/1/untangling-gentrification-and-displacement.
8
- City Observatory. December 14, 2020.
https://www.cityobservatory.org/building-more-housing-lowers-rents-for-everyone.
9
Mense, Andreas. n.d. Review of The Impact of New Housing Supply on the Distribution of Rents*. Kiel, Hamburg: ZBW - Leibniz Information
Centre for Economics. Accessed March 2, 2021. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/224569/1/vfs-2020-pid-39662.pdf
10
Sightline Institute, 10 Aug. 2016,
www.sightline.org/2016/08/10/displacement-the-gnawing-injustice-at-the-heart-of-housing-crises.
11 2021. https://www.Psregcncl.maps.arcgis.com.
26 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!52
5/E/b
within city limits.
F IGURE 4: D ISPLACEMENT R ISK M AP
PSRC data indicators utilize 5-yr American Community Survey (ACS) estimates from 2012-2016 for socio-
economic indicators including race, languages spoken, education levels, rental data, cost burden, and
household income. In addition to socioeconomic indicators, transportation indicators sourced by PSRC
during the Regional Transportation Plan update include job access, transit proximity, and proximity to
current or future Link Light R-range plans for bus
rapid transit.
Other indicators used in this analysis include proximity to business, civic infrastructure, higher-income
neighborhoods, development capacity, median rent, and voter turnout. The full technical
12
documentation can be found through PSRC. It is important to note that no single report can
capture all the complexities of poverty, population concentration, displacement, and gentrification.
Considerations for Kent
As indicated in Figure 4, Kent neighborhoods with the highest displacement risk are those in the valley
and adjacent to the future Link Light Rail Station on West Hill. Larger portions of East Hill are shown at
moderate risk for displacement rather than high. Outreach responses and Rental Housing Inspection
Program data paint a slightly different picture; fear of displacement is a reality for many East Hill
12
27 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!53
5/E/b
indicators. As such, this resource should be used as a starting point, not the sole data source for
displacement risk.
To that end, Chapter 7 details policies for further displacement risk analyses that should be done in
conjunction with major zoning changes.
28 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!54
5/E/b
Chapter 3. Housing Policy Analysis
Introduction
The universe of policy is vast and multilayered. Kent operates within the policy constructs laid out by
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the region; the
13
, establish regional guidance on housing.
From that regional level, countywide planning policies (CPPs, an update of which is under development
at the time of this writing, see more below) further refine the housing policy landscape for cities to then
work within in comprehensive plan policies. However, these specific policy documents are not the only
realm of policy; other conceptions worthy of analysis may include certain development regulations. For
Element Policy LU-
regulations such as height maximum, square footage maximum, parking requirement, owner-occupancy
requirement, site coverage maximum, design requirements, and morethe totality of which could
comprise the C all development regulations can be construed to fit
within neat policy arenas, and there are generally far too numerous regulations to truly analyze them
all; therefore, the below sections will include an analysis of the most relevant policy frameworks
affecting residential building capacity, beginning with a subregional targeted policy analysis, and moving
onto further analysis of development regulations that may be impacting residential building capacity. A
ent and Land Use
Element of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan follows, and the chapter finishes with an analysis of the
adopted Multicounty Planning Policies related to housing, and draft CPPs on the same. Further work to
connect the policy direction laid out in this document with those newly adopted CPPs will be required
after the CPPs are finalized and adopted, likely during the next Comprehensive Plan update (scheduled
for adoption in 2024).
SoKiHo Housing Policy Assessment Recommendations
The six SoKiHo cities collaboratively identified five policy areas for an analysis that compared the
approaches and results of the varying cities, to identify meaningful policies that have shown measurable
success. The five policy areas were ADUs, multifamily tax exemptions (MFTE), fee waivers, density and
height bonuses, and planned action ordinances/environmental impact statements (PAOs). This
assessment is included in full in Appendix D; the recommendations are summarized and analyzed below.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
None of the six cities have seen significant ADU construction; Kent has issued 33 permits for ADUs since
2005, which is similar to other cities studied. The City of Renton recently took significant initiative in
adopting a more ambitious ADU strategy including approved basic plans, fee reductions, planning
assistance, and more. The success of this new strategy is yet to be determined but should significant
ADU development occur in the coming years, Kent and the other cities could replicate some or all of
13
Puget Sound Regional Council, 25 Feb. 2021, www.psrc.org/sites/default/files/vision-2050-plan.pdf.
29 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!55
5/E/b
potentially through SKHHP, including pre-approved plans. While the efficacy of regulating at the SKHHP
subregional level is questionable, the other regulatory recommendations such as reducing requirements
are applicable and relevant to Kent and are explored in Chapter 5, page X.
Multifamily Tax Exemption Programs (MFTE)
Renton was the only city of the six SoKiHo communities to see significant units developed using MFTE;
generally, other market factors have likely impacted the financial feasibility of projects even with an
incentive such as MFTE as a possibility. Much analysis of profitability, which can be read in full in
Appendix D, yielded a recommendation that , entitled Targeted
Residential Investment Program (TRIP): an 8-year program focused on market-rate projects, and a 12-
year program with affordability requirements. More discussion of specifics can be found in Chapter 5,
page XTRIP policy is grounded solidly in an objective
assessment of market readiness, land costs, and regional development factors. Changes to TRIP based
on political or other considerations are still possible; however, a market-driven policy assessment
perspective would not support such policy direction.
Fee Waivers
Fee waivers or reductions have been utilized in Renton, Auburn, and Tukwila for achieving certain
development goals. A broad fee assessment exercise yielded the finding of a limiting factor: that the
largest development fees tended to be the most highly regulated by state lawimpact fees. Other
permitting fees, while smaller, have the limitation of being primary revenue sources for permitting
, and the deferral of fees, rather than true
waivers, was suggested as the more appropriate strategy to pursue. Kent has a single-family fee deferral
program that is rarely utilized under Kent City Code (KCC) 12.20.040, which allows applicants to annually
receive deferrals of all applicable impact fees that would otherwise be collected for the first 20 single-
family residential construction permits. This can be issued by the City to the applicant by filing an
application and the recording of a deferred impact fee lien against the property. Potential expansion of
this policy to middle housing and multifamily is addressed in Chapter 5.
Density and Height Bonuses
Several cities have development bonuses of various types that are available today; however, not many
units have been created as a result of such bonuses. Generally, the analysis showed that the overall
benefit provided by a given bonus was likely too small to be meaningful in terms of producing significant
numbers of new units. No strong recommendation was made for bonuses, perhaps due to the
complexity of right-sizing exactions. An optional recommendation related to minimum infrastructure
standards, with bonuses available for more enhanced infrastructure upgrades, is not explored in-depth
in this document due to its relative lack of benefit compared to the complexity of developing such
standards.
Planned Action Ordinances (PAOs)
Pre-analyzing the predicted
seems as if it could help reduce delays for future development that otherwise might stem from
disagreements over potential impacts of any individual projectthis was the promise of the PAO as an
environmental review tool. However, reality has differed: appeals have not caused any significant delays
for SoKiHo cities, regardless of PAOs. While thousands of units have been produced within PAO areas
across all six cities, the likelihood that the PAOs were critical to the development of any of the projects is
30 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!56
5/E/b
low. The recommendation for cities to make the most of their PAOs was to implement better tracking so
that what was planned for versus what has been developed is easily discoverable by those wishing to
develop further under the PAO (see Chapter 7, SPO-2).
Generally, the SoKiHo Policy Assessment yielded relevant background information and validated the
assessment of some existing policies; however, the sum of the recommendations was not particularly
specific or impactful for Kent. Therefore, the more detailed policy analysis below holds more promise for
policies and therefore helps serve as a solid basis upon
which the rest of the document, including strategies (Chapter 5) and goal and policies Chapter 7), can
build.
Development Regulations
Background
Analysis of development regulations in the context of the current development climate is an
important exercise in establishing the efficacy of the City's current housing policies and to ensure
regulations are not unintentionally impacting housing development.
Single-Family and Multifamily (3+)
Recent development patterns show a preference for single-family subdivisions, even in situations
where multifamily development would yield more units. At the time of this writing, the City is
reviewing a proposal for a 50-unit subdivision in Low-Density Multifamily Residential Zone (MR-G).
The 7.3-acre property could yield 118 multifamily units with full utilization of the allowed density of
16 dwelling units per acre. This discrepancy between what could be built and what is being
proposed can be attributed to the market driving a single-family product. While city policies cannot
override the market, it is possible to revise the existing regulations to ensure the undue burden is
not placed on higher-density projects.
When comparing the existing development regulations for single-family versus multifamily, it is
evident there is little incentive to build multifamily. The chart below compares some of the most
impactful development standards for single-family and multifamily development in KentMR-G
zone as an example of ways the code places some burden on multifamily such that single-family is
the easier choice even in multifamily zones
Table 3.4
Regulation Single-Family Multifamily Impact
(MR-G)
Max Density 16 dwelling units 16 dwelling units per No multifamily incentive.
per acre acre
Minimum Lot None 8,500 for the first two Difficult to calculate, no
Area and 2,500 after multifamily incentive.
Minimum Lot 25 80 Three single-family homes need
Width less of a footprint than a triplex.
Negligible on larger MF projects.
Maximum 55% 45% May incentivize single-family by
Building allowing a larger footprint per
Coverage unit and more gross floor area.
31 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!57
5/E/b
Open Space Subdivisions over 25% of the lot shall be Subdivisions under 20 lots: Pay a
20 lots: open designated open space, park impact fee in lieu of open
space of 180 per plus 150 per unit in space designation
lot in addition to design guidelines
a park impact fee.
Landscaping Only during Parking lot landscaping, In addition to other open space
subdivision; 10' requirements, this can be a
buffer for street significant requirement for
abutting multifamily.
Design Review Reviewed with a Separate design review Additional development time,
building permit, permit, an additional material cost, fees, etc. for
no additional fee fee multifamily.
While not intentional, some of the development regulations may provide a disincentive to
multifamily developers. Although single-family development requires applicants to go through the
procedural hurdle of a subdivision, developers are still willing to take that risk. Anecdotally, the
requirements for multifamily compound upon one another and may be a limiting factor in some
cases, where the risk of a product that does not perform as well in the market or drive as steep of a
profit margin is not worth it to the developer.
See Chapter 5 for further elucidation of possible code amendments to rebalance the regulations
related to multifamily development.
Comprehensive Plan
Background
The current Kent Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2015, establishes a vision for 2035. The Housing
Element contains five housing goals and twenty-one associated policies which are generally supportive
of increased density and housing variety, healthy and strong neighborhoods, and the supply of quality
and affordable housing. Additionally, the Land Use Element includes four goals and nineteen policies
that are supportive of housing diversity, increased density, and adaptability to changing housing needs;
analysis of both these Elements is necessary to gain a comprehensive understanding of housing policy
efficacy. While the Comprehensive Plan demonstrates a general level of support for increasing
residential building capacity, the direction in the existing policies is not robust enough to be considered
sufficient to move the City forward without further refinement.
In addition, at the time of this writing, there are draft legislative changes to the Housing Element
requirements which would further dictate the nature of an update to the Housing Element; the below
analysis can serve as a basis for future updates in combination with any new requirements that are
adopted subsequent to this plan.
Analysis
The following sections will evaluate the Housing Element Goals and Policies, Housing Programs, and the
Land Use Element for achievement and alignment with the goals of this effort.
32 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!58
5/E/b
Table Key:
ECD= Economic and Community Development
RHIP= Rental Housing Inspection Program
HSD = Human Services Division
CE= Code Enforcement
SKHHP= South King County Housing and Homelessness Partners
CBOs= Community Based Organizations
SoKiHo= South King Housing Workgroup
SKHHP= South King Housing and Homelessness Partners
Table 3.1
Housing Element
Policy Policy Text Achievement Analysis
Goal H-1 Preserve and improve existing housing
Policy H-1.1 Monitor and enforce Code enforcement continues Retain. Building quality
building and property to enforce standards for single-remains an integral part of
maintenance code family and multifamily when healthy and safe housing
standards in residential complaints are received while stock.
neighborhoods. the Rental Housing Inspection
Program educates, monitors,
Policy H-1.2 Promote the repair, Modify to explicitly include
and enforces building code
revitalization, and rental housing and
standards for multifamily
rehabilitation of multifamily.
rentals proactively.
residential structures
that have fallen into
disrepair.
Policy H-1.3 Promote increased Modify to encourage an
awareness among education component geared
property owners and towards equity.
residents of the
importance of property
maintenance to long-
term housing values and
neighborhood quality.
Policy H-1.4 Provide a high quality of City services like parks, public Retain. Quality of life will
services to maintain the works, ECD, police, and code only become more essential
appearance of enforcement work together to as the City densifies.
neighborhoods and the ensure code compliance,
quality of life of safety, and high quality of life
residents. for residents.
Policy H-1.5 Pursue comprehensive This has largely been in the Modify to include
neighborhood purview of the Neighborhood displacement policies. It is
preservation strategies Councils, which have pursued unclear what was intended
for portions of the small grants to reinvest in their by neighborhood
community that need neighborhoods on an ad-hoc preservation. This item can
reinvestment. basis. The Neighborhoods often be construed as the
33 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!59
5/E/b
program is undergoing a desire to maintain
revamp at the time of this neighborhoods at existing
writing and that process may density, or strict design
yield further insights into the regulations.
success or lack thereof of these
types of strategies. Several
Human Services programs also
fall within this policy including
the Home repair Program.
Policy H-1.6 Promote additional Kent continually reviews and Retain and advocate for
funding for supports legislation that legislation to expand
rehabilitation, energy promotes energy efficiency. programs to include a wider
efficiency, and Kent is an active King County range of housing types
weatherization by Cities Climate Collaborative including rentals and
supporting legislation at (K4C) partner and actively multifamily.
the state and federal engages in energy and climate
level to expand these legislation.
programs.
New Additional policies should be considered that focus on minimizing or mitigating
Policies displacement of people living in naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH), regulated
affordable housing, and mobile home parks, with intentional language towards
communities most often burdened by displacement.
Goal H-2 Encourage a variety of housing types
Policy H-2.1 Provide adequate sites Kent Zoning Map establishes a Retain. Kent has successfully
and zoning to encourage wide array of residential zoning facilitated the development
and facilitate a range of designations from one dwelling of housing to meet growth
housing to address the unit per acre to unlimited targets and should continue
regional fair share density. this general approach as the
allocation. community grows.
Policy H-2.2 Encourage infill Kent has successfully Retain. Infill will become
development and encouraged infill development more critical as greenfield
recycling of land to through flexible minimum lot land is used up.
provide adequate size allowances and ADUs.
residential sites.
Policy H-2.3 Facilitate and encourage Kent has the largest housing Expand to address the
the development of size in the state and continues development of affordable
affordable housing for to facilitate large housing to rentals and homeownership
seniors, large families, meet that need. Most of the opportunities and consider
and other identified affordable developments emerging policy needs
special housing needs. Downtown are restricted to related to supportive
seniors and/or special needs. housing.
Policy H-2.4 Assist private and Human services and ECD Expand to address
nonprofit developers in continue to partner with the partnerships with BIPOC
providing affordable King County Housing Authority CBOs/non-profits to expand
housing to low-income and other nonprofits and CBOs equity-based strategies in
to assist low-income residents.
34 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:
5/E/b
residents and special providing affordable housing
needs groups. to those most in need.
New New policies should be considered that are geared towards culturally relevant housing
Policies types, including multigenerational housing/communal housing, and affordable
homeownership.
Goal H-3 Provide housing assistance where needed
Policy H-3.1 Use public financial Community Development Block Retain. Financial resources
resources, as feasible, to Grant Program (CDBG) funds are discussed more in
support the provision of distributed in 2020: $1,139,685 Chapter 6 and are critical to
housing for lower- meeting the needs of these
income households, The City successfully addressed populations.
seniors, and special the goals of meeting basic
needs groups. needs, affordable housing to
homeless and at-risk persons,
Policy H-3.2 Provide rental assistance Retain.
increasing self-sufficiency, and
to address existing
planning and administration.
housing problems and
Sub-recipients used Kent CDBG
provide homeownership
funds to provide:
assistance to expand
housing opportunities. Rent and utility
assistance
Home repair assistance
Case management
services to youth with
intellectual disabilities
and their families
Case management and
referral services to
African women
Shelter
Transitional housing
Outcomes for 2020 were:
home repair assistance
transitional housing
shelter
were provided (these grants
are largely unduplicated)
35 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!61
5/E/b
Policy H-3.3 Support the Modify to incorporate the
Human Services and ECD
preservation of preservation of naturally
continuously pursue
multifamily units, occurring affordable housing
partnership opportunities with
government-subsidized and include displacement
nonprofits to preserve and
housing, and other strategies.
expand affordable housing in
sources of affordable
the City. Additionally, SKHHP
housing.
will be supporting this work
Policy H-3.4 Further public-private Modify to support public-
through monitoring and
partnerships to develop, private partnerships for
potentially investing in the
rehabilitate and projects at all income levels.
preservation of units that are
maintain affordable
at risk of going off the market.
housing.
Policy H-3.5 Consider investments in Capital investment has not Retain. This concept still
capital infrastructure been significant enough to holds promise even if success
projects that reduce reduce costs for any private has not been achieved yet.
private costs for the development; competing Further capital project
construction of needs are too high and sources may open in the
affordable housing by revenue sources too few and future, making strategic
nonprofit housing far between to make capital investments that
providers targeted to meaningful achievement on specifically support housing
those making less than this front. by nonprofit housing
30 percent AMI. providers more possible.
Goal H-4 Remove governmental constraints
Policy H-4.1 Review development The City annually reviews Retain. This is essential to
fees annually to ensure development fees. continued housing
that fees and exactions development at the
do not unduly constrain necessary pace.
the production and
maintenance of housing.
Policy H-4.2 Provide for streamlined, Kent passed a streamlining Retain. This is an ongoing
timely, and coordinated process amendment in 2020 to need that should be
processing of residential establish a timelier processing continually monitored.
projects to minimize of design review and short
holding costs and plats. Amendments also
encourage housing included public notice revisions
production. and internal process updates.
Permit intake updates in 2020
are also expected to better
serve customers including
residential developers.
36 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!62
5/E/b
Policy H-4.3 Utilize density bonuses, Zoning does not currently Modify to incorporate more
fee reductions, or other utilize density bonuses due to a incentives for affordable and
regulatory incentives to generous density and height middle housing within
minimize the effect of allowance. Fees are in line with proximity to transit, and
governmental other jurisdictions and additional review of impact
constraints on housing generally, government fees and alignment with
affordability, particularly constraints are in balance with middle housing policies.
in neighborhoods with development costs/benefits.
proximity to transit,
employment, or
educational
opportunities
Policy H-4.4 Utilize the Housing King County Housing Authority Retain. Consider expansion
Authority as a tool to (KCHA) maintains over 600 to include a more proactive
provide sites and assist units in Kent spread partnership with KCHA.
in the development of throughout multiple senior and
affordable housing. multifamily communities, in
addition to the management of
the Section 8 Program.
Policy H-4.5 Explore collaborations Successfully partnered with Update to reflect formation
with other South King five other cities for SoKiHo (the of SKHHP and possibly
County jurisdictions to formation of which is described SoKiHo or other South King
assess housing needs, in Chapter 1; results of County collaborations.
coordinate funding, collaboration occur throughout
increase capacity and this document). Successfully
find cost efficiencies. partnered with other cities to
form SKHHP which will further
coordinate funding and
increase capacity to effectuate
housing outcomes.
Goal H-5 Promote equal housing opportunities
Policy H-5.1 Encourage the use of Americans with Disabilities Act Retain.
barrier-free architecture (ADA) compliance is integrated
in new housing into building permit review
developments. through most recent building
code.
New Additional policies should be considered that address equal housing opportunities, housing
Policies
37 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!63
5/E/b
Table 3.2
Housing Programs
Name Program TItle Achievement Opportunity
Program 1 Code Enforcement This program provides
continues to conduct inspections on a outreach to homeowners
complaint basis. Staff almost always and renters to work
takes an educate-first approach as towards a greater
people are often unaware that they understanding of the
are violating city codes. In 2020, Code importance of code
Enforcement was moved from ECD compliance. Since 2018,
supervision to Police, allowing for a some of the education
full-time code enforcement assistant components have been
and more support. Code enforcement taken on by the Rental
handled 444 complaints in 2020 which Housing Inspection
is representative of an average year. Program for code
compliance items that
are related to building
safety. Possible
opportunities to increase
education about code
before a violation occurs
might necessitate
additional staff support.
Program 2 Home Repair In 2020, 94 households received home The rental housing
Program repair assistance. Repairs are intended inspection program has
to maintain the health and safety of identified multiple
occupants and preserve the dwelling
by addressing critical repairs. Priority is
given to households occupied by multifamily properties
seniors and residents with disabilities. need significant repairs.
The cost of the repairs is
often a concern for
property owners. If there
are no legal constraints
to the use of the fund
towards rental
properties, Kent should
explore the opportunity
to use the funds for small
in a partnership through
the RHIP program.
38 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!64
5/E/b
Program 3 Monitor and Staff resources on this have been put Continuous
Preserve towards the formation and support of Improvement
Affordable SKHHP; now that SKHHP is staffed and
Housing has the capacity, it is anticipated that
this program will be run by SKHHP (see
Appendix H, SKHHP workplan).
The City worked collaboratively to
address the needs of public housing by
advocating for and investing in
affordable housing stock, providing
supportive services to prevent
homelessness (keeping additional
people off the King County Housing
Authority waitlist), and staffing several
committees and application review
teams that directed funds to
organizations managing affordable
housing stock.
Program 4 Energy Efficient The building department is up to date Continuous
Design on all energy materials. Energy Improvement
conversation and water conservation
are handled through Public Works.
Kent Home Repair staff seek
opportunities to assist low-income
clients with improving energy
efficiency within the constraints of the
federally funded program.
Program 5 Housing Economic Development staff continue Continuous
Opportunity Sites to facilitate the redevelopment of Improvement
underutilized sites through various
outreach methods to the development
community.
Program 6 Section 8 Rental King County Housing Authority Continuous
Assistance provides Section 8 assistance; Human Improvement
Services helps to facilitate connections
between residents and KCHA while
monitoring the number of units
available.
The City added its first permanent
supportive housing project in
partnership with King County Housing
Authority. 40 0f the units have project-
based VASH vouchers attached. (HUD-
VASH is a collaborative program
39 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!65
5/E/b
between HUD and VA that combines
HUD housing vouchers with VA
supportive services to help Veterans
who are homeless, and their families
find and sustain permanent housing.)
For more on this project, see Chapter
2, Page X.
Program 7 Remove Staff periodically review development This plan lays the
Development constraints through docketed code groundwork for more
Constraints amendments. comprehensive
amendments to
unnecessarily
constraining regulations.
See Chapter 8 for the
schedule of
implementation.
Program 8 Planned Unit Enabled in Kent City code, but rarely Continue to allow PUDs,
Developments utilized. and review potential
constraints to the
utilization of the
program.
Program 9 Streamline In the Fall of 2021, a new cloud-based Continue to monitor
Processing permit software and applicant portal, permit processing times
Amanda, is scheduled to be released. and investigate ways to
While it is always necessary to refine streamline the process.
and streamline the permit process, Continue to digitize
staff anticipates this increase in quality information including
submittal data will significantly building permits and the
improve output. Amanda has zoning code.
automated notice capabilities that will
alleviate time-consuming bottlenecks,
including unclear timelines and
inconsistent due dates. Other
capabilities that will streamline staff
time include autogenerated staff
report templates, correction letters,
email notices, and more. Small items
add up to significant staff time that
can be more efficiently utilized once
the Amanda system is implemented.
Program 10 Prioritize Housing When the City received stimulus funds Continuous
Program Activities through the Neighborhood Improvement
Stabilization Program (NSP), the funds
were used to purchase and
rehabilitate three foreclosed homes,
which were then sold to income-
eligible homebuyers. The homebuyers
40 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!66
5/E/b
were families of African descent that
had been on the Habitat for Humanity
waitlist for an extended period; the
families received zero-interest loans. A
fifteen-year covenant of affordability
was signed by each homebuyer.
Mortgage payments received from the
homebuyers were entered into a fund
that will allow Habitat for Humanity to
purchase, rehabilitate, and sell
additional houses. (Habitat for
Humanity provides an annual
accounting to the City on the amount
of these funds.) The mortgage
payments will allow the City and
Habitat for Humanity to target
additional homeownership to African
American and Hispanic households
that are on the waitlist. The City
provides an annual report to the State
on its NSP project. Recently, Habitat
asked if it could use mortgage
payments to purchase additional
homes or land to house
low/moderate-income homeowners.
The City supports this investment and
encouraged the purchase of larger
homes for families who cannot afford
to purchase homes on the open
market. A Memorandum of
Understanding is being drafted to
provide more autonomy to Habitat for
Humanity to increase affordable
housing in Kent.
In 2019 the City of Kent provided joint
funding to the Fair Housing Center of
Washington to conduct fair housing
testing. FHC observed thirty-nine (39)
positive violations of Fair Housing law
throughout King County during the
contract period. Additional testing as
well as sending technical letters are
both recommended to 1) further
identify potentially systemic barriers
to fair housing, 2) make violators
aware of their actions, and 3) bring
said violators into compliance with Fair
41 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!67
5/E/b
Housing law. In addition, increased fair
housing education, including annual
fair housing training throughout the
county may help to combat instances
of discrimination, for both new and
seasoned property managers, leasing
agents, and other actors in the housing
space.
Program 11 Planning and Development fee assessment and
Development Fees collection is an integral part of the are generally in line with
permit process. Fee reduction, other cities, evaluation
waivers, and payments are methods to of the equitable
incentivize affordable housing assessment of fees on
construction; however, city-assessed projects, and the
fees are only a portion of the costs possible expansion of the
associated with a project. To submit a existing fee deferral
complete application, applicants may program are areas for
need to hire design professionals, continual improvement.
contractors, engineers, and other
professionals. In addition to these
costs and the fees that fund the permit
process, impact fees are assessed and
collected to finance necessary
infrastructure improvements
associated with specific development
proposals. School, transportation,
park, and fire impact fees are collected
to negate the impact of the new
development on the existing services.
Program 12 Reasonable The City continues to administer the Continuous
Accommodations Home Repair Program to assist Improvement
disabled households with architectural
modifications to their homes. The
Home Repair program completed 20
ADA projects in 2020.
The City continues to post fair housing
materials on its website and regularly
provides fair housing
articles/information/notices in
electronic communications to the Kent
Cultural Diversity Initiative Group.
In January 2017, the Kent City Council
unanimously passed a Source of
Income Discrimination Ordinance. This
tenant protection ensures that people
already facing high barriers to housing
42 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!68
5/E/b
are not discriminated against solely
based on the use of a Section 8
voucher or another form of public
assistance. This can have a significant
impact on communities like Kent
whose low-income residents
disproportionately need to rely on
housing subsidies to make ends meet,
including households of color, seniors,
veterans, people with disabilities, and
single-parent households with young
children.
Table 3.3
Land Use Element
Policy Policy Text Achievement Future Action
Goal LU-3: Kent will focus on household and employment growth in the Urban Center and designated
Activity Centers to provide adequate land and densities to accommodate a large portion of the
adopted 20-
Planning Area.
Policy LU-3.1 Encourage mixed-Kent encourages mixed-use Retain. Consider
use development development in downtown and other alternative
that combines retail, activity centers. Several large conceptions of
office, or residential developments have been constructed mixed-use as part of
uses to provide a over the last 10 years, some of which mixed-use regulation
diverse and have included commercial in addition to updates.
economically residential.
vibrant Urban
Center and
designated Activity
Centers.
Policy LU-3.2 Encourage medium- Zoning in Downtown allows for Retain.
and high-density unlimited density and height, as well as
residential ground floor commercial requirements
development in the to encourage mixed-use development.
Urban Center that Several high-density projects have been
supports high-constructed in the Urban Center, and
capacity transit and nearly half of the units Downtown are
is affordable to all affordable to lower-income seniors.
ranges of income.
Policy LU-3.4 Designate Activity Kent has designated multiple activity Remove (due to
Centers in areas that centers within the Comprehensive Plan. completion) or
currently contain consider updating to
concentrations of incorporate new
commercial activity center goals
43 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!69
5/E/b
development with and other potential
surrounding designations.
medium-density
housing, are
supported by
transit, or have an
existing subarea
plan.
Policy LU-3.5 Periodically evaluate Kent is actively working on establishing Retain.
household and new growth targets for 2044.
employment
forecasts to ensure
that land-use
policies based on
previous
assumptions are
current.
Goal LU-6: Kent will provide adequate land and densities to accommodate the 20-year housing target
of 10,858 new dwelling units within the Kent Planning Area.
Policy LU-6.1 Evaluate, monitor, Kent land use map contains a Retain.
and modify, if significant percentage of single-family
necessary, existing zoning. Modifications to the map or to
land use plan map what is allowed in single-family zoning
designations to are likely necessary to accommodate the
ensure adequate next 20-year horizon.
capacity to
accommodate 20
years of household
and employment
growth.
Policy LU-6.2 Establish flexible There is no established minimum Modify and expand
regulatory methods, density. Other flexible methods are to explore minimum
such as shadow established within Kent City Code. densities; specifically,
platting and multifamily
minimum densities, properties being
to ensure future subdivided and
land division that developed as single-
supports urban family should be
densities. examined so that
continual
underutilization of
property is
prevented.
44 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!6:
5/E/b
Policy LU-6.3 Locate housing Retain.
opportunities with a higher density areas, and mixed-use
variety of densities zones strategically place along major
within close transit corridors.
proximity to
employment,
shopping, transit,
human and
community services.
Goal LU-7: Kent will provide opportunities for a variety of housing types, options, and densities
Policy LU-7.1 Ensure residential No minimum density is required in Kent Modify to clarify
development City Code, flexible lot size thresholds allowance thresholds
achieves a within subdivisions allow developers to versus achievement
substantial portion get closer to the maximum density after threshold.
of the allowable removing open space, right-of-way, etc.
maximum density
on the net buildable There is no mechanism in place that
acreage. would require anyone to build more
units to achieve a substantial portion of
the allowable maximum density.
Policy LU-7.2 Allow and Dense development is allowed and Retain.
encourage urban encouraged with generous height limits
density residential and other flexible thresholds in the
development in the Urban Center and, to varying degrees, in
designated Urban the designated Activity Centers.
Center and
designated Activity
Centers.
Policy LU-7.3 Allow and Multifamily is allowed within mixed-use Retain, but explore
encourage a variety areas, but only as part of mixed-use the modification of
of multifamily development. The code requirement for development
housing forms and a dedicated percentage of commercial standards to actively
densities within floor area can be unintentionally encourage more
designated prohibitive to development. residential
commercial mixed-development.
use land use areas.
45 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!71
5/E/b
Policy LU-7.4 Allow a diversity of As written, all the listed housing types Retain and expand to
single-family are allowed, however, they are not support missing
housing forms and actively constructed. There have been middle housing
strategies in all no cottage developments in Kent, even types, i.e., duplexes,
residential districts after the cottage demonstration triplexes,
(e.g., accessory ordinance. townhomes, etc.
dwellings, reduced
lot size, cottage, or Design and development standards are Include of a range of
cluster housing), required but might be too stringent and housing types that
subject to design unintentionally prohibit the construction foster culturally
and development of the diverse housing types outlined in diverse communities
standards, to ensure this goal. including
minimal impact to multigenerational/
surrounding communal housing.
properties.
Policy LU-7.5 Allow attached Current interpretation of the term Remove. The intent
single-family ttached single-family housing would of the policy is
housing within be considered townhome development. unclear.
multifamily land use The intent of this policy is unclear.
areas (e.g., MRT-12
and MRT-16), and as
demonstration
projects in mixed-
use land use areas.
Goal LU-8: Kent will revise development regulations to encourage single-family and multifamily
development that is more flexible and innovative in terms of building design, street standards for
private roads, and site design.
Policy LU-8.1 Support the Kent allows a flexible minimum lot size Expand to support
achievement of within subdivisions of 3,000 SF to middle housing
allowable density in support the achievement of allowable types.
single-family density.
developments
through flexibility
and creativity in site
design.
Policy LU-8.3 Develop design Design standards for single-family have Remove (due to
standards for high-been developed and implemented. completion) or
quality, compact, Resulting home designs tend to skew consider modifying
innovative single-towards craftsman style construction. to reflect updated
family housing to Requirements for modulation and roof understanding of
ensure such housing forms may unintentionally prohibit opportunities to
integrates well into compact and modern development. improve design
surrounding standards for more
neighborhoods. innovative housing
types.
46 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!72
5/E/b
Policy LU-8.4 Allow more Parking and setback flexibility are built Retain.
flexibility in single-into the code under an administrative
family and process.
multifamily
residential setbacks,
vehicle access, and
parking, particularly
on small lots, to
encourage more
compact infill
development and
innovative site
design.
Policy LU-8.6 Establish design Design standards for accessory dwelling Remove. ADU
standards and units (ADUs) do not allow detached regulations need to
parking structures taller than the main home; be evaluated and
requirements for this unintentionally prohibits new styles adjusted over time,
accessory dwelling of construction and development. The and both design
units to ensure that parking requirement may also standards and
the neighborhood unintentionally prohibit development. parking requirements
character is have been cited as
maintained. barriers to ADU
development in some
cases. Additionally,
legislation to alter
ADU parking
requirements is likely
in the near future.
Policy LU-8.7 Integrate Multifamily design review and strategic Expand to include
multifamily housing land-use zoning have worked to meet middle housing.
with the this goal.
surrounding
neighborhood,
through site design,
architectural
features common to
adjacent single-
family design,
pedestrian
connectivity, and
landscaping.
Policy LU-8.8 Adopt minimum Kent has not adopted minimum density Retain.
density requirements.
requirements for Explore minimum
residential density requirements
development. and legality.
47 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!73
5/E/b
A Note on Equity
Past policy work demonstrates intentionality towards equity-based strategies, most notably in goal H-4,
which addresses increased government intervention where needed. However, policies should be drafted
not only towards future
policies lack enough specificity to be meaningful on this point. To achieve equitable housing outcomes,
future policy work will need to look at historic patterns of investment and intervention. The goal of this
plan is to provide options for , and as such, the analysis herein should provide a
solid basis for that work.
Regional Coordination
Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs)
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) is a regional body that develops policies and coordinates decisions
about regional growth, transportation, and economic development planning within King, Pierce,
rowth, VISION 2050, establishes multicounty-
accessible, healthy, and safe housing choices to every resident. The region continues to promote fair
To facilitate that goal, VISION 2050 establishes twelve Housing Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs),
that are generally aimed at addressing the need for a range of housing options, increased housing
supply along the economic spectrum, public intervention policies, increased homeownership
opportunities, and displacement prevention/minimization. These policy directions are consistent with
the goals of this effort, and the policies adopted in this plan are expected to fully comply with this
regional guidance.
Countywide Planning (CPPs)
The Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) are a series of policies that address growth management issues
in King County. The Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) brings together elected officials from
King County and the cities and jurisdictions within it to develop the CPPs.
Adopted and ratified by the cities in 2013, the CPPs provide a countywide vision and serve as a
framework for each jurisdiction to develop its comprehensive plan, which must be consistent with the
overall vision for the future of King County. At the time of this writing, the CPPs are undergoing
significant revision with input by an inter-jurisdictional team to ensure regional compatibility with
VISION 2050 and statewide housing direction.
healthy, and safe housing choices to every resident in King County. All jurisdictions work to: preserve,
improve, and expand their housing stock; promote fair and equitable access to housing for all people;
and take actions that eliminate race-, place-, ability-, and income-
policies support this goal with significantly increased reporting/monitoring guidance, specific
countywide need targets for different affordability levels, and a focus on those most negatively
impacted by housing practices of the past including BIPOC communities and the lowest income segment
48 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!74
5/E/b
of the population. Policies require documentation of historical discriminatory housing practices, address
housing stability, promote access to homeownership, and require the prioritization of local resources for
income-restricted housing.
While the policies are not finalized and may still undergo significant revision, the orientation of the
update points clearly to the need for Kent and other South King County cities to continue participating
and collaborating with the County through this and other processes. While it is anticipated that the
goals of this effort will align within the eventually adopted CPPs, there are aspects of this work that may
fall outside the narrower interests of those at the County level, such as the importance of market-rate
unit production in cities where such a thing is not guaranteed. The County includes such giants of the
development world as Seattle, obviously, which may skew the County's perception or orientation
towards those highest-cost areas without realization of unintended consequences in comparatively
lower-cost areas such as Kent. At the time of the next Comprehensive Plan update, it is likely that Kent
will have to reassess the housing needs that were done for this effort (see Chapter 2) given the draft
requirements for housing needs assessments in the policies of the draft CPPs; at that time, there will
to those
policy frameworks. This document should be highly relevant and integral to that update, but some
departures may be required at that point based on updated data or the final form of individual CPPs.
49 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!75
5/E/b
Chapter 4: Community and Stakeholder Engagement
Introduction
Engaging the community is crucial to any planning process; particularly for a topic as personal as
into the policy direction for the City is essential. Community outreach was conducted in three phases:
focus groups with the development community as part of Phase 1, comprehensive and targeted
community engagement during the development of this document as part of Phase 2, and significant
surveying of owners, residents, and experts as part of the study on mobile home park preservation.
SoKiHo Outreach (Phase 1)
Outreach conducted as part of the South King Housing (SoKiHo) work was conducted via stakeholder
focus groups, with the goal of understanding how the development community views the prospect of
building housing in South King County. Partner cities identified stakeholders that work, or have
proposed work, in the area, including nonprofit and private developers and real estate professionals,
(see full results in Appendix E). This outreach resulted in themes that reflected the general perception of
difficulty in building what most developers see as a public good (housing units, whether regulated for
affordability or market-rate) and the frustration with processes that add cost, delay, or complexity to
development. The themes pointed to the need for cities to establish a clearly articulated vision of their
approach to housing with buy-in at every staff level, and for cities to prioritize eliminating barriers to
housing production by expanding incentives, eliminating policy barriers, and increasing zoning capacity.
Many of the strategies identified in the next chapter respond to these themes; however, some broader
organizational or political shifts are outside the realm of this document. For instance, Kent has long had
buy-in for every project at every individual point in the process by every staff is not easily measurable.
Broadly, the efforts of the City to define quality standards and enforce those through permitting to help
facilitate the efficient delivery of housing products should only be strengthened by the strong policy
direction contained in this document and the code amendments stemming from the findings herein. It is
y those seeking to build
housing here.
Broader Community Outreach (Phase 2)
An Unprecedented Challenge
The desire to engage the community in a robust discussion about housing was severely impacted by the
ongoing global pandemic, COVID-19. The state placed restrictions on the gathering of individuals outside
of established households, inhibiting all traditional methods of in-person engagement. This made
outreach very challenging and resulted in methods that favored individuals with access to technology.
Inequities in technological access potentially lead to skewed demographic results, such as fewer
responses from older adults, non-native English speakers, and those with lower incomes. Embedded
translation and community-based organization (CBO) assistance were the main tools utilized to combat
this issue.
50 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!76
5/E/b
Methods Utilized
Due to the lack of available in-person outreach methods, staff focused on expanding the types of direct
methods to engage as many sectors of the Kent population as possible. Through these methods, nearly
- over digital
meeting platforms. The three live meetings were strategically held at different times (one during the
day, one in the evening, and one on a weekend afternoon), to facilitate participation opportunities.
The following methods were utilized:
Project website
Online survey
Listserv
Three digital live meetings
Direct communication with Kent Cultural Communities Board
Presentations and discussions with:
o Cambridge Neighborhood Association Meeting
o Kent Cultural Diversity Initiative Group (24 CBOs)
o Kent Community Development Collaborative- KCDC (7 Development Partners)
o Kent Sustainability Ambassadors Youth Leaders
Flyers to Kent School District families
Targeted Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter ads
400 hand-delivered postcards to King County Housing Authority residents
300 postcards delivered to culturally specific grocery stores in the Valley and Kent East Hill
300 postcards distributed at the Kent Foodbank
Mayor video spotlight
Results
Survey
The survey was live on the project website for four months and consisted of eight questions carefully
interventions. Questions were worded and ordered to clearly establish the nexus between government
interventions and potential housing costs, as this relationship is somewhat unintuitive to the public.
General themes from the 292 responses are below; the complete survey results can be found in
Appendix G.
51 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!77
5/E/b
Resp
Analysis: Single-family homeowners were the most well represented groupa familiar phenomenon to
those involved in planning or, indeed, any civic engagement. However, the fact that renters did
participate, and also that respondents from less typical housing situations (such as renting a single-
family homesomething the City has no way of tracking) were included as well, means that the results
can be considered to come from a range of perspectives.
Top items most important to help house everyone:
More access to homeownership (50%)
More affordable rental housing (41.8%)
More units to house vulnerable populations (38%)
Preventing displacement (36%)
Analysis: Homeownership is resoundingly popular across the political and economic spectrum, given its
wealth. More affordable
rental housing is an interesting second priority given that many of the respondents owned single family
homes; respondents are likely familiar with the degree to which rents have outpaced incomes in recent
years and are reflecting a widely understood community need. The desire to help house people who
have vulnerabilities of various types is laudable and speaks to a strong sense of community in Kent.
Top items to keep quality of life high during growth:
More walkable streets or better transit (58.5%)
52 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!78
5/E/b
Public safety (50.6%)
Addressing impacts of homelessness (47.6%)
More trees/ vegetation (33.4%)
Analysis: The need for better transportation options as an alternative to driving is strong among
respondents, which likely speaks to experiences of traffic congestion, pedestrian safety, or trouble
accessing desired destinations. Public safety and homelessness as priorities may be based on
City invests
nearly half its human services funding towards programs that address the impacts of homelessness,
including displacement prevention services, emergency services that provide safe places for people to
stay, and connections to housing and services focused on finding permanent housing solutions.
Additionally, the City has allocated funding to participate in a pilot mental health co-responder program
to provide a coordinated response to those in South King County experiencing mental health crises and
emergencies to facilitate a better response solutionso the community will hopefully see
improvements due to these efforts. The fourth most selected desire for more trees and vegetation,
while not the highest priority, does speak to an actionable land use issue in terms of design standards.
Willingness to fund priorities mentioned above:
Willing and able (43.5%)
Willing but not able (25.7%)
Able but not willing (11%)
Not willing or able (19.9%)
Analysis: Given the failed levy attempts in recent years (see Chapter 6, page X), there was some question
as to whether voters would ever elect to fund identified priorities. While it is promising that over 43% of
respondents indicate a willingness and ability to fund priorities (the scale of which was left to the
imagination), the majority of respondents were either not willing and/or not able to pay for any priority
they had identified. This suite of responses suggests that voter-approved levies are not likely to be a
successful funding source for housing work in the foreseeable future.
Top types of new housing that would be welcomed in Kent:
Groups of small cottages (50%)
Townhomes (48.6%)
Mother-in-law/ ADUs (43.7%)
Duplexes and triplexes (34.2%)
Analysis: The responses point to a clear set of actions the City can take that should receive minimal
public pushbacksee Chapter 5 for specific code amendments that relate to these types of housing.
Top reasons for wanting to move in the upcoming years:
To move to a more appealing neighborhood (25%)
To lower my housing costs (19.4%)
Analysis: The lack of strong response here may point to a level of desirability or stability that Kent
residents have found. The following question yields more insight.
53 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!79
5/E/b
If planning to move, would they stay in Kent:
Yes (21%)
No (23%)
Maybe (31.3%)
Not planning on moving (24.7%)
Analysis: The results suggest that nearly half of respondents are committed to Kent as their choice of
home (those who are not planning on moving or who would stay in Kent if planning to move). The rest
of the respondents may not be able to find housing that suits their needs, or they may have other
reasons for being uncertain about their future in Kent. Regardless, it is the job of this document to lay
out a path to provide more housing options so that those who desire to stay can find housing that meets
their expe
example of a specific constituent that Kent can better serve through more housing options.
What level of design requirements should Kent consider for new housing?
Fewer requirements in terms of design/amenities, lower potential housing cost (24.9%)
Some design/amenities requirements, variable housing cost (57.8%)
Highest requirements design/amenities, higher potential housing cost (17.3%)
Analysis: This question, while somewhat abstract, grouped respondents into three general camps: those
who would favor less regulation if it lowered housing costs, those who could not commit to less
regulation but did not specifically want more, and those for whom housing cost was less important than
design and amenity requirements. The results show that most
preferring the middle ground (and perhaps uncertain as to the exact nature of the trade-offs). What the
remaining responses suggest is that there may be more support for reducing regulations with the
explicit goal of lower housing costs, as opposed to increasing requirements with the consequence of
higher housing costs. This information may prove valuable during future code amendments (see
chapters 5 and 8), particularly when it comes to design review regulations.
Digital Public Meetings
Three live public meetings were held to educate the public about housing supply, housing needs in Kent,
and promising methods to increase residential building capacity. The uniqueness of this method brought
participation challenges, but also opportunities for instant feedback methods. Live polling and a visual
preference survey were integrated into the presentations; this method allowed instantaneous feedback
to be discussed in real-time. The first and third meetings each had a small number of engaged
attendees, resulting in time for in-
connection to the material. The second meeting was scheduled in the winter at night, and while 10
people registered, no participants signed in at the meeting time.
The visual preference survey consisted of two slides, each with an accompanying verbal scenario, of a
variety of middle housing types; attendees were asked which most appealed to them. The slides were
shown after the educational material about affordable housing, housing supply issues, and Area Median
Income (AMI) in Kent. This was intentional to help participants establish a baseline understanding of the
need for increased density and attendees were asked to keep that new knowledge in mind as they made
their selections.
54 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!7:
5/E/b
Poll 1:
Results: The most common options chosen on this slide were A, B, and C, followed by E and F. Discussion
around this noted that respondents preferred the styles of the ones chosen to the more modern styles,
even though option D contained less density than options A and B. Inclusion of design standards that
ensure neighborhood compatibility and scale was important to their considerations.
Overwhelmingly, respondents chose B, a cottage development in Kirkland. Respondents noted that they
liked the styles that looked like single-family homes, with more traditional designs.
Poll 2:
Results: Options C, E, and F were the housing types chosen most. Unlike in the first poll, there was less
of a range of responses, and option G was never chosen. This slide prompted discussion about multi-unit
55 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!81
5/E/b
properties without garages. It was noted that many of the people who will choose to live in these types
of units will still have cars and that some of the attendees would not live in units without off-street
parking due to the need to have a car in Kent. Similar to the discussion with the first visual preference
poll, design elements and whether there appeared to be open space were indicators of whether
attendees chose the images.
Student Focus Group
A focus group with the Sustainability Ambassadors, a King County Program focused on sustainability and
leadership skills for middle and high school students, was held on February 10, 2021; six students, five of
whom were Kent residents, attended. The presentation focused on educating the students about
housing supply and demand, the role of government in housing, and missing middle housing types.
Students were asked after the presentation about the future of Kent, how they connected to the
material, and to engage in an open dialogue about housing and outreach.
Students described a lack of ability to envision the future of housing in Kent and attributed it to a lack of
supply and demand issue, and that middle housing was a way to accomplish that goal; however, some
consistent themes were raised that expanded on what was heard in adult focus groups.
The American Dream
One of the largest themes that discussion of middle housing
The group reflected on the reasons that their families immigrated to America. Living in a single-
while anything else is considered
a concession amongst their relatives. Owning a single-family home is the only way to achieve
the vision, and multifamily living contains a stigma amongst their parents and grandparents.
Multigenerational Housing
Many of the students discussed living with larger families in multigenerational housing, due to
having larger families or grandparents that lived with them. Smaller units are not something that
would accommodate these large families, but instead larger homes with ADUs may be a better
way to accommodate multigenerational households. Multigenerational housing was a
component of many of the students' identified cultures. It was brought up that many cultural
groups choose to cohabitate or live in clusters, which helps to provide a sense of security and a
Safety
The focus group's perception is that multifamily developments in wealthier neighborhoods, like
Kirkland and Bellevue, would not be as heavily stigmatized due to those areas being safer. Safety
was brought up as a large concern surrounding larger multifamily developments or
neighborhoods in Kent. When asked what would make Kent feel safer, participants identified
mixed-use developments or proximity to parks, shops, and other amenities. These factors were
seen as making the wealthier neighborhoods feel nicer and more welcoming, and thus safer.
56 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!82
5/E/b
Kent Community Development Collaborative (KCDC)
14
A focus group with Kent Community Development Collaborative (KCDC) was held on February 19,
2021. KCDC is comprised of seven organizations that are focused on equitable community development
and supporting communities of color, immigrants, refugees, and low-income residents in an advocacy
capacity. The presentation focused on the role of government in housing and potential strategies to
address increased housing capacity, as well as the C
future engagement opportunities. KCDC provided valuable feedback on the landscape of need for the
populations they serve, and how the disenfranchisement of many of the communities of color leads to
underrepresentation in housing decisions, including in the outreach for this effort. Strong themes that
occurred during the discussion included:
Displacement and Gentrification
The group discussed a fear that flexible zoning and increased mixed-use capacity would displace
human services organizations as they are often the first ones displaced by mixed-use and TOD
developments near their served communities due to the high increase in commercial rents.
Missing middle as a concept seems that it is geared more towards the middle class and that it
might cause displacement and gentrification of the communities that are most in need of
housing and at risk of displacement.
Education and Homeownership
Many populations who would like to buy homes have limited access to homeownership due to a
lack of information. Marginalized communities in Kent need to be reached out to directly and
given the resources to learn about homeownership opportunities. The missing middle could
increase housing at this price point, but the concern was raised that those who need it the most
would not be knowledgeable enough to access the new opportunities. The group encouraged
city leadership to continue to engage throughout the housing process in the upcoming years.
Mobile Home Park Preservation Study Outreach
Wanting to get a better understanding of housing issues specific to mobile home park residents, the City
(MHPs). The study (discussed more
in-depth in Chapter 5, page X) included significant outreach to ensure the findings were grounded in the
lived experience of Kent mobile home park residents. This section outlines the outreach methods and
high-level findings; further information can be found in Appendix I, Kent Manufactured Home Park
Preservation Study Findings.
Methods
Community and stakeholder outreach was conducted between December, 2020 and March, 2021. As
mentioned previously, COVID-19 inhibited gatherings and tenant meetings, requiring different strategies
to reach stakeholders. Various engagement methods were utilized to reach park residents, managers,
and owners including an owner questionnaire, resident questionnaire, and one-on-one interviews.
An owner's questionnaire covering park logistics including total units, number of spaces, and questions
regarding plans for future improvements or ownership status (i.e., selling) was mailed to the registered
unresponsive
14
Kent Community Development Collaborative, https://www.kentcdc.com/.
57 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!83
5/E/b
owners through phone, email, text, site visits, and intercepting residents in the community to get
updated information on park managers.
A complementary rquestionnaire covering home repair needs, park conditions, what residents
like was circulated in various ways. Strategies to reach
residents were developed on a park-by-park basis depending on the cooperation of the park/owner.
Park managers were not asked for the contact information of residents. Methods included sending a
, and
announcing the study on Spanish radio. Outreach efforts were conducted in English and Spanish.
Additionally, interviews with relevant expert stakeholders including MHP specialists and representatives
from service organizations, as well as city staff knowledgeable about the issues.
Results
Resident responses on the questionnaire pointed to the need for more consistent education of tenants'
rights and responsibilities as well as issues in the park that would require repair and significant
investment. While Kent staff have had some previous knowledge of discrete issues at parks, the
outreach conducted for this study resulted in a more detailed and comprehensive understanding of
possible code compliance issues, including lack of park amenities and poor site maintenance as primary
concerns. Pest problems and home damage were frequently cited; however, notably, residents overall
reported satisfaction with their park and site conditions, using terms such as "tranquil" and "peaceful.
The full findings from the study can be found in Appendix I.
58 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!84
5/E/b
Chapter 5: Evaluating and Prioritizing Housing Strategies
South King Housing Workgroup (SoKiHo) Recommendations
Introduction
The strategies explored in the SoKiHo Housing Strategies Framework (see Appendix F) consider the
broad needs of the subregion. There are four major strategies, each with elements that help support the
strategytaken together, the various ideas comprise a picklist for cities in the subregion to consider,
analyze, and pursue. The strategies focus on preserving housing stock, affordable housing production,
middle housing typologies, and Transit Oriented Development (TOD)/urban centersall towards the
goals of preserving affordability, creating affordable and workforce housing, and increasing housing
options and supply. The strategies range from low to high in terms of potential impact, as well as from
property to market level in terms of scalability. Each city from the SoKiHo collaborative therefore has
the same foundation and shared understanding of possible strategies for further considerationbut the
expectation is not that all cities will pursue all strategies equally. While recommendations made for
SoKiHo related to middle housing have high potential in Kent, others such as TOD have largely already
been implemented in Kent and may be more appropriate for immediate action by a neighboring
jurisdiction. This chapter explains the four major strategies, ranks and prioritizes the individual strategy
elements, and gives an in-depth analysis of each strategy element as it might apply in Kent. This serves
as the core analysis from which the Implementation Plan (Chapter 8) is built.
The Four Major Strategies
Preservation/Anti-Displacement
The Housing Strategies Framework describes the housing markets in South King County as generally
having aging housing stock that could be at risk of investment purchases. Even regulated affordable
housing (the landscape of which is described in Chapter 2, page X) is at risk depending on the capital
availability and funding structure. Preserving both regulated and unregulated housing stock could have a
moderate impact at the neighborhood or market level, depending on the toolalthough the actions
cities can take in this regard are somewhat circumscribed by resources (and the administrative burden
of resource allocation for cities without a housing authoritysee chapter 6 page X). Fortunately, Kent
has made significant strides through recent programmatic efforts, which are detailed below (such as
Rental Housing Inspection Program). Further anti-displacement efforts also show promise for Kent,
particularly related to mobile home park preservation efforts (see below, page X).
Affordable Housing Production
Reducing the cost of development for affordable housing could have an impact on the number of
subsidized affordable units on a project-by-project basis, although some affordable housing developers
have successfully built projects in Kent without any financing difficulties. Consideration for cost
reductions which, as detailed in
Chapter 2, are the affordable developments unlikely to be constructed without government intervention
(likely 0-30% AMI and potentially 30-50% AMI). With a history of affordable housing projects
concentrating in certain areas of the City, the need for affordable housing now is to have increased
variety, more variation in levels of income subsidy, and greater dispersal so that Kent continues to be
welcoming to all. Strategy elements related to affordable housing production are therefore considered
59 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!85
5/E/b
in light of how they can support these Kent-specific goals for increased variety, rather than accepting
continued investment of a narrower segment of affordable housing type.
Middle housing
Moderately dense housing fills a gap in South King County as an opportunity for unregulated housing
types that may be lower cost than single-family detached housing (i.e., potentially moderately
affordable) while also increasing overall supply to help with long-term affordability. Increasing the
feasibility of this development type could result in widespread incremental change throughout
neighborhoods. As shown in Chapter 2 (see page X), middle housing has significant potential in Kent
even more so than the rest of the SoKiHo collaborative; since it requires more immediate regulation
changes rather than long term resource allocation, it is in some ways the most promising strategy that
falls squarely within the responsibilities and duties of planning staff. While it may be aided by
coordination with partners, the City as a regulator can enable, remove barriers from, and incentivize this
housing type to see the desired outcomes for increased supply and homeownership. Therefore, the
sections below go into significant detail on this strategy and lay out many actionable paths for middle
housing development.
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and Urban Centers
Targeting housing growth in urban centers and TOD areas through improving development feasibility is
transit providers. While TOD is not necessarily always deeply affordable, it creates location efficient
housing options for residents and is generally efficient from an infrastructure and service delivery
standpoint for jurisdictions as well. Since Kent has long embraced TOD in the urban centers around high
Light Rail), the
-
line and future RapidRide lines. RapidRide, King Co
includes five elements: stations designed with the amenities that meet the communit needs and
incorporate their priorities, vehicles that will ensure decreases in greenhouse gas emissions, speed and
reliability improvements to ensure that RapidRide is a competitive and attractive option compared to
driving, service and operating plans to maximize funding and riders served, and branding that
communicates the high rider expectations. RapidRide routes provide a distinct service with equally
distinct applicable types of TOD. These TOD types differ from TOD types typically associated with
commuter rail and light rail. This distinction in TOD types relevant to RapidRide and commuter rail/light
rail is increasingly coming into focus in the region (and is not articulated in the SoKiHo framework);
therefore the details below are exploratory in nature accounting for the what-ifsas this issue
develops. There is significant overlap with middle housing as they both relate generally to appropriate
levels of density for different neighborhoods in Kent.
60 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!86
5/E/b
Honing the Details for Kent
The following table ranks the SoKiHo recommendations based on the highest potential for direct impact
within the shortest timeframe in Kent. The section following contains a deep dive into each
recommendation, starting with those deemed the highest priorities and nearest term, with an
explanation of the likely efficacy of the strategy for Kent, goals for each strategy, and the next steps for
implementation.
Table 5.1
Strategy Element Implementation Priority
& Timing
1A- Revolving Loan Fund Low priority, Long-term
1B- Monitor Regulated Properties Low priority, Long-term
1C- NOAHs/Aging Housing Stock Medium priority, Medium-term
1D- Culturally Specific Support Medium priority, Medium-term
1E- Tenant Protections Medium priority, Medium-term
1F- Mobile Home Park Preservation High priority, Near-term
1G- Rental Licensing Program Existing, Continual improvement
2A- Revolving Loan Fund Low priority, Long-term
2B- Other Funding Mechanisms Low priority, Long-term
2C- MFTE Expansion Existing, Continual improvement
2D- Reduced Parking Requirements Medium priority, Medium-term
2E- Create and Calibrate Density Bonuses Low priority, Long-term
Multifamily Development Code Calibration High priority, Near-term
3A- Middle Housing Zoning Code High priority, Near-term
3B- Middle Housing Incentives Medium priority, Medium-term
3C- Refine ADU Standards and Incentives High priority, Near-term
4A- Encourage Higher Density Housing Existing, Continual improvement
(I-Line) High priority, Near-term
4B- Expand TOD and UC designations Existing, Continual improvement
(I-Line) High priority, Near-term
4C- Evaluate TOD Market Readiness Existing, Continual improvement
(I-Line) High priority, Near-term
4D- Evaluate Capital Improvement Plans Existing, Continual improvement
4E- Explore Public-Private Partnerships Existing, Continual improvement
High-priority/ Near-term
Mobile Home Park Preservation (1F)
Background
Mobile home park preservation is sometimes thought of as merely a zoning exercise, and indeed zoning
can play a crucial role in the future of the land underneath mobile home parks (MHPs)recognizing this,
61 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!87
5/E/b
Kent has had MHP zoning in place since the early 1960s, effectively preserving most parks except those
in areas slated for transit-oriented development. However, the concept of preservation extends beyond
zoning, as actually preserving the parks themselvesboth the infrastructure serving the park (i.e., roads,
community spaces, refuse, lighting, etc.) as well as the structuresis another crucial aspect of
preservation to ensure parks are safe and fit for human habitation. In other words, zoning alone is not
sufficient to guarantee that MHPs can continue providing the uniquely affordable version of
homeownership they have in the past. And for those parks in areas that are better suited to higher
density development, while preservation may not be the concept that best fits the overall community
goals, displacement mitigation and relocation requirements may be an appropriate strategy to consider.
To better understand these complexities and adequately analyze various related strategies, a consultant
There are 26 mobile home parks in Kent, with over 1,700 housing units and likely over 5,000 residents.
The conditions of the parks vary across Kent, depending on the property management approach, site
density, and the age of the units at the park. Newer parks tend to have wider lot sizes, community
amenities, and newer housing units. Parks in poorer condition have a tendency towards higher site
density (crowding), higher frequency of unsafe accessory structures, improper fuel storage, poorly
maintained site grounds, older units, and/or unresponsive or irresponsible management practices. One
positive finding was that more parks were well maintained than the number that presented this highest
level of concern. According to an assessment methodology developed in conjunction with city inspection
staff, seven parks were designated as the highest level of concern, ten parks need some improvement,
and nine parks were determined to be well-
manufactured housing standards in 1976 often lack fire safety considerations and proper electrical
wiring; unsurprisingly, then, many of the parks identified as the highest level of concern for overall
conditions are also those with the oldest homes. MHP experts suggest that newer homes may be the
only way to rectify some of the critical issues in older parks; in other words, repair is not always an
option, though it may seem more financially feasible than full replacement. Additionally, overcrowding
and accessory structures present challenges to making improvements to the parks, as replacing older
coaches with newer ones in an unsafe (crowded) configuration would not rectify the entirety of the fire
safety issue, as one example.
Ownership/management structures also vary consi
tenant-owned, two are owned by non-profits, and the rest are a mix of third party managers, owner-
manager companies, and small self-managed ownership. The structure of ownership and management
of the park has implications for potential improvement strategies; contacting the right party and
understanding their role in the process will help the city in any efforts to engage owners in preservation
efforts.
The study also detailed the extensively regulated nature of MHP tenant-landlord relations, including
lease contracts, and the ways park tenants are at a disadvantage in holding landlords accountable to
legal requirements. Tenants may be unaware of their rights and could benefit from understanding the
way to navigate the proper channels to get issues addressed. Providing educational materials in helpful
formats could help to rectify unequal power dynamics between tenants and owners.
Another area of regulation deserving of some scrutiny is the notification of closure and relocation plan
requirements. The state legislature recently approved HB 1083, which increased funding for relocation
62 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!88
5/E/b
15
assistance (from $7,500 to $11,000 for a single-wide and from $12,000 to $17,000 for a double-wide),
recognizing that relocation may be a daunting prospect for tenants with few other options. Other
organizations also provide assistance, but again, tenants may not be aware of all the options available to
them.
Goals
Given the heavily regulated nature of this housing type, one primary way the City can help mobile home
park tenants is to be a source of information and aid when it comes to understanding the regulatory
landscape. The study recommends a MHP webpage, translating materials, conducting tenant
information sessions, and clarifying requirements.
In terms of addressing the numerous code issues identified in the study, several approaches should be
incoming light rail development, policy concepts for these parks must take into account prior city land
use decisions to designate the land for transit-oriented development. In other words, these parks are
not appropriate for preservation policy (it would not be sensible to invest in upgrades given the
likelihood of redevelopment) but may instead be considered for displacement mitigation or other forms
of financial assistance, perhaps in excess of existing state requirements.
r improvement must be
carefully calibrated to minimize risk of displacement, and owners interested in upgrades are not turned
away due to nonconformance. Since some parks may not be able to become fully up to code without
must take this reality into account. A strategic approach that focuses less on rote compliance and more
on risk reduction could allow the city to work with park owners to improve safety even if total site plan
overhaul is not feasible. This could be done through a carefully designed code enforcement strategy, as
well as through code changes related to nonconformance.
Next Steps
1. Prioritize displacement mitigation efforts at those parks already designated non-MHP (such as
Transit-Oriented Community) on the land use map.
2. Prioritize home replacements at those parks designated MHP on the land use map, and that
rank as highest levels of concern, but where minimum setback required by building code is
possible.
3. Consider additional criteria for redesignating land currently designated and zoned for MHPs.
4. Create educational materials regarding tenant rights and owner responsibilities in accessible,
translated, and helpful formats, and proactively distribute them in conjunction with other
efforts.
5. Develop a compassionate and nuanced code enforcement strategy, starting with those code
violations that pose the highest risk to health and safety but rectification of which would not
displace residents.
6. Incentivize the purchase by tenants when parks go up for sale.
7. Review and explore opportunities within Kent's existing MHP zoning and non-conformance
policies to address site inconsistencies and make it easier for mobile home parks to remedy
15
http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2021-22/Pdf/Bills/House%20Passed%20Legislature/1083-S2.PL.pdf?q=20210429105532
63 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!89
5/E/b
existing issues though proper channels. Focus on overcrowding as defined by setback
compliance, not density calculation, and consider other ways to allow upgrades to
nonconforming parks.
8. Explore an inspection program for mobile home park units. Modeled after the success of the
Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP).
Transit-Oriented Development Along Bus Rapid Transit I-Line (4A/4B/4C)
Background
Kent has two existing TOD-oriented areas, Downtown and Midway, which will be discussed later in this
chapter, as ongoing opportunities for continual improvement. However, the development and imminent
deliv
potential opportunity for development that capitalizes on this type of transit service.
The I-line is a large-scale connection project that will connect downtown Auburn, through downtown
(see Figure 6, page x). The East
Hill, including the Panther Lake area, contains a significant amount of the naturally occurring affordable
16
housing stock in Kent, according to the ECONorthwest Housing Policy Evaluation tool developed for
SoKiHo (see Chapter 2, page X), meaning RapidRide I line will serve populations who may gain crucial
benefit from increased investment.
F IGURE 5: R APID R IDE I-L INE
16
South King County Policy Analysis Tool. https://econw.shinyapps.io/south-kc-policy-analysis-tool/
64 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!8:
5/E/b
TOD is generally focused on the area within ¼ to ½ mile of a transit amenity. The narrowest traditional
walking radius is ¼ mile, considered a conservative and reasonable access distance. However, distances
up to ½ mile of transit stops are also relevant to considerations of density, as access would still be
relatively reasonable, perhaps for a smaller portion of the population (i.e., the able-bodied, or those
aided by wheeled or electric devices such as bicycles, scooters or wheelchairs). Increased density around
high-quality transit stops plays an integral role in the relationship between available local services, a
lively streetscape, a vibrant mix of uses, and public health. TOD as a land-use pattern decreases reliance
on automobiles, which reduces impacts to roads, traffic congestion, and greenhouse gas emissions.
When carefully instituted, TOD can increase housing numbers in employment centers, which can link
workers to jobs and can decrease transportation costs. When housing supply is low, workers commute
from farther distances to find homes. As prices in Seattle suburbs have increased over the past couple of
decades, single--family neighborhoods have
been largely built out, and new development is increasingly focused in areas that more easily
accommodate higher densities. Increased transit capacity brought by RapidRide I is an opportunity for
Kent to capitalize on the principles of TOD and increase density reciprocally with increased access to
transit and amenities.
Goals
Goals for RapidRide I TOD differ from other TOD areas, due to several factors. The service itself is subject
to more variability than the commuter rail and light rail that anchor Downtown and Midway,
respectively. The destinations, services, and amenities that are anticipated to be connected by
central business district (both of which are or will be connected by rail). Finally, RapidRide I traverses
heavily residential areas with small pockets of existing, potentially dilapidated, strip mall development.
While these areas may be ripe for some amount of redevelopment and change, careful consideration
will be needed to scale the change appropriately to avoid adverse impacts on surrounding areas.
Land use designations along RapidRide I include the full range of residential and commercial zones;
those areas within a ½ mile radius of future stations and currently zoned SF are a high priority for
evaluating higher densities. Many of the single-family neighborhoods along RapidRide I do not have the
infrastructure to support full TOD build-out. In instances of smaller-scale redevelopment, middle
housing as discussed on page X, could be an appropriate measure to capture a need for increased
residential density at an appropriate single-family scale. For existing multifamily and mixed-use zones,
evaluating current regulations and considering them against TOD principles will be the next priority. In
particular, the commercial requirement in mixed-use zones is known to be prohibitive given the lack of
retail demand; alternatives to ensure quality ground floor pedestrian experience should be considered.
Next Steps
The City should evaluate market readiness along RapidRide I to inform strategic code amendments
that prioritize investment without increased risk of displacement.
In combination with middle housing, the City should pursue targeted upzones around station
areas.
The City should evaluate mixed-use regulations for alternatives to commercial space requirements
in conjunction with density analyses, and potentially adjust development standards, design
65 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!91
5/E/b
review, or other regulations to steer development towards more TOD-type products where
proximity to stations warrants within mixed-use zones.
The City should work collaboratively with large Grayfield property owners in proximity to future,
frequent, all-day transit, to create master development plans that meet identified community
goals.
Middle Housing (3A/3B/3C)
Background
17
Missing middle housing is a term created in 2010 to define housing that falls between an apartment
and a single-family home. Middle housing consists of smaller scale multifamily dwelling units including
duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, cottage clusters, and smaller multiplexes. (For this plan, accessory
dwelling units (ADUs) will be discussed in this section as well, though they are not consistently
categorized as middle housing). Middle housing is a resurgence of pre-WWII style neighborhoods where
small-scale multifamily was well integrated within walkable, mixed-income, and mixed-use
(GI Bill), and the 1956 Federal Highway Act, an explosive combination of new infrastructure and funding
for auto-dependent single-family homes on large lots created the foundation for many existing
neighborhoods.
18
particular community on a dis as part of the sordid history of single-family
neighborhoods as they exist now. Even Kent has minor history with racial covenants and redlining:
19
according to the University of Washington Racial Covenants Map, there is one historic plat that
contained such covenants within the City boundaries, Ross Fair Addition, and one right outside the City
boundaries, Lake Fenwick Tracts. Middle housing regulations will not be able to reverse decades of
social inequality, nor can they guarantee affordability; but adopting codes that move the City towards
equity-based strategies is a step in the right direction.
What middle housing does provide is a potential increased supply of smaller housing units and
densification of neighborhoods, which when combined with other strategies, are promising methods to
address housing supply and affordability. These product types help provide opportunities for residents
across the socioeconomic spectrum to find affordable units that meet the changing demographics of the
community. Middle housing can provide for entry-level homeownership opportunities, larger rental
options for families, smaller units for adults to age in place, opportunities for mixed generation
households, and mixed-income communities to come together in ways not previously achievable in
single-family neighborhoods with only larger homes.
Variation in housing types can increase neighborhood character, resilience, and vitality. Smaller housing
breaks the monotony of neighborhoods by breaking down superblocks, incorporating more types of
residents, and allowing the neighborhood to slowly adapt to changing needs of the community. Resident
17
https://missingmiddlehousing.com/.
3
Merriam-Webster.com Legal Dictionary-webster.com/legal/redlining.
19
- Sea
https://depts.washington.edu/civilr/covenants_map.htm.
66 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!92
5/E/b
feedback during outreach established a willingness to see more townhomes, cottage clusters, and ADUs
within existing neighborhoods (see Chapter 4, page X).
Part of the appeal of middle housing is how it allows low-density zones to slowly increase in density
without a more dramatic scale of change. General implementation concerns for middle housing include
neighborhood compatibility and design elements. Another specific implementation concern for Kent is
appropriate parking requirements, as the level of car ownership associated with these housing types in
the near future or longer-term future is unclear, and may be subject to market changes as well as the
continued viability of transit or other modes for daily transportation needs. Mitigation measures for
potential impacts must balance community desires with anticipated associated costs to ensure code
requirements are not so cumbersome as to impede development.
Goals
surrounding jurisdictions such as Olympia, Burien, Kirkland, and Renton, inform the below opportunities
to am
goal is to increase overall residential density while maintaining the single-family neighborhood character
(See Chapter 7 for Strategic Policy Goals). The following tables identify areas of opportunity and rank
potential remedies to achieve this goal.
Table 5.1
Duplex and Triplex
Current Code: Duplexes and triplexes are allowed in single-family zones SR-4.5, SR-6, and SR-
8, within subdivisions, at a maximum of 25% of the total permitted dwelling
units.
Issues: The code as written only allows the permitted units within plats, within the
established maximum density, and with no incentivization. While technically
enabled within the current code, the provisions have not been utilized. The
code is too restrictive and/or the circumstances under which
duplexes/triplexes would be allowed are too uncommon for these product
types to be built.
High Priority The City should:
Remedies:
Allow duplexes and triplexes outright in single-family zones subject to
development regulations for:
o Lot size
o Density
o Building scale
o Transit proximity
o Location
o Lot configuration
67 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!93
5/E/b
Adopt code amendments that streamline development regulations
for duplexes/triplexes and align with less stringent single-family
requirements:
o Open space
o Minimum lot size
o Density calculations
o Lot coverage
Allow flexibility in design standards for duplex/triplex while ensuring
compatibility and scale with single-family.
Explore parking within a garage to count towards minimum
requirements with covenant based on location criteria.
Medium/Low In the long-term, the City could:
Priority Remedies:
Explore potential parking reduction allowances when development is
within walking distance of high capacity transit and available street
parking.
Explore the possibility of offering an expedited permit for middle
housing that meets specific location criteria particularly if
incentivizing middle housing is deemed necessary due to infrequent
permitting.
Consider exploring adjusted impact fees, altering the impact fee
deferral program to include middle housing, or implementing impact
fee payment plans for middle housing, depending on measured
achievement at meeting housing needs, at the time of impact fee
updates.
Table 5.2
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
Current Code: ADUs are allowed in all single-family zones with size limitations and design
requirements. Detached accessory dwelling units are limited in size to 33% of
the principal unit or 800 square feet, whichever is less. The attached units are
limited to 40%. Accessory buildings are also limited in height to be no higher
than the primary dwelling unit. Owners are required to sign an affidavit of
ownership occupancy in order to rent out an ADU.
Issues: Size Limits: -style homes.
These homes are shorter than modern construction with flat and lower pitch
roofs. These homes can also be small, which results in a small size allowance
for ADUs. The total monetary investment needed to construct an ADU can be
significant and often exceeds the value of the finished product. Many
residents inquire about ADUs at the permit counter, yet Kent has had less
than 20 applications for ADUs in the last 10 years.
68 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!94
5/E/b
Parking Requirements: Under Kent City Code, ADUs require an additional
parking stall. While seemingly insignificant, the code does not allow garages
to count towards parking for single-family. In order to build an ADU, another
stall would likely need to be constructed, which leads to other development
issues (i.e. maximum impervious limits, access restrictions).
Impact Fees: Kent assesses impact fees on ADUs. This can be an additional
cost of 8-10K dollars. Many cities do not collect impact fees on ADUs since
they are intended to be small and subordinate. If the ownership requirement
remains intact, a further discussion about the occupancy limit and
subordinate nature of ADUs may create a nexus for reduction or waiver of
ADU impact fees.
Tiny Homes: The permit counter also sees numerous inquiries about tiny
homes and the potential utilization of detached ADUs. According to Kent City
Code, tiny homes are considered an RV and are not allowed to be occupied
without a permanent foundation.
High Priority The City should:
Remedies:
Increase ADU size allowances.
Remove size correlation to the main home.
Increase allowed accessory structure height.
Revise design standards to allow more variation in roof pitch.
Explore the removal of required ADU parking.
Increase allowed accessory building coverage.
Reconsider the necessity or utility of owner-occupancy requirement.
Medium/Low If the above remedies are not sufficient to generate more ADUs in Kent, the
Priority Remedies: City could later explore the following:
Consider a basic plan program for ADUs.
Consider integrating tiny homes with ADU code, in line with
legislative changes.
Explore the potential for condominium rules that would allow ADUs
to be purchased and sold.
Adjust impact fees for ADUs, potentially subject to occupancy limits.
69 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!95
5/E/b
Consider allowing two ADUs per lot (one attached and one
detached).
Table 5.3
Fourplex, Cottages, Townhomes, and Other Multiplex Housing Types
Current Code: Small multifamily is not allowed within single-family zones in Kent.
Issues: Infrastructure, traffic, and neighborhood compatibility are concerns for
adopting regulations that would encourage higher density middle housing.
Medium Priority The City shall consider allowing townhomes and cottage-type developments
Remedies: in areas within proximity to transit:
Revise existing multifamily density allowances to calibrate minimum
lot size with adjusted duplex and triplex minimums.
Consider expansion of low-density multifamily zoning where single-
family zoning no longer makes sense (i.e., along arterials).
Consider allowance of only certain middle typologies that would
integrate within single-family neighborhoods like townhomes and
cottages with criteria related to:
o Lot size
o Density
o Building scale
o Transit proximity
o Location
o Land area
o Lot configuration
Low Priority If the above remedies are not sufficient to generate more middle housing in
Remedies: Kent, the City could later explore the following:
Allow 4-6 units along arterials, with careful consideration for further
expansion within single-family neighborhoods with criteria related to:
o Lot size
o Density
o Building scale
o Transit proximity
o Location
o Land area
o Lot configuration
Consider exploring adjusted impact fees, altering the impact fee
deferral program to include middle housing, or implementing impact
fee payment plans for middle housing, depending on measured
achievement at meeting housing needs, at the time of impact fee
updates.
70 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!96
5/E/b
Next steps
The City should amend the zoning code to allow middle housing with:
o Criteria for each housing type, size, location, zone, and design standards.
o Zoning to incrementally increase density throughout residential areas, with
consideration for proximity to transit.
o Remedies for existing barriers and inconsistencies related to middle housing in the code.
Monitor density of neighborhoods concerning overall growth and growth targets, to ensure
continual iteration and adjustment of code to incentivize and increase development.
Development Standards Calibration - Density, Parking, and Multifamily Codes (2D, 2E, Expanded)
Background
Multifamily code
As discussed in Chapter 3, page X, there are possible code barriers to higher unit counts being developed
in multifamily and commercial zones. While the middle housing code will help to increase density in
single-family zones, recent development proposals in multifamily zones suggest developer preference
for lower-density single-family subdivisions. Requirements for multifamily may be prohibitively
expensive given market demand (anticipated rents) as compared to the financial feasibility of single-
family products. The City needs to review the existing development standards to ensure that regulations
are not unintentionally prohibiting multifamily development or making it harder for those projects to
"pencil out" financially. Continuation of this development pattern may result in projects significantly
under planned capacity. There are several straightforward opportunities to amend the code to rectify
this issue.
Parking
Parking for developments in Kent is codified by unit count and development type. One of the strategies
to support increased development feasibility and increase housing opportunity is to consider a
reduction to codified parking requirements. However, it is important to note that Kent is a large city
without a fully developed, frequent service transit system in many of the multifamily areas. The City
receives frequent complaints about parking issues due to spillover from inside developments onto
nearby residential streets. Additionally, new residential streets are generally designed to be 28 feet
wide, allowing for parking on only one side of the street. With the newer small-lot developments,
streets often do not have any parking due to the lack of suitable distance between driveway cuts. These
are the types of scenarios reviewed when an applicant submits a request to modify parking
requirements. The ability for the Planning Manager to grant flexibility is built into the parking code, with
the approval of a parking demand study, and is granted on a case-by-case basis. At such a time in which
frequent all-day transit is available to most neighborhoods in Kent, then a reevaluation of code required
parking may be appropriate.
Density Bonus
Kent City Code does not have provisions for density bonuses, due to a lack of density requirements in
high-density mixed-use areas like Downtown and Midway. Multifamily and single-family zones have
flexible minimum lot sizes to facilitate the achievement of the maximum density during project
71 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!97
5/E/b
development. Density bonuses are often offered in exchange for a public benefit or as part of an
inclusionary-zoning program. While density bonuses may not have much short-term possibility due to
, it may be worth reconsidering in the future, perhaps in situations
where developments are unable to meet density due to critical areas, stormwater facilities, or right-of-
way dedication requirements. It may also be considered as an incentive for desirable development, for
example, if middle housing development fails within the next five to ten years after code changes.
Goals
Potential improvement could consist of code alterations to calibrate multifamily development
standards, parking reductions when in proximity to high capacity or frequent, all-day transit, and
potential scenarios to encourage density bonuses.
Next Steps
The City should review and amend the multifamily and mixed-use residential development
standards to ensure that they are generally less strict than single-family development in that
zone or prohibit single-family entirely, including review and possible amendment of:
o Minimum lot size and dimensions
o Minimum density
o Parking
o Open space requirements
o Lot coverage
o Impervious coverage
Review potential for multifamily incentives, waivers, and increased density allowances.
Consider altering the impact fee deferral program to include multifamily housing or implement
impact fee payment plans for multifamily, depending on measured achievement at meeting
housing needs, at the time of impact fee updates.
Monitor density of neighborhoods as related to overall growth and growth targets, to ensure
continual iteration and adjustment of code to incentivize and increase development.
The City should review parking standards for each use type and consider codifying lower parking
standards in transit-rich areas and/or with reduction criteria for adjacency to high capacity
transit.
The City should review density allowances in each zone and consider minimum density
requirements.
If other considerations do not sufficiently increase density, the City may consider density
bonuses in the future in exchange for public benefit, affordability, or enhanced open space.
Existing/Continual Improvement
Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP)(1G)
Background
The City of Kent established the
programs in the state, founded with the intent to prevent conditions of deterioration and blight that
m has been a successful model for
72 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!98
5/E/b
program established a database of multifamily housing, instituted licensing requirements, and began the
inspection of random units on a three-year basis. Kent finished the first year of the first three-year cycle
and is finishing the second year after delays due to COVID-19.
In its first two years, RHIP resulted in the inspection of 133 rental properties and the repair or
replacement of hundreds of smoke detectors, water heaters, unsafe decks/handrails, plumbing,
electrical and ventilation issues, and broken or faulty walls, floors, siding, gutters, cabinets, and
appliances. RHIP-required repairs have not caused any known displacement of tenants.
Goals
One challenge encountered within the program thus far is increasing difficulty for private inspectors to
only two of nine approved inspectors have adequate coverage and are willing to inspect larger
complexes. A long-term improvement then could be to hire city RHIP inspectors, as many other RHIP
programs do (giving landlords the choice between hiring a private inspector or a city inspector).
Another potential long-term improvement to the program could consist of expansion to include rentals
of single-family homes, subject to an increase in staff capacity.
Additionally, replacing tracking software to provide better data analytics and expanding translation of
documents (currently only the educational brochure is translated, into the top eight languages spoken in
Kent) could both aid in improving communications and compliance rate.
Next Steps
In conjunction with an assessment of capacity and resources, the City should evaluate the
potential for eventual expansion of the RHIP to include rental of single-family homes.
Explore the potential for hiring city inspectors.
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) (Downtown and Midway) (4A/4B/4C/4E)
Background
Kent has two existing TOD areas, Downtown and Midway. South King Housing workgroup (SoKiHo)
guidance recommends cities increase height allowances to encourage density; however, Kent has
already accomplished this through zoning (Downtown, the zoning code does not set a maximum
building height, and for Midway, building heights are capped at a generous 65 feet adjacent to Highway
99, and 200 feet elsewhere). Market limitations on parking, construction cost, and other development
regulations are more limiting in Kent than the proposed height.
Similarly, Kent does not have density limits in either TOD zone. The number of units constructed is more
limited by these other factors than a codified maximum density in the TOD.
Goals
Code requirements related to parking, design requirements, and other development standards should
be continually monitored and improved upon to ensure that they do not inhibit quality development.
73 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!99
5/E/b
Boundaries of TOD areas should be examined to ensure they reflect community goals and priorities; if
warranted, expansions to include adjacent areas that were previously thought of as distinct may be
appropriate given changes in development and land use over time.
Next steps
Review development standards to balance requirements and possible impacts to feasibility for
TOD, including:
o Parking
o Open space
o Extent/impact of design requirements
o Landscaping
Evaluate the potential for expansion of the Midway and Downtown TOD boundaries.
Capital Plans (4D)
Background
The SoKiHo recommendation to evaluate capital improvement plans for prioritization of projects that
support transit station areas and TOD refers to a process that mostly already occurs within the City,
albeit in an informal way. The City of Kent engages in capital planning every year during the Capital
Improvement Plan update that occurs as part of the budgeting process; however, this is generally a
department-by-department exercise that builds on existing plans to implement projects already
identified. The plan-making that occurs more intermittentlysuch as water system or transportation
master plan updatesis the crucial time for interdepartmental coordination to ensure capital plans
include appropriate housing growth and TOD considerations. Kent staff across all departments have
been very committed to coordination on these fronts and give due consideration to desired growth in
transit areas; recent examples include reduced impact fees in Midway and Downtown to allow TOD
projects to capitalize on existing transit rather than pay the full fee.
As far as ensuring that capital projects are prioritized according to their role in aiding TOD, this concept
is somewhat undercut by the necessity of providing infrastructure and utilities in ways that meet
adopted ratepayer levels of service/expectations. Capital prioritization processes have been explored in
Kent but have run into issues related to restrictions on utility funding expenditures, ratepayer
challenge, which is that land-use goals are not necessarily afforded the highest consideration in city
processes; while state law and subarea planning processes heavily tie capital project decision-making to
a land-use framework, the reality of implementation is not always so clear. Many competing priorities
including, for example, rate payers with below service water pressure issues, or available grant funding
for a non-TOD-supportive infrastructure project that greatly improves safety, may outweigh the
conceptualized capital needs of new development in TOD area in the minds of leadership, staff, and
community. For this reason, capital planning in support of TOD is not necessarily highly catalytic as a
concept and can largely remain part of the informal processes that occur today, with staff and
leadership weighing TOD potential as part of broader capital needs. Growth projections for TOD areas
-term capital planning accommodates new development, and
that process can continue to be honed and refined.
74 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!9:
5/E/b
Goals
It may be advisable for the City to reimagine a prioritization process for capital projects that takes
utilitiesfunding restrictions and provisionbetter into account. This process would ensure that TOD
-making, rather than considered on a case-by-case
basis. Such an effort would require significant strategic leadership, given the history of the concept in
the City.
Next steps
Consider a revamped capital projects prioritization process that includes TOD as a consideration.
Continue to tie growth projections, TOD assumptions, and capital planning together during
capital plan updates.
Multifamily Tax Exemption Programs (MFTE) (2c)
Background
and Rehabilitated Multi-
within urban centers, a tax incentive was implemented that exempted the value of new housing
construction or rehabilitation from ad valorem property taxation for ten years. This chapter, 84.14 RCW,
was subsequently amended to include two levels of tax exemptionan eight-year exemption and a
twelve-year exemption, with the latter stipulating affordability requirements. The exemption only
applies to the improvements on the land; property tax on the land itself is still collected under the
program.
Kent has had MFTE in several forms over the years; currently, adopted program, Targeted
Residential Investment Program (TRIP), designates greater Downtown Kent and most of the Midway
subarea as Residential Targeted Areas (RTAs) and includes both an eight-year exemption option and a
twelve-year exemption option.
Goals
As detailed in the SoKiHo Housing Policy Assessment (Appendix D, summarized in Chapter 3 page X),
relatively low projected rents (compared to the region) inhibits the types of dense developments that
can most benefit from an affordability-focused MFTE program. The recommendation from SoKiHo was
to focus MFTE programs in South King County on market-rate development until market conditions
change such that rents/sale prices increase, and financing costs decrease. The recommendation was also
to adopt a twelve-
option becomes attractive. Essentially, the recommendation was for cities to adopt precisely what Kent
has on the books at the time of this writing. The current TRIP program is maximized in terms of its
possible use for getting more housing units online.
Some nuances do exist that leave room for continual improvement. It was also recommended, for
example, that cities consider expanding MFTE to larger areas and ensure that programs are calibrated to
market conditions. Program requirements in Kent such as structured parking may prove prohibitive and
warrant reconsideration. Larger areas may be considered in tandem with such a reconsideration since
the product type (podium construction) will not necessarily pencil everywhere in Kentbut may pencil
75 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:1
5/E/b
in a greater area than is currently designated. Ultimately, if the City has no takers to the current TRIP
program (in place for about a year at the time of this writing), there will certainly be a reason to re-
evaluate the program and refine it to better meet objectives.
Next Steps
If TRIP is not used within three years of adoption, re-evaluate the program requirements and
adjust, utilizing developer feedback and with input from City Council.
When market conditions have shifted enough such that market-rate urban products have
proven profitable without incentive, remove the eight-year program or add affordability
requirements to it.
Continue to monitor and give input on proposed legislative changes.
Medium-priority/ Medium-term
Tenant Protections (1E)
Background
Rental properties, including houses and apartments, are generally controlled by the Residential-Landlord
20
Tenant Act (RLTA), Chapter 59.18 RCW (rentals of mobile home lots are generally controlled under a
separate RCW) Notably, the RLTA regulates the rights and duties of both landlords and tenants, as well
as provides procedures for either party to enforce their respective rights in the event of a violation.
Most commonly, tenant protections are conceptualized as relating to evictions; the RLTA lays out
requirements that landlords must follow to evict a tenant, including filing an action in Superior Court.
Some cities, including some members of SKHHP, have chosen to pass ordinances that add to these
requirements; often called these may provide specific and exclusive reasons a
landlord may legally evict a tenant.
ons range in the types of
policies that have been implemented.
Other tenant protections relate to ome cities
basis, whereby the
landlord generally must award a lease to the first eligible tenant to apply for the unit (rather than
selecting tenants in a potentially discriminatory manner)
ordinances which generally prohibit discrimination in housing against renters with arrest records,
conviction records, or criminal history.
Some of these ordinances have withstood legal challenge by landlords, while others are currently being
litigated. Aside from potential legal issues, programs of this sort may suffer from a lack of meaningful
enforcement mechanism; residents may perceive the City as intending to provide specific resources
rather than the intention for an ordinance to be used as a defense to eviction in court. Even responding
to queries and directing residents to existing legal aid resources can be time consuming for staff; any
program considered in the future should therefore include a careful consideration of staff capacity and
meaningful enforcement capabilities.
20
-TENANT ACT, https://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=59.18.
76 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:2
5/E/b
Other possible tenant protections authorized by the RLTA include requirements for landlords to provide
tenant relocation assistance to low-income tenants if a residence is being demolished or rehabilitated,
and the prohibition of source of income discrimination. Prior to it becoming state law, Kent had adopted
a prohibition on source of income discrimination. (Other Washington laws prohibit discrimination with
regards to rental housing on the basis of sex, marital status, sexual orientation, race, creed, color,
national origin, citizenship or immigration status, families with children status, honorably discharged
veteran or military status, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a
21
service animal by a person with a disability.) The RLTA also protects tenants from retaliation if they
make valid, good-faith complaints about landlords failing to comply with regulations.
Goals
The RLTA also lays out timelines for termination of tenancy; 20 days is required for written notice. This
short timeline may be problematic for tenants looking to relocate in a competitive rental market. At the
time of this writing, an ordinance adopting a new chapter in the Kent City Code to establish a 40-day
notice requirement before the 20-day notice of termination is moving being adopted in Kent.
Next Steps
Adopt a 40-day
Continue to monitor lawsuits involving the cities of Burien and Federal Way currently being
Continue to monitor potential state legislation addressing the rights and duties of tenants and
landlords,
Monitoring Unregulated Affordable Housing/ Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAHs) (1C)
Background
Redevelopment and resulting displacement risk may be associated with low rents, deferred
maintenance, small size (under 20 units), non-institutional owners (e.g., -
locations in amenity-rich areas, near recent redevelopments, or on high-cost land. The City of Kent does
not currently have any programs in place that monitor naturally occurring affordable housing. Some
22
15,000 units could qualify as NOAHs, depending on the definition used.
Assessing such large numbers of properties for these qualities may prove to be a resource-intensive
exercise; as such, it is fortuitous that SKHHP will be exploring this further as an item that was identified
in the 2020-2021 SKHHP work plan. SKHHP will be putting together a group of stakeholders to strategize
the best path forward while recognizing staff capacity and resource constraints, identifying goals and
priorities, and potential strategies on how to monitor unregulated affordable housing properties across
South King County.
Goals
Monitoring would be most valuable if paired with a revolving loan fund that could offer grants or low-
interest loans to purchase properties and maintain affordability and habitability for a defined duration.
Without such funding, the City or SKHHP may be in a position of monitoring forces over which there is
little ability to
21
RCW 49.60.222/WAC 162-36-005.
22
South King County Policy Analysis Tool. https://econw.shinyapps.io/south-kc-policy-analysis-tool/
77 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:3
5/E/b
serve to better articulate a need that a city would still not have any way of meetingnor is such a
requirement particularly enforceable. Further work by the SKHHP stakeholder group may yield an
implementation plan that brings a meaningful program into focus, and the City should participate fully in
this effort.
This concept does illuminate further coordination that is needed within the City between existing
workgroups, such as Planning, Human Services, and the Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP). RHIP
maintains a database for multifamily rental housing; however, mobile homes and single-family rentals
are not included in this database and rent subsidy amounts are unknown. Planning staff may be aware
of pending development plans or policy options being explored in other cities for displacement
prevention but be unaware of the exact needs on a project-by-project basis. Human Services staff works
with community-based organizations that may end up being the first line of defense if redevelopment
causes displacement, meaning there are meaningful community and institutional connections that could
help link up various efforts. See more in the next section (Community-Based Organizations).
Next Steps
Participate in the SKHHP stakeholder group tasked with establishing priorities for a NOAH
monitoring system.
Review current programs for opportunities to include data collection on NOAHs within current
staff capacities.
Review potential addition of programming or staff on the biennial cycle pursuant to council
guidance for funding and further monitoring.
Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) (1D)
Background
The City has formal relationships with 75 CBOs through Human Services General Fund, Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG), and CDBG-CV contracts. The C
an additional 90 external partners through informal partnerships.
Relationship building with local CBOs is an important component to the successful implementation of
KHOP, as well as a successful way to incorporate coalition building into engagement practices.
Partnerships with CBOs may help staff identify communities with individuals who may be especially
vulnerable to displacement as housing markets continue to see increasing affordability pressures.
In addition to City efforts, SKHHP is starting a South King County Advisory Board aimed at providing
connection and advancement of South King County interests, strengthening and understanding
community needs and interests related to affordable housing and homelessness, and providing
priorities for staffing the board include members with a deep connection to South King County who are
committed to furthering housing stability, with a range of knowledge and experience that reflects the
diverse populations within South King County.
Extensive outreach and engagement have been conducted with community organizations and
individuals connected to South King County communities and at the time of this writing, the SKHHP
78 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:4
5/E/b
Executive Board is considering a resolution that would formally establish the SKHHP Advisory Board.
Once the resolution is adopted, SKHHP will move forward with a recruitment and application process
with the goal of appointing the first Advisory Board members in Summer 2021.
Goals
Staff should prioritize coalition-building with historically marginalized communities like communities of
color, immigrants, or non-English speaking communities. Work with CBOs shall focus on equity and
social justice while empowering the community to participate by providing feedback and guidance for
future housing development.
Next Steps
Utilizing existing relationships and extended networks, bridge the gap between staff working on
housing policy and interested CBOs to build new and strengthen existing relationships.
Evaluate CBOs for interest and capacity in furthering their reach into housing policy and
planning.
Provide housing policy training and technical assistance to increase capacity for direct
community engagement in housing policy work.
If there is interest, collaborate with CBOs serving nearby jurisdictions to facilitate mentorships
or partnerships that help Kent CBOs step into the realm of housing in an informed, organized,
and resourced way.
Low-priority/ Long-term
Funding Strategies (1A, 2A, 2B)
Background
Revolving Loan Funds and other funding mechanisms are identified as a Preservation & Anti-
Displacement Strategy as well as an Affordable Housing and Production Strategy. Discussion of the
details of these funding mechanisms can be found in Chapter 6; the below goals and next steps should
be read considering the information found in that chapter.
Goals
The City of Kent is not particularly set up to manage the acquisition, rehabilitation, management,
operations, or construction of affordable housing. Considerable overhead would be required for any
agency to oversee such large-scale projects, and so any funding sources raise the inevitable question of
how to disburse funding once acquired. South King Housing and Homelessness Partnership (SKHHP) was
formed partially for this reasonthe pooling of resources would enable centralized disbursement of
funding. However, SKHHP also has capacity constraintswith only two staff now, it will likely take years
before the organization is equipped to manage projects of any scale. Ultimately, Kent must continue
resourcing and participating in SKHHP, so that in partnership with other cities, South King County can
finally have an agency capable of managing housing projects at scale. See further explanation in Chapter
6.
79 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:5
5/E/b
Next Steps
Continue working with SKHHP at staff and elected level to pool resources, build capacity, and
eventually distribute funds from various sources towards projects and programs that meet
shared goals.
Should funding from a particular source not end up being pooled, determine project type,
scale, and prioritization to aid in effective disbursement.
Monitoring Regulated Affordable Properties (1B)
Background
Currently, regulated affordable housing is not monitored by the City. Some regulated housing properties
may have funding structures such that the subsidy providing affordability expires after a certain number
of years. For instance, for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, from 1986 to 1989, federal law
required developers to maintain these affordability provisions for at least 15 years. Beginning in 1990,
23
however, new LIHTC properties were required to preserve affordability for 30 years.
nd naturally occurring affordable housing
However, King County and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) are
also putting together an inventory of regulated affordable housing including tax credit developments.
Rather than duplicate this work, SKHHP is coordinating with King County and PSRC staff to establish the
inventory.
Goals
The City should work collaboratively with SKHHP, King County, and PSRC to collect information and
assist however possible with the inventory creation.
Next Steps
Add questions to the online permit portal for new buildings that intend to rent subsidized units
to track:
o Number of units
o Bedroom mix of affordable unit(s)
o Subsidy level targeted at what AMI level(s)
o What funding structure used
Revise forms for existing multifamily registration processes through either RHIP registration or
business license to collect the above-listed data for existing properties.
Coordinate with SKHHP, King County, and PSRC on the creation of the inventory and collaborate
to determine the next steps for ongoing monitoring.
23
https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr_edge_research_081712.html.
80 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:6
5/E/b
Chapter 6: Funding Mechanisms
Introduction
Improving housing outcomes will require investment, from both the private sector and the public. While
stakeholder agencies have access to various types of funding, this chapter will focus on revenue options
available to the City of Kent and their likely efficacy in helping achieve housing goals. Crucially,
investment from outside sources (the development community) is needed to achieve meaningful
objectives on such high potential strategies as middle housing. However, several medium- and longer-
term strategies will only be possible with City resources. Moreover, most of those strategies are best
pursued with pooled resources through South King Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP); many
of the sources below, therefore, discuss planned SKHHP actions and will require close collaboration with
that organization.
While there are significant limitations on expenditures for most sources, recent changes have provided
hitherto impossible levels of funding that are just now becoming a reality at the time of this writing. This
represents an exciting turning point, but it also means that some critical questions about certain sources
are not yet answerable. The sections below lay out, to the extent possible, the background, projected
dollar amount, restrictions/limitations, and competing priorities for each source of funding.
Sources of Funding
Regional Revolving Loan Funds
The original Interlocal Agreement (ILA) establishing SKHHP created a Housing Capital Funds Account to
allow for the eventual establishment of a capital fund. There were no funds available at the time it was
created, but as it was a future goal it was included in order to avoid needing to go back through
individual councils in order to establish it at a future date. It was created for the purpose of
administering the contributions of SKHHP cities, or other public or private entities, to affordable housing
projects and programs.
The 2021 SKHHP Work Plan (Appendix H)
Housing Capital Fund that s
Project dollar amounts are unknown, as are restrictions on use and competing priorities; however,
negotiation with other SKHHP cities may yield competing priorities between jurisdictions. Regardless,
the SKHHP Executive Board will work collectively and with their individual jurisdictions to reach
consensus on SKHHP Housing Capital Fund goals, priorities, and funding allocation decisions.
HB 1406 Local Sales and Use Tax from State
The Washington State Legislature passed Substitute House Bill 1406 during the 2019 Regular Legislative
Session. RCW 82.14.540 authorizes the legislative authority of a county or city to impose a local sale and
use tax for affordable and supportive housing to income-eligible persons.
RCW 82.14.540 stipulates the sums of money collected or bonds issued through this sales tax credit may
only be provided to persons whose income is at or below 60% of the median income of the county or
city imposing the tax and may only be used for the following purposes: (i) acquiring, rehabilitating, or
constructing affordable housing, which may include new units of affordable housing within an existing
structure or facilities providing supportive housing services under RCW 71.24.385; or (ii) funding the
operations and maintenance costs of new units of affordable or supportive housing.
81 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:7
5/E/b
Kent and each of the other SKHHP jurisdictions adopted legislation authorizing the maximum capacity of
the tax, and the SKHHP Executive Board urged each of the nine member jurisdictions cities to pool 100%
of the tax receipts collected, as anticipated and encouraged in the legislation. Pooling allows the cities
to act cooperatively to pool tax revenue received in individual cities to allow leverage of other funds and
make a more meaningful and significant impact on affordable housing challenges in South King County.
SKHHP intends to periodically invite applications for funding for eligible projects and/or programs. The
SKHHP Executive Board will identify funding guidelines including the amount of available funding,
household income targets, funding priorities, eligible activities, and geographic areas, regulatory terms,
other award terms/reporting requirements, application contents, the review process, evaluation
criteria, and schedule for funding allocation. Recommendations from a newly formed Advisory Board
will inform strategic funding priorities considering South King County housing needs, other funding
sources that support affordable housing and supportive housing, local housing needs, and equitable
housing that serves
households earning 0-30% AMI more so than 30-60% AMI) will need to be represented on the Advisory
Board
Pooled funds would generate approximately $1,000,000 per year for the eligible 20 year period (as
opposed to a maximum of approximately $185,000 for Kent alone if not pooled). This represents a
relatively meaningful resource in terms of the ability to fund significant projects at the SKHHP level.
HB 1590 Increase in Local Sales and Use Tax
During the 2020 legislative session, the legislature passed House Bill 1590, which amended RCW
82.14.530, related to sales and use tax for housing and related services. Previously, this housing sales tax
was required to go to the ballot, requiring voters to approve it (unlikely in Kent) but House Bill 1590
provided the option for the tax to be councilmanic. The new law gave counties until September 30,
2020, to impose the tax countywide; after that date, cities could impose the tax. King County Council
had not acted by that date, and so three of the SKHHP cities imposed the sales tax: Covington, Kent, and
Renton, in addition to five other non-SKHHP cities.
Imposing the tax first (instead of allowing King County to do so) allows Kent to retain 100% of the
proceeds generated in the City; this could mean an estimated 2.5 to 2.8 million per year that could be
used for projects/services. At least 60% of proceeds must be used for the construction of affordable
housing or mental/behavioral health-related facilities, or operations and maintenance of new affordable
housing or newly constructed evaluation and treatment centers. Housing or other facilities utilizing this
funding must serve those at or below 60% AMI who have behavioral health disabilities or are veterans,
homeless families with children (or families at risk of homelessness), unaccompanied homeless youth or
young adults, those with disabilities, or domestic violence survivors. (At the time of this writing, some
edits are being considered by the legislature that may result in some changes to the bill including
explicitly allowing acquisition and expanding the population to include single homeless adults.)
This portion may be best pooled with SKHHP, although priorities for allocation are still to be determined
and may be complicated by the need to balance multiple perspectives; however, without such pooling,
staff capacity to administer funding is a significant concern.
The remaining funds (40% of the proceeds) can be used for operation, delivery, or evaluation of mental
and behavioral health treatment programs and services or housing-related servicesFor 2021, Kent has
82 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:8
5/E/b
elected to spend a portion of this funding to research and develop a mental health co-responder police
program, as well as providing some one-time grant funds to local organizations to expand access to
youth behavioral health programs.
Real Estate Excise Tax
All cities can levy a 0.25% tax on property sales; for 2021 and 2022, this is budgeted at $1.75 million per
year. In 2020, $3.286 million was collected. The revenues must be spent on capital projects that are
listed in the capital facilities plan (CFP) element of the Comprehensive Plan. These can include
affordable housing projects and the planning, acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of facilities for
people experiencing homelessness; however, also competing for capital dollars are the acquisition,
construction or rehabilitation, of roads, sidewalks, water systems, parks, law enforcement facilities, etc.
In other words, all capital projects throughout the City represent competing priorities with few other
sources of revenue.
REET tax revenue is very unpredictable. The amount of revenue the City received is completely
dependent upon the price of real estate. Since 2016, with the high volume of sales and sale prices,
record amounts of REET funds were collected before the pandemic. If/when the real estate bubble
bursts, the revenue received could drop to or below budgeted levels.
Due to aging infrastructure (and specifically many substandard roads built by King County and annexed
into Kent), in addition to the need for sidewalks and parks to help mitigate the impacts of growth (not to
mention the limitations of staff capacity for administration), diverting REET initiatives for housing work
is not supportable at this time.
Levies
Property tax levies are defined by RCW 84.52.105, which allows cities to place an additional tax up to
$0.50 per thousand dollars assessed for up to ten years. Funds must go toward financing affordable
housing for households earning below 50% MFI. Kent would need significant resident support to
consider a measure like a property tax levy.
In recent years, levies have not been successful in Kent, perhaps due to anti-tax sentiment or resource-
strained voters, or a combination of both.
For instance, in 2018, Proposition A, a 2% utility tax increase for police and criminal justice services,
failed by more than 2,000 votes (57% to 43%). The measure was intended to fund additional police
officers and criminal justice services in Kent, establishing police officer staffing levels consistent with
comparable jurisdictions.
And lest the issue seems unique to police and criminal justice services, another example from the past
decade of a failed levy, Kent City Parks and Streets Levy Proposition (2012). This proposition would have
increased the regular property tax levy by $0.37/$1,000 assessed valuation, for a regular levy of
approximately $1.96/$1,000 and failed by over 4,000 votes (56% to 43%).
Additionally, the majority of outreach respondents did not indicate an ability and willingness to pay for
their identified housing priorities (see Chapter 4, page X), suggesting that crafting a successful levy
package to raise revenue for housing is all but impossible for Kent. Continued outreach and
communication with voters are key to understanding voter priorities and willingness to fund housing
83 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!:9
5/E/b
work; this issue can be revisited when more unity of vision and alignment of resource availability is
evident.
84 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!::
5/E/b
Chapter 7: Strategic Policy Objectives and Actions
Introduction
The recommended actions in this Plan were informed by public engagement, data analysis, review of
relevant policies and planning documents, staff input, development feasibility, and examples from other
jurisdictions. These recommendations can help increase the housing supply, the variety of housing
types, and the availability of housing affordable to all income levels in Kent. The following strategic
policy objectives encompass the main policy orientation related to housing for the City of Kent in the
coming decades, and are not ranked by priority:
1. Preserve the affordable housing options in Kent while minimizing and mitigating displacement.
2. .
3. Leverage and expand partnerships to further housing-related goals.
4. .
Strategic Policy Objective 1: Preserve the affordable housing options in Kent while
minimizing and mitigating displacement.
Why is this important?
Preservation of existing housing stock is integral to continue housing people who chose a more
affordable alternative to higher cost parts of the county. If the existing stock of affordable housing,
whether regulated or naturally occurring, is not maintained, people will have to seek housing potentially
much farther away, with ensuing loss of stability and community, as well as longer commutes and more
congestion. In order to maintain a high quality of life, it is necessary to ensure that the housing available
is maintained, and also that it is safe and in good condition.
Actions
1. Actively support
establish monitoring programs, provide critical data that aids in identifying potential
displacement, and explore city capacity to fill any gaps not addressed by those efforts.
2. Continue Rental Housing Inspection Program and refine parameters over time to ensure desired
outcomes. With additional resources, consider expanding the programs to single-family rentals
and creating a parallel program for mobile homes, and potentially increase data collection
(including potential sales, renovations, or other causes of rent increases) to support monitoring
efforts.
3. Mitigate the effects of displacement on residents in mobile home parks likely to be redeveloped
by prioritizing displacement mitigation efforts at those parks already designated non-mobile
home park (such as Transit-Oriented Community) on the land use map. Advocate to state
legislature (or at the federal level) for additional resources for displaced mobile home park
residents and explore options for additional consideration when mobile home park owners
apply for a non-mobile home park land use designation.
4. Improve conditions at mobile home parks such that they can remain a healthy and safe place to
live, through the creation and distribution of educational materials about regulatory
responsibilities for addressing issues, a compassionate code enforcement strategy focused on
risk reduction rather than rote compliance, code changes to allow park upgrades regardless of
overall compliance, and possibly a home replacement program. Work first to identify
improvements park owners can take, as opposed to homeowners within parks, and consider
ways to incentivize the purchase by tenants when parks go up for sale.
85 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!211
5/E/b
5. Work closely with King County, Low Income Housing Institute, and others to identify properties
at risk of renovation/ cost increase, or in need of more active management, for purchase and
operations to preserve affordability and ensure quality of life.
6. Leverage existing resources that aid in displacement prevention and proactively disseminate
that information to residents, including but not limited to foreclosure assistance, legal aid, and
tax relief programs.
7. Advocate for legislation that provides more resources for eviction assistance and legal aid.
8. Streamline processes for people applying for rental assistance to ensure equitable access by
exploring innovative partnerships and technology solutions, including but not limited to a
centralized online location managed by the City for all housing-related resources.
9. Explore partnerships and funding opportunities to expand translation resources and provide
community education in multiple languages to make education more accessible to non-English
speakers. The educational opportunities proposed for this action may include tenant rights, fair
housing laws, and information about the Home Repair program.
Strategic Pol
housing variety and choice.
Why is this important?
It is important that Kent rise to the task of ensuring sufficient options in the housing market. While city
policies cannot reverse market pressures, codes and standards can be adapted to make it easier to build
an increased variety of housing options. The housing stock must grow to keep up with demand, but if it
should continue to grow in ways that only meet the needs of a certain subset of households, there is a
It is important to ensure a sufficient supply of housing to meet
the needs of low-income, moderate-income, upper-income, and special needs individuals and
households that are equitably and rationally distributed throughout the City. There are many types of
households and the increase in housing stock must come with an increase in variety to ensure that
needs are being met across every spectrum while prioritizing neighborhood development that fosters
mixed-income communities.
Actions
1. Enable more middle housing and remove barriers to its construction, particularly along
transportation corridors. Consider design requirements and ways to minimize and mitigate
displacement.
2. Monitor density of neighborhoods in relation to overall growth and growth targets, to ensure
sustained growth in middle housing in single-family neighborhoods. Continually iterate and
adjust code and consider incentivizing middle housing (utilizing tools such as density bonuses
and fee waivers or deferrals) should initial code iterations not prove sufficient to induce
construction.
3. Remove barriers to accessory dwelling unit construction by adjusting code requirements related
to height calculation, size calculation, and parking requirements. Advocate to the state
legislature for assistance reducing fees to aid construction of accessory dwelling units.
4. Continue to incentivize market-rate rentals in multifamily, mixed-use zones, and downtown,
through the Target Residential Investment Program. Consider expansion of the program to
multifamily zones. If the program is not used within three years of adoption, reevaluate the
program requirements and adjust, utilizing developer feedback and with input from City Council.
5. Continue to advocate for the eight-year multifamily tax exemption program at the state
legislature.
86 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!212
5/E/b
6. When market conditions have shifted enough such that market-rate urban products have
proven profitable without incentive, remove the eight-year Targeted Residential Investment
Program or add affordability requirements to it.
7. Streamline downtown construction through implementing planned action ordinance coverage
tracking.
8. Review and amend the multifamily development standards to ensure that standards do not
unintentionally disincentivize multifamily construction in multifamily zones; encourage
development projects to trend closer to maximum allowable density.
9. Evaluate market readiness along the planned bus rapid transit line and make strategic code
amendments to increase density at levels appropriately scaled for neighborhood compatibility
and expected level of transit service.
10. Evaluate mixed-use regulations for alternatives to commercial space requirements in
conjunction with density analyses, and potentially adjust development standards, design review,
or other regulations to steer development towards more transit-oriented development products
where proximity to stations warrants within mixed-use zones, once bus rapid transit station
locations are finalized.
11. Work collaboratively with large Grayfield property owners in proximity to future transit and
community-based organizations to master plan new neighborhoods that meet community goals.
12. Remove barriers to regulated affordable housing that fills needed gaps.
a. Encourage dispersion of affordable homeownership projects, such as Habitat for
Humanity or similar models, in all residential zones in order to avoid concentrations and
equitably serve communities.
b. Incentivize construction of rentals affordable to those making less than 30% Area
Median Income in mixed income communities within Downtown and Midway through
the Targeted Residential Investment Program or other means.
c. Consider creating a fee collection/reimbursement system where new market-rate
development contributes additional fees that are pooled to offset permitting fees for
affordable housing projects.
d. Monitor trends in supportive housing and regulate as needed, working with supportive
housing providers to collaboratively determine appropriate siting/spacing, address
permitting issues, and ensure successful operations.
13. Boost homeownership at all affordability levels:
a. Foster partnerships to utilize community land trusts as a vehicle to ensure land is held in
perpetuity for affordable homeownership.
b. Increase participation in existing first-time homebuyer programs and resources for new
homebuyers by connecting residents to existing programs (such as the Home Advantage
Program).
c. Promote homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income families and
individuals while recognizing historic inequities in access to homeownership
opportunities for communities of color.
14. Sustain Downtown.
a. Assess the Downtown Strategic Action Plan for implementation success and update as
needed.
b. When thresholds are met, apply to Puget Sound Regional Council to expand the
marketing.
87 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!213
5/E/b
Strategic Policy Objective 3: Leverage and expand partnerships to further housing-related
goals.
Why is it important?
Kent does to work with those who do to effectuate better
outcomes. It's also critical
sure those most affected by housing issues are having their needs met. Expanding city partnerships with
community-based organizations, the development community, housing stakeholders, and other external
organizations enables sustained engagement to ensure that the housing that is built in Kent meets
community needs.
Actions
1. Partner with community-based organizations and individuals most impacted by housing
affordability challenges to ensure affected parties have access to and are involved in meaningful
public participation during the planning phases for housing policies and regulations. This could
involve convening citizen advisory groups, partnerships with Kent-based development
collaboratives, and other tools for engaging diverse communities.
2. Evaluate partnerships with community-based organizations for interest and capacity in housing
policy and planning work to bridge the gap between staff capacity and organization resources.
3. Continue to partner with Sound Transit, King County Metro, and other public agencies to
maximize opportunities on public surplus property.
4. Continue to foster and build relationships with non-profits and faith-based organizations that
prioritize housing and services for those experiencing homelessness.
5. Continue working with South King Housing and Homelessness Partners at staff and elected level
to pool resources, build capacity, and eventually distribute funds from various sources towards
projects and programs that meet shared goals.
6. Engage directly with housing developers, both for-profit and non-profit, to collaboratively
identify projects that meet community needs.
Strategic Policy Objective 4:
South King County subregion.
Why is it important?
While understanding the housing needs within the broader Puget Sound region is important, Kent and
the South King County cities are in a unique position as the lowest cost area in a very high-cost County.
Spreading the word about
opportunities, helps to establish a collaborative baseline for intervention, while also maintaining
regional consistency for priorities and actions.
Actions
1. Collaborate with South King County cities to continually hone, refine, update and share the
South King Housing story to the greater housing realm including such players as King County,
Housing Development Consortium, the development community, the regional planning
community, and others.
2. Proactively communicate with Puget Sound Regional Council and take opportunities to inform
and collaborate on how regional policymaking can take South King County housing realities into
account.
3. Take a proactive role in collaboration with the state legislature on housing-related legislation.
88 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!214
5/E/b
4. Build relationships with King County to collaborate on decision-making in planning efforts and
development projects.
5.
a. Explore options and develop a code that better accommodates communal residences
and multigenerational housing that serves diverse cultures while minimizing the risk of
exploitation for vulnerable residents.
b. Collect data and monitor trends in senior housing types or other accommodations to
ensure that seniors in Kent have options.
c. Collect data and monitor trends in family size, household makeup, and housing stock
consideration in planning, policy, development, and regional coordination.
89 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!215
5/E/b
Chapter 8: Implementation Plan
Introduction
The four Strategic Policy Objectives identified in Chapter 7 categorize subsequent actions that will
require different levels of partnership, staff time, and funding to be fully implemented. As such, each of
the actions is assigned a timeline of near-term (1-2 years), medium-term (2-5 years), and long-term (5+
years) priority. Each of these actions will involve contributions from stakeholders such as other city
departments, City Council, Land Use and Planning Board, residents, community-based organizations
(CBOs), developers (both affordable and market-rate), and others. It is important to note that measuring
achievement can be complicated by the complexity of the issues; however, the most relevant metrics of
success are identified in the below table for ease of reporting and monitoring progress. Extensive,
equitable, and inclusive engagement processes should be considered during each implementation action
to ensure positive outcomes. Coordination with each City department (including but not limited to
historically excluded populations should be incorporated into decision-making steps for new programs
and policies.
Implementation Matrix Key
NT= Near Term
MT= Medium Term
LT= Long Term
ECD= Economic and Community Development (Includes Permitting, Building, Planning, Rental Housing
Inspection Program)
HSD = Human Services Division
CE= Code Enforcement
SKHHP= South King County Housing and Homelessness Partners
CBOs= Community Based Organizations
SPO= Strategic Policy Objective
90 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!216
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Appendices
A. SoKiHo Fact Packet Kent
B. SoKiHo Fact Packet South King County
C. SoKiHo Methodology Memo
D. SoKiHo Housing Policy Assessment
E. SoKiHo Stakeholder Outreach Results
F. SoKiHo Housing Strategies Framework
G. Complete Survey Results
H. SKHHP workplan
I. Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
101 | Page
Qbdlfu!Qh/!227
5/E/b
Appendix A
LFOU
TPVUI!LJOH!DPVOUZ!TVC.SFHJPOBM
IPVTJOH!BDUJPO!QMBO!GSBNFXPSL
3131
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!228
5/E/b
Uijt!epdvnfou!qspwjeft!usfoet!jo!efnphsbqijd-!Uif!tvc.sfhjpo!ejggfst!gspn!Fbtu!Ljoh!Dpvouz!
fnqmpznfou-!ipvtjoh-!boe!ipvtjoh!bggpsebcjmjuz!boe!Tfbuumf-!xifsf!ipvtjoh!nbslfut!boe!jodpnf!
bmpoh!xjui!ipvtjoh!qspkfdujpot!gps!uif!Djuz!mfwfmt!tjhojgjdboumz!tlfx!uif!Bsfb!Nfejbo!
pg!Lfou/!Lfou!jt!b!qbsujdjqbou!pg!uif!Tpvui!Jodpnf!bt!ju!sfmbuft!up!ipx!bggpsebcjmjuz!jt!
Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.sfhjpobm!djujft!xip!bsf!efgjofe-!boe!uifsfgpsf!ipx!tvddfttgvm!tpvui!
dppsejobujoh!b!dpnqsfifotjwf!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Ljoh!Dpvouz!djujft!bsf!jo!qspwjejoh!bggpsebcmf!
Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!gps!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!xijdi!ipvtjoh!gps!uifjs!dpnnvojujft/!B!tvc.sfhjpobm!
jodmveft!uif!djujft!pg;gsbnfxpsl!uibu!dbquvsft!cspbe!gbdupst!
jnqbdujoh!ipvtjoh!dipjdf-!dptu!cvsefo-!boe!
!Bvcvso
fyjtujoh!dpoejujpot!pg!ipvtjoh!tupdl!jo!Tpvui!
!Cvsjfo
Ljoh!Dpvouz!xjmm!tfu!uif!tubhf!up!fwbmvbuf!boe!
!Gfefsbm!Xbz
jodpsqpsbuf!bqqspqsjbuf!qpmjdjft-!uppmt!boe!
!Lfou
jodfoujwft!gps!jodsfbtjoh!sftjefoujbm!dbqbdjuz/
!Sfoupo
Uijt!epdvnfou!boe!bobmztft!xfsf!qspevdfe!cz;!
!Uvlxjmb
Hjwfo!uibu!uif!qbsujdjqbujoh!dpnnvojujft!bsf!
jnqbdufe!cz!nboz!dpnnpo!nbslfu!usfoet!boe!
efnboet-!dppqfsbujpo!jt!ofdfttbsz!up!beesftt!
uiftf!jttvft/!Qspwjejoh!gps!uif!tvc.sfhjpobm!
dppsejobujpo!pg!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbot!uispvhi!b!
dpnnpo!Gsbnfxpsl!xjmm!bmmpx!bmm!uif!qbsuofst!
up!beesftt!ipvtjoh!jttvft!ipmjtujdbmmz!boe!
fotvsf!ipvtjoh.sfmbufe!cvsefot!bsf!opu!tjnqmz!
tijgufe!bspvoe!cfuxffo!djujft/
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
3
Djuz!pg!Lfou!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!229
5/E/b
Fyfdvujwf!Tvnnbsz
!Lfou!hbjofe!nboz!3.qfstpo!ipvtfipmet-!xijmf!
!Lfou!offet!bcpvu!6-:::!ofx!ipvtjoh!vojut!cz!
tffjoh!b!mbshf!efdmjof!jo!2.qfstpo!ipvtfipmet!
3151!xifo!jut!qpqvmbujpo!jt!fyqfdufe!up!sfbdi!
gspn!3123!up!3129/!Uif!Djuzt!pwfsbmm!qpqvmbujpo!
bcpvu!249-611!qfpqmf!)tff!qbhf!8*/!
hsfx!4:&-!uxjdf!bt!ijhi!bt!uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!
Dpvouz!tvcsfhjpot!hspxui!pwfs!uibu!ujnfgsbnf!
!Lfou!offet!up!qspevdf!bcpvu!411!vojut!qfs!
)qh/!6*/!
zfbs!up!sfbdi!uijt!hpbm!)qh/!8*/!Uijt!jt!bcpvu!uif!
tbnf!qbdf!pg!vojut!qspevdfe!boovbmmz!pwfs!uif!
!Lfout!efnphsbqijdt!dibohfe!cz!jodpnf!upp/!
3122.312:!ujnfgsbnf!)qh/!5*/!
Ipvtfipmet!fbsojoh!npsf!uibo!211&!pg!BNJ!tbx!
uif!mbshftu!jodsfbtf;!uifz!bddpvoufe!gps!38&!
!Lfou!tbx!b!mpu!pg!efwfmpqnfou!jo!uif!sfdfou!
pg!upubm!ipvtfipmet!jo!3123!cvu!uijt!jodsfbtfe!
efwfmpqnfou!dzdmf!xjui!b!opujdfbcmf!jodsfbtf!
up!44&!pg!upubm!ipvtfipmet!cz!3129!)qh/!6*/!
jo!qspevdujpo!tjodf!3128-!ipxfwfs!uijt!xbt!opu!
Uijt!jodsfbtf!xbt!hsfbufs!uibo!Bvcvso-!Gfefsbm!
fopvhi!up!lffq!vq!xjui!efnboe/!Gspn!3121!up!
Xbz-!ps!Sfoupot!jodsfbtf!jo!ijhi.jodpnf!
312:-!Lfou!pomz!qspevdfe!:/2!ipvtjoh!vojut!gps!
ipvtfipmet-!boe!hsfbufs!uibo!uif!jodsfbtf!jo!uif!
fwfsz!21!ofx!ipvtfipmet!)qh/!5*/
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!tvcsfhjpo!bt!b!xipmf/
!Eftqjuf!tuspoh!qspevdujpo-!ipnf!qsjdft!ibwf!
!Bt!b!sftvmu!pg!Lfout!dibohjoh!efnphsbqijdt-!
tujmm!sjtfo!uispvhipvu!Lfou/!Bwfsbhf!3.cfesppn!
uif!cvml!pg!jut!ofx!vojut!bsf!offefe!bu!uif!
sfout!jodsfbtfe!bmnptu!71&!tjodf!3121-!boe!
211&,!BNJ!bggpsebcjmjuz!sbohf-!gpmmpxfe!cz!vojut!
ipnf!qsjdft!jodsfbtfe!99&!)qh/!7*/
offefe!jo!uif!61&.91&!BNJ!boe!1.41&!BNJ!
sbohft!)qh/!8*/
!Ipvtjoh!dptut!bsf!rvjdlmz!pvuqbdjoh!
jodpnft;!pwfs!uif!3123!up!3129!ujnf!qfsjpe-!
!Uif!nbkpsjuz!pg!Lfout!sftjefout!xpsl!jo!uif!
sfoufs!jodpnft!pomz!hsfx!36&!boe!ipnfpxofs!
nbovgbduvsjoh!tfdups!)xjui!b!nfejbo!tbmbsz!
jodpnft!pomz!hsfx!22&!)qh/!6*/
kvtu!voefs!%71-111*-!gpmmpxfe!cz!xipmftbmf!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
usbeft!)%65-111*-!dpotusvdujpo!)%64-111*-!boe!
!Jo!3129-!94&!pg!sfoufst!boe!:7&!pg!
usbotqpsubujpo!boe!xbsfipvtjoh!)%61-211*!
ipnfpxofst!fbsojoh!mftt!uibo!41&!pg!BNJ!xfsf!
)qh/!9*/
dptu!cvsefofe-!bmpoh!xjui!92&!pg!sfoufst!boe!
68&!pg!ipnfpxofst!fbsojoh!cfuxffo!41&!boe!
Uif!3129!IVE!Bsfb!Nfejbo!Jodpnf!)BNJ*!
61&!pg!BNJ!)qh/!7*/
gps!Ljoh!Dpvouz!jt!%214-511!gps!b!5.qfstpo!
ipvtfipme/!Ebub!ejtdvttjoh!&!BNJ!bsf!
qspqpsujpofe!pgg!pg!uijt!nfejbo!boe!bsf!bmtp!gps!
5.qfstpo!ipvtfipmet/
4
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Djuz!pg!Lfou!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!22:
5/E/b
Ipvtjoh!Usfoet
Ovncfs!pg!Vojut!Cvjmu!Qfs!Zfbs-!3122.312:
59-339
Ovncfs!pg!upubm!ipvtjoh!
vojut!jo!3129
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
3-86:
Ovncfs!pg!ipvtjoh!vojut!
cvjmu!tjodf!3122
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
418
Ofx!ipvtjoh!vojut!cvjmu!po!
Tdbmf!pg!Ipvtjoh!Cvjmu!cz!Efdbef-!2:71.3131
bwfsbhf!fwfsz!zfbs!tjodf!3122
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
:/2
Ofx!ipvtjoh!vojut!qfs!fwfsz!
21!ofx!ipvtfipmet
!Cfuxffo!3121.312:
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:-!FDPOpsuixftu!
dbmdvmbujpot
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Cvjmu!cz
Efdbef-!2:71.3131
Efdbef&!pg!Vojut
Cfgpsf!2:71t7&
2:71t24&
2:81t25&
2:91t41&
2::1t29&
3111t21&
3121t8&
5
Djuz!pg!Lfou!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!231
5/E/b
Efnphsbqijdt
Dibohf!jo!Ipvtfipme!Uzqf-!3123!'!3129
4:&
Dibohf!jo!qpqvmbujpo!
!Cfuxffo!3121!boe!3129
31213129
Qpqvmbujpo:3-522239-:11
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
7&
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
Dibohf!jo!ovncfs!pg!ipvtfipmet
!Cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129
Jodpnf!Ejtusjcvujpo!cz!BNJ-!3123!'!3129
31233129
Ipvtfipmet52-:6255-671
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
36&
Dibohf!jo!nfejbo!sfoufs
ipvtfipme!jodpnf
!Cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129
31233129
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
Nfejbo
%47-478%56-69:
Jodpnf
Jodpnf!Ejtusjcvujpo!cz!BNJ!boe!Ufovsf-!312:
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
22&
Dibohf!jo!nfejbo!pxofs!
ipvtfipme!jodpnf
!Cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129
31233129
Nfejbo!
%92-938%:2-28:
Jodpnf
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
Tpvsdf;!QVNT-!3129
6
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Djuz!pg!Lfou!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!232
5/E/b
Ipvtjoh!Bggpsebcjmjuz
Dptu!Cvsefofe
Dptu!Cvsefofe!boe!Tfwfsfmz!Dptu!Cvsefofe!cz!
Ufovsf-!3129
!B!ipvtfipme!xip!qbzt!npsf!
uibo!41&!pg!uifjs!jodpnf!
po!ipvtjoh!)jodmvtjwf!pg!
ipvtfipmet!xjui!tfwfsf!dptu!
cvsefojoh*/
Tfwfsfmz!Dptu!Cvsefofe
!B!ipvtfipme!xip!qbzt!npsf!
uibo!61&!pg!uifjs!jodpnf!po!
ipvtjoh/
4-197
Ovncfs!pg!jodpnf!sftusjdufe!
vojut
!Upubm!vojut!bt!pg!3131
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!qvcmjd!
bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!ebub
Tpvsdf;!QVNT-!3129
69&
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Bggpsebcmf!cz!BNJ!boe!Ufovsf-!3129
Dibohf!jo!bwfsbhf!sfou!gps!
3.cfesppn!bqbsunfou
!Cfuxffo!3121!boe!3131
31213131
Bwfsbhf!
%:24%2-551
Sfou
Tpvsdf;!Dptubs
99&
Dibohf!jo!nfejbo!ipnf!tbmft!
qsjdf
!Cfuxffo!3121!boe!3131
31213131
Nfejbo!
%348-861%558-611
Tbmft!Qsjdf
Tpvsdf;!QVNT-!3129
Tpvsdf;!\[jmmpx
7
Djuz!pg!Lfou!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!233
5/E/b
Ipvtjoh!Offe!Gpsfdbtu
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Offefe!Uispvhi!3151
249-564
VoefsqspevdujpoGvuvsf!OffeIpvtjoh!Offe
Qspkfdufe!qpqvmbujpo!cz!
16-:::6-:::
3151
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!3128
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Offefe!bt!b!Tibsf!pg!Fyjtujoh!Tupdl
Fyjtujoh!VojutIpvtjoh!Offe&!pg!Fyjtujoh!Vojut
565
59-3396-:::23&
Bwfsbhf!boovbm!qpqvmbujpo!
hspxui!qspkfdufe!uispvhi!3151
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!3128-!FDPOpsuixftu!
dbmdvmbujpot
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Offefe!cz!BNJ-!3151
BNJ$!pg!Vojut&!pg!Vojut
6-:::
1.41&2-19129&
Qspkfdufe!ovncfs!pg!vojut!
41.61&83123&
offefe!cz!3151
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!
61.91&2-31131&
FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
91.211&83123&
411
211&,3-39149&
Bwfsbhf!ovncfs!pg!ofx!
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
vojut!offefe!qfs!zfbs!
uispvhi!3151
IVE!Bggpsebcjmjuz!Mfwfm!cz!Ipvtjoh!Uzqf-!3129
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!
BNJTuvejp2.cfe3.cfe
FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
41&%653%693%7:9
61&%:15%:81%2-275
1&
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Jodsfbtf!jo!boovbm!ipvtjoh!
91&%2-559%2-663%2-973
qspevdujpo!up!sfbdi!3151!
211&%2-921%2-:49%3-437
ipvtjoh!offe!ubshfu!
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!
Tpvsdf;!IVE-!3129
FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
Voefsqspevdujpo!!Ipvtjoh!vojut!offefe!up!tbujtgz!fyjtujoh!ipvtfipmet!upebz/
Gvuvsf!Offe!!QTSD!3151!qpqvmbujpo!gpsfdbtu!usbotmbufe!joup!ipvtjoh!vojut/
8
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Djuz!pg!Lfou!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!234
5/E/b
Sfhjpobm!Bddftt!up!
Lfou!Fnqmpznfou!Ovncfst
Fnqmpznfou
Joevtusz!)3.ejhju!OBJDT!Dpef*Fnqmpzfft$!Dibohf&!DibohfNfejbo!Tbmbsz&!Kpct!cz!&!Kpct!cz!
)3129*)3119.3129*)3119.3129*)3129*BvupUsbotju
Bhsjdvmuvsf-!Gpsftusz-!Gjtijoh!boe!
72.93.68&%!37-77838&2&
Ivoujoh
Njojoh-!Rvbsszjoh-!boe!Pjm!boe!Hbt!
111&OB54&6&
Fyusbdujpo
Vujmjujft
664585711&%:2-36151&3&
Dpotusvdujpo
9-5:94-56479&%63-:6962&4&
Nbovgbduvsjoh
25-262.2-199.8&%6:-2825:&4&
Xipmftbmf!Usbef
21-951:6621&%64-:4773&5&
Sfubjm!Usbef
7-161.3:4.6&%46-39963&4&
Usbotqpsubujpo!boe!Xbsfipvtjoh
7-8632-58939&%61-28785&7&
Jogpsnbujpo
625.283.36&%7:-25234&2&
Gjobodf!boe!Jotvsbodf
86:.527.46&%68-:7:52&3&
Sfbm!Ftubuf!boe!Sfoubm!boe!
:5121&%53-27958&4&
Mfbtjoh
2-:79483&%78-91544&2&
Ufdiojdbm!Tfswjdft
Nbobhfnfou!pg!Dpnqbojft!boe!
3-5152-4:1248&%6:-93968&5&
Foufsqsjtft
Benjojtusbujwf!boe!Tvqqpsu!
boe!Xbtuf!Nbobhfnfou!boe!3-97993:52&%46-92862&4&
Sfnfejbujpo!tfswjdft
Fevdbujpobm!Tfswjdft
4-9962-57:72&%66-54148&4&
Ifbmui!Dbsf!boe!Tpdjbm!Bttjtubodf
7-1433-39672&%55-67557&4&
Bsut-!Foufsubjonfou-!boe!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
923545226&%53-31854&2&
Sfdsfbujpo
Bddpnnpebujpo!boe!Gppe!
4-8744:123&%39-86:57&5&
Tfswjdft
Puifs!Tfswjdf
3-244294:&%51-43656&3&
Qvcmjd!Benjojtusbujpo
4-313572&%79-63961&4&
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!FDPOpsuixftu!
9
Djuz!pg!Lfou!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!235
5/E/b
+!Usbotju!boe!esjwf!ujnf!pg!56!njovuft-!efqbsujoh!bu!9;11!BN-!njexffl
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!FDPOpsuixftu!
Bddftt!up!Fnqmpznfou+
Uiftf!djuz.mfwfm!fnqmpznfou!ftujnbuft!cz!Usbotju!boe!bvup!bddftt!up!sfhjpobm!fnqmpznfou!
3.ejhju!OBJDT!dpeft!xfsf!efsjwfe!vtjoh!b!xbt!efsjwfe!vtjoh!56.njovuf!usbwfm!tifet!gps!
dpncjobujpo!pg!uif!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbvt!fbdi!npef/!Xf!dbmdvmbufe!uif!ovncfs!pg!kpct!
Mpohjuvejobm!Fnqmpzfs.Ipvtfipme!Ezobnjdt!bwbjmbcmf!xjuijo!uiftf!usbwfm!tifet!jo!fbdi!
)MFIE*!Psjhjo.Eftujobujpo!Fnqmpznfou!3.ejhju!OBJDT!dbufhpsz!gps!uif!gpvs.dpvouz!
Tubujtujdt!)MPEFT*!ebub-!boe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!sfhjpo!)Ljoh-!Qjfsdf-!Topipnjti-!boe!Ljutbq*/
Sfhjpobm!Dpvodjmt!Dpwfsfe!Fnqmpznfou!
Ftujnbuft/!Uiftf!fnqmpznfou!ftujnbuft!tipx!
uif!upubm!ovncfs!pg!sftjefout!xpsljoh!jo!fbdi!
3.ejhju!OBJDT!tfdups!jo!uibu!djuz-!uif!dibohf!
jo!fnqmpznfou!jo!uibu!tfdups!jo!uibu!djuz!tjodf!
3119-!boe!uif!3129!nfejbo!xbhft!gps!uif!
sftjefout!jo!uibu!djuz!jo!uibu!tfdups/
:
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Djuz!pg!Lfou!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!236
5/E/b
Appendix B
TPVUI!LJOH!
DPVOUZ!SFHJPO
TPVUI!LJOH!DPVOUZ!TVC.SFHJPOBM
IPVTJOH!BDUJPO!QMBO!GSBNFXPSL
3131
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!237
5/E/b
Uijt!epdvnfou!qspwjeft!usfoet!jo!efnphsbqijd-!Uif!tvc.sfhjpo!ejggfst!gspn!Fbtu!Ljoh!Dpvouz!
fnqmpznfou-!ipvtjoh!boe!ipvtjoh!bggpsebcjmjuz!boe!Tfbuumf-!xifsf!ipvtjoh!nbslfut!boe!jodpnf!
bmpoh!xjui!ipvtjoh!qspkfdujpot!gps!uif!mfwfmt!tjhojgjdboumz!tlfx!uif!Bsfb!Nfejbo!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo/!Uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!Jodpnf!bt!ju!sfmbuft!up!ipx!bggpsebcjmjuz!jt!
Dpvouz!Tvc.sfhjpobm!djujft!bsf!dppsejobujoh!b!efgjofe-!boe!uifsfgpsf!ipx!tvddfttgvm!tpvui!
dpnqsfifotjwf!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!Ljoh!Dpvouz!djujft!bsf!jo!qspwjejoh!bggpsebcmf!
gps!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!xijdi!jodmveft!uif!djujft!ipvtjoh!gps!uifjs!dpnnvojujft/!B!tvc.sfhjpobm!
pg;gsbnfxpsl!uibu!dbquvsft!cspbe!gbdupst!
jnqbdujoh!ipvtjoh!dipjdf-!dptu!cvsefo-!boe!
!Bvcvso
fyjtujoh!dpoejujpot!pg!ipvtjoh!tupdl!jo!Tpvui!
!Cvsjfo
Ljoh!Dpvouz!xjmm!tfu!uif!tubhf!up!fwbmvbuf!boe!
!Gfefsbm!Xbz
jodpsqpsbuf!bqqspqsjbuf!qpmjdjft-!uppmt!boe!
!Lfou
jodfoujwft!gps!jodsfbtjoh!sftjefoujbm!dbqbdjuz/
!Sfoupo
Uijt!epdvnfou!boe!bobmztft!xfsf!qspevdfe!cz;!
!Uvlxjmb
Hjwfo!uibu!uif!qbsujdjqbujoh!dpnnvojujft!bsf!
jnqbdufe!cz!nboz!dpnnpo!nbslfu!usfoet!boe!
efnboet-!dppqfsbujpo!jt!ofdfttbsz!up!beesftt!
uiftf!jttvft/!Qspwjejoh!gps!uif!tvc.sfhjpobm!
dppsejobujpo!pg!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbot!uispvhi!b!
dpnnpo!Gsbnfxpsl!xjmm!bmmpx!bmm!uif!qbsuofst!
up!beesftt!ipvtjoh!jttvft!ipmjtujdbmmz!boe!
fotvsf!ipvtjoh.sfmbufe!cvsefot!bsf!opu!tjnqmz!
tijgufe!bspvoe!cfuxffo!djujft/
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
3
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!238
5/E/b
Fyfdvujwf!Tvnnbsz
!Ipxfwfs-!sfoufs!jodpnft!sfnbjo!cfmpx!
!Uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo!offet!bcpvu!
ipnfpxofs!jodpnft/!Jo!3129-!85&!pg!sfoufs!
74-1:1!ofx!ipvtjoh!vojut!cz!3151!xifo!jut!
ipvtfipmet!fbsofe!cfmpx!91&!pg!BNJ-!dpnqbsfe!
qpqvmbujpo!jt!fyqfdufe!up!sfbdi!npsf!uibo!
up!56&!pg!ipnfpxofs!ipvtfipmet!)qh/!6*/
743-111!qfpqmf!)tff!qbhf!8*/!
!Uif!ovncfs!pg!ipvtfipmet!jo!uif!sfhjpo!hsfx!
!Uif!sfhjpo!boe!jut!kvsjtejdujpot!offe!up!
cz!:&!pwfs!uif!3123.3129!ujnf!qfsjpe/!Uijt!xbt!
qspevdf!bcpvu!4-266!ipvtjoh!vojut!qfs!zfbs!up!
nptumz!3.qfstpo!boe!5.qfstpo!ipvtfipmet/!Uif!
sfbdi!uijt!hpbm!)qh/!8*/!Uijt!jt!b!58&!jodsfbtf!
ovncfs!pg!2.qfstpo!ipvtfipmet!efdmjofe!pwfs!
pwfs!uif!3-25:!bwfsbhf!vojut!uibu!xfsf!qspevdfe!
uijt!ujnf!gsbnf!)qh/!6*/!!
boovbmmz!jo!uif!3122.312:!ujnfgsbnf!)qh/!5*/!
!Uif!sfhjpo!bmtp!tbx!b!efdmjof!jo!uif!ovncfs!
!Uif!sfhjpo!tbx!efwfmpqnfou!qjdl!vq!qbdf!jo!
pg!ipvtfipmet!fbsojoh!mftt!uibo!61&!pg!BNJ!
uif!mbuufs!qbsu!pg!uif!efwfmpqnfou!dzdmf-!gspn!
cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129-!xijmf!uif!ovncfs!pg!
3127!uispvhi!312:/!Ipxfwfs-!uif!nbkpsjuz!pg!uif!
ipvtfipmet!fbsojoh!npsf!uibo!61&!pg!BNJ!hsfx!
sfhjpot!ipvtjoh!vojut!xfsf!cvjmu!jo!uif!2:91t/!
)qh/!6*/!
Nptu!pg!uif!efwfmpqnfou!jo!uif!2:91t!efdbef!
xbt!nvmujgbnjmz!ipvtjoh/!Pomz!31&!pg!uif!
!Bt!b!sftvmu!pg!uif!sfhjpot!dibohjoh!
sfhjpot!ipvtjoh!tupdl!xbt!cvjmu!bgufs!3111!
efnphsbqijdt-!uif!cvml!pg!jut!ofx!vojut!bsf!
)qh/!5*/
offefe!bu!uif!211&,!BNJ!bggpsebcjmjuz!sbohf-!
gpmmpxfe!cz!vojut!offefe!jo!uif!61&.91&!BNJ!
!Jo!3129-!99&!pg!sfoufst!boe!98&!pg!
boe!1.41&!BNJ!sbohft!)qh/!8*/!!
ipnfpxofst!fbsojoh!mftt!uibo!41&!pg!BNJ!xfsf!
dptu!cvsefofe-!bmpoh!xjui!92&!pg!sfoufst!boe!
Uif!3129!IVE!Bsfb!Nfejbo!Jodpnf!)BNJ*!
68&!pg!ipnfpxofst!fbsojoh!cfuxffo!41&!boe!
gps!Ljoh!Dpvouz!jt!%214-511!gps!b!5.qfstpo!
61&!pg!BNJ!)qh/!7*/
ipvtfipme/!Ebub!ejtdvttjoh!&!BNJ!bsf!
qspqpsujpofe!pgg!pg!uijt!nfejbo!boe!bsf!bmtp!gps!
5.qfstpo!ipvtfipmet/
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
!Cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129-!uif!nfejbo!
sfoufs!ipvtfipme!jodpnf!hsfx!cz!63&!jo!uif!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!tvcsfhjpo-!xijmf!nfejbo!
ipnfpxofs!ipvtfipme!jodpnft!hsfx!cz!pomz!
31&!)qh/!6*/!
4
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo
Qbdlfu!Qh/!239
5/E/b
Ipvtjoh!Usfoet
Ovncfs!pg!Vojut!Cvjmu!Qfs!Zfbs-!3122.312:
326-237
Ovncfs!pg!upubm!ipvtjoh!
vojut!jo!3129
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
2:-448
Ovncfs!pg!ipvtjoh!vojut!
cvjmu!tjodf!3122
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
3-25:
Ofx!ipvtjoh!vojut!cvjmu!po!
Tdbmf!pg!Ipvtjoh!Cvjmu!cz!Efdbef-!2:71.3131
bwfsbhf!fwfsz!zfbs!tjodf!3122
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
8/6
Ofx!ipvtjoh!vojut!qfs!fwfsz!
21!ofx!ipvtfipmet
!Cfuxffo!3122.312:
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:-!FDPOpsuixftu!
dbmdvmbujpot
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Cvjmu!cz
Efdbef-!2:71.3131
Efdbef&!pg!Vojut
Cfgpsf!2:71t27&
2:71t28&
2:81t24&
2:91t32&
2::1t24&
3111t23&
3121t9&
5
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!23:
5/E/b
Efnphsbqijdt
Dibohf!jo!Ipvtfipme!Uzqf-!3123!'!3129
2:&
Dibohf!jo!qpqvmbujpo!
!Cfuxffo!3121!boe!3129
31213129
Qpqvmbujpo571-38165:-771
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:
:&
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
Dibohf!jo!ipvtfipmet
!Cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129
Jodpnf!Ejtusjcvujpo!cz!BNJ-!3123!'!3129
31233129
Ipvtfipmet336-1:9355-461
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
63&
Dibohf!jo!nfejbo!sfoufs
ipvtfipme!jodpnf
!Cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129
31233129
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
Nfejbo
%47-478%66-223
Jodpnf
Jodpnf!Ejtusjcvujpo!cz!BNJ!boe!Ufovsf-!3129
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
31&
Dibohf!jo!nfejbo!pxofs!
ipvtfipme!jodpnf
!Cfuxffo!3123!boe!3129
31233129
Nfejbo!
%86-877%:2-28:
Jodpnf
Tpvsdf;!QVNT!)3123-!3129*
Tpvsdf;!QVNT-!3129
6
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo
Qbdlfu!Qh/!241
5/E/b
Ipvtjoh!Bggpsebcjmjuz
Dptu!Cvsefofe
Dptu!Cvsefofe!boe!Tfwfsfmz!Dptu!Cvsefofe!cz!
Ufovsf-!3129
!B!ipvtfipme!xip!qbzt!npsf!
uibo!41&!pg!uifjs!jodpnf!
po!ipvtjoh!)jodmvtjwf!pg!
ipvtfipmet!xjui!tfwfsf!dptu!
cvsefojoh*/
Tfwfsfmz!Dptu!Cvsefofe
!B!ipvtfipme!xip!qbzt!npsf!
uibo!61&!pg!uifjs!jodpnf!po!
ipvtjoh/
24-673
Ovncfs!pg!jodpnf!sftusjdufe!
vojut
!Upubm!vojut!bt!pg!3131
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!qvcmjd!
bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!ebub/
Tpvsdf;!QVNT-!3129
Opuf;!Jodmveft!tvcsfhjpo!djujft;!Bvcvso-!
Cvsjfo-!Gfefsbm!Xbz-!Lfou-!Sfoupo-!Uvlxjmb/
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Bggpsebcmf!cz!BNJ!boe!Ufovsf-!3129
Ljoh!Dpvouz!3129!Bsfb!Nfejbo!
Jodpnf!)BNJ*!gps!b!5.qfstpo!
Ipvtfipme
Tpvui!Ljoh!Ljoh!
BNJ
DpvouzDpvouz
1.41&29&29&
41.61&27&26&
61.91&34&27&
91.211&23&22&
211&,42&51&
Tpvsdf;!IVE-!3129
Tpvsdf;!QVNT-!3129
7
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!242
5/E/b
Ipvtjoh!Offe!Gpsfdbtu
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Offefe!Uispvhi!3151
743-7:3
VoefsqspevdujpoGvuvsf!OffeIpvtjoh!Offe
Qspkfdufe!qpqvmbujpo!cz!
2:-83454-47874-1:1
3151
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!3128
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Offefe!bt!b!Tibsf!pg!Fyjtujoh!Tupdl
Fyjtujoh!VojutIpvtjoh!Offe&!pg!Fyjtujoh!Vojut
4-911
Bwfsbhf!boovbm!qpqvmbujpo!
326-23774-1:13:&
hspxui!qspkfdufe!uispvhi!3151
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!3128-!FDPOpsuixftu!
dbmdvmbujpot
Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Offefe!cz!BNJ-!3151
BNJ$!pg!Vojut&!pg!Vojut
74-1:1
1.41&9-94425&
Qspkfdufe!ovncfs!pg!vojut!
41.61&8-68223&
offefe!cz!3151
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!
61.91&25-62234&
FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
91.211&8-68223&
4-266
211&,35-7164:&
Bwfsbhf!ovncfs!pg!ofx!
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
vojut!offefe!qfs!zfbs!
uispvhi!3151
IVE!Bggpsebcjmjuz!Mfwfm!cz!Ipvtjoh!Uzqf-!3129
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!
BNJTuvejp2.cfe3.cfe
FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
41&%653%693%7:9
61&%:15%:81%2-275
58&
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Jodsfbtf!jo!boovbm!ipvtjoh!
91&%2-559%2-663%2-973
qspevdujpo!up!sfbdi!3151!
211&%2-921%2-:49%3-437
ipvtjoh!offe!ubshfu!
Tpvsdf;!PGN-!312:<!QTSD-!3128<!
Tpvsdf;!IVE-!3129
FDPOpsuixftu!Dbmdvmbujpo
Voefsqspevdujpo!!Ipvtjoh!vojut!offefe!up!tbujtgz!fyjtujoh!ipvtfipmet!upebz/
Gvuvsf!Offe!!QTSD!3151!qpqvmbujpo!gpsfdbtu!usbotmbufe!joup!ipvtjoh!vojut/
8
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo
Qbdlfu!Qh/!243
5/E/b
Sfhjpobm!Bddftt!up!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo!Fnqmpznfou!Ovncfst
Fnqmpznfou
Joevtusz!)3.ejhju!OBJDT!Dpef*Fnqmpzfft$!Dibohf&!DibohfNfejbo!Tbmbsz&!Kpct!cz!&!Kpct!cz!
)3129*)3119.3129*)3119.3129*)3129*BvupUsbotju
Bhsjdvmuvsf-!Gpsftusz-!Gjtijoh!boe!
374.:9.38&%45-91142&2&
Ivoujoh
Njojoh-!Rvbsszjoh-!boe!Pjm!boe!Hbt!
2674438&OB57&6&
Fyusbdujpo
Vujmjujft
8:779:&%96-91155&3&
Dpotusvdujpo
29-3994-93537&%67-31164&4&
Nbovgbduvsjoh
62-5:321-67337&%75-31161&6&
Xipmftbmf!Usbef
35-6243-44:22&%61-11175&5&
Sfubjm!Usbef
44-3333-6619&%52-81165&5&
Usbotqpsubujpo!boe!Xbsfipvtjoh
43-1627-54:36&%5:-71187&8&
Jogpsnbujpo
3-:67743&%74-31146&2&
Gjobodf!boe!Jotvsbodf
6-95538:6&%71-91159&4&
Sfbm!Ftubuf!boe!Sfoubm!boe!
6-99983725&%57-41164&4&
Mfbtjoh
:-169853:&%82-81154&3&
Ufdiojdbm!Tfswjdft
Nbobhfnfou!pg!Dpnqbojft!boe!
6-316.475.8&OB69&5&
Foufsqsjtft
Benjojtusbujwf!boe!Tvqqpsu!
boe!Xbtuf!Nbobhfnfou!boe!26-887.47:.3&%47-71165&4&
Sfnfejbujpo!tfswjdft
Fevdbujpobm!Tfswjdft
31-39:3-78326&%64-31156&3&
Ifbmui!Dbsf!boe!Tpdjbm!Bttjtubodf
3:-8125-12327&%59-61162&4&
Bsut-!Foufsubjonfou-!boe!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
6-6443846&%52-:1158&3&
Sfdsfbujpo
Bddpnnpebujpo!boe!Gppe!
32-:245-7:538&%42-71162&5&
Tfswjdft
Puifs!Tfswjdf
8-444552&%4:-31161&4&
Qvcmjd!Benjojtusbujpo
6-48699331&%75-11163&4&
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!FDPOpsuixftu!
9
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl
Qbdlfu!Qh/!244
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz
Sfhjpo
+!Usbotju!boe!esjwf!ujnf!pg!56!njovuft-!efqbsujoh!bu!9;11!BN-!njexffl
Tpvsdf;!QTSD-!FDPOpsuixftu!
Bddftt!up!Fnqmpznfou+
Uiftf!djuz.mfwfm!fnqmpznfou!ftujnbuft!cz!Usbotju!boe!bvup!bddftt!up!sfhjpobm!fnqmpznfou!
3.ejhju!OBJDT!dpeft!xfsf!efsjwfe!vtjoh!b!xbt!efsjwfe!vtjoh!56.njovuf!usbwfm!tifet!gps!
dpncjobujpo!pg!uif!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbvt!fbdi!npef/!Xf!dbmdvmbufe!uif!ovncfs!pg!kpct!
Mpohjuvejobm!Fnqmpzfs.Ipvtfipme!Ezobnjdt!bwbjmbcmf!xjuijo!uiftf!usbwfm!tifet!jo!fbdi!
)MFIE*!Psjhjo.Eftujobujpo!Fnqmpznfou!3.ejhju!OBJDT!dbufhpsz!gps!uif!gpvs.dpvouz!
Tubujtujdt!)MPEFT*!ebub-!boe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!sfhjpo!)Ljoh-!Qjfsdf-!Topipnjti-!boe!Ljutbq*/
Sfhjpobm!Dpvodjmt!Dpwfsfe!Fnqmpznfou!
Ftujnbuft/!Uiftf!fnqmpznfou!ftujnbuft!tipx!
uif!upubm!ovncfs!pg!sftjefout!xpsljoh!jo!fbdi!
3.ejhju!OBJDT!tfdups!jo!uibu!djuz-!uif!dibohf!
jo!fnqmpznfou!jo!uibu!tfdups!jo!uibu!djuz!tjodf!
3119-!boe!uif!3129!nfejbo!xbhft!gps!uif!
sftjefout!jo!uibu!djuz!jo!uibu!tfdups/
:
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvc.Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!Gsbnfxpsl!!!!}!!!!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpo
Qbdlfu!Qh/!245
5/E/b
Appendix C
!
EBUF;!!Tvnnfs!3131!
UP;!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!IBQ!Ufbn!Nfncfst!
GSPN;!FDPOpsuixftu!
TVCKFDU;!TPVUI!LJOH!DPVOUZ!TVCSFHJPOBM!IPVTJOH!BDUJPO!GSBNFXPSL!Ä!UBTL!3!IPVTJOH!
DPOUFYU!BTTFTTNFOU!NFUIPET!NFNP!
Cbdlhspvoe!boe!Qvsqptf!
Gjhvsf!2/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!
FDPOpsuixftu!}!Qpsumboe!}!Tfbuumf!}!Mpt!Bohfmft!}!Fvhfof!}!Cpjtf!}!fdpox/dpn!2!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!246
5/E/b
!
!
Efgjojoh!uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!
Ebub!Tpvsdft!
Uxp!Bqqspbdift!Cbtfe!po!Djuz!Tj{f!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Bobmztjt!Nfuipet!
Upubm!Ipvtjoh!Vojut!Offefe!!
FDPOpsuixftu!!3!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!247
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!3/!Upubm!Offefe!Ipvtjoh!Vojut!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!cz!3151!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!QTSD!boe!PNG!ebub!
Dvssfou!Voefsqspevdujpo!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!4!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!248
5/E/b
!
!
Gvuvsf!Ipvtjoh!Offet!!
Upubm!Vojut!Offefe!cz!Jodpnf!!
Gjhvsf!4/!Ipvtfipme!Jodpnf!Ejtusjcvujpo!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!boe!Ljoh!Dpvouz!!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!3129!Dfotvt!2.zfbs!QVNT!ebub!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!!
Ljoh!Dpvouz!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
BNJ!Mfwfm!
1.41&!BNJ!29&!29&!
42.61&!BNJ!27&!26&!
62.91&!BNJ!34&!27&!
92.211&!BNJ!23&!22&!
211&,!BNJ!42&!51&!
FDPOpsuixftu!!5!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!249
5/E/b
!
!
!
Gjhvsf!5/!Ipvtfipme!Jodpnf!Ejtusjcvujpo!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!boe!Ljoh!Dpvouz!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!3129!Dfotvt!2.zfbs!QVNT!ebub!
Gjhvsf!6/!Upubm!Vojut!Offefe!cz!3151!cz!Bsfb!Nfejbo!Jodpnf!Ejtusjcvujpo!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!3129!Dfotvt!2.zfbs!QVNT!ebub!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!!
Upubm!Vojut!Offefe!cz!3151!
BNJ!Mfwfm!
1.41&!BNJ!29&!22-318!
42.61&!BNJ!27&!21-399!
62.91&!BNJ!34&!25-663!
92.211&!BNJ!23&!8-714!
211&,!BNJ!42&!2:-551!
UPUBM!!74-1:1!
Fnqmpznfou!Bobmztjt!!
FDPOpsuixftu!!6!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!24:
5/E/b
!
!
Bddftt!up!Fnqmpznfou!
Usbotju!Jtpdispoft!
Bvup!Jtpdispoft!
Tibsf!pg!Kpct!Bddfttjcmf!!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kpct!Xjuijo!Kvsjtejdujpot!
FDPOpsuixftu!!7!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!251
5/E/b
!
!
Dbwfbut!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!Ipvtjoh!Usfoet!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!8!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!252
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!7/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtfipmet!cz!Jodpnf!Sbohf-!3123!boe!3129!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbv!QVNT!3129!2.zfbs!tvswfz!ebub!!
91-111
86-233
81-111
73-526
71-11167-184
64-818
5:-752
61-111
55-2274:-8:6
49-588
51-111
3:-355
41-111
31-969
31-111
21-111
1
1.41&!BNJ42.61&!BNJ62.91&!BNJ92.211&!BNJ211&,!BNJ
31233129
!
!
Jodpnf!boe!Bggpsebcjmjuz!Mjnjut!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!9!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!253
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!8/!IVE!3129!Jodpnf!Mjnjut!gps!Tfbuumf.Cfmmfwvf-!XB!IVE!Nfusp!GNS!Bsfb!
Tpvsdf;!IVE!)tff!iuuqt;00xxx/ivevtfs/hpw0qpsubm0ebubtfut0jm/iunm!boe!tfmfdu!uif!zfbs!boe!nfusp!bsfb!gspn!uif!mjtu*/!!
Gbnjmz!Tj{f!)Ovncfs!pg!Qfpqmf*!
Bggpse.
bcjmjuz!
2!3!4!5!6!7!8!
9!
Mfwfm!
41&!%33-611!%36-811!%39-:11!%43-211!%45-811!%48-361!%4:-961!%53-511!
61&!%48-561!%53-911!%59-261!%64-611!%68-911!%73-211!%77-461!%81-761!
91&!%67-311!%75-311!%83-361!%91-361!%97-811!%:4-211!%::-661!%216-:61!
211&!!!!%214-511!!!!!!
!
Nfejbo!Ipvtfipme!Jodpnf!!
Sbdf!boe!Fuiojdjuz!!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!:!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!254
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!9/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtfipmet!cz!Sbdf!boe!Fuiojdjuz-!3129!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbv!QVNT!3129!2.zfbs!tvswfz!ebub!!
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Xijuf
66/2&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Btjbo
25/3&
Ijtqbojd!pg!Boz!Sbdf
22/:&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Cmbdl!ps!Bgsjdbo!Bnfsjdbo
22/3&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Uxp!ps!npsf!Sbdft
6/2&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Obujwf!Ibxbjjbo!ps!Puifs!Qbdjgjd!Jtmboefs
2/5&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Bnfsjdbo!Joejbo!ps!Bmbtlbo!Obujwf
1/:&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Puifs!Sbdf1/2&
1/1&31/1&51/1&71/1&
Gjhvsf!:/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!boe!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtfipme!Jodpnf!bt!Qfsdfou!pg!Bsfb!Nfejbo!Jodpnf!
cz!Sbdf!boe!Fuiojdjuz-!3129!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbv!QVNT!3129!2.zfbs!tvswfz!ebub!!
FDPOpsuixftu!!21!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!255
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!21/!Nfejbo!Npouimz!Ipvtjoh!Dptut!bt!b!Tibsf!pg!Ipvtfipme!Jodpnf!gps!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!
Ipvtfipmet!cz!Sbdf!boe!Fuiojdjuz-!3129!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbv!QVNT!3129!2.zfbs!tvswfz!ebub!!
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Bnfsjdbo!Joejbo!ps!Bmbtlbo!Obujwf
44&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Cmbdl!ps!Bgsjdbo!Bnfsjdbo
42&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Obujwf!Ibxbjjbo!ps!Puifs!Qbdjgjd!Jtmboefs
3:&
Ijtqbojd!pg!Boz!Sbdf
39&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Puifs!Sbdf
37&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Btjbo
36&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Uxp!ps!npsf!Sbdft35&
Opo.Ijtqbojd-!Xijuf
34&
1&21&31&41&51&
Nvmujgbnjmz!Dpoepnjojvnt!boe!Dpowfstjpot!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Gjhvsf!22!Nvmujgbnjmz!Vojut!Cvjmu!Tjodf!3121!cz!Ufovsf!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!Ljoh!boe!Qjfsdf!Dpvouz!bttfttps!ebub!
Bqbsunfout!Dpoepnjojvnt!&!Bqbsunfout!
&!Dpoep!
Djuz!
Bvcvso!957!742!68&!54&!
Cvsjfo!713!1!211&!1&!
FDPOpsuixftu!!22!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!256
5/E/b
!
!
Gfefsbm!Xbz!:69!411!87&!35&!
Lfou!2-439!77!:6&!6&!
Sfoupo!976!4:3!7:&!42&!
Uvlxjmb!73:!2:4!88&!34&!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!7-521!2-:22!88&!34&!
!
Voju!Tj{f!!
Gjhvsf!23/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tuvez!Bsfb!Ipvtjoh!Jowfoupsz!cz!Cfesppn!Tj{f!!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbv!QVNT!3129!2.zfbs!tvswfz!ebub!!
Tuvejpt!2.CS!Vojut!3.CS!Vojut!4.CS!Vojut!5.CS!Vojut!
6,!CS!Vojut!
Sfhjpo!
Bvcvso!2-4:8!6-488!21-217!28-288!21-8::!2-8:4!
Cvsjfo!567!4-546!6-875!7-328!4-321!:15!
Gfefsbm!Xbz!3-115!7-624!27-763!27-795!9-266!3-671!
Lfou!2-794!6-35:!23-758!27-672!9-:45!3-634!
Sfoupo!2-412!8-9:1!28-856!27-88:!22-619!3-778!
Uvlxjmb!3:3!2-717!3-::1!2-312!986!532!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!9-17:!44-:88!83-144!94-358!58-67:!23-471!
Ljoh!Dpvouz!73-39:!271-886!344-455!369-329!291-697!68-496!
Ljoh!Dpvouz
8&28&35&38&2:&7&
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz
4&24&39&43&29&6&
Uvlxjmb
5&33&51&27&23&7&
Sfoupo
3&25&42&3:&31&6&
Lfou
5&22&38&46&2:&6&
Gfefsbm!Xbz
5&23&43&43&27&6&
Cvsjfo3&28&3:&42&27&6&
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Bvcvso4&23&33&48&34&5&
1&21&31&41&51&61&71&81&91&:1&211&
Tuvejpt2.CS!Vojut3.CS!Vojut4.CS!Vojut5.CS!Vojut6,!CS!Vojut
!
FDPOpsuixftu!!23!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!257
5/E/b
!
!
Voju!Dpoejujpo!
Gjhvsf!24/!DpTubs!Qspqfsuz!Sbujoht!!Nbusjy!
Tpvsdf;!DpTubs!!
!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!24!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!258
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!25/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tuvez!Bsfb!Ipvtjoh!Jowfoupsz!cz!DpTubs!Qspqfsuz!Sbujoh!!
Tpvsdf;!DpTubs!Nvmujgbnjmz!Ipvtjoh!Jowfoupsz-!bddfttfe!Kvof!3131!
Nbslfu!Sbuf!Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh!
FDPOpsuixftu!!25!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!259
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!26/!OPBI!Vojut!cz!Tj{f!boe!Bggpsebcjmjuz!jo!Fbdi!Djuz!boe!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!Bobmztjt!pg!DpTubs!ebub!!
Djuz!Tuvejpt!2.CS!Vojut!3.CS!Vojut!4.CS!Vojut!5.CS!Vojut!
Upubm!!
BNJ!
Bvcvso!341!3-588!4-24:!582!215!7-532!
Cvsjfo!232!2-692!2-679!28:!4!4-563!
Gfefsbm!276!5-554!6-387!2-735!257!22-765!
91&!
Xbz!
ps!
Lfou!554!6-485!8-546!2-963!:3!26-2:7!
mftt!
Sfoupo!799!5-829!6-238!:61!7:!22-663!
Uvlxjmb!257!2-383!2-582!53!5!3-:46!
62-321!
2-8:4!2:-976!35-127!6-229!529!
UPUBM!
Djuz!Tuvejpt!2.CS!Vojut!3.CS!Vojut!4.CS!Vojut!5.CS!Vojut!
Upubm!!
BNJ!
Bvcvso!98!2-13:!:63!214!23!3-294!
Cvsjfo!96!448!366!2!2!78:!
Gfefsbm!4:!2-148!7:8!99!9!2-97:!
61&!
Xbz!
ps!
Lfou!37!2-321!2-388!383!28!3-913!
Mftt!
Sfoupo!447!824!643!:6!27!2-7:3!
Uvlxjmb!5!485!555!6!5!942!
21-167!
688!5-811!5-268!675!69!
UPUBM!
!
Sfhvmbufe!Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh!Bobmztjt!Nfuipepmphz!!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Bggpsebcmf!Sfoubm!Ipvtjoh!
FDPOpsuixftu!!26!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!25:
5/E/b
!
!
Sfhvmbufe!Bggpsebcmf!Sfoubm!Ipvtjoh!Jowfoupsz!
Gjhvsf!27/!312:!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhvmbufe!Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh!Qspqfsujft!boe!Vojut!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!ebub!gspn!Xbtijohupo!Tubuf!Ipvtjoh!Gjobodf!Dpnnjttjpo-!uif!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!
Ipvtjoh!boe!Vscbo!Efwfmpqnfou-!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtjoh!Bvuipsjuz-!Sfoupo!Ipvtjoh!Bvuipsjuz-!boe!V/T/!Dfotvt!Cvsfbv!QVNT!
3129!2.zfbs!tvswfz!ebub!
Upubm!Upubm!Bwh/!Vojut!BI!Vojut!Djuz(t!Upubm!BI!Vojut!bt!
Djuz!
Qspqfsujft!Vojut+!qfs!Tibsf!pg!Bqbsunfou!Tibsf!pg!
Qspqfsuz!Tvcsfhjpo!Tupdl!Djuz(t!
Upubm!
Bqbsunfout!
Bvcvso!43!3-929!99!2:/9&!22-657!35/5&!
Cvsjfo!24!::7!88!8/1&!7-718!26/2&!
Gfefsbm!Xbz!3:!4-4:4!228!34/:&!2:-841!28/3&!
FDPOpsuixftu!!27!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!261
5/E/b
!
!
Lfou!36!4-197!234!32/8&!25-315!32/8&!
Sfoupo!45!3-816!91!2:/1&!29-:97!25/3&!
Uvlxjmb!21!2-31:!232!9/6&!4-52:!46/5&!
254!25-318!717!211/1&!85-5:3!
2:/2&!
Tvcsfhjpo!Upubm!
+jodmveft!vojut!voefs!dpotusvdujpo!
!
Gjhvsf!28/!312:!Tfmfdujwf!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhvmbufe!Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh!Vojut!cz!Jodpnf!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!ebub!gspn!Xbtijohupo!Tubuf!Ipvtjoh!Gjobodf!Dpnnjttjpo-!uif!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!
Ipvtjoh!boe!Vscbo!Efwfmpqnfou-!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtjoh!Bvuipsjuz-!boe!Sfoupo!Ipvtjoh!Bvuipsjuz!!
9-111
8-111
7-111
6-111
5-111
4-111
3-111
2-111
1
MJI!41&MJI!46&MJI!51&MJI!61&MJI!71&
Uvlxjmb
173636839
Sfoupo2442913542-297
Lfou58354266932-568
Gfefsbm!Xbz2241915432-825
Cvsjfo
1114133:
Bvcvso411545612-641
!
Opuft;!Ebub!po!jodpnf!mfwfmt!xbt!mjnjufe/!Pomz!81&!pg!bmm!vojut!ibe!jodpnf!mjnju!jogpsnbujpo-!cvu!uijt!wbsjfe!cz!djuz;!85&!pg!vojut!jo!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Bvcvso!ibe!jodpnf!jogpsnbujpo-!37&!jo!Cvsjfo-!84&!jo!Gfefsbm!Xbz-!8:&!jo!Lfou-!76&!jo!Sfoupo-!boe!84&!jo!Uvlxjmb/!
!
FDPOpsuixftu!!28!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!262
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!29/!312:!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhvmbufe!Bggpsebcmf!Sfoubm!Ipvtjoh!Vojut!cz!Zfbs!Cvjmu!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!bobmztjt!pg!ebub!gspn!Xbtijohupo!Tubuf!Ipvtjoh!Gjobodf!Dpnnjttjpo-!uif!VT!Efqbsunfou!pg!
Ipvtjoh!boe!Vscbo!Efwfmpqnfou-!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtjoh!Bvuipsjuz-!boe!Sfoupo!Ipvtjoh!Bvuipsjuz!!
5-111
4-611
4-111
3-611
3-111
2-611
2-111
611
1
Qsf.3111.
31223123312431253126312731283129312:31313132
31113121
Uvlxjmb22459211111112:111253
Sfoupo
833453191293:511441583821
Lfou3:62-415148311113692:7111
Gfefsbm!Xbz3952-14811115865543:71112:9
Cvsjfo1::11111114512711
Bvcvso
561592169111123698:1145
!
Opuft;!Ebub!po!uif!zfbs!cvjmu!xbt!mjnjufe/!Pomz!87&!pg!bmm!uif!vojut!ibe!zfbs!cvjmu!jogpsnbujpo-!cvu!uijt!wbsjfe!cz!
djuz;!84&!pg!uif!vojut!jo!Bvcvso!ibe!uijt!jogpsnbujpo-!3:&!jo!Cvsjfo-!97&!jo!Gfefsbm!Xbz-!8:&!jo!Lfou-!94&!jo!
Sfoupo-!boe!88&!jo!Uvlxjmb/!!
!
!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!29!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!263
5/E/b
Appendix D
Qbdlfu!Qh/!264
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!265
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!2!
CBDLHSPVOE!
IC2:34!IPVTJOH!HSBOU!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!266
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!3!
!
QVSQPTF!PG!UIJT!BTTFTTNFOU!
NFUIPEPMPHZ!GPS!UIJT!BTTFTTNFOU!
BTTVNQUJPOT!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!267
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!4!
DPOUFYU!
TVCSFHJPOBM!DPOUFYU!BOE!EFNPHSBQIJDT!
IPVTJOH!VOJU!QSPEVDUJPO!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!268
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!5!
EFWFMPQNFOU!DPOUFYU!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!269
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!6!
QPMJDZ!BOBMZTJT!
NVMUJGBNJMZ!UBY!FYFNQUJPO!)NGUF*!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!26:
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!7!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!271
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!8!
TVHHFTUJPOT!GPS!JNQSPWFNFOU!
BDDFTTPSZ!EXFMMJOH!VOJUT!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!272
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!9!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!273
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!:!
TVHHFTUJPOT!GPS!JNQSPWFNFOU!
GFF!XBJWFST!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!274
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!21!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!275
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!22!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
!
TVHHFTUJPOT!GPS!JNQSPWFNFOU!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!276
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!23!
EFWFMPQNFOU!JODFOUJWFT!BOE!CPOVTFT
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!277
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!24!
TVHHFTUJPOT!GPS!JNQSPWFNFOU!
QMBOOFE!BDUJPO!FJT!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!278
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!25!
TVHHFTUJPOT!GPS!JNQSPWFNFOU!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
TVNNBSZ!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!279
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!26!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!27:
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!27!
GVUVSF!TUVEZ!
Qbsljoh!Tuboebset!
Usbotju!Bddfttjcjmjuz!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!281
5/E/b
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!Ipvtjoh!Bdujpo!Qmbo!!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!}!28!
Jogsbtusvduvsf!Offet!
Gvoejoh!boe!Mboe!Dpousjcvujpot!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!282
Qbdlfu!Qh/!285
in at
-
.
SoKiCo Regional Housing Action Approach
Remove some retail requirements in multifamily zones.Revise or eliminate parking requirements.Waive impact fees.Ease design guidelines for affordable housing.Allow more housing capacity
around transit.
Establishing a clearly articulated vision of their approach to housing with buyevery staff level. Eliminating barriers to housing production by expanding incentives, eliminating policy
barriers, and increasing zoning capacity. These could include:
Development is hampered by a combination of perception and economics. Land prices are high, but without the demand for density that exists in SeattleCities should consider:
5/E/b
Appendix F
!
EBUF;!!Kvmz!2:-!3131!
UP;!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhjpobm!IBQ!Ufbn!Nfncfst!
GSPN;!FDPOpsuixftu!
TVCKFDU;!TPVUI!LJOH!DPVOUZ!SFHJPOBM!IPVTJOH!BDUJPO!QMBO!Ä!UBTL!4/3!IPVTJOH!
TUSBUFHJFT!GSBNFXPSL!
Cbdlhspvoe!boe!Qvsqptf!
Gjhvsf!2/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Tvcsfhjpo!!
Tpvsdf;!FDPOpsuixftu!
Bdujpo!Tiffut!
FDPOpsuixftu!}!Qpsumboe!}!Tfbuumf!}!Mpt!Bohfmft!}!Fvhfof!}!Cpjtf!}!fdpox/dpn!2!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!29:
5/E/b
!
!
Gjhvsf!3/!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtjoh!Tusbufhjft-!Hpbmt-!boe!Qpufoujbm!Jnqbdu!
Qpufoujbm!Jnqbdu!
Hpbm!Bdijfwfe!
!
!
Dsfbuf!Jodsfbtf!
!
!
Jnqbdu!po!
Qsftfswf!
Bggpsebcmf!'!Ipvtjoh!
Tdbmbcjmjuz!
Tusbufhz!
Bggpsebcjmjuz!
Bggpsebcjmjuz!
Xpslgpsdf!Pqujpot!'!
Ipvtjoh!Tvqqmz!
!!!
Qsftfswbujpo!'!Bouj.!
!
Nbslfu!mfwfm!Mpx!jnqbdu!
!!
Ejtqmbdfnfou!
!!!
Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh!
Qspqfsuz!mfwfm!Ijhi!jnqbdu!
!!!
boe!Qspevdujpo!
!!!Nbslfu!ps!
Npefsbuf!
Njeemf!Ipvtjoh!
Ofjhicpsippe!
!!
jnqbdu!
mfwfm!
Nbslfu!ps!
!
!!
Npefsbuf!
UPE!'!Vscbo!Dfoufst!Ofjhicpsippe!
!!
jnqbdu!
mfwfm!
!
FDPOpsuixftu!!3!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:1
5/E/b
!
!
2!Qsftfswbujpo!'!Bouj.Ejtqmbdfnfou!Tusbufhjft!
Qsjnbsz!Hpbm!Ipvtjoh!Cbssjfst!Pwfsdpnf!
Qsftfswf!bggpsebcjmjuz!jo!fyjtujoh!vojut!
Qsftfswft!bhjoh!ps!fyqjsjoh!sftusjdufe!vojut-!
qsftfswft!vosfhvmbufe!bggpsebcmf!qspqfsujft-!
njojnj{ft!ejtqmbdfnfou/!
Qsftfswbujpo!boe!bouj.!Uiftf!tusbufhjft!bsf!bqqmjdbcmf!jo!
Tdbmbcjmjuz!
Nbslfu!
ejtqmbdfnfou!fggpsut!xpsl!bu!uif!ÆipuÇ!ipvtjoh!nbslfut!gbdjoh!ijhi!
Dpoejujpot!
ofjhicpsippe!ps!nbslfu!mfwfm/!qsjdf!boe!sfou!hspxui-!
boe!Ujnjoh!
hfousjgjdbujpo!boe!ejtqmbdfnfou!
Jnqbdu!
Uiftf!tusbufhjft!ibwf!b!npefsbuf!
qsfttvsft-!boe!sfefwfmpqnfou/!
jnqbdu!po!bggpsebcjmjuz/!
Eftdsjqujpo!
Ipvtjoh!qsftfswbujpo!boe!bouj.ejtqmbdfnfou!tusbufhjft!dbo!fyqboe!ipvtjoh!bggpsebcjmjuz!boe!
bwbjmbcjmjuz!jo!wbsjpvt!xbzt/!Nboz!pg!uif!ipvtjoh!nbslfut!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!ibwf!bhjoh!ipvtjoh!
tupdl!uibu!dpvme!cf!bu!sjtl!pg!jowftunfou!qvsdibtft!)xifsf!uifz!bsf!cpvhiu-!sfopwbufe-!boe!sfoufe!bu!
ijhifs!qsjdft*/!Fwfo!sfhvmbufe!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!qspqfsujft!dbo!cf!bu!sjtl!jg!uifjs!bggpsebcjmjuz!qfsjpet!
bsf!ofbsjoh!fyqjsbujpo!boe!uif!gvoefst!bsf!vobcmf!up!sfdbqjubmj{f!)xijdi!jt!pgufo!efqfoefou!po!mjnjufe!
qvcmjd!gvoejoh*/!B!sfwjfx!pg!uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Sfhvmbufe!Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh!Jowfoupsz!dpnqjmfe!
gps!uijt!qspkfdu!joejdbuft!uibu!uifsf!bsf!2-44:!jodpnf!sftusjdufe!vojut!jo!21!cvjmejoht!uibu!xjmm!ibwf!
fyqjsjoh!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!bhsffnfout!cz!3141!boe!3-618!jodpnf!sftusjdufe!vojut!jo!29!cvjmejoht!
uibu!xjmm!ibwf!fyqjsjoh!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!bhsffnfout!cz!3151/!Uiftf!fyqjsjoh!uby!dsfeju!gvoefe!
bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!bhsffnfout!sfqsftfou!39&!pg!uif!upubm!24-673!jodpnf!sftusjdufe!uibu!fyjtu!jo!
Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!upebz/!
!
Uif!gpmmpxjoh!tusbufhz!fmfnfout!dpvme!ifmq!qsftfswf!cpui!sfhvmbufe!boe!vosfhvmbufe!bggpsebcmf!vojut!
boe!qsfwfou!uif!ejtqmbdfnfou!pg!mpx.jodpnf!dpnnvojujft!xijmf!ofx!efwfmpqnfou!pddvst/!
Tusbufhz!Fmfnfout!
2B*!Sfhjpobm!Sfwpmwjoh!Mpbo!Gvoe/!Djujft!tipvme!dpotjefs!kpjojoh!gpsdft!up!dsfbuf!b!sfhjpobm!bggpsebcmf!
ipvtjoh!sfwpmwjoh!mpbo!gvoe!gps!qsftfswbujpo!pqqpsuvojujft/!Bo!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!sfwpmwjoh!mpbo!gvoe!jt!
b!qppm!pg!npofz!uibu!pggfst!mpx.joufsftu!mpbot!up!fmjhjcmf!sfdjqjfout!gps!uif!efwfmpqnfou!ps!qsftfswbujpo!
pg!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh/!Sfwpmwjoh!mpbo!gvoet!dbo!bje!uif!gfbtjcjmjuz!pg!)sf*efwfmpqnfou!cz!pggfsjoh!
cfmpx.!nbslfu!joufsftu!sbuft!boe!hfofspvt!mpbo!ufsnt!dpnqbsfe!up!nbslfu!mpbot-!boe!dbo!cf!vtfe!up!
gjmm!gvoejoh!hbqt!jo!b!efwfmpqnfou!efbm!)b!nbkps!ivsemf!gps!dsfbujoh!ofx!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh*/!B!gvoe!jt!
tffefe!cz!ovnfspvt!jowftupst;!qvcmjd!gvoefst-!qijmbouispqjd!gvoefst-!cbolt-!gjobodjbm!jotujuvujpot-!ps!
puifs!jowftupst/!Bo!foujuz!mjlf!uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!Ipvtjoh!boe!Ipnfmftt!Qbsuofs!)TLIIQ*!ofuxpsl!xpvme!
cf!b!tuspoh!mfbe!gps!uijt!uzqf!pg!sfhjpobm!fggpsu/!Uijt!dpvme!cf!npefmfe!pgg!uif!Djuz!pg!TfbuumfÉt!SFEJ!
Gvoe/!
!
2C*!Npojups!Fyqjsjoh!Sfhvmbufe!Qspqfsujft/!Djujft!dpvme!ftubcmjti!qsphsbnt!boe!nfdibojtnt!up!
npojups!sfhvmbufe!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!qspqfsujft!uibu!bsf!ofbsjoh!uifjs!bggpsebcjmjuz!fyqjsbujpo!ebuft-!
boe!xpsl!xjui!uif!qspqfsuz!pxofst!up!sfdbqjubmj{f!boe!sfibcjmjubuf!uif!qspqfsuz!xjui!ofx!gvoejoh/!
Dsfbuf!b!ebubcbtf!boe!nbqqjoh!tztufn!up!npojups!boe!qmbo!gps!vqdpnjoh!fyqjsbujpot/!
!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
2D*!Npojups!Vosfhvmbufe!Bggpsebcmf!Qspqfsujft/!Djujft!dpvme!ftubcmjti!b!qspdftt!up!npojups!vosfhvmbufe!
bggpsebcmf!sfoubm!qspqfsujft!boe!npcjmf!ipnf!qbslt!uibu!njhiu!cf!bu!sjtl!pg!tfmmjoh!up!qsjwbuf!jowftupst!
boe!tffjoh!sfout0mfbtft!jodsfbtf/!Ftubcmjti!dsjufsjb!up!gmbh!qspqfsujft!bu!sjtl-!tvdi!bt;!mpx.sfout-!
efgfssfe!nbjoufobodf-!tnbmm!)voefs!31!vojut*-!opo.jotujuvujpobm!pxofst!)f/h/-!.!Ænpn!boe!qpqÇ!
pxofst*-!mpdbufe!jo!bnfojuz!sjdi!bsfbt-!ofbs!sfdfou!sfefwfmpqnfout-!ps!po!ijhi!dptu!mboe/!
Uijt!tusbufhz!xpvme!cf!npsf!wbmvbcmf!jg!qbjsfe!xjui!b!sfwpmwjoh!mpbo!gvoe!uibu!dpvme!pggfs!hsbout!ps!
mpx.joufsftu!mpbot!up!qvsdibtf!qspqfsujft!boe!nbjoubjo!bggpsebcjmjuz!boe!ibcjubcjmjuz!gps!b!efgjofe!
evsbujpo/!!
Uijt!tusbufhz!dpvme!bmtp!cf!qbjsfe!xjui!b!sfrvjsfnfou!pg!opujdf!pg!joufou!up!tfmm!gps!qspqfsujft!uibu!
bsf!jefoujgjfe!jo!bo!vosfhvmbufe!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!jowfoupsz/!
FDPOpsuixftu!!4!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:2
5/E/b
!
!
2E*!Fnqpxfsjoh!Dpnnvojuz!boe!Qbsuofsjoh!xjui!Dpnnvojuz!Pshboj{bujpot/!Djujft!dpvme!fwbmvbuf!uifjs!
dpnnvojujft!boe!ofjhicpsippet!up!jefoujgz!xip!nbz!cf!ftqfdjbmmz!wvmofsbcmf!up!ejtqmbdfnfou!bt!
ipvtjoh!nbslfut!dpoujovf!up!tff!jodsfbtjoh!bggpsebcjmjuz!qsfttvsft/!Uijt!xpsl!tipvme!qsjpsjuj{f!cvjmejoh!
dbqbdjuz!gps!ijtupsjdbmmz!nbshjobmj{fe!dpnnvojujft!mjlf!dpnnvojujft!pg!dpmps-!jnnjhsbout-!ps!opo.
Fohmjti!tqfbljoh!dpnnvojujft/!Uijt!xpsl!tipvme!gpdvt!po!frvjuz!boe!tpdjbm!kvtujdf!pvudpnft!boe!
fnqpxfs!uif!dpnnvojuz!cz!qspwjejoh!mfbefstijq!usbjojoh!jo!bewpdbdz!gps!frvjubcmf!efwfmpqnfou-!
foibodjoh!dvmuvsbmmz!boe!mjohvjtujdbmmz!tqfdjgjd!tfswjdft-!boe!hbjojoh!npsf!ejsfdu-!dpnnvojuz!jogpsnfe!
hvjebodf!po!gvuvsf!efwfmpqnfou!
!
2F*!Ufobou!Qspufdujpot/!Djujft!dpvme!ftubcmjti-!vqebuf-!ps!tusfohuifo!ufobou!qspufdujpot!boe!sftpvsdft-!
tvdi!bt!qpmjdjft!sfmbujoh!up!kvtu.dbvtf!fwjdujpot-!mpx.cbssjfs!bqqmjdbujpo!tdsffojoh-!boe!gbjs.ipvtjoh!ps!
bouj.ejtdsjnjobujpo!qpmjdjft/!Ufobou!fevdbujpo!boe!ufoboutÉ!sjhiut!qsphsbnt!mjlf!SfouXfmm!ps!SfouTnbsu!
dbo!ifmq!ufobout!xjui!ejggjdvmu!sfoubm!ijtupsjft!tfu!uifntfmwft!vq!gps!tvddftt/!Ufobou!qspufdujpot!tvdi!
bt!uiptf!mjtufe!ifsf!bsf!nptu!fggfdujwf!bu!njujhbujoh!ejtqmbdfnfou!sjtl!gps!ipvtfipmet!uibu!bsf!nptu!bu!
sjtl!jo!uif!ipvtjoh!nbslfu/!!
!
2G*!Nbovgbduvsfe!Ipnf!Qsftfswbujpo/!Nbovgbduvsfe!ipnf!qbslt!dbo!gbdf!jodsfejcmf!ejtqmbdfnfou!
boe!sfefwfmpqnfou!qsfttvsf!jg!uifz!bsf!tjufe!po!wbmvbcmf!mboe!xjui!dmptf!qspyjnjuz!up!tuspoh!ipvtjoh!
nbslfut-!sfhjpobm!fnqmpznfou!dfoufst-!boe!dpodfousbujpot!pg!bnfojujft/!Djujft!dpvme!ftubcmjti!
qspdfevsft!ps!hvjefmjoft!up!ifmq!uif!sftjefout!bu!uiftf!qspqfsujft!up!ftubcmjti!b!dp.pqfsbujwf!
pxofstijq!tusvduvsf!ps!tvqqpsu!opo.qspgju!ipvtjoh!qspwjefst!up!bdrvjsf!boe!nbobhf!nbovgbduvsfe!
ipnf!qbst/!Uiftf!hvjefmjoft!tipvme!bmtp!qspwjef!dmfbs!dsjufsjb!bspvoe!ipvtjoh!rvbmjuz!boe!
fowjsponfoubm!ifbmui!boe!mjgf!tbgfuz!tuboebset!gps!ipvtjoh!jo!nbovgbduvsfe!ipnf!qbslt!up!jefoujgz!
xifo!ju!jt!bqqspqsjbuf!gps!qvcmjd!ps!opo.qspgju!bdrvjtjujpo!up!tvqqpsu!mpoh!ufsn!ifbmuiz!ipvtjoh!gps!
ipvtfipmet/!Qsftfswbujpo!dbo!cf!b!ijhimz!fggfdujwf!npefm!gps!qsfwfoujoh!npcjmf!ipnf!qbslt!gspn!cfjoh!
qvsdibtfe!boe!sfefwfmpqfe/!!
!
Beejujpobmmz-!uifsf!bsf!{pojoh!tusbufhjft!uibu!djujft!dpvme!jnqmfnfou!up!qsftfswf!npcjmf!ipnf!
qbslt!boe!uifjs!dsjujdbm!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!tupdl/!B!3129!djuz!psejobodf!jo!Qpsumboe!Psfhpo!dsfbufe!
b!ofx!Nbovgbduvsfe!Exfmmjoh!Qbsl!{pof!up!sfhvmbuf!mboe!vtf!bu!67!qbslt!jo!uif!djuz/!Uijt!
qsftfswbujpo!tusbufhz!sfrvjsft!b!sfwjfx!qspdftt!boe!Djuz!Dpvodjm!wpuf!jg!b!efwfmpqfs!qspqptft!
dmptjoh!b!qbsl!gps!sfefwfmpqnfou/!
!
2H*!Sfoubm!Mjdfotjoh!boe!Jotqfdujpo!Qsphsbnt/!Djujft!dpvme!dpotjefs!ftubcmjtijoh!tuspoh!sfoubm!!!
mjdfotjoh!boe!jotqfdujpo!qsphsbnt!up!usbdl-!npojups-!boe!jotqfdu!b!qpsujpo!pg!bmm!sfoubm!ipvtjoh!jo!uifjs!
kvsjtejdujpo/!Uijt!qsftfswbujpo!tusbufhz!ifmqt!fsbejdbuf!tmvnmpset-!dsfbuft!b!ebubcbtf!pg!bmm!nvmujgbnjmz!
ipvtjoh-!boe!qsfwfout!mboempse!sfubmjbujpo!gspn!ibcjubcjmjuz!dpnqmbjout/!Jg!uif!mjdfotf!gff!jt!tfu!
bqqspqsjbufmz-!uijt!uzqf!pg!gvoejoh!dbo!cf!sfwfovf!qptjujwf!)ps!bu!mfbtu!sfwfovf!ofvusbm*!up!qbz!gps!uif!
dptut!pg!jotqfdujpot!boe!pwfsifbe/!
!
Dvssfoumz-!Bvcvso-!Cvsjfo-!Lfou-!boe!Uvlxjmb!bmm!ibwf!uiftf!qsphsbnt!jo!qmbdf/!SfoupoÉt!qsphsbn!epft!
opu!sfrvjsf!bo!jotqfdujpo-!fydfqu!xifo!b!wjpmbujpo!ibt!pddvssfe/!Xjuipvu!cfjoh!b!sboepn!jotqfdujpo-!b!
mboempse!dpvme!sfubmjbuf!bhbjotu!b!ufobou!xifo!bo!jotqfdujpo!pddvst/!Gfefsbm!Xbz!jt!dvssfoumz!
dpotjefsjoh!b!qsphsbn-!boe!tipvme!mppl!up!uif!tvddfttft!boe!gbjmvsft!pg!jut!ofjhicpsjoh!djujft!up!
eftjho!uif!qsphsbn!boe!tfu!uif!gff/!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
!
FDPOpsuixftu!!5!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:3
5/E/b
!
!
3!Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh!boe!Qspevdujpo!Tusbufhjft!
Qsjnbsz!Hpbm!Ipvtjoh!Cbssjfst!Pwfsdpnf!
Dsfbuf!Npsf!Bggpsebcmf!'!Xpslgpsdf!Ipvtjoh<!Mbdl!pg!gvoejoh!gps!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!
Qsftfswf!Bggpsebcjmjuz!efwfmpqnfout-!sfevdft!dptu!pg!efwfmpqnfou!gps!
bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh/!
Bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!qspevdujpo!Xjui!tdbsdf!sftpvsdft-!bggpsebcmf!
Tdbmbcjmjuz!
Nbslfu!
xpslt!po!b!qspqfsuz.cz.qspqfsuz!ipvtjoh!sftpvsdft!dbo!hp!gvsuifs!
!
Dpoejujpot!
cbtjt-!cvu!ibwf!b!ijhi!jnqbdu!po!jo!nbslfut!xjui!mpxfs!mboe!qsjdft/!
Jnqbdu!
boe!Ujnjoh!
bggpsebcjmjuz/!
Jo!bsfbt!xjui!ijhi!mboe!qsjdft!boe!
ijhi!ipvtjoh!dptut-!bggpsebcmf!
ipvtjoh!dbo!cf!npsf!fyqfotjwf!
up!qspevdf!cvu!dsfbuf!mbtujoh!
njyfe.jodpnf!dpnnvojujft!
Eftdsjqujpo!
Wbsjpvt!pqujpot!fyjtu!up!cpptu!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!qspevdujpo/!Uiftf!sbohf!gspn!gvoejoh!uppmt!up!mboe!
vtf!boe!{pojoh!uppmt-!boe!dbo!cf!ejsfdufe!upxbse!nbslfu!sbuf!efwfmpqfst!ps!opoqspgju!efwfmpqfst/!Uif!
Xbtijohupo!Tubuf!mfhjtmbuvsf!jt!wfsz!gpdvtfe!po!ipvtjoh!bggpsebcjmjuz!boe!nbz!bee!npsf!pqujpot!jo!uif!
ofbs!ufsn/!Bddpsejoh!up!uif!Nvojdjqbm!Sftfbsdi!boe!Tfswjdft!Dfoufs!)NSTD*-!uif!gpmmpxjoh!mpdbm!ubyjoh!
nfbtvsft!gps!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!dpvme!cf!dpotjefsfe/!
!
Uif!gpmmpxjoh!tusbufhz!fmfnfout!dpvme!cf!dpotjefsfe!up!cpptu!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!qspevdujpo!boe!
qsftfswf!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!bt!ofx!efwfmpqnfou!pddvst/!
Tusbufhz!Fmfnfout!
3B*!Sfhjpobm!Sfwpmwjoh!Mpbo!Gvoe/!Tjnjmbs!up!uif!sfwpmwjoh!mpbo!gvoe!nfoujpofe!jo!uif!qsftfswbujpo!
tusbufhjft-!b!sfwpmwjoh!mpbo!gvoe!dpvme!cf!vtfe!up!gjmm!efwfmpqnfou!hbqt!gps!sfhvmbufe!bggpsebcmf!
ipvtjoh/!Uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!Ipvtjoh!boe!Ipnfmfttoftt!Qbsuofstijq!)TLIIQ*!ibt!jefoujgjfe!uif!
dsfbujpo!pg!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!gvoe!jo!uif!pshboj{bujpoÉt!xpsl!qmbo/!TLIIQ!jt!xfmm!qptjujpofe!up!
benjojtufs!b!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!mpbo!gvoe/!!
!
3C*!Puifs!Gvoejoh!Nfdibojtnt!jodmvef;!
B!qspqfsuz!uby!mfwz!)SDX!95/63/216*!xijdi!bmmpxt!djujft!up!qmbdf!bo!beejujpobm!uby!vq!up!%1/61!qfs!
uipvtboe!epmmbst!bttfttfe!gps!vq!up!ufo!zfbst/!Gvoet!nvtu!hp!upxbse!gjobodjoh!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!
gps!ipvtfipmet!fbsojoh!cfmpx!61&!NGJ/!
B!tbmft!uby!mfwz!)SDX!93/25/641*!xijdi!bmmpxt!kvsjtejdujpot!up!qmbdf!b!tbmft!uby!vq!up!1/2&/!Bu!
mfbtu!71&!pg!gvoet!nvtu!hp!upxbse!dpotusvdujoh!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh-!nfoubm0cfibwjpsbm!ifbmui.
sfmbufe!gbdjmjujft-!ps!gvoejoh!uif!pqfsbujpot!boe!nbjoufobodf!dptut!pg!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!boe!
gbdjmjujft!xifsf!ipvtjoh.sfmbufe!qsphsbnt!bsf!qspwjefe/!Bu!mfbtu!51&!pg!gvoet!nvtu!hp!upxbse!
nfoubm!0!cfibwjpsbm!ifbmui!usfbunfou!qsphsbnt!boe!tfswjdft!ps!ipvtjoh.sfmbufe!tfswjdft/!
B!sfbm!ftubuf!fydjtf!uby!)SFFU*!)SDX!93/57/146*!xijdi!bmmpxt!b!qpsujpo!pg!djuz!SFFU!gvoet!up!cf!
vtfe!gps!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!qspkfdut!boe!uif!qmboojoh-!bdrvjtjujpo-!sfibcjmjubujpo-!sfqbjs-!
sfqmbdfnfou-!dpotusvdujpo-!ps!jnqspwfnfou!pg!gbdjmjujft!gps!qfpqmf!fyqfsjfodjoh!ipnfmfttoftt/!
Uiftf!qspkfdut!nvtu!cf!mjtufe!jo!djuzÉt!uif!dbqjubm!gbdjmjujft!qmbo/!
!
3D*!NGUF!Fyqbotjpo/!Gfefsbm!Xbz!jt!uif!pomz!djuz!opu!dvssfoumz!pggfsjoh!bo!NGUF!cpovt!tp!ju!tipvme!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
dpotjefs!uif!qsphsbn!xifo!nbslfu!dpoejujpot!bsf!sjhiu/!Uijt!gjobodjbm!jodfoujwf!qsphsbn!dbo!cf!
jnqmfnfoufe!jo!dfsubjo!bsfbt!xifsf!uif!djuz!xbout!up!tff!ofx!efwfmpqnfou-!tvdi!bt!bmpoh!nbkps!
bsufsjbmt-!jo!tubujpo!bsfbt-!ps!vscbo!dfoufst/!Uijt!qsphsbn!dbo!fodpvsbhf!ijhifs.efotjuz!efwfmpqnfou!
uibo!uif!nbslfu!xpvme!puifsxjtf!efmjwfs/!
!
Uif!djujft!bmsfbez!vujmj{joh!NGUF!tipvme!fotvsf!uibu!uifz!bsf!dbmjcsbufe!xjui!uifjs!nbslfu!dpoejujpot!Ä!
fotvsjoh!uibu!uibu!fyfnqujpot!bsf!wbmvbcmf!fopvhi!gps!b!efwfmpqfs!up!xbou!up!vtf!uifn-!cvu!opu!upp!
wbmvbcmf!up!fspef!qvcmjd!cfofgju/!Djujft!tipvme!bmtp!dpotjefs!fyqboejoh!NGUF!{poft!up!fodpvsbhf!
efotjuz!jo!mbshfs!bsfbt/!Ps!xifo!nbslfu!dpoejujpot!bsf!tuspoh!fopvhi-!djujft!tipvme!dpotjefs!vujmj{joh!
FDPOpsuixftu!!6!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:4
5/E/b
!
!
uif!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!dpnqpofou!pg!uif!NGUF!qsphsbn!up!dbquvsf!qvcmjd!cfofgju!)bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh*!
jo!qsjwbuf!efwfmpqnfou/!
!
3E*!Gff!Xbjwfst/!Nboz!djujft!dvssfoumz!ibwf-!ps!ibwf!ibe!jo!uif!qbtu-!gff!xbjwfst!up!tvqqpsu!uif!
efwfmpqnfou!pg!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh/!Djujft!tipvme!fwbmvbuf!uif!tusvduvsf!pg!uifjs!gff!xbjwfst!up!bt!bo!
beejujpobm!uppm!uibu!dbo!cf!mbzfsfe!xjui!NGUF-!efotjuz!cpovtft-!boe!puifs!gjobodjbm!sftpvsdft!up!ifmq!
tvqqpsu!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh/!!
!
3E*!Beejujpobm!Mboe!Vtf!Uppmt/!Uiftf!mboe!vtf!uppmt!xfsf!fwbmvbufe!boe!jefoujgjfe!gps!gvsuifs!
jnqmfnfoubujpo!dpotjefsbujpo!jo!uif!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Bobmztjt!jo!Ubtl!4/2/!
!
Sfevdfe!Qbsljoh!Sfrvjsfnfout/!Qbsljoh!dbo!cf!bo!fyqfotjwf!qbsu!pg!qspkfdu!efwfmpqnfou!)xifo!
tusvduvsfe*!ps!dbo!dpotvnf!mbshf!bnpvout!pg!mboe-!sfevdjoh!uif!bnpvou!pg!efwfmpqnfou!uibu!dbo!
gju!po!b!tjuf/!Up!uif!fyufou!uibu!dpef!sfrvjsft!npsf!qbsljoh!uibo!b!efwfmpqfs!xpvme!puifsxjtf!xbou!
up!qspwjef-!uif!dptu!pg!nffujoh!uiftf!sfrvjsfnfout!dsfbuft!gjobodjbm!cvsefo/!Djujft!tipvme!bekvtu!
qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!gps!ubshfufe!ipvtjoh!uzqft!boe!gps!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!qspkfdut/!Fydfttjwf!
qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!dbo!ibwf!effq!jnqbdut!up!qspkfdu!gfbtjcjmjuz!gps!cpui!njeemf!ipvtjoh!boe!
mbshfs!tdbmf!nvmuj.gbnjmz!efwfmpqnfou/!Qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!wbsz!xjefmz!cz!djuz!boe!bdsptt!
ejggfsfou!{pojoh!eftjhobujpot!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz/!Djujft!tipvme!fwbmvbuf!njojnvn!qbsljoh!
sfrvjsfnfout!gps!njeemf!ipvtjoh!boe!nvmuj.gbnjmz!efwfmpqnfou!boe!dpotjefs!qbsljoh!sbujpt!pg!mftt!
uibo!uxp!tqbdft!qfs!voju!up!tvqqpsu!beejujpobm!ipvtjoh!efwfmpqnfou/!Djujft!dpvme!bmtp!fyqmpsf!
pqujpot!up!bmmpx!qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!up!cf!nfu!uispvhi!po.tusffu!qbsljoh!ps!jo!tibsfe!qbsljoh!
gbdjmjujft!jo!UPE!bsfbt!boe!Vscbo!Dfoufst/!!!
!
Dsfbuf!boe!Dbmjcsbuf!Efotjuz!Cpovtft/!Uif!Ubtl!4/2!Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Nfnp!ibt!jefoujgjfe!
voefsvujmj{fe!efotjuz!cpovt!qsphsbnt!jo!tfwfsbm!djujft!)tvdi!bt!Gfefsbm!Xbz!boe!Uvlxjmb*/!Gfefsbm!
Xbz!boe!Uvlxjmb!tipvme!fotvsf!uibu!uiftf!qsphsbnt!bsf!dbmjcsbufe!xjui!uifjs!nbslfu!dpoejujpot!Ä!
fotvsjoh!uibu!uif!cpovtft!bsf!wbmvbcmf!fopvhi!gps!b!efwfmpqfs!up!xbou!up!vtf!uifn-!cvu!opu!upp!
wbmvbcmf!up!fspef!qvcmjd!cfofgju/!Xijmf!uijt!jt!efqfoefou!po!nbslfu!dpoejujpot-!xijdi!gmvduvbuf-!
uif!djujft!tipvme!ibwf!pohpjoh!ejtdvttjpot!xjui!efwfmpqfst!up!voefstuboe!uif!cbssjfst!up!uif!uzqft!
pg!efwfmpqnfou!uiftf!qsphsbnt!bjn!up!fodpvsbhf-!boe!uifo!bmjho!uif!cpovt!up!ifmq!pwfsdpnf!
uiptf!cbssjfst/!SfoupoÉt!qsphsbn!ibt!cffo!uif!nptu!vujmj{fe!pg!bmm!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!djujft/!
Bvcvso-!Cvsjfo-!boe!Lfou!ep!opu!ibwf!efotjuz!cpovtft!pvutjef!pg!uif!NGUF!qsphsbn!cvu!tipvme!
dpotjefs!efotjuz!boe!ifjhiu!cpovtft!bmpoh!xjui!uif!gvmm!sbohf!pg!uppmt!fwbmvbufe!up!tvqqpsu!
ipvtjoh!qspevdujpo/!
!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!7!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:5
5/E/b
!
!
4!Njeemf!Ipvtjoh!Tusbufhjft!
Qsjnbsz!Hpbm!Ipvtjoh!Cbssjfst!Pwfsdpnf!
Dsfbuf!Npsf!Bggpsebcmf!'!Xpslgpsdf!Ipvtjoh<!Pwfsdpnf!{pojoh!cbssjfst!)jmmfhbmjuz*!pg!ejwfstf!boe!
Jodsfbtf!Ipvtjoh!Tvqqmz!efotf!ipvtjoh!uzqft-!jodsfbtf!efwfmpqnfou!
gfbtjcjmjuz!wjb!sfevdfe!dptut!
Uiftf!tusbufhjft!dbo!cf!tdbmfe!Uiftf!bsf!tusbufhjft!uibu!tipvme!
Tdbmbcjmjuz!
Nbslfu!
boe!jnqmfnfoufe!bu!uif!cf!dpotjefsfe!jo!bmm!nbslfut!
Dpoejujpot!
!
ofjhicpsippe!mfwfm/!uispvhipvu!uif!tvcsfhjpo/!Djujft!
boe!Ujnjoh!
!
xjui!b!ijhi!tibsf!pg!efnboe!gps!
!
Uiftf!tusbufhjft!ibwf!b!91.211&,!NGJ!ipvtfipmet!
Jnqbdu!
npefsbuf!jnqbdu!po!
tipvme!qsjpsjuj{f!uiftf!tusbufhjft!
ipvtjoh!bggpsebcjmjuz/!
up!nffu!efnboe!gps!nbslfu!sbuf!
pxofstijq!pqqpsuvojujft/!
Eftdsjqujpo!
Fodpvsbhjoh!dfsubjo!uzqft!pg!npefsbufmz.efotf!ipvtjoh-!tvdi!bt!dpuubhf!dmvtufst-!joufsobm!ejwjtjpo!pg!
mbshfs!ipnft-!evqmfyft-!boe!bddfttpsz!exfmmjoh!vojut-!dbo!ifmq!up!jodsfbtf!ipvtjoh!tvqqmz!boe!dipjdf!
jo!bqqspqsjbuf!ofjhicpsippet/!Jo!uifpsz-!uiftf!vojut!dbo!cf!npsf!bggpsebcmf!uibo!puifs!vojut!cfdbvtf!
uifz!bsf!tnbmmfs/!Uijt!xpvme!opu!hvbsbouff!bggpsebcjmjuz-!cvu!xpvme!fyqboe!pqqpsuvojujft!gps!
vosfhvmbufe!ipvtjoh!uzqft!uibu!nbz!cf!mpxfs!dptu!uibo!tjohmf!gbnjmz!efubdife!ipvtjoh!boe!ifmq!dsfbuf!
tvqqmz!pwfs!uif!uxfouz!zfbs!qmboojoh!qfsjpe!up!ifmq!xjui!bggpsebcjmjuz!pwfs!uif!mpoh.ufsn/!!
Tusbufhz!Fmfnfout!
Tufq!4B*!Fobcmf!njeemf!ipvtjoh/!Qmboojoh!gps!uijt!uzqf!pg!ipvtjoh!pgufo!tubsut!xjui!b!sfwjfx!pg!{pojoh!
dpeft!boe!efwfmpqnfou!tuboebset-!boe!bekvtujoh!uifn!up!mfhbmj{f!uijt!uzqf!pg!ipvtjoh!xifsf!
bqqspqsjbuf/!Jo!nboz!djujft-!uiftf!uzqft!pg!npefsbufmz.efotf!ipvtjoh!bsf!jmmfhbm!jo!vscbo!bsfbt!{pofe!
gps!tjohmf.gbnjmz!exfmmjoht/!
Ju!jt!jnqpsubou!up!dbsfgvmmz!jefoujgz!uif!{poft!uibu!xpvme!cf!dibohfe-!uif!uzqft!pg!vojut!bmmpxfe-!
boe!uif!tj{f-!tdbmf-!boe!efwfmpqnfou!tuboebset!pg!uiptf!vojut/!
B!dbqbdjuz!bobmztjt!njhiu!cf!offefe-!boe!xpvme!jodmvef!mjlfmz!efwfmpqnfou!dptut-!uif!ovncfs!pg!
vojut!uibu!dpvme!cf!fyqfdufe!up!cf!efwfmpqfe-!uif!mjlfmz!qpufoujbm!sfout-!boe!uif!mpdbujpot!xifsf!
sfout!nblf!efwfmpqnfou!gfbtjcmf/!
B!qvcmjd!fohbhfnfou!qmbo!up!sfevdf!gfbst!bcpvu!ofjhicpsippe!dibohf-!vq!{pojoh-!boe!efotjuz!
xpvme!cf!ifmqgvm!up!sfevdf!qpmjujdbm!ps!ofjhicpsippe!pqqptjujpo/!Uijt!tipvme!jodmvef!dpowfstbujpot!
po!ipx!beefe!efotjuz!dbo!cf!eftjhofe!up!cmfoe!joup!dpnnvojujft/!
IC2:34!tfut!pvu!fybnqmf!{pojoh!dibohft-!qbsbnfufst-!hpbmt-!boe!bmtp!qspufdujpo!gspn!mfhbm!
bqqfbmt!gps!dpnnvojujft!uibu!dibohf!{pojoh!eftjhobujpo!jo!gbwps!pg!ijhifs!efotjuz!ipvtjoh/!
!
Tufq!4C*!Sfnpwf!Puifs!Cbssjfst/!Cfzpoe!mfhbmj{joh!uijt!uzqf!pg!ipvtjoh-!kvsjtejdujpot!nbz!bmtp!offe!up!
sfnpwf!cbssjfst!uibu!fggfdujwfmz!qsfwfou!uifn!gspn!cfjoh!efwfmpqfe!)fwfo!jg!mfhbm*!jo!ijhi.pqqpsuvojuz!
bsfbt/!Uiftf!dibohft!dpvme!jodmvef!boz!uif!gpmmpxjoh!dpodfqut-!jnqmfnfoufe!jo!dpncjobujpo!ps!
tfqbsbufmz/!Uijt!jt!opu!bo!fyibvtujwf!mjtu-!cvu!jt!nfbou!bt!b!tubsujoh!qpjou!gps!jodsfnfoubm!dibohft;!
Mpxfs!jnqbdu!gff!boe!vujmjuz!ipplvq!dibshft!gps!joufsobm!dpowfstjpot!jg!op!ofu.ofx!trvbsf!gppubhf!
jt!beefe!up!b!qspqfsuz/!
Bmmpxjoh!qspqfsuz!pxofst!up!gjobodf!jnqbdu!gfft!boe!vujmjuz!ipplvq!dibshft-!uifsfcz!tqsfbejoh!uif!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
vqgspou!dptut!pwfs!ujnf/!
Sfevdf!ps!xbjwf!pgg.tusffu!qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!gps!njeemf!ipvtjoh-!qbsujdvmbsmz!gps!joufsobm!
dpowfstjpot!jg!op!ofu.ofx!trvbsf!gppubhf!jt!beefe!up!b!qspqfsuz/!
Ibwjoh!qsf.bqqspwfe!eftjhot!gps!BEVt!ps!njeemf!ipvtjoh!uzqft!uibu!ipnfpxofst!dbo!dipptf!gspn!
sfevdft!uif!dpnqmfyjuz-!ujnf-!boe!dptu!gps!efwfmpqnfou/!Dpotjefs!cz.sjhiu!efwfmpqnfou!tuboebset!
gps!BEVt!jo!bsfbt!uibu!bsf!bmsfbez!nfejvn!efotjuz-!xbmlbcmf-!boe!eftjsbcmf!dpnnvojujft/!
Fwbmvbuf!mboe!ejwjtjpo!dpef!sfrvjsfnfout!up!gbdjmjubuf!gff!tjnqmf!efwfmpqnfou!up!cfuufs!nffu!
ipnf!pxofstijq!efnboe/!
Sfwjfx!pg!dpef!gps!dpnqbujcjmjuz!xjui!qsfgbcsjdbufe!ipnft-!eftjho!tuboebset-!ps!puifs!joopwbujwf!
ipnf!qspevdujpo!ufdiojrvft/!
FDPOpsuixftu!!8!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:6
5/E/b
!
!
Tufq!4D*!Jodfoujwj{f/!Cfzpoe!sfnpwjoh!cbssjfst-!kvsjtejdujpot!dbo!bdujwfmz!fodpvsbhf!uijt!uzqf!pg!
ipvtjoh!efwfmpqnfou!wjb!{pojoh!boe!gjobodjbm!jodfoujwft/!Uiftf!nbz!jodmvef;!
Efotjuz!cpovtft!gps!ofx!dpotusvdujpo!pg!b!njeemf!qspqfsuz!uzqf/!
Tusfbnmjofe!ps!qsjpsjuj{fe!qfsnju!boe!eftjho!sfwjfx!gps!njeemf!ipvtjoh!efwfmpqnfou!jo!ijhi.!
pqqpsuvojuz!bsfbt/!
Qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!ibwf!b!mbshf!jnqbdu!po!njeemf!ipvtjoh!efwfmpqnfou!po!tnbmmfs!jogjmm!mput/!
Qbsljoh!tuboebset!gps!tjohmf!gbnjmz!efwfmpqnfou!bqqmjfe!up!njeemf!ipvtjoh!dbo!dsfbuf!cpui!
qiztjdbm!efwfmpqnfou!boe!gfbtjcjmjuz!dibmmfohft!up!qspevdjoh!njeemf!ipvtjoh/!
!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!9!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:7
5/E/b
!
!
5!
Usbotju.Psjfoufe!Efwfmpqnfou!'!Vscbo!Dfoufst!
Tusbufhjft!
Qsjnbsz!Hpbm!Ipvtjoh!Cbssjfst!Pwfsdpnf!
Efwfmpq!beejujpobm!ipvtjoh!jo!vscbo!dfoufst!boe!Jnqspwft!efwfmpqnfou!gfbtjcjmjuz!jo!ijhi!
usbotju.tfswfe!bsfbt!pqqpsuvojuz!bsfbt/!Dsfbuft!mpdbujpo!fggjdjfou!
ipvtjoh!pqujpot/!
Uiftf!tusbufhjft!dbo!cf!UPE!boe!Vscbo!Dfoufst!
Tdbmbcjmjuz!Nbslfu!
jnqmfnfoufe!bu!uif!ofjhicpsippe!Tusbufhjft!offe!tuspoh!nbslfu!
Dpoejujpot!
!
mfwfm/!dpoejujpot!xifsf!sfout!bsf!ijhi!
boe!Ujnjoh!
!
!
fopvhi!up!tvqqpsu!ofx-!efotf-!
Jnqbdu!
Uifz!ibwf!b!npefsbuf!njyfe.vtf!nbslfu!sbuf!
efwfmpqnfou/!
jnqbdu!po!bggpsebcjmjuz/!
Eftdsjqujpo!
Djujft!jo!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!ibwf!b!vojrvf!pqqpsuvojuz!up!mfwfsbhf!mbshf!tdbmf!jowftunfout!uispvhi!uif!
Ubdpnb!Epnf!Mjol!Fyufotjpo!boe!J.516!CSU!up!bewbodf!ipvtjoh!qspevdujpo-!jodsfbtf!bggpsebcjmjuz-!boe!
tvqqpsu!dpnnvojuz!hpbmt/!Ubshfujoh!ipvtjoh!hspxui!jo!vscbo!dfoufst!boe!usbotju.psjfoufe!efwfmpqnfou!
)UPE*!bsfbt!bmmpxt!kvsjtejdujpot-!qmboofst-!efwfmpqfst-!boe!uif!qvcmjd!up!voefstuboe!xifsf!hspxui!xjmm!
pddvs-!boe!qmbdft!offefe!ipvtjoh!dmptf!up!usbotju!boe!bnfojujft/!
!
Voefstuboejoh!uibu!nvdi!pg!uif!Tpvui!Ljoh!Dpvouz!sfhjpo!jt!bmsfbez!cvjmu!pvu!Ä!uifsf!jt!mjuumf!
voefwfmpqfe!mboe!boe!b!mpu!pg!tjohmf!gbnjmz!{pofe!mboe/!Uivt-!uif!qspevdujpo!pg!ofx!ipvtjoh!offefe!up!
nffu!qpqvmbujpo!boe!ipvtjoh!hspxui!ubshfut!xjmm!offe!up!pddvs!jo!ijhifs!efotjujft/!Uif!gpmmpxjoh!
tusbufhz!fmfnfout!dbo!cf!ifmqgvm!gps!djujft!up!dpotjefs!bt!uifz!mppl!up!qmbdf!offefe!ipvtjoh!jo!uifjs!
dpnnvojujft-!xjui!tuspoh!bddftt!up!pqqpsuvojuz-!usbotju-!boe!bnfojujft/!
Tusbufhz!Fmfnfout!
Cvjmejoh!ijhifs!efotjuz!ipvtjoh!ofbs!usbotju!bmmpxt!gps!usbotju!bhfodjft!up!jodsfbtf!sjefstijq-!sfevdft!
dbst!po!uif!spbet-!jnqspwft!dpohftujpo!boe!hsffoipvtf!hbt!fnjttjpot-!boe!dbo!dsfbuf!bnfojuz.sjdi!
bsfbt!xjui!njyfe!dpnnfsdjbm-!sftjefoujbm-!boe!sfubjm!efwfmpqnfou/!Cvjmejoh!ijhifs!efotjuz!ipvtjoh!jo!
vscbo!dfoufst!dbo!dsfbuf!wjcsbou!ofjhicpsippet!xjui!b!njy!pg!ipvtjoh-!sfubjm-!boe!dpnnfsdjbm!
efwfmpqnfou!bmpoh!xjui!qmb{bt!boe!qvcmjd!tqbdft/!
!
5B*!Fodpvsbhf!Ijhifs!Efotjuz!Ipvtjoh/!Djujft!dbo!fodpvsbhf!ijhifs.efotjuz!UPE!cz!pggfsjoh!bmmpxbodft!
uibu!ifmq!jnqspwf!efwfmpqnfou!gfbtjcjmjuz!uifsfcz!jodsfbtjoh!uif!ovncfs!pg!vojut!uibu!dbo!cf!cvjmu!ofbs!
tubujpo!bsfbt/!Nboz!djujft!ibwf!pqqpsuvojujft!up!jefoujgz!cbssjfst!up!efwfmpqnfou!gfbtjcjmjuz!uibu!fyjtu!jo!
efwfmpqnfou!tuboebset!boe!eftjho!tuboebset!jo!UPE!bsfbt!boe!Vscbo!Dfoufst/!
Jodsfbtf!Bmmpxbodft/!Jodsfbtf!ifjhiu!boe!gmpps!bsfb!sbujp!)GBS*!bmmpxbodft!jo!fyjtujoh!UPE!bsfbt!
boe!vscbo!dfoufs!{poft!dbo!ifmq!efwfmpqfst!hfu!uif!ovncfs!pg!vojut!)boe!sfou!sfwfovft*!offefe!
gps!b!UPE!qspkfdu!up!cf!gfbtjcmf/!Dpotjefs!fyqboejoh!efwfmpqnfou!bmmpxbodft!gps!nfejvn!efotjuz!
efwfmpqnfou!cfzpoe!usbejujpobm!!njmf!tubujpo!bsfb!qmboojoh!cpvoebsjft/!!
Sfevdfe!Qbsljoh!Sfrvjsfnfout/!Gps!tjnjmbs!sfbtpot!bt!ejtdvttfe!jo!uif!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!
tusbufhz-!sfevdfe!qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!jo!UPE!bsfbt!sfevdft!dptut!boe!fodpvsbhft!sftjefout!up!
vtf!usbotju!jotufbe!pg!bvupnpcjmft-!uifsfcz!jodsfbtjoh!sjefstijq!boe!hfofsbujoh!sfwfovf!gps!usbotju!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
bhfodjft/!Mpxfs!qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!jo!UPE!bsfbt!dbo!nfbojohgvmmz!jnqspwf!qspkfdu!gfbtjcjmjuz/!
Sfwjfx!Efwfmpqnfou!Boe!Eftjho!Tuboebset/!Uifsf!bsf!b!ovncfs!pg!xfmm.joufoefe!efwfmpqnfou!boe!
eftjho!tuboebset!uibu!ofhbujwfmz!jnqbdu!efwfmpqnfou!gfbtjcjmjuz!jo!djujft!uibu!ibwf!nbslfu!
dpotusbjout!xifsf!uif!sfwfovft!pg!ofx!efwfmpqnfou!dboopu!dmfbs!uif!ivsemf!pg!efwfmpqnfou!dptut/!
Fybnqmft!pg!efwfmpqnfou!boe!eftjho!tuboebset!uibu!dpvme!cf!sfwjfxfe!up!tvqqpsu!npsf!ofbs!ufsn!
efwfmpqnfou!jodmvef!cvjmejoh!tufq.cbdl!sfrvjsfnfout-!pqfo!tqbdf!boe!sfdsfbujpo!bsfb!
sfrvjsfnfout-!hspvoe!gmpps!dpnnfsdjbm!sfrvjsfnfout-!boe!vtf!pg!sppgupq!bsfb!up!nffu!tpnf!
sfrvjsfnfout/!
FDPOpsuixftu!!:!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:8
5/E/b
!
!
5C*!Fyqboe!UPE!Bsfbt/!Cz!fyqboejoh!UPE!pwfsmbzt!gvsuifs!gspn!fyjtujoh!usbotju!tubujpot!djujft!dpvme!
fyqboe!uif!ijhifs!efotjuz!{pojoh!boe!efwfmpqnfou!bmmpxbodft!up!hfofsbuf!npsf!ipvtjoh/!Usbotju!
tvqqpsujwf!{pojoh!dbo!tpnfujnft!cf!mjnjufe!up!obsspx!cboet!pg!qbsdfmt!bmpoh!dpnnfsdjbm!dpssjepst!
bekbdfou!up!tubujpot!bsfbt/!Fyqboejoh!usbotju!tvqqpsujwf!mboe!vtft!npsf!cspbemz!uispvhi!njyfe.vtf!boe!
nfejvn.efotjuz!{pojoh!dbo!ifmq!tvqqpsu!UPE!pvudpnft/!
!
5D*!Fwbmvbuf!UPE!Nbslfu!Sfbejoftt/!Bobmz{f!uif!mpdbm!sfbm!ftubuf!nbslfu!boe!gfbtjcjmjuz!dsjufsjb!gps!wbsjpvt!
efwfmpqnfou!sfmbujwf!up!efwfmpqnfou!tuboebset!jo!boe!bspvoe!tubujpo!bsfbt/!Uijt!xjmm!ifmq!tfu!sfbmjtujd!
fyqfdubujpot!pg!mfwfm!pg!dibohf!gps!efwfmpqnfou!jo!tubujpo!bsfbt!pwfs!ujnf!boe!bt!sfbm!ftubuf!nbslfut!
tijgu/!
!
5E*!Fwbmvbuf!Dbqjubm!Jnqspwfnfou!Qmbot/!Fwbmvbuf!dbqjubm!jnqspwfnfou!qmbot!up!qsjpsjuj{f!ofbs!ufsn!
jogsbtusvduvsf!qspkfdut!uibu!tvqqpsu!usbotju!tubujpot!bsfbt!boe!usbotju.psjfoufe!efwfmpqnfou/!
!
5F*!Qsjpsjuj{f!Mpdbujpo.Fggjdjfou!Bggpsebcmf!Ipvtjoh/!Qsjpsjuj{f!bggpsebcmf!ipvtjoh!sftpvsdft!jo!UPE!bsfbt!boe!
Vscbo!Dfoufst!up!dsfbuf!npsf!mpdbujpo.fggjdjfou!boe!sfevdf!ipvtfipme!usbotqpsubujpo!dptut!uispvhi!cfuufs!
bddftt!up!sfhjpobm!usbotju/!!!
!
5G*!Fyqmpsf!Qvcmjd.Qsjwbuf!Qbsuofstijqt/!Djujft!dbo!qmbz!bo!jnqpsubou!spmf!jo!dppsejobujoh!efwfmpqnfou!xjui!
cpui!opo.qspgju!boe!nbslfu!sbuf!efwfmpqfst/!Qvcmjd.qsjwbuf!qbsuofstijqt!bsf!nptu!fggfdujwf!xifo!djujft!
dbo!dpousjcvuf!sftpvsdft-!mboe-!ps!qspdftt!jnqspwfnfout!up!gbdjmjubuf!UPE!xifo!cspbefs!nbslfu!cbssjfst!
dbo!fyjtu/!
Ipvtjoh!Tusbufhz!boe!Jnqmfnfoubujpo!Nbusjy!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!21!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2:9
5/E/b
!
!
Ipvtjoh!Dpoufyu!Bttfttnfou!
Tublfipmefs!Fohbhfnfou!!
Efwfmpqfs!Joufswjfxt!!
Efwfmpqfs!Joufswjfx!Lfz!Uifnft!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!22!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!2::
5/E/b
!
!
Djuz!Tubgg!Joufswjfxt!!
Djuz!Tubgg!Joufswjfx!Lfz!Uifnft!
Ipvtjoh!Qpmjdz!Uppm!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!23!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!311
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
!
24
!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!312
!
!
Uvlxjmb
Ufsn
.
!
Mpoh
!
Sfoupo
!
!
!
!
Ufsn
.
Lfou
Nfejvn
!
!
Xbz
Gfefsbm!
!
!
ufsn
.
!
Nbslfu!Dpoejujpot!'!Ujnjoh
Cvsjfo
Ofbs
!
!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bvcvso
!
ujoh!
!!
Fyjt
TLIIQ
!
Sfhjpobm
0
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
fs!eftjhobujpot
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Gvoe
Qsjwbuf!Qbsuofstijqt
.
!
pojups!Sfhvmbufe!Qspqfsujft
Fmfnfou Sfwpmwjoh!Mpbo!GvoeNOPBIt!0!bhjoh!ipvtjoh!tupdlDvmuvsbmmz!Tqfdjgjd!TvqqpsuUfobou!QspufdujpotNpcjmf!Ipnf!Qbsl!QsftfswbujpoSfoubm!Mjdfotjoh!QsphsbnSfwpmwjoh!Mpbo!Puifs!Gvoejoh!NfdibojtntNGUF!Fy
qbotjpoSfevdfe!Qbsljoh!SfrvjsfnfoutDsfbuf!boe!Dbmjcsbuf!Efotjuz!CpovtftNjeemf!Ipvtjoh!\[pojoh!DpefNjeemf!Ipvtjoh!JodfoujwftSfgjof!BEV!Tuboebset!boe!JodfoujwftFodpvsbhf!ijhifs!efotjuz!ipvtjohFyqboe!UP
E!boe!vscbo!dfouFwbmvbuf!UPE!Nbslfu!SfbejofttFwbmvbuf!Dbqjubm!Jnqspwfnfou!QmbotFyqmpsf!Qvcmjd
!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!
!!
!
!
$2B2C2D2E2F2G2H3B3C3D3E3E4B4C4D5B5C5D5E5F
!Tusbufhjft
!
!
!Tusbufhz
!Qspevdujpo
!Ejtqmbdfnfou!Dfoufst
pvtjoh!I
Ipvtjoh!'!
!.Qsftfswbujpo!'!BoujUPE!'!Vscbo!
Njeemf!
Bggpsebcmf!
psuixftu
!!
Tusbufhz
DPO
!!F
5/E/b
!
!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
FDPOpsuixftu!!25!!
Qbdlfu!Qh/!313
5/E/b
Appendix G
Survey Results
.ĻƌƚǞ źƭ ƷŷĻ ĭƚƒƦƌĻƷĻ IƚǒƭźƓŭ hƦƷźƚƓƭ tƌğƓ ƭǒƩǝĻǤ ğƭ źƷ Ǟğƭ ƦƩĻƭĻƓƷĻķ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ ǞĻĬƭźƷĻ ĬĻŅƚƩĻ
ĻƒĬĻķķĻķ ƷƩğƓƭƌğƷźƚƓ ĬğƭĻķ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ ŷƚƭƷ ĭƚƒƦǒƷĻƩγƭ ƌğƓŭǒğŭĻ ƚŅ ĭŷƚźĭĻ͵ CƚƌƌƚǞźƓŭ ƷŷĻ Ņǒƌƌ ƭǒƩǝĻǤ ğƩĻ
ƷŷĻ Ņǒƌƌ ƩĻƭǒƌƷƭ͵
Kent Housing Options Plan Survey
Filling out this survey will help us to better understand what are housing needs in Kent. Thank you for
taking the time to help us shape Kent's housing future.
If wanting to select an answer that is not listed, check "other" and a fill in box will appear.
*1. What is your current housing status?
I own a single-family home in Kent
I own a townhome in Kent
I rent an apartment in Kent
I own a condo in Kent
I own or rent a mobile home in Kent
I rent a single-family home in Kent
I rent a townhome in Kent
I am experiencing homelessness
I do not live in Kent
Other
*2. Kent is growing. Please select up to three items you believe are most important to help
house everyone:
More affordable rental housing
More access to home ownership
Providing more small housing units
Providing more larger housing units (4+ bedrooms)
Preventing displacement of lower income residents
Availability of more units to house vulnerable populations (seniors, homeless)
Enacting tenant protections that go beyond state law
Availability of housing that allows for multiple families or generations
Availability of higher end housing
Qbdlfu!Qh/!314
5/E/b
Other
3. We know growth can be tough. Please select up to three items you believe are most
important to help keep quality of life high during periods of growth:
More trees/vegetation
More walkable streets or better transit
More cultural or recreational services or activities to build community
More ability to build wealth through homeownership, property improvement, or property values
Preservation of local character or charm
Higher design requirements for new construction
Public safety
Addressing impacts of homelessness
Other
*4. I would be willing and able to pay more money in rent/property tax to be able to fund
my choices as identified in questions 2 and 3.
Willing and able
Willing but not able
Able but not willing
Not willing or able
5. What new housing types would you welcome near you in Kent?
Groups of small cottages
Prefabricated tiny homes
Mother-in-law units/backyard cottages
Duplexes/triplexes
Fourplexes/multiplexes
Small courtyard apartments
Townhomes
Other
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
6. If you plan to move within the next few years what are your top two reasons for wanting
a change?
My family needs a larger home/yard
To get a place of my own
Would like a smaller home
To buy a house/townhouse/condominium
Qbdlfu!Qh/!315
5/E/b
To be closer to transit like light rail or express bus
To move to a more appealing neighborhood
To lower my housing costs
To move closer to work/school
Need assisted living services
None, no plans to move
Other
7. If you plan to move within the next few years would you want to stay in Kent?
Yes
No
Maybe
Not planning to move
8. While the City does not provide housing, it CAN require new housing to provide better
design and amenities. More requirements can make construction costs higher, which can
make housing costs higher. What do you think is most important for Kent to require?
Fewer requirements in terms of design/amenities, lower potential housing cost
Some design/amenities requirements, variable housing cost
Highest requirements design/amenities, higher potential housing cost
Demographics
By filling out these demographics questions you can help us determine correlations between indicators.
For example, if people in a certain zipcode are more likely to want better transit. To skip this section, go
to the bottom of the survey and hit submit.
What is your zip code?
What is your age?
19 or younger
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 and above
Prefer not to say
What is your current employment status?
Qbdlfu!Qh/!316
5/E/b
I work in Kent
I work outside of Kent
I am retired
I attend school full time
I am currently not working
Other
What is the primary language spoken in your home?
Somali
English
Korean
Mandarin/Cantonese
Spanish
Tagalog
Vietnamese
Arabic
Punjabi
Other
What is your race or ethnicity? (Select all that apply)
American Indian or Alaska Native
Asian
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
White
Other
Do you have a disability?
Cognitive
Hearing
Mobility
None
Vision
I'd rather not say
Qbdlfu!Qh/!317
5/E/b
Other
What gender do you identify as? (For self identification click other)
Female
Male
Non-binary
I'd rather not say
Other
Results
Qbdlfu!Qh/!318
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!319
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!31:
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!321
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!322
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!323
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!324
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!325
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!326
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!327
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!328
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!329
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!32:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!331
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!332
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!333
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!334
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!335
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!336
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!337
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!338
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!339
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!33:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!341
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!342
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!343
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!344
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!345
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!346
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!347
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!348
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!349
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!34:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!351
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!352
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!353
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!354
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!355
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!356
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!357
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!358
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!359
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!35:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!361
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!362
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!363
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!364
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!365
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!366
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!367
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!368
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!369
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!36:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!371
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!372
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!373
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!374
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!375
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!376
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!377
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!378
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!379
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!37:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!381
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!382
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!383
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!384
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!385
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!386
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!387
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!388
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!389
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!38:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!391
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!392
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!393
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!394
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!395
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!396
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!397
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!398
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5/E/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!399
5/E/b
Appendix H
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!39:
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:1
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:2
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:3
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:4
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:5
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:6
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:7
5/E/b
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:8
5/E/b
Appendix I
Djuz!pg!Lfou!
Manufactured Home Park
Preservation Study
April 2021
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3:9
5/E/b
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1000
Seattle, Washington 98121
P (206) 324-8760
www.berkconsulting.com
Founded in 1988, we are an interdisciplinary strategy and analysis firm providing integrated, creative and
analytically rigorous approaches to complex policy and planning decisions. Our team of strategic planners, policy
and financial analysts, economists, cartographers, information designers and facilitators work together to bring
new ideas, clarity, and robust frameworks to the development of analytically-based and action-oriented plans.
BERK Consulting Alma Villegas Consulting
Alma VillegasSpanish Outreach Manager
Dawn Couch · Project Manager ·
Carla Escobar
Allegra Calder · Advisor · Community Liaison
Jonathan Morales · Policy Analyst
Lisa Johnson · Inventory Analyst
Qbdlfu!Qh/!3::
5/E/b
Contents
Contents ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 2
Key Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 5
1. There is a wide ran ..................................................................................... 5
2. Many manufactured and mobile homes in Kent need repairs and upgrades to modern safety
standards. .................................................................................................................................................................. 11
3. MHP communities include a diverse range of household types. ................................................................. 14
4. MHPs fill an important, affordable niche between apartments and single family housing. ................. 17
5. Some parks have professional third-party management with active oversight and higher levels of
service, while others are largely absent and difficult to contact. ................................................................... 21
6. MHP Communities in Kent can be supported through local regulations, tenant supportive services,
and investments in site conditions. ......................................................................................................................... 28
7. Resident resources, misaligned owner incentives, and dated infrastructure serve as barriers to
needed improvements. ............................................................................................................................................ 31
8. Kent MHPs located in higher density zones can be sold for other uses. When this happens, residents
need supportive services to avoid the worst impacts from displacement. .................................................... 37
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 38
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 1
Qbdlfu!Qh/!411
5/E/b
Introduction
The City of Kent seeks to preserve and increase affordable housing options in the community. Many
residents.
This study identifies 26 MHPs in the City of Kent, as shown in the map in Exhibit 2 (page 3). MHPs in this study
include a reported 1,722 housing units. This aligns with the proportion of manufactured housing units as a total
Exhibit 1. Using the average household size reported by residents, the study estimates 5,235 residents of Kents
1
MHPs
Exhibit 1: Kent Housing Stock by Unit Type, 2020.
Sources: Washington OFM, 2021; BERK, 2021.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
1
Average household size of 3.04 residents. Population estimate from Washington OFM population estimates, 2021.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 2
Qbdlfu!Qh/!412
5/E/b
Exhibit 2: MHPs in Kent, 2021.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Note: Kenton Firs 1 is not shown on this map or considered as part of this study. The project understanding, confirmed by an HOA
representative, is that residents in this community own their parcels individually. While the homes are manufactured housing
Sources: King County Assessor, 2021; BERK, 2021.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 3
Qbdlfu!Qh/!413
5/E/b
Study Questions
MHPs including strategies to preserve MHPs where they provide quality, safe, affordable housing for
ormation that would help the city determine MHP suitability for
preservation and assess possible policy interventions.
The Study is driven by eight key questions:
What are the conditions of existing Manufactured Home Parks in Kent?
What are the conditions of manufactured and mobile homes in Kent?
What are the characteristics of Manufactured Home Park communities in Kent?
What role do manufactured homes play as part of the overall inventory of housing options in Kent?
What are the common landlord-tenant arrangements between park owners and residents? What do
residents understand to be the responsibility of the park owner? What role(s) do park owners play in
the community? What are the mechanisms of accountability?
What are the tools or resources available to support the preservation of Mobile Home Park
communities in Kent when they provide quality, affordable housing for the benefit of the community?
What are the barriers to improving conditions in parks or units? What physical deficiencies are most
impactful to residents? What are most impactful to owners?
What are the tools and resources available to support residents when Mobile Home Parks are
replaced with other land uses? How can hardships to residents be minimized or mitigated?
Study Components
In addition to this Findings and Recommendations Report, the study includes other components to help the
City of Kent assess possible policy and regulatory interventions for preserving manufactured home parks
going forward. These include:
Attachment A. Park Quality Assessment. The Park Quality Assessment tool details the approach
used for assessing MHP quality. As part of this project, a standardized assessment tool was
developed for a systematic and transparent method for assigning a quality rating. These assessment
results are supplemented by qualitative findings documented in site visits, staff interviews, and input
from both owners and residents.
Attachment B. Resource Options Toolkit. The Resource Options Toolkit reviews and describes
resources, policy models, and protections available to residents of MHPs in Kent.
Attachment C. Kent Manufactured Home Park Inventory. The Park Inventory provides information
on each of the identified MHPs in Kent.
Methods and Data Sources
Community and Stakeholder Input
Stakeholder outreach was conducted between December 2020 and March 2021. Public safety measures
related to the coronavirus pandemic prevented gatherings or tenant meetings.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 4
Qbdlfu!Qh/!414
5/E/b
An
initial mailing, attempts were made to reach unresponsive owners through phone, email, text, site
visits, and intercepting residents in the community to get updated information on park managers.
A that covered home repair needs, park conditions, what residents liked
about their MHP, and concerns. Strategies to reach residents to increase awareness of the
project and gather input were developed for each park depending on the cooperation of the
park/owner. Park managers were not asked for the contact information of residents. Methods
include sending a notice of the study in the park tenant monthly billing statement, posting flyers
about the study to
participation, mailing an initial postcard in advance of site visits, visiting MHPs and telling the
residents about the study, customizing mailings to specific parks, announcing the study on Spanish
radio. Outreach efforts were conducted in English and Spanish.
Interviews with relevant expert stakeholders including MHP specialists and representatives from
service organizations.
Other Data Sources
King County Assessor: County assessor data includes details on park parcels, including the
registered ownership entity, zoning, estimated value, and an inventory of units listed as accessory
structures with varying levels of detail. Some properties include the park age. The size of the site
also comes from this source, contributing to the units per acre density calculations.
FEMA: FEMA mapping data identifies 100-year and 500-year floodplains.
American Community Survey (ACS): ACS data provides demographic summaries and household
income information, used in this report to gauge housing affordability in Kent.
Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM): OFM data compiles estimates for housing
units by type and total population for cities in Washington.
Resident and Owner Questionnaire: Questionnaire responses from
residents contribute to our understanding of park conditions and tenant-owner relationships. We
received owner questionnaires from 19 of 26 parks (73%) and from 156 residents. Results from
these questionnaires are presented throughout this report.
Zillow: Estimates for current housing costs are based on reporting from Zillow. Home value estimates
and rental trends over time are based on published datasets. Apartment rents and manufactured
housing payments are based on current postings (updated as of April 2021).
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Key Findings
1. There is a wide range of conditions at Ken
Park conditions and land use designations are driving factors impacting the likelihood that a MHP will
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 5
Qbdlfu!Qh/!415
5/E/b
remain a MHP. Parks on land not designated for MHP use are at a greater risk of being closed and the
land converted to another use. Parks with poor maintenance, or infrastructure not suited to their current
use, are also at risk due to the complexity and cost of updating the park infrastructure.
The conditions of MHPs vary across Kent. The most significant determining factors appear to be the
property management approach, site density, and the age of the units at the park. Newer parks tend to
have wider lot sizes, community amenities, and newer housing units. Signals of poor park condition include
high site density, frequency of unsafe accessory structures, improper fuel storage, poorly maintained site
grounds, age of units, and unresponsive or irresponsible management practices.
2
Many older parks are prone to crowded conditions and deferred maintenance issues. Some of these
parks were established to serve as temporary mobile home parking in the 1960s and are geared
toward smaller vehicles and dwellings. The size of manufactured housing has grown over time, making the
smaller lot sizes in these MHPs incompatible with modern units. A history of deferred site maintenance
results in needed infrastructure upgrades or flood prevention measures. At some parks, ownership has
removed site amenities, like playgrounds and clubhouses, and replaced them with additional housing
units. These practices contribute to crowding and lower quality of life for all park residents.
Park Rating Designations
A 3-highest level of concern
re visualized within a category
matrix in Exhibit 4 and on the map in Exhibit 5. The category matrix adds land use context, an important
reference point for considering long-term displacement risk.
Highest level of concern. MHPs in this category are those with poor site quality conditions. The parks
score a 2 or below on the assessment tool, or a 3 with significant documented resident complaints.
Park concerns are likely to include three or more of the following: crowding of units, high frequency
of unsafe accessory structures, improper fuel storage, poorly maintained site grounds, high
percentage of units in disrepair, and unresponsive or irresponsible management practices. Residents
are likely to express dissatisfaction with park management or appear guarded and unwilling to
share information management.
Improvement efforts needed. MHPs in this category demonstrate deficiencies in park maintenance,
home repair, and/or management practices. Their assessment scoring is between a 2 and a 4,
reflecting a mix of positive reviews and areas of concern. Concerns are likely to include one or more
of the following: crowding of units, high frequency of unsafe accessory structures, improper fuel
storage, poorly maintained site grounds, high percentage of units in disrepair, and unresponsive or
irresponsible management practices. Resident surveys may reveal mixed reviews on site quality, unit
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
upkeep, and management satisfaction.
Well maintained. MHPs in this category score above a 3 on site assessments. Residents are
generally happy with management practices or identify targeted concerns that do not pose imminent
health and safety risks. Identified concerns apply to a limited number of units or spaces within the
park. These parks are seen as successful examples of MHPs providing safe, quality housing in Kent.
2
home placement.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 6
Qbdlfu!Qh/!416
5/E/b
Residential Zones
The underlying land use of MHPs is an important factor to consider. The land use designation determines
whether the park can be converted to another use. Kent
Mobile Home Park zone within its residential categories. This zone protects manufactured housing
communities from conversion to site-built housing, multifamily structures, and commercial uses, which are
not permitted in the MHP zone.
There are 7 MHPs in Kent located outside of the MHP zone. Four of these are in zones where
redevelopment is more likely three in Midway Transit Community zones (MTC-1 and MTC-2), adjacent
to incoming light rail development, one of these is also partially in the Midway Commercial/Residential
(MCR) zone, and the fourth is in a Community Commercial (CC) district. Development pressures are more
likely to affect these parks. The MTC-2 and MCR zones allow buildings up to 16 stories or 200 feet, the
MTC-1 zone allows building up to 7 stores of 65 feet, and the CC zone allows buildings up to 3 stories or
40 feet. Owners are incentivized to sell or redevelop the property into another use that generates
greater revenue. Three additional MHPs are located in lower-density residential zones: Soos Creek in SR-
1, Kenton Firs 2 in SR-6, and Glenbrook condominium in SR-8. While these zones do not incorporate the
commercial and multifamily uses found in the MTC and CC zones, they do allow for site-built homes. The
density permitted in the SR-8 zone is only slightly less dense than the MHP zone (8.71 dwelling units/acre
compared to 9 dwelling units/acre). In the scenario of residential land scarcity in Kent, these parks would
3
be more vulnerable to purchase and redevelopment.
Rating Results
This study identifies seven parks Four of
4
these seven parks are clustered in western Kent near incoming light rail development. Four are in land
use zones that allow higher density, multifamily development. At least three of these parks opened pre-
1980 (three parks do not report age in assessor data). Site conditions reveal unit crowding, many
unpermitted accessory structures, lack of park amenities, and poor maintenance. Many of these parks
include a higher number of RV parking spaces. Unit density per acre is higher than the citywide average
and MHP zoning allowance for all seven of these parks, with a group average of 13.4 dwelling units per
acre (See Exhibit 3).
There are nine parks The common areas of these parks are kept clean and
there is generally an active on-site management presence. The units tend to be newer and in better
condition.
for residents 55 and older. All of these parks are located in either central or eastern Kent. Six of these
parks are in MHP zoned areas; three are located in low density residential zones. All parks have lower
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
than average site density. Three of these parks are located within the 100-year floodplain. The average
unit density for these parks is 6.9 units per acre and none of the parks exceed the MHP zoning threshold
of 9 units per acre.
3
KCC 15.04 for zoning regulations.
4
One MHP in Kent (Jackson MHP) has been closed to accommodate the Federal Way Light Link Extension. Four others front or
face the light rail construction sites (Green Acres, Mar A Vue, Tip Top, and Midway). A portion of Tip Top Trailer Park has
been converted to accommodate the light rail extension. The property manager for both Midway and Tip Top report greater
difficulty in leasing spaces due to the construction impacts. The property owner at Green Acres reports that residents are
excited about the proximity of the future light rail station.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 7
Qbdlfu!Qh/!417
5/E/b
The remaining ten parks fall somewhere in-between. Some of these parks are older with deferred
maintenance issues, but the site is generally well kept with less unit crowding. Other parks show signs of
decline, with amenities removed and less management oversight on conditions. All of these parks are
located within MHP zoning. Five are in floodplains (4 in 500-year and 1 in 100-year). These parks are
scattered across Kent and do not follow a common geographic pattern. The average unit density for
these parks is 10.8 units per acre six of the parks have unit densities that exceed the MHP zoning
threshold.
Exhibit 3: Site Density by Quality Rating of Kent MHPs.
Average Dwelling
According to Kent Municipal
Units per Acre
Code, the maximum density for
new Manufactured Home Parks
Well maintained 6.9
is 9 units per acre.
KCC 12.05.200
Improvement Efforts Needed 10.8
Highest level of concern 13.4
Overall 10.1
Sources: King County Assessor, 2021; BERK, 2021.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 8
Qbdlfu!Qh/!418
5/E/b
Exhibit 4: Kent MHP Classification Matrix.
Park Quality Rating
Highest Level of
100-year floodplain
Improvements NeededWell Maintained
500-year floodplain
Concern
Martells Mobile Manor
New Alaska Trailer Park
Transit
Center/Commercial
Tip Top RV Park
Zoning
Midway Village MHP
Glenbrook Condominium
Other Residential
Soos Creek Estates
Zoning
Kenton Firs 2
Circle K MHP Benson Village EstatesCanyon View
Green Acres MHPCascade Villa MHPClarks Glen Mobile Park
Willo Vista MHP Lake Meridian EstatesHoreshoe Acres MHP
Maple Lane Pantera Lago Estates
Meadows at Bonel Pantera Nuevo
MHP Zoning
Mar a Vue MHP Walnut Grove MHP
Paradise MHP
Shafran Mobile Estates
Valley Manor MHP
West Hill Mobile Manor
Sources: Zoning from Kent Municipal Code, 2021; Floodplain Status from FEMA, 2021; BERK, 2021.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 9
Qbdlfu!Qh/!419
5/E/b
Exhibit 5: Quality Assessment Ratings of Kent MHPs.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Sources: King County Assessor, 2021; BERK, 2021.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 10
Qbdlfu!Qh/!41:
5/E/b
2. Many manufactured and mobile homes in Kent need
repairs and upgrades to modern safety standards.
5
Similar to MHPs, the conditions of manufactured housing units vary widely across Kent. Some MHP
communities are comprised of a wide range of home ages, styles, and conditions, while others are more
homogenous with all homes being of similar vintage and condition. See a summary of unit age in Exhibit
8. Unpermitted accessory structures are very common and often lack basic construction safety standards.
They also tend to remove the intended buffer space between units, leading to crowding that can be
tured housing standards in
1976 often lack fire safety considerations and proper electrical wiring. Unsurprisingly, many of the parks
identified as the highest level of concern for overall conditions are also those with the oldest housing units.
Manufactured homeowners report a wide range of concerns for home conditions. The MHP resident
questionnaire included a list of potential home maintenance concerns typical of mobile/manufactured
housing. MHP residents most commonly report housing issues with pests, internal condensation from
cooking or showering, soft spots in the floors, a lack of adequate heating, and a need for entryway
repairs. Residents who live at parks with higher concentrations of older units report many home repair
problems. More than 3 home repair issues are identified by many respondents, particularly those from
Mar a Vue, Willo Vista, Meadows at Bonel, Lake Meridian Estates, and West Hill. Exhibit 6 and Exhibit
7 summarize MHP resident responses related to home conditions.
Some residents offered comments about their greatest home maintenance concern. A sampling of
comments are:
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
5
Summaries of home conditions in individual parks are presented in Attachment C: Kent Manufactured Home Park Inventory.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 11
Qbdlfu!Qh/!421
5/E/b
Exhibit 6: Percent of MHP Residents Reporting 3 or More Home Conditions Issues.
Source: BERK, 2021.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 12
Qbdlfu!Qh/!422
5/E/b
Exhibit 7: Percent of MHP Residents Indicated a Housing Problem
% Respondents responding "Yes" indicating a housing problem.
38%
Are there any holes or soft spots in your floors?
13%
Does your roof leak?
Does water enter your home through the
21%
windows and doors?
Is it difficult to keep your home warm enough to
32%
be comfortable?
Do you use portable, electric heaters to heat
38%
your home?
Do you have to haul fuel for heating or cooking
3%
(propane tanks, logs for wood stove, etc)?
Do you have problems with pests (ants,
56%
cockroaches, mice, rats, bedbugs, fleas or
other)?
Does any of your plumbing leak (bathroom or
8%
kitchen)?
Do you get water condensation on your inside
28%
walls when you cook or shower?
23%
Do you have any problems with mold?
18%
Does your electricity ever shut off unexpectedly?
Is your entryway in need of repair or a
23%
handrail?
% Respondents responding "No" indicating a housing problem.
Does your home have reliable, clean drinking
13%
water?
15%
Doe you have a working smoke detector?
Do your bedroom windows push open so that
14%
you can escape if there is a fire?
Do your windows and doors open and shut
13%
easily?
11%
Is your home level?
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Source: BERK, 2021.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 13
Qbdlfu!Qh/!423
5/E/b
Exhibit 8: Age of Mobile/Manufactured Housing Units in Kent MHPs
Notes:
Some data do not include recreational vehicles (these are not reported to OFM) and thus undercount the number of homes located
in the park. For example, West Hill has 53 mobile or manufactured homes plus an additional 10 recreational vehicles that are
integrated as housing units throughout the park.
Tip Top RV Park, Martells Mobile Manor, and Glenbrook HOA unit age not reported in County Assessor data. Tip Top RV Park
and Martells are mostly comprised of recreational vehicles and traditionally built structures (duplexes and a house). Glenbrook is a
condominium development with all residents reporting a housing unit vintage of 1991.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Sources: King County Assessor, 2021. BERK, 2021.
3. MHP communities include a diverse range of household
types.
, but many living in these communities represent
more socially vulnerable segments of the population. There is limited data on the specific compositions of
park communities and park owners and managers are reluctant to collect or report demographic
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 14
Qbdlfu!Qh/!424
5/E/b
information due to fair housing laws. The study found:
6
Residents are often low-income or fixed income households.
home ownership as the top two factors that residents report they like most about living in their
respective MHP communities, presented in Exhibit 10.
Questionnaire results reveal family sizes range from one to eight persons, with an average of 3.4.
45% of households have children under 18 and 49% include older adults. See Exhibit 9.
There is a disproportionate population of Spanish-speaking households among MHP residents. The
study team conducted targeted Spanish-language outreach, but even outside of these efforts, 33%
7
of questionnaire Other
languages identified during outreach include Arabic, Ukrainian, and Vietnamese.
Exhibit 9: Household Composition at Kent MHPs.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Source: BERK, 2021.
6
Based on manager and MHP resident reports. The resident questionnaire did not ask about household income.
7
ACS 5-year S1601 Estimates, 2015-2019.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 15
Qbdlfu!Qh/!425
5/E/b
Senior Park Communities
Ensuring adequate housing suitable for aging in place is an important policy objective for communities
experiencing an increased proportion of older residents. In King County, it is anticipated that by 2040,
8
20% of residents will be 65 and older. This is almost double the current rate in Kent (11%). Housing well
suited for older adults does and will continue to serve an important role in the C
Several aspects of manufactured housing make it a good fit for aging in place: homes are single level
and more appropriately sized for 1- and 2-person households, monthly costs are lower and thus better
suited toward fixed incomes, and the clustered development style can foster community and connectivity
among residents.
Not all parks are governed by age-restricted covenants but can still act as de facto retirement
communities. The Glenbrook development is one such example. These Kent MHPs are explicitly for
residents 55 and older:
Canyon View Estates (93 units) Pantera Lago (188 units)
Pantera Nuevo (15 units)
Horseshoe Acres (35 units) Walnut Grove (37 units)
Lake Meridian Estates (78 units)
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
8
OFM Medium-Series Estimates, 2017; ACS 5-year S0101 Estimates, 2015-2019
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 16
Qbdlfu!Qh/!426
5/E/b
4. MHPs fill an important, affordable niche between
apartments and single family housing.
Most manufactured homes and manufactured home parks provide quality housing at price points that are
more affordable than site-built housing that is similarly located and sized.
Benefits of MHP Community Living
Parks range from 7 units to 180 units in size, offering different levels of amenities and service from
management. Amenities vary from park to park and include park space, shared laundry facilities, and
clubhouses.
Residents report a variety of factors that contribute to their choice to live in MHP communities. When
asked to list the three best things about their MHP community the top responses are
and affordability offered in these parks Exhibit 10. The ownership aspect includes
the ability to make modifications to the home and the ability to somewhat control changes in housing cost.
Location, privacy, and sense of community are also common responses. Write-in comments echo these
living.
Exhibit 10: What MHP Residents Like Best About Living In Their Manufactured Home Community.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Source: BERK, 2021.
Manufactured Housing Offers a More Affordable Housing Option
Housing affordability is a statewide challenge in Washington. Kent home values have increased at more
than four times the rate of income between 2012 and 2018, as shown in Exhibit 11. These dynamics put
pressure on household budgets and can lead to difficult financial tradeoffs for households, particularly
those who spend 30% or more of their income toward housing.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations
Qbdlfu!Qh/!427 17
5/E/b
Exhibit 11: Percent Change from 2010 for Home Values, Rental Rates, and HUD Area Median Family Income.
Sources: Zillow, 2020; HUD, 2020; BERK, 2021.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 18
Qbdlfu!Qh/!428
5/E/b
Homeowners of average and below average homes pay an
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
estimated range of $1,800 to $2,900 monthly in Kent, before
9
considering utilities and other expenses.
The Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) sets
affordability thresholds, this is affordable for households earning
a threshold of 30% as the
$73,000 or more annually. Apartments and other rental housing
maximum amount of monthly
in Kent vary widely in cost and size. Active postings on Zillow for
income that a household can
one- and two-bedroom rentals start around $1,300 monthly. This
offers affordability for households earning at least $52,000
before being considered cost
annually. See Exhibit 12 and Exhibit 13. Households earning less
burdened from housing. Cost
than this (approximately 36% of Kent households) will struggle to
burden analysis does not
afford quality, market rate housing in the rental and ownership
consider other essential
markets.
household expenses such as
Residents report monthly rent ranging from $575
transportation, healthcare, or
10
- $1,100. These estimates are likely not inclusive of all housing
food.
expenses, as utilities, parking fees, and potential home loan
In King County, a household
payments are additional costs for a park resident. This cost of
earning between $25,000 and
living is roughly aligned with housing affordability for residents
$50,000 per year fall into
earning $25,000 - $50,000 annually. Approximately 20% of
struggle to find housing in the private market that meets their
categories. The private market
needs while staying affordable. See detail in sidebar.
struggles to provide housing
affordable to these income
Exhibit 12: Households by Income Bracket in Kent (as a % of all
groups and, while these families
Households), 2018.
quality for income-subsidized
housing, there is a lack of
available subsidized housing
units in the market.
Manufactured housing and
MHPs play an important role
in Kent by offering market rate
housing options for
households in these lower
income brackets.
-Sources: Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 2021; King County Regional
Affordable Housing Task Force, 2019
Sources: ACS 5-year S1901 Estimates, 2018; BERK, 2021.
9thth
Calculations based on a and 65
percentile range of estimated value.
10
Residents living in the two properties owned by the non-profit MHCP report lower rents, in the $300 - $600 range.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 19
Qbdlfu!Qh/!429
5/E/b
Exhibit 13: Estimated Monthly Payments by Housing Type in Kent.
Sources: Single family homes based on estimated monthly mortgages for median and lower market home values (2020), as
reported by Zillow; MHP monthly cost based on resident reported rental payments and estimated mortgage for
manufactured housing values as found on Zillow, 2021; Apartment rents based on 1- and 2-bedroom apartment rentals as
reported by Zillow, 2021; BERK, 2021.
Inconsistent Price to Quality Relationship
In Kent, there is no clear relationship between the reported lot rent paid by residents and the assessed
quality of parks. See Exhibit 14. Many parks with low quality ratings charge higher rent than well
maintained parks. Residents within the same park report a range of monthly expenses too, with little
differentiation between individual lots. This variance may be due in part to added fees for things such as
parking, pet ownership, utility use, and site upkeep. These fees can be a substantial percentage of
monthly housing costs.
Residents in MHP communities often lack the option to easily leave their home site or move to another
MHPs is very low and moving a manufactured housing unit is costly and could
potentially damage the unit. Since market rate housing and apartment rentals are often out of the price
range for many of these families, residents are a captive market and vulnerable to increased fees by
park management.
This pattern of high fees added to monthly rent appears As with site
quality and household type, there is a lot of variation between parks. The detail provided during study
interviews reveals utilities and fees add anywhere from 10% to 100% on top of the base monthly rent.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
With few realistic housing alternatives, residents with little income to spare must bear these additional
monthly costs.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 20
Qbdlfu!Qh/!42:
5/E/b
Exhibit 14: Resident-reported Monthly Rent by MHP.
Source: BERK, 2021.
5. Some parks have professional third-party management
with active oversight and higher levels of service, while
others are largely absent and difficult to contact.
Ownership and Management Arrangements
In most cases, private park owners are quite remote to the park tenants. Parks are commonly held by
Limited Liability Corporatiothat liabilities
on one property do not impact other properties, and has the benefit of pass-through taxation. An LLC
that owns a specific park could then be held by another LLC, and so on. LLCs allow an investor to
syndicate a property, enabling additional investors to participate, thus increasing access to capital for
the purchase of more MHPs. The investor groups that own a portfolio of Manufactured Homes Parks tend
to have easier access to financing, greater sophistication in management and organization, and some
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 21
Qbdlfu!Qh/!431
5/E/b
11
economies of scale in marketing, legal, and other management functions.
The Manufactured Housing Landlord-Tenant Act (MHLTA) requires the lease agreement to provide the
name and address of the landlord or . In most cases the owner is listed as the LLC, for
12
the accountant or lawyer of the owner. Most residents do not know who the actual owner of the park is.
or lives in
another MHP in the region.
An inquiry about park owners and
managers was sent to ts associated with MHPs in
Kent. The study team followed up with other web-based contact information and located some managers
that then passed the information on to the owners. Site visits and resident intercepts were also used to
clarify or confirm property managers and/or property owners. Finally, business records from the
Washington State Department of Revenue were used to identify the governors of LLCs and other
corporations listed as owners. Among the combination of park owners and managers in Kent there is a
great deal of variation in management approaches spanning from small, family-owned, self-managed
parks to professional on-site management. Generalized categories of ownership arrangements
represented in Kent include:
Resident-owned. There are two resident-owned MHPs in Kent. Glenbrook is established as a
condominium development with each homeowner owning their home as well as a proportional share
of the park land. Residents are responsible for their own home maintenance and utilities.
Homeowners also pay monthly dues to a association (HOA)s
property management support through Bel-Anderson, a property management company with
expertise in working with HOAs. Kenton Firs 1 is a community of 94 properties, located directly
resembles a traditional single family
neighborhood, with parceled land owned by individuals. Most residents of this neighborhood own
their home as well as the land where it sits. Some residents own a couple of parcels and rent the
homes on them out to tenants. The neighborhood HOA limits individual leased property to a
maximum of 30% of total parcels. Because this ownership model is less
neighborhood, Kenton Firs 1 is not compared alongside the MHPs in this study.
Non-profit owned. -profit organization Manufactured
Housing Community Preservationists (MHCP). These are The Meadows at Bonel and Paradise Mobile
Home Park. MCHP operates on a community land trust model by acquiring and holding land on
which the residents hold lot leases. The residents are responsible for maintaining their homes as well
as their personal utilities, taxes, and insurance. MHCP is governed by a board of directors, with each
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
MHCP community electing one of its residents to the Board. As a non-profit, MHCP was able to
secure public funds for financing the land, which places income restrictions on residents (less than
11
Washington State Department of Commerce. 2020. Manufactured Housing Communities Workgroup Report. Pursuant to
ESHB 1582 (2019).
12
Most park owners were responsive to our inquiries for information on MHPs in Kent. A few were difficult to reach. Some
property managers said they were not allowed to identify, or confirm the identity, of park owners. An owner of Parks
Preservation, LLC would not confirm that they owned any parks in Kent (they own three) only that they do own MHPs in
Washington.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 22
Qbdlfu!Qh/!432
5/E/b
50% of the area median income). MHCP provides an on-site manager.
Owner with third-party managers. Five (5) parks have owners that contract with a third-party
management company. The owners of these parks are typically not involved in the day to day
operations of the park and may have very little contact with the park manager familiar to residents.
The third-party management companies bring professional management services. The owners may
have other primary business interests, with the parks being one component of their investment
portfolio.
Vertically integrated manager/owners. Ten (10) parks have owner/manager arrangements without
third party management. To keep the management function and related liability separate from the
real estate asset, the management company may be its own separate corporation independent of
the corporation that holds the real estate (e.g. the park owner). Functionally these operate as a
vertically integrated manager/owner operations, removing the need for a third-party manager thus
reducing the overall cost to the park owner. Many of the owners in this category are family
businesses, some multigenerational family businesses, that specialize in MHPs.
Self-managed. Four (4) parks are smaller, self-managed, mom-and-pop type places. These tend to
be the smaller, older parks with a greater mix of housing types (RVs, old site-built homes). These are
all self-managed, though three of them have residents who act as a handyman who residents may
consider to be a manager but is in fact a resident.
Residents Most Commonly Look to the Park Manager for Assistance
We asked park residents who they go to for assistance or information. The most common response is the
park manager. Only two parks, Glenbrook and Pantera Lago Estates have homeowners associations or
formal resident groups. Residents of parks without onsite management are more likely to rely on friends
or neighbors living in or outside of the park. Details about specific parks are provided in the Kent
Manufactured Home Park Inventory (Attachment C).
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 23
Qbdlfu!Qh/!433
5/E/b
Exhibit 15: Who Kent MHP Residents Go to For Information or Assistance.
Source: BERK, 2021.
Management Challenges
Park owners and managers report a range of issues related to site management. Most commonly
challenges are environmental issues, stormwater/drainage, and
neighboring land uses. Issues with parking and resident maintenance of their homes were also commonly
reported. In qualitative comments and conversations, owners and managers discuss frustrations with
municipal responsiveness to complaints. Some owners discussed interactions with the City where projects
started and stopped, requiring action and money from the owners without any end resolution. Other
managers complained that reported issues of nearby dumping or site trespassing were not responded to
in timely or effective manners.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 24
Qbdlfu!Qh/!434
5/E/b
Exhibit 16: Kent MHP Owner-Reported Park Management Challenges
No Not a Moderate Significant
ResponseChallengeChallengeChallenge
3843
Nbjoufobodf!dptut
Ejggjdvmuz!xjui!befrvbuf!po.tjuf!nbobhfnfou
1161
Spbe!nbjoufobodf!boe0ps!tbgfuz
1053
Wfijdmf!qbsljoh0nbobhfnfou
2115
Fowjsponfoubm!jttvft
576
Tupsnxbufs!ps!esbjobhf
576
Tfdvsjuz!)gfodjoh-!usftqbttjoh*
11052
Qvcmjd!tbgfuz!jodmvejoh!qspqfsuz!dsjnf
11142
Jotvggjdjfou!sftjefou!nbjoufobodf!pg!uifjs!ipnft
855
Fydftt!hbscbhf!ps!evnqjoh
1863
Gjsf!sjtl
31023
Bekbdfou!mboe!vtft
5436
Source: BERK, 2021.
Mechanisms of Accountability
Due to the combination of factory-built and site-built components, as well as owner and leasing interests
in Manufactured Home Parks, MHPs have overlapping interests and regulatory authority.
Kent City Code (KCC)
The City of Kent has regulatory authority over the site plan and all site-built structures of the
development.
Site plan. The City approves the Site Plan (KCC 12.05.120) and issues a permit to occupy the
manufactured home park. All were developed prior to the establishment of
the new site plan requirements and are considered legal, nonconforming uses. When an owner of a
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!435
5/E/b
MHP seeks to alter the current site plan by either removing or adding a new mobile home pad, they
are required to apply for a permit to do so. If the site plan is modified without the appropriate
permit the property owner is subject to a code enforcement action. Currently the City does not
proactively check that the park use matches its approved site plan. The City would confirm if changes
were reported by a resident or some other party or if city staff observe changes while in the park
for another reason. If the City confirms that an un-approved change was made to the site plan, it can
issue fines to the property owner until the violation is addressed. The property owner may be
required to undo the unpermitted work or obtain the appropriate permits for the change.
Site built structures. The City of Kent regulates the quality and safety standards of site-built structures
including carports, sheds, or other built structures that are not attached to the manufactured home
(are self-supporting). Homeowners must apply for a building permit to make structural additions to
the lot they lease from the landowner. Landowners must apply for a permit to add or make
alterations to park-owned structures. If the City finds unpermitted alterations to manufactured homes
in a MHP, it will generally notify both the property owner and homeowner. The City will often work
with the relevant parties to bring the addition into compliance with city code. If that is not possible,
or if the addition encroaches on the required setbacks, the City can require the addition to be
removed.
State Laws Regulating Manufactured and Mobile Homes
The Washington State Department of Labor and Industries Factory Assembled Structures (LNI FAS)
enforces the state laws regarding modular structures (RCW chapters 43.22 and 43.22A). LNI FAS
provides oversite and regulation of manufactured housing including any alterations to a
manufactured homes structural, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing systems. LNI FAS provides
permits and inspections to ensure alterations meet state standards. LNI FAS also provides
Homeowner Requested Inspections (HRI) for owners wishing to refinance or sell their manufactured
home.
The City and State pursue enforcement when it becomes aware of code violations. In both stick-built
and manufactured homes, work that is not visible due to its location can elude enforcement.
Many homeowners may not be aware of requirements associated with changes to their
manufactured home. The financial or equity incentive for acquiring permits and inspections of home
remodel projects lies in the resale value of the home. In general, MHP resident homeowners focus on
staying in their home rather than building the equity in their home. The average length of tenure in a
manufactured home is longer than in other types of housing. There are three underlying factors that
drive this; First, manufactured homeowners tend to be older with many MHPs being formal or de
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
facto retirement communities. Second, the price differential between a manufactured home and a
traditionally-built home makes it unlikely that a household will be able to advance into site-built
housing. Third, owing to the availability of credit and the fact that the manufactured home is on land
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 26
Qbdlfu!Qh/!436
5/E/b
owned by someone else, manufactured homes do not
13
appreciate in value as much as site-built homes.
MANUFACTURED/
Manufactured/Mobile Home Communities are required to
MOBILE HOME
register and receive an endorsement from the Washington
LANDLORD-
State Department of Revenue (DOR). DOR collects an annual
fee for each qualifying manufactured or mobile home within
TENANT ACT
a park. The fee pays for the Manufactured/Mobile Home
(MHLTA)
14
Dispute Resolution Program. There is a fine for MHPs that
do not register with the program. It is unclear if there are
The uniqueness of the
any other consequences for non-compliance.
landlord-homeowner
relationship leaves
stakeholders confused about
Lease contract between the property owner and leasing
the contractual agreement
homeowner.
that they sign. Landlord and
While MHP tenants are homeowners, they are subject to the rules
Tenant rights and obligations
and regulations established in their lease agreement with the
are established by the
landlord/property owner. The lease is the foundational document
Manufactured/Mobile Home
that determines the obligations of the landlord and the
Landlord-Tenant Act (MHLTA)
obligations of the homeowner. The lease agreement can require
(RCW 59.20). This includes
things more commonly associated with rental tenancy such as
noticing requirements, grace
written approval for long-term guests, prohibition of renting the
periods, and conditions on
property to another party, and requiring approvals for home
which the landlord could issue
modifications. The Manufactured/Mobile Home Landlord-Tenant
sanctions against the tenant. It
Act (MHLTA) lays out the requirements for a rental agreement
also specifies the recourse
15
between a tenant and landlord. While the MHLTA offers
property owners and
protections to homeowners/tenants, those protections are largely
residents have when there is
procedural. The landlord holds a much stronger position in the
a lease violation.
landlord/homeowner relationship.
More information on the
The landlord maintains immutable rights as a property owner.
MHLTA is available in the
After meeting specified procedural checks, the landlord
Resource Options Toolkit as
maintains the right to evict the tenant, at which point the
well as through the Attorney
tenant/homeowner can either try to sell their home or have their
home moved to another location. If the tenant is able to sell their
Housing Dispute Resolution
home, the landlord maintains the right to approve the buyer of
Program and the Northwest
the unit. If there is back-owed rent, the landlord may require that
Justice Project.
rent be paid out of the proceeds of the unit sale. If the tenant is
unable to sell their home, and unable to move their home within
13
Some manufactured homes in MHPs do appreciate in value. For example, Glenbrook is structured as condominiums, so each
home is associated with a proportional share of the underlying land. Homes in parks owned by non-profits have more
predictable rent changes and tenant resources, which supports the preservation or growth in home equity for the homeowner.
Examples from other states with rent control show that manufacture homes can appreciate in value similar to other housing
types.
14
The following parks are not registered with the DOR system: Circle K, Green Acres, Mar A Vue, Martells, New Alaska, and
Shafran.
15
The MHLTA is reviewed in the Resource Options Toolkit.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 27
Qbdlfu!Qh/!437
5/E/b
the required period, the personal property could be deemed abandoned, thus allowing the landlord to
take possession of what is At this time the park owner could sell the
home to a new buyer, though often the condition of the home requires improvements in order for it to be
sold. If the home is uninhabitable due to poor condition, the landlord can dispose of the home and sue the
homeowner for the incurred costs.
Park tenants are at a significant disadvantage in holding landlords accountable to the requirements
of the MHLTA.
The disadvantages are multifaceted and include:
The immobile nature of most manufactured homes
The lack of vacancy in MHPs in general
Limited financial resources on behalf of the tenant
Limited knowledge of tenant rights and landlord obligations
Institutional disadvantages associated with race, language, culture, or nativity
In response to this imbalance, the state directs
education around the MHLTA as well as mediation services through the Manufactured Housing Dispute
Resolution Program (MHDRP). The A scope of services focuses narrowly on compliance
with the MHLTA and can be utilized by both the landlord and tenant. The AG endeavors to help the
landlord and the tenant come into compliance with the MHLTA through education and mediation services
though it has the authority to issue fines or other penalties. The MHDRP can help the tenant homeowner
hold landlords accountable to the obligations specified in the MHLTA. In addition to the MHDRP, a
6. MHP Communities in Kent can be supported through local
regulations, tenant supportive services, and investments in
site conditions.
While many of the laws governing MHPs and manufactured housing are established at the federal and
state levels, cities play an important role in cultivating fair and sustainable MHPs in their local jurisdiction.
This section provides a broad overview of tools available to the City of Kent for preserving MHPs. The
Resource Options Toolkit provides more details on each of the tool categories and examples from other
jurisdictions.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Zoning
As the regulator of the built environment, local jurisdictions play a significant role in protecting the
interests of homeowners and tenants in the community. Zoning serves to protect the interest of traditional
site-built housing by providing confidence in the conditions of the environs of the home. Likewise, zoning
protects the ownership equity in manufactured homes by ensuring that the park cannot be suddenly or
easily changed to a different land use. Given the immobile nature of most manufactured homes, the value
of the home relies on the stable predictability that zoning affords. The chance a manufactured
homeowner could sell a home in a MHP community under threat of closure is significantly less than if the
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 28
Qbdlfu!Qh/!438
5/E/b
park is unlikely to change. In this way, the most significant mechanism of manufactured home park
preservation and protection for manufactured homeowners is MHP-specific zoning, though there are
limitations.
Several jurisdictions in Washington State use Mobile/Manufactured Home Zoning as a tool to regulate
parks and promote their preservation by limiting the ability of the landowner to convert the land to other
uses, including other residential uses. Supreme Court
through Laurel Park Community, LLC v. City of Tumwater (2012), which concluded that the City of
Tumwater rezoning did not represent a take of
interest in the parks. The parks could still be used as MHPs.
The City of Kent regulates MHPs through the Mobile Home Park Zone (Chapter 12.05), which allows
MHPs to be sited in existing MHP zones, or in MHP combining districts (Chapter 12.05.060), which allows
MHPs in all land zoned for residential uses, with the exception of R1-Single Family Residential.
Kent City Code establishes a robust process for reviewing a rezone request by a property owner
(Chapter 15.09.050). In reviewing a rezone request, the City considers certain standards and criteria,
including:
The rezone should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,
The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be compatible with
development in the vicinity,
The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the property
with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated,
Whether circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current zoning
district to warrant the proposed rezone, and
The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens
of the city.
Land Use Designation
In addition to Mobile Home Park Zoning, Kent City Code also lists mobile home park as an allowed use.
A property owner can also pursue a land use map amendment (change in use process) to site MHPs; this
process (KCC 12.02.050) would require that:
The amendment will result in development that will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and
general welfare; and
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the plan that
warrants an amendment to the plan; and
The amendment will result in long-term benefits to the community as a whole and is in the best
interest of the community; and
The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the
amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities
elements of the plan.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 29
Qbdlfu!Qh/!439
5/E/b
A land use map amendment process is subject to a Process VI legislative action, which goes through the
Land Use & Planning Board as a recommendation, with a final decision made by City Council. A rezone
process is subject to Process IV, which goes through the Hearing Examiner as a recommendation, and final
decision made by City Council (KCC 12.01.040).
Programs Focused on Improving Home Conditions
There are several home repair programs offered to owners of manufactured housing in the Puget Sound
region. Many jurisdictions administer housing repair programs, as referenced in the Resources Options
Toolkit, which provide funds and labor to make necessary repairs and upgrades, including modification
assistance for senior households and disabled households.
Various financing programs exist to help manufactured homeowners make necessary repairs and
upgrades to their homes. Manufactured homeowners do not have the same access to financing for major
home improvements that traditional site-built homeowners have. The resources available either require
the home to meet the lending requirements of Freddie Mac/Sally Mae or are through public funds that
allow use in manufactured housing. Examples of loan programs offered to low income residents of
manufactured homes include the King County Manufactured Home Grant program, which offers grants up
16
to $8,000 for repairs to income-eligible households. Loans are available for the replacement of
manufactured homes if a home is not safe and/or inhabitable.
Perhaps dissimilar to apartment housing, many residents of MHPs have significant home maintenance and
repair experience and skillsets. Of the many Latinx communities residing in Kent MHPs, many residents
work in the building and construction trades and have the skills and tools necessary to make home repairs
and repairs in the community. There is an opportunity to encourage volunteer and sweat equity models
such as Habitat for Humanity to implement home improvement efforts in Kents MHP communities.
Maintenance and upkeep of park infrastructure is at the expense of the property owner. Non-profit
property owners may have access to lower cost debt than for-profit owners.
Enforcement of Existing MHP Regulations and Standards
MHPs are subject to federal, state, and local regulations. Ensuring the preservation of parks in the long
term will not require new regulations as much as it would benefit from the enforcement of existing
regulations.
Jurisdictions often require standard code enforcement and inspection of property, including manufactured
home parks. Property owners/landlords are required under the Manufactured/Mobile Home
Landlord/Tenant Act (MHLTA) to maintain parks, including common areas.
Chapter 12.05 of the Kent City Code (Mobile Home Park Zone) lays out certain requirements for
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
enforcement of the MHP zone related to standards, including inspections and maintenance; Chapter
12.05.220 lays out the requirements for landscaping. MHPs in Kent are required to follow standard
building, health, and safety codes.
The MHLTA, RCW 59.20, provides landlord responsibilities under a landlord-tenant relationship in an
MHP. Related to park conditions, a landlord is required to:
16
As of March 2021, to be eligible a resident must earn at or below 50% of the Area Median Income in King County.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 30
Qbdlfu!Qh/!43:
5/E/b
Maintain common areas and keep them reasonably clean; this also includes extermination of pests, if
necessary,
Maintain all utilities and keep roads in good condition, and
Obey all codes, ordinances, statutes and regulations related to the park
There are other responsibilities related to respecting tenant privacy, notifying tenants upon entry of the
lot for inspection, etc. All state board of health rules applicable to the health and safety of MHPs are
required to be enforced by the City and/or county. As established by RCW 59.20.190, failure to
remedy any violations may result in a fine to the landlord/property owner.
7. Resident resources, misaligned owner incentives, and
dated infrastructure serve as barriers to needed
improvements.
The majority of manufactured housing units and MHPs provide quality housing at price points more
affordable than site-built housing that is similarly located and sized. For the housing and parks with
maintenance deficiencies and poor conditions, this study highlights three main barriers to improving
conditions in parks and housing units. The first is the limited financial resources of homeowners. At the park
level, a second barrier to improvements is a lack of owner incentives. The third barrier to park
improvements is the comprehensive nature of needed upgrades, given the age of the site layout and
infrastructure systems at many MHPs.
Limited Resources of Homeowners
For housing units with maintenance deficiencies and poor conditions, the primary barrier to improving
conditions is the limited financial resources of homeowners. Manufactured homes are disproportionately
occupied by older adults compared to other housing types and may have fixed incomes. MHP households
tend to have lower incomes than residents of other housing types, estimated at $50,000 or less per year,
as discussed on page 19.
Exhibit 17 n King County. MHP residents earning less
than $50,000 per year are considered very low or extremely low income, depending on family size.
Many manufactured homeowners purchase their home with the intention of using them as their retirement
locale. Others buy their unit because it is the only type of housing they can afford, and maintenance and
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
upkeep expenditures will be limited to the essential.
Exhibit 17: FY2021 King County Income Limits by Family Size ($).
FY 2021 Income Limit Category1 2 3 45 6 7 8
Low Income Limits (80% MFI) 63,350 72,400 81,450 90,500 97,750 105,000 112,250 119,500
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 31
Qbdlfu!Qh/!441
5/E/b
Very Low Income Limits (50% MFI) 40,500 46,300 52,100 57,850 62,500 67,150 71,750 76,400
Extremely Low Income Limits
24,300 27,800 31,250 34,700 37,500 40,300 43,050 45,850
(30% MFI)
MFI = HUD-area median family income. Kent is located in the Seattle-Bellevue WA HUD FMR Area, which includes King and
Snohomish Counties.
Sources: HUD, 2021; BERK, 2021.
Rising Rents
Like other forms of housing, rent has risen significantly over the last two decades. Though land rents in
MHPs may be more affordable than other housing types, they are also experiencing upward pressure on
rents. Drivers of rent increases include limited supply and changing business models.
Limited Supply. There are no new Manufactured Housing Communities in King County, and the
limited supply of available lot spaces, coupled with the immobile nature of manufactured homes,
reduces the market regulation of prices. Residents do not have the option to move, and landlords do
not have to offer competitive incentives to attract tenants, let alone to ensure releasing of the
property. Even if the tenant can find less costly housing elsewhere, it would most likely represent
leaving home ownership. Without the option to move, homeowners are at the mercy of their landlord.
Changing Business Models. Over the last two decades, many mobile homes went from mom-and-
17
pop ownership to property investors or investor groups focused on increasing land-lease fees. The
value of commercial property is based on its productivity, namely the amount of revenue it
generates. A property owner can increase the value of his or her asset by simply increasing the
space rents. In addition to increasing rents, the landlord may also increase the number of rented
spaces by converting common area spaces into leased spaces or adding additional fees such as
charging for parking.
Rising rents have the obvious impact of creating more monthly housing costs for homeowners/tenants, but
also can represent a shift in equity from the homeowner to the park owner. As space rents rise, the
amount a homeowner can sell their home for decreases because people factor in the cost of the rent
when considering the purchase of a manufactured home. The increased rent improves the market value of
the park but decreases the market value of the manufactured homes.
Unlike apartment rental housing, there is limited information on historical rents, so we are unable to
ascertain patterns in space rental prices in Kent. Residents have reported consistent annual rent increases
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
and the addition of extra fees.
A recent study of MHP homeowner concerns in Washington state identified rising rents as a top concern
18
of residents, and many Kent residents reported frustration with rising rents coupled with decreased
property management services.
17
Washington State Department of Commerce. 2020. Manufactured Housing Communities Workgroup Report. Pursuant to
ESHB 1582 (2019).
18
Washington State Department of Commerce. 2020. Manufactured Housing Communities Workgroup Report. Pursuant to
ESHB 1582 (2019).
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 32
Qbdlfu!Qh/!442
5/E/b
To address rising rents, homeowners favor extended lease terms to ensure communities remain a reliable
and stable place to live. Currently, state law requires a minimum of 1-year leases for residents in MHPs,
though there are examples of longer-term leases. In addition, collective ownership by
residents/homeowners or by non-profits are more likely to maintain affordable rents and provide long-
19
term security of tenure. Landlords may only increase the lot rent at the expiration of the lease term and
are not required to justify the amount of rent charged. Tying rent increases to the renewal of the rental
contract disincentivizes landlords from offering rental agreements longer than one year.
Lack of Owner Incentive to Invest
Owners are not always incentivized to invest in park quality. The lack of maintenance overhead required
in comparison to the demands of an apartment building is one of the attractive traits of MHPs as an
investment opportunity. Owners collect rent from tenants, enjoy land appreciation at the time of sale, and
can keep a minimal operating budget.
Park owner intentions vary and can hugely impact the quality of life in MHPs. Some owners prioritize
maintaining a park at the higher end of the MHP market, while others prioritize a revenue-maximizing
approach and will add as many units as possible onto the site. Evidence of both strategies can be found
gn with the strategy of creating a
20
Units are newer, adequately spaced, and community amenities
make the MHP a desirable retirement location. The revenue maximizing approach can be identified by
signals such as removing park amenities to add additional units, adding and increasing various fees on
21
top of rent payments, and taking a laissez-faire approach to site management. Parks such as Valley
Manor and Circle K demonstrate this ownership style.
Of the 18 property owners who completed our owner questionnaire, 15 have one or no improvements
planned for the upcoming 5-year window and three owners list plans to sell within the next 5 years. One
property (Shafran Mobile Estates) is currently in the process of being sold. See summary of upgrade
plans in Exhibit 18.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
19
For example, KCHA rents versus rents in Kent.
20
Forbes Real Estate Council, 2020.
21
-The New Yorker, 2021.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 33
Qbdlfu!Qh/!443
5/E/b
Exhibit 18: Owner Responses About Plans To Upgrade Park Systems In The Next 5 years
Yes, improvements planned
-No improvements planned
Paradise MHP--------
Non-Profit
Meadows at Bonel-------
Glenbrook Condominium--------
Residents
Kenton Firs 2 no response
Green Acres MHP--------
Self-
Martells Mobile Manor--------
Managed
New Alaska Trailer Park--------
Mar a Vue no response
Benson Village Estates---------
Soos Creek Estates---------
Third Pary
Walnut Grove MHP--------
Horeshoe Acres MHP---------
Lake Meridian Estates no response
West Hill Mobile Manor--------
Unknown
Shafran Mobile Estates no response
Maple Lane MHP------
Tip Top RV Park---------
Midway Village MHP---------
Willo Vista MHP--
Pantera Nuevo--------
Vertically
Canyon View Mobile Estates---------
Integrated
Clarks Glen Mobile Park---------
Pantera Lago Estates no response
Cascade Villa no response
Circle K no response
Valley Manor no response
trying for a couple years to repair/replace the infrastructure in this community, yet the answer we receive from the City is
that the only way we can replace roads, storm lines, and utilities is to close the community, remove all the homes, and raise
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Source: BERK, 2021.
Inadequate Site Configuration and Insufficiency of Park Systems
The size of manufactured housing has expanded over time, but lot sizes in older parks have not changed.
In Kent, the result is that many parks have homes that are larger than the original platting intended which
reduces, and sometimes almost completely eliminates, the required separation between units.
Additionally, older park designs often lack adequate water capacity and access roads from a fire safety
perspective. The solution to this challenge is not simple or easy. Expert interviews discuss the likely solution
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 34
Qbdlfu!Qh/!444
5/E/b
to be the removal of all units, platting the site according to the
of
current zoning code, addressing critical infrastructure concerns
years to repair/replace the infrastructure in
such as water capacity for fire suppression, and then replacing
this community, yet the answer we
homes into newer, wider lot sizes. This is possible but comes at a
receive from the City is that the only way
we can replace roads, storm lines, and
significant cost and disruption to residents and park owners
utilities is to close the community, remove
alike. This is discussed specifically by two park owners in their
all the homes, and raise the soil level by
questionnaire responses to planned system upgrades.
Ownership from Willo Vista and New Alaska note that they
-Beau Harer, Willo Vista
would need to completely remove the homes from their parks to
make needed site improvements possible.
Aerial site images demonstrate inadequate site configuration and increased site crowding over time.
These photos, shown on the following page, capture the site plan view of Circle K Park in 2009 and
again in 2020. Over the decade, many units were replaced with larger homes and open space is
replaced with additional unit capacity. These changes demonstrate a common site issue at older MHPs in
Kent. The current density of Circle K is 13 units per acre, compared to the maximum 9 units per acre
allowed in the MHP zoning code.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 35
Qbdlfu!Qh/!445
5/E/b
Circle K MHP
Aerial photo from
2009. Red box
identifies the
community park.
Circle K MHP
Aerial photo from
2020. Red boxes
highlight areas
where units
appear to be
added or
enlarged. Note
the loss of
community park
and general
crowding of the
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
site.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations
Qbdlfu!Qh/!446 36
5/E/b
8. Kent MHPs located in higher density zones can be sold
for other uses. When this happens, residents need
supportive services to avoid the worst impacts from
displacement.
Displacement Risk
Though produced elsewhere and sited in the community, manufactured homes are largely immobile once
initially placed. Considering homeowners in MHPs lease the underlying land, the added costs of lot rent,
which can range from $575-$1,100+ (according to resident input) on top of a mortgage, could present a
challenge in affordability and ultimately risk of eviction, etc., if tenants cannot keep up with lot rental
payments. This is even more challenging if a park owner/landlord decides to sell a property, leaving
residents with the burden of finding replacement homes/other parks for placement of their homes if they
are moveable.
Notification Requirements
Landlords are required to notify MHP residents about impending sales/closure of parks, to allow
residents time to plan for the movement of their mobile homes and relocation. The MHTLA provides that a
landlord must give each homeowner within an MHP at least 12-months written notice regarding their
intentions to sell the park, and ultimately close the park. In addition, the landlord must give the
Department of Commerce Office of Mobile/Manufactured Housing a copy of the notices and record the
provide relevant information about where to find relocation assistance.
The City of Kent requires landlords to prepare a Relocation Report and Plan. The Plan must show how the
landlord intends to comply with the MHLTA and the Mobile Home Relocation Assistance requirement. The
Plan must be submitted to the Human Services Office, which must be approved before going forward
with the plan to close and/or change the use of land for something other than MHPs. A Park closure
and/or comprehensive plan and zoning redesignation cannot go forward without a certificate of
completion from the Human Services Office (Chapter 12.05.340).
Responsibility of the Homeowner
either move the home or pay to have the home destroyed. The homeowner can move the home to another
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
park or private land or could try to sell the home to someone who will move it to another park or private
land. However, in practice, moving the home is rare. First, there is a significant undersupply of space for
manufactured homes in manufactured home parks. Second, in many cases the home is too old and not in
good enough condition to move. The cost of moving the home (ranging between $10,000 and $15,000)
may be more than the value of the home itself. If the homeowner cannot move the home, either due to the
condition of the home or to a lack of a place to move the home, the homeowner is responsible for
disposing of what may be their most valuable equity investment. Displacement from a mobile home park
can mean economic ruin and homelessness for a homeowner.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations
Qbdlfu!Qh/!447 37
5/E/b
Given the limited options, the homeowner may abandon the home, in which case it becomes the
responsibility of the landowner.
Relocation Assistance to Homeowners
The Washington Department of Commerce
Assistance Program. The program is funded by a $100 fee that manufactured homeowners pay to
receive their title. Funds available for relocation assistance are limited to $7,500 for single-section homes
and $12,000 for multi-section homes. The funding provided has been the same since 2005 and rarely
covers all costs associated with relocation. According to Commerce, the reasoning behind maintaining the
current allocation of funds is due to the perception that contractors may just raise costs if funding is
22
increased.
Approximately 60% of homes are demolished or disposed of during a park closure, and 30% of homes
are relocated to another MHP or to private property. This leaves the vast majority of MHP tenants at
parks that are facing closure with having to purchase new homes or find alternative housing options such
as affordable apartments. The program offers support for relocation and directs tenants to other services
and programs such as legal and advocacy resources.
In 1989, the Washington Supreme Court invalidated a law that required park owners to contribute
owners of manufactured
home parks. The Court also found that the law, established by the state legislature, violated substantive
due process.
Minimizing Hardships to Residents
Considering many MHP households are financially vulnerable, and many may lack the necessary
resources to afford housing outside the context of an MHP, resources related to relocation assistance,
financial incentives and grants, and other services are necessary in the event of a park closure.
Washington State can provide legal assistance, especially
for renters of MHPs. Additionally, t
resolution assistance to guide productive negotiations between manufactured housing residents and
landlords. More information on these resources can be found in the Resource Options Toolkit.
Recommendations
Many of the regulations governing manufactured home parks are set at the state level and serve
valuable policy goals related to managing population growth, protecting environmental critical areas,
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
and ensuring mobility options. Additionally, much of the landlord-tenant relationship in MHPs is regulated
by state law such as through noticing and lease requirements.
Local jurisdictions play an important role in protecting the homeowner, commercial property owner, and
resident interests in the community. These roles have an important place in ensuring manufactured home
parks remain part of the affordable housing options available in Kent.
The following include recommendations that the City of Kent could pursue to help preserve existing MHPs.
22
Interview with Brigid Henderson, Program Manager - Department of Commerce
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 38
Qbdlfu!Qh/!448
5/E/b
The study does not address options to encourage the development of
23
new MHPs.
TENANT
SUPPORT BEST PRACTICES IN PARK MANAGEMENT
RESOURCES
MHP owners and tenant/homeowners both have a financial stake in park
The Northwest Justice Project
quality. For an MHP owner, the value of the park is driven by the net
is a Washington based legal
revenues it generates. The value to the homeowners is based on the
aid program that offers legal
protection of their home equity as well as the livability of the MHP
services to manufactured
community (which is manifested in impacts to their housing costs as well as
home tenants, among many
the value of their home). Supporting best practices in park management
other services. The
can improve the long-term livability of MHPs and their preservation in
organization has produced a
the community.
guide that lays out the
protections afforded to
Improve access and clarity around the rights and
residents under RCW 59.20,
responsibilities of owners and tenants in manufactured home
which include the right to a
parks
rental agreement for the
rented lot space.
As explained above, tenants of MHPs in Kent face many disadvantages
in the landlord-tenant relationship. The City of Kent could mitigate some
The Washington State
of these disadvantages by increasing landlord and tenant awareness of
their rights and obligations. There are valuable resources available to
provides education and
tenants (see sidebar) but these may be difficult for tenants to find.
assistance to tenants and
Indeed, the City may be the first place residents turn to for many of the
landlords through the
problems they face. The City could improve access to the available
Manufactured Housing
resources for tenants by:
Dispute Resolution Program.
Establishing an MHP web. Given that
At the advocacy level, groups
the city is a logical first step when encountering neighborhood
such as the
problems such as disputes over unsafe trees, roaming animals, and
Washington State offer
utility charges, providing clear and navigable information on where
resources available to renters
to get assistance would be a benefit to MHPs. The Resource Options
of both a manufactured
Toolkit provides a first step in identifying resources and appropriate
homes and the land on which
contacts for remedying common problems.
it sits on, as protected through
the Residential Landlord-
Translate key materials into needed languages. The MHLTA and
Tenant Act. Several legal
other regulations regarding landlord and tenant rights and
service organizations exist at
obligations are in English. They are also written in a legally sound
the regional, federal, and
way that is hard to decipher for people for whom English is their
national level, that provide
second or third language. Providing a brief overview of the basic
legal expertise and
tenets of the MHLTA in languages other than English would be a first
education to residents of
step. Providing information about important resources in other
manufactured home parks,
languages would also help residents find the information they need.
including its most vulnerable
Both the Manufactured Housing Dispute Resolution Program and
residents.
23
Barriers to development of new MHPs is available in Commerce 2020
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 39
Qbdlfu!Qh/!449
5/E/b
Northwest Justice Project provide interpretation services and translated materials regarding state
law.
As part of the
Manufactured Housing Dispute Resolution Program, the AGs office is charged with providing
outreach and information about the requirement of the MHLTA and its mediation services. They
typically hold information sessions for tenants, but these have been canceled since 2020 due to the
coronavirus pandemic. If the City is hearing about multiple problems and concerns for any given
park, it could help facilitate an information session by for park residents.
Prevent code violations through improved case making, clarity, and dissemination of
requirements. A comprehensive 2019 assessment of Circle K MHP found that more than half of units
had structural and/or electrical alterations that should have been permitted and inspected by Labor
24
& Industries FAS program. It is possible that some of homeowners who made these modifications
were aware of the requirements for permits and chose not to follow them, but many were just as
likely to not know the requirements existed. Property managers may know that some modifications
require a permit, but not know what the requirements are. Developing and disseminating clear
statements of the requirements to both the park managers (on-site) as well as tenants would help
inform residents about the requirements and clarify the role of the City and L&I as regulators of
manufactured home standards. Information should include descriptions of:
Purpose. As explained above, the resale value of the home may be less of a motivating factor
for manufactured homeowners than site-built homes. It may increase compliance if the safety
risks were more clearly explained, such as ensuring carports can withstand the weight of snow.
Process. Many MHP residents simply do not know how to go about getting a permit or have
heard anecdotal stories of delayed or denied permits. These factors may encourage
manufactured homeowners to proceed without procuring a permit, opting to ask for forgiveness
rather than permission. Clarifying the process upfront could dispel any myths about permitting
and make the process seem less intimidating.
Cost. Many manufactured homeowners may assume that permits are cost-prohibitive.
Consequences/risks for non-compliance. Like other types of housing, homeowners make
cost/risk/benefit decisions about making home modifications. Illegal, unsafe home additions are
not restricted to manufactured housing and occur in all types of housing. To encourage
homeowners to engage th
help to communicate the risks of not doing so.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Clarify the role of property management. Some lease agreements require tenants to get written
permission before starting a home improvement
park are doing a home improvement project. Working with MHP experts such as the MHDRP
program and LNI FAS, it would help to clarify the desired process and role of MHP owners and
managers with regards to home improvements. Some property managers report providing residents
guidance on what home modifications require a city permit and which do not. This is helpful to
24
Letter from Chris Rarig, LNI FAS, to Russ Millard, owner of Circle K, June 3, 2019.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 40
Qbdlfu!Qh/!44:
5/E/b
preventing unsafe home modifications in the community, though it is not the obligation of property
managers to educate
Property laws serve to protect the interests of MHP landowners, but outside of procedural rights, there
are limited protections for manufactured homeowners. Through its land use decisions, the City can create
negative impacts to the equity interest of manufactured homeowners.
There are a number of conditions in Kent, reviewed in the findings, that lead to this dynamic. First,
manufactured homes are largely immobile. Second, the value of a manufactured home is dependent on
the quality of the MHP in which it is located. When park conditions deteriorate, the value of the homes
also deteriorates. Third, the profitability of a MHP for the landlord is not dependent on park conditions.
Since manufactured homeowners in MHPs are essentially a captured market, the landowner can increase
rents and decrease services without incurring new vacancies. This is driven by the fourth factor; even if
their home can be moved, there are extremely limited options for homeowners to move their home.
Finally, fifth, the current affordable housing crisis ensures there is ample demand for housing.
In apartments, typically poor conditions and rising rents lead to increased vacancies and tenant turnover,
both resulting in increased costs and reduced revenues for the apartment owner. These two risks to the
MHP owners are essentially non-existent in manufactured home parks in Kent. The result is that park
owners are incentivized to increase revenues and decrease costs to improve the profitability and the
25
commercial value of the property. Revenues can be increased by raising rents on existing lots, adding
additional rented lots onto the site, or by converting open space to rentable lots. These last two
mechanisms for increasing park revenue are regulated by the City.
Consider impacts to manufactured homeowner equity when making land use decisions. Each
MHP should have an approved site plan on file with the City. When a park owner seeks to modify
the site plan of the MHP it requires an application and review by the City. Just as the City serves to
protect the equity interest of owners in site-built housing, when considering land use change requests,
the City should consider impacts to manufactured homeowner equity. When the modification removes
common space or community amenities, requests could be made to make substitutable space
available on the site. Improved noticing and outreach to residents could help them take advantage
legislative processes.
Require improvements to address crowding. When permitting the siting of a manufactured home
onto an existing lot, the City evaluates However,
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
there is evidence that older, smaller homes are being replaced with larger homes
knowledge, thus encroaching on the required setbacks. Old site layouts may prevent adequate
spacing of new manufactured homes. In these cases, the City could require a suitable remedy to fire
risk such as a fire wall. A fire wall would be considered a permanent addition to the park
infrastructure and the responsibility of the park owner.
25
All property owners are different and maximizing profitability is not the paramount factor for all, or even most, of MHP
owners. Many MHP owners are interested in community stability and the livability of their parks.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 41
Qbdlfu!Qh/!451
5/E/b
These two examples address future changes to park conditions, but do not begin to address existing
deficiencies. They also require a robust enforcement system to ensure parks remain aligned to their
approved site plans.
ENCOURAGE MHP HOMEOWNER PARTICIPATION IN HOME REPAIR PROGRAMS
In conducting resident outreach,
particularly among older adults with emerging mobility concerns. The home repair model is a good fit for
residents of MHPs, but many may not be aware of the program or their eligibility as a manufactured
homeowner.
Increase and target outreach to MHPs. Outreach to MHPs may increase manufactured homeowner
participation in the program. m requires participating homes to meet
current safety standards, and thus is more likely to be suitable for homes newer than 1976, the start
of modern federal safety regulations. Targeting outreach to parks with homes built after 1976
would be appropriate.
Given the close proximity of MHP homes, as well as the similar vintage of homes in some parks, there
may be an opportunity for making multiple improvements in a park at one time, thus reducing
administrative and mobilization costs for each home. Improvements to entryways and home access
may be well suited to this approach.
IMPLEMENT A ROLLING INSPECTION PROGRAM
Relying on resident-reported complaints is not an effective method for managing conditions at MHPs.
Fear of retribution from landlords, distrust of public authorities, and frustration from previous interactions
are some reasons that residents are unlikely to report inappropriate management behavior or unsafe
conditions. An inspection program would improve the preservation likelihood of MHPs by ensuring park
conditions meet established city and state guidelines for health, safety, and quality of life.
The City of Kent recognizes the challenge of landlord/tenant dynamics for its apartment dwellers and
implemented a proactive rental inspection program that monitors health and safety conditions across all
rental units in the city. The program started in 2019 and it leverages fines through code enforcement and
the issuance of an annual business license as its primary tools for enforcement. Property owners are
responsible for hiring an inspector and completing the inspection within the allotted timeframe. When a
building or unit falls out of compliance with the program standards, the building department is notified of
the violation and a series of notices and fines can be applied to the property owner. If the issue is not
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
26
permitted rental in the city.
27
-occupied housing,
Rental Inspection Program do not fit the conditions of MHPs. Rather than adding MHPs to the existing
program, a version of the program can be developed to address the conditions of MHPs that are the
purview of the property owner.
26
Kent Rental Inspection Program
27
The study did not include a comprehensive assessment of tenancy in MHPs, but the only parks with reported renter occupied
MHPs include Mar a Vue and New Alaska Trailer Park.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 42
Qbdlfu!Qh/!452
5/E/b
California has a statewide program to regulate its MHPs that can help inform the development of an
approach in Kent. While the inspection system does not collect fees, violations are issued to park owners
if site conditions fall out of compliance with established standards. Failure to respond to the violations
results in revoking the permit to operate. This means that the park owner cannot legally collect rental
payments and signage is posted in the park informing residents of this status. The end action with a
canceled permit is that the land use can be reverted to a non-MHP designation. Local police power could
28
be used to enforce this change.
In developing an ongoing inspection system, include MHP residents in the program development as well
as other stakeholders such as non-profit MHP owners and for-profit MHP owners. Many of the life and
safety risk code violations in MHPs are alterations made to the home and are thus the responsibility of
the homeowner. As a result, an MHP inspection program can lead to citations and impose hardship on
MHP residents. The City should work with stakeholders to establish clarity around the role of the
inspection system in terms of improving the long-term preservation and safety of MHPs. The Resource
Options
Establish an Effective Enforcement System for MHPs
An inspection system will not improve the long-term preservation of MHPs if it only generates citations
without effective follow up and accountability to ensure improved MHP conditions. Even in site-built
housing and commercial property, there are limited mechanisms for ensuring code violations are
remedied. One mechanism of accountability for most real estate are requirements for financing that can
home rental will increase the revenue of an apartment building, but that revenue will not be counted in
the appraised value of the building for purposes of financing (either refinancing to release capital for
other investments or financing for the purchase of the property). If the property owner wishes to
maximize the value of the asset, they are motivated to procure the necessary permits. Since MHP owners
do not own many of the improvements on their land, and the value of MHPs tends to be in the land itself
and not the use or improvements, there may be less motivation to seek appropriate permits.
For MHPS, the overlapping landowner and homeowner interests and overlapping federal, state, and city
regulations have created confusion over regulatory authority and responsibility. The insular nature of
many MHP communities, distrust of government, and the belief that city governments are an antagonist of
MHP housing prevent MHP tenants and manufactured homeowners from calling on their local cities for
assistance. Some landowners have benefited from these grey areas, reducing the services and amenities
in the parks while increasing rents.
codes and over time improve or preserve the quality of rental housing available in Kent. A program
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
addressing the same policy goal could improve the preservation of MHPs in Kent. MHPs that meet this
owners and residents. Current conditions observed in some parks suggest that lack of enforcement is a
greater challenge than a lack of regulation.
A significant challenge of increasing building code and land use policy enforcement is that many MHPs in
Kent have a staggering amount of code violations and potential life and safety risk. There is a question
28
California Mobile Home Park Maintenance Inspection Program and Local Enforcement Agencies
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 43
Qbdlfu!Qh/!453
5/E/b
out all at once. The City
may consider starting with an initiative around a specific policy objective such as fire risk, flood risk, pest
management, or another topic. Other options include starting with parks designated for older adults or
parks in a specific geographic area.
IMPROVE MUNICIPAL SERVICES
Park residents and site managers share many concerns with communities comprised of site-built housing
and apartment housing. Concerns such as homeless people camping in adjacent areas, property crime,
garbage dumping, stray dogs, and other issues were reported by residents and on-site managers.
Residents and property managers shared that they have called the police or the City, but that no one
came, leaving them to feel that the City is unconcerned with safety and security in its MHPs. Improving
response and follow-up to service calls can improve park conditions and the sense of residents as valued
members of the community.
REDUCE HARDSHIP TO RESIDENTS WHEN PARKS CLOSE
Closing MHPs can result in economic devastation for resident homeowners. Both Washington State and the
City of Kent provide procedural protections for resident homeowners when parks close, but there are
limited financial resources or supports.
cover the costs incurred when a manufactured homeowner is forced to move due to the closing of a park.
State legislative efforts to require landowners to cover some or all relocation costs have been struck
down by the Supreme Court because it puts an undue burden on one type of residential property owner
and not others.
The Department of Commerce provides technical assistance and support for residents of closing MHPs,
often working closely with the local jurisdiction. Other options for reducing hardships to residents include:
Augment relocation assistance administered by the Department of Commerce in a way that benefits
the homeowner.
Waive fees for residents moving their home into a park in Kent if they have been displaced due to a
closing park.
Waive fees for replacing homes on private land within Kent for residents.
SUPPORT RESIDENT, NON-PROFIT, OR LOCAL PHA PURCHASE OF
MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Second to zoning, the most powerful way to preserve MHPs is to convert the ownership to a tenant or
non-profit owned community. Resident or non-profit purchase of MHPs offers a lot of benefits to residents.
Th
29
stabilize rent increases, and protect against abuses that can occur in a landlord/tenant relationship. In
addition, non-profit-owned communities may qualify for funding and financing opportunities for
29
IMLC Assessing Public Resources
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 44
Qbdlfu!Qh/!454
5/E/b
acquisition and park infrastructure that privately owned parks do not.
Successful conversions of MHPs from private ownership to tenant-ownership or non-profit ownership often
require technical assistance, public support through access to funding and/or financing, and other non-
tangible forms of support. The Resource Options Toolkit provides an overview of some of the locally
available resources.
The City cannot require a landlord to sell an group or non-profit. In 2000, the
law stating that the statutory grant of a right of first refusal to the tenants of mobile home parks amounts
to a taking and transfer of private property. The right of disposition, or the right of transfer to other
persons, and the right of transmission, are fundamental rights of ownership.
30
The City can encourage and support the sale of MHPs to tenant or non-profit groups. Some options the
City could pursue include:
Identify MHPs that are suitable for alternative ownership models. A first step in this process would
be to evaluate which parks in Kent would be good candidates for conversion to alternative
ownership models. Factors such as underlying land use, flood plain status, park size, park conditions,
and the income of residents are all relevant factors.
Fund predevelopment studies. Consider funding some of the predevelopment costs that would
enable non-profits or resident groups to purchase their communities. These include site surveys,
appraisals, engineering analyses, and environmental reports.
Make benefits to landowners known. The state offers an incentive to sell to residents or non-profits
in the form of an exemption from the state portion of the real estate excise tax.
Incentivize the sale to residents or nonprofit groups. The City could consider making MHP owners
exempt from the local share of the real estate excise tax in exchange for selling their community to a
nonprofit, HOA, public entity, or the homeowner residents.
Outreach to property owners and referral to partners. The first prerequisite for converting an MHP
into an alternative form of ownership is that the owner wishes to sell. Rarely are residents successful
in approaching the owner on their own and making an offer to purchase. Through its business service
role with the landowners, the City may be in a position to learn that a property owner wishes to sell
and can notify relevant non-profits such as the Manufactured Home Community Preservationists,
public agencies such as the King County Housing Authority, or technical experts on resident-owned
communities such as Northwest Cooperative Development Center, or the Washington State
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Department of Commerce.
30
Not all MHPs are suitable for conversion to tenant- or non-profit- ownership. In general, it is unfeasible for MHPs with fewer
than 25 units (due to land costs) and the residents must be able to afford the monthly costs to finance the land.
Kent Manufactured Home Park Preservation Study Findings and Recommendations 45
Qbdlfu!Qh/!455
5/E/c
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
1011 Plum Street SE PO Box 42525 Olympia, Washington 98504-2525 (360) 725-4000
www.commerce.wa.gov
May 3, 2021
Kent City Council
c/o Hayley Bonsteel, Long Range Planning Manager
City of Kent
400 West Gowe
Kent, Washington 98032
Sent Via Electronic Mail
RE: Draft Kent Housing Options Plan
Dear Council Members:
We applaud the City of Kent’s choice to pursue the HB 1923 grant to plan for additional affordable
and market rate housing in a greater variety of housing types, at prices that are accessible to a greater
variety of incomes. We appreciate the chance to review and comment on proposed draft Kent Housing
Options Plan (KHOP).
Kent has done an excellent job completing all of the required elements of a housing action plan (HAP)
outlined in RCW 36.70A.600(2). The plan, if implemented as designed, will help the city address its
future housing needs by accommodating the future population demand with a greater diversity of
housing options and greater affordability, while addressing displacement and preserving affordable
housing. We especially like the following:
The housing policy and code review explores how the city is achieving its current policies and
whether improvements or revisions are needed to the policies to achieve the goals of the
KHOP. This section also addresses recent legislation that broadens the Housing Element
requirements for cities. We applaud this excellent work!
The comprehensive list of housing strategy recommendations effectively addresses the
objectives of the KHOP and the specific needs of Kent, including displacement. It also
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!IPQ`Dpnnfsdf!Dpnnfout!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
includes goals and next steps for each strategy that will guide the city as it takes its next steps.
The implementation plan identifies the action needed, responsible parties, the proposed timing
of each strategy, and relevant measures of success. This planning will help the city put these
strategies into action.
The KHOP used this grant to look at unique issues within Kent and focused on mobile home
park preservation. This extra focus will allow the city to be prepared to preserve and
sensitively address displacement amongst this more affordable housing within the city.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!456
5/E/c
Kent City Council
May 3, 2021
Page 2
The review of redlining within and around Kent is laudable and will help the city to implement
the new requirements added to the housing element under HB 1220, which passed the
legislation this year.
As the city looks to adoption and implementation of this strong set of housing strategies, we have the
following recommendations:
Expand the implementation plan to include staff time required for various actions to better
understand the level of effort needed to complete these future work plan items.
Make a plan for how you will monitor the objectives and strategies within the KHOP. The list
of relevant measures of success are a great start, but a plan for how often to monitor and by
whom would allow the city to measure its progress and evaluate which changes have been
effective at meeting the objectives.
Review recent legislation and future grant programs which may provide support for identified
planning efforts to increase missing middle housing, refine ADU standards, and focus on
increasing housing opportunities in transit-oriented areas.
Congratulations to the staff for the great work the draft KHOP represents. If you have any questions or
need technical assistance as you move forward with this plan, please feel free to contact me at
laura.hodgson@commerce.wa.govor (360) 764-3143. We extend our continued support to the City of
Kent as you review this draft plan for adoption as intended direction for housing policy.
Sincerely,
Laura Hodgson
Associate Planner
Growth Management Services
cc: David Andersen, AICP, Managing Director, Growth Management Services
Steve Roberge, Deputy Managing Director, Growth Management Services
Ben Serr, AICP, Eastern Region Manager, Growth Management Services
Anne Fritzel, AICP, Senior Housing Planner, Growth Management Services
Laura Hodgson, Associate Housing Planner, Growth Management Services
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!IPQ`Dpnnfsdf!Dpnnfout!!)3825!;!Lfou!Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!Qmbo!.!Bepqu*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!457
5/F
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Pat Fitzpatrick, City Attorney
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5770
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Repeal Ordinance 4399/Chapter 10.03 KCC Which
Established 40-Day Additional Notice for Termination of
Month-to-Month Rental Agreement - Adopt
MOTION: Move to adopt Ordinance No. 4405, repealing Chapter 10.03 of
-
SUMMARY: On April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance 4399, which
established a new Chapter 10.03 of the Kent City Code. Chapter 10.03 of the Kent
City Code provides that with respect to a month-to-month or other period-to-period
residential rental arrangement, a landlord shall provide to the tenant a written
Landlord Tenant Act (RCW 59.18.200(1)(a)) for the issuance of what was then a 20-
day notice of termination. A violation of the ordinance provides the tenant with an
affirmative defense to eviction.
The ordinance was passed by the Council because the short 20-day notice period in
then-
to find alternative housing, especially when occupancy rates were high and housing
was difficult to find.
terminate a month-to-month lease without just cause. Engrossed Substitute House
-day timeline in
the ordinance ineffective; and (2)
law, because the just cause requirements of ESHB 1236 establish timelines that are,
nance cannot be enforced and by this ordinance,
is repealed.
BUDGET IMPACT: None.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Thriving City - Creating safe neighborhoods, healthy people, vibrant commercial districts, and
inviting parks and recreation.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!458
5/F
Inclusive Community - Embracing our diversity and advancing equity through genuine community
engagement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Rental Ordinance - REPEAL of Additional 40 Day Notice for Month to Month
(PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!459
5/F/b
ORDINANCE NO. 4405
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, repealing Chapter 10.03
of the Kent City Code entitled, “Residential Landlord
Tenant Regulations.”
RECITALS
A. On April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance 4399,
which established a new Chapter 10.03 of the Kent City Code.
B. Chapter 10.03 KCC provides that with respect to a month-to-
month or other period-to-period residential rental arrangement, a landlord
shall provide to the tenant a written “Warning of Intent to Terminate
Tenancy” 40 days prior to the time required of the Landlord Tenant Act (RCW
59.18.200(1)(a)) for the issuance of what was then a 20-day notice of
termination. A violation of the ordinance provides the tenant with an
affirmative defense to eviction.
C. The ordinance was passed by the Council because the short 20-
day notice period in then-existing state law had the potential to result in the
vacating tenant’s inability to find alternative housing, especially when
occupancy rates were high and housing was difficult to find.
D. Subsequent to the Council’s passage of Ordinance 4399, the
Washington State Legislature amended the Landlord Tenant Act and
eliminated a landlord’s ability to terminate a month-to-month lease without
just cause.
Buubdinfou;!Sfoubm!Psejobodf!.!SFQFBM!pg!Beejujpobm!51!Ebz!Opujdf!gps!Npoui!up!Npoui!!)3829!;!Sfqfbm!Psejobodf!54::0Dibqufs!21/14!LDD
1
Qbdlfu!Qh/!45:
5/F/b
E. Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1236 had two major impacts
on Kent’s ordinance: (1) the 20-day timeline in state law that formed the
basis for Kent’s Chapter 10.03 was eliminated, making the ordinance
ineffective; and (2) the City’s ordinance is now in conflict with state law,
because the just cause requirements of ESHB 1236 establish timelines that
are, in some cases, longer than the total 60 days provided for by Kent’s
ordinance. As a result of these impacts, Kent’s ordinance cannot be enforced
and repeal of Chapter 10.03 KCC is appropriate.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
ORDINANCE
SECTION 1. – Chapter 10.03 Repealed. Chapter 10.03 of the Kent
City Code, entitled “Landlord-Tenant Regulations” is hereby repealed in its
entirety.
SECTION 2. - 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 3. – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be
in force thirty days from and after its passage, as provided by law.
June 1, 2021
DANA RALPH, MAYOR Date Approved
ATTEST:
June 1, 2021
Buubdinfou;!Sfoubm!Psejobodf!.!SFQFBM!pg!Beejujpobm!51!Ebz!Opujdf!gps!Npoui!up!Npoui!!)3829!;!Sfqfbm!Psejobodf!54::0Dibqufs!21/14!LDD
2
Qbdlfu!Qh/!461
5/F/b
KIMBERLEY A. KOMOTO, CITY CLERK Date Adopted
June 4, 2021
Date Published
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHUR “PAT” FITZPATRICK, CITY ATTORNEY
Buubdinfou;!Sfoubm!Psejobodf!.!SFQFBM!pg!Beejujpobm!51!Ebz!Opujdf!gps!Npoui!up!Npoui!!)3829!;!Sfqfbm!Psejobodf!54::0Dibqufs!21/14!LDD
3
Qbdlfu!Qh/!462
5/G
PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
Julie Parascondola
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5100
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: INFO ONLY: Closure of 100th Place S.E. to Motorized Vehicle
Traffic
SUMMARY: The Parks and Public Works Departments have jointly and mutually
determined that there is public benefit to be gained from the permanent closure of
ththth
100 Place S.E. to motorized vehicle traffic between S.E. 260 and S.E. 264
Streets.
This right-of-way is a low-traffic, non-residential access road adjacent to Mill Creek
Canyon and behind a commercial retail development anchored by a Target store.
The need for the closure derives in part from the recently completed Mill Creek
Canyon Cleanup project, in which nearly 100 tons of refuse, garbage and debris
were removed from the wooded canyon and Mill Creek.
th
The permanent closure of 100 Place S.E. would involve placing concrete barricades
and signage on each end of the street to prevent vehicle access in this area. The
road itself will remain in place and open for walking, jogging, biking, and other
recreational uses. This small section of street sees little vehicle traffic and is
typically a place where illegal dumping and other illicit and illegal activities are
taking place. Closing the street will deter this illicit activity from occurring and allow
activation of the right-of-way for future, recreation-focused positive uses.
Other specific steps are being taken to help maximize the renewed investment in
Mill Creek Canyon including additional resources allocated in the 2021-2022 budget
for contracted cleanup and seasonal park staff to increase our maintenance level of
service in Mill Creek Canyon.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Thriving City - Creating safe neighborhoods, healthy people, vibrant commercial districts, and
inviting parks and recreation.
Inclusive Community - Embracing our diversity and advancing equity through genuine community
engagement.
ATTACHMENTS:
Qbdlfu!Qh/!463
5/G
1. EXHIBIT 100th Place S.E. Closure (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!464
5/G/b
EXHIBIT
100th Place SE
Buubdinfou;!FYIJCJU!211ui!Qmbdf!T/F/!Dmptvsf!!)3826!;!JOGP!POMZ;!Dmptvsf!pg!211ui!Qmbdf!T/F/!up!Npupsj{fe!Wfijdmf!Usbggjd*
Qbdlfu!Qh/!465
5/H
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Chad Bieren, PE - Public Works Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5600
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Consultant Services Agreement with Jacobs Engineering
Group, Inc for the Green River Natural Resources Area
Stormwater Pump Station Project - Authorize
MOTION: Move to Authorize the Mayor to sign a Consultant Services
Agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. for the Green River Natural
Resources Area North Stormwater Pump Station project, in an amount not
to exceed $280,782.92, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to
the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
SUMMARY: The Green River Natural Resources Area (GRNRA) features a regional
stormwater detention and water quality improvement facility in the heart of the
Kent Valley. A series of stormwater ponds in the GRNRA collect and treat
stormwater runoff from streets and buildings nearby. High flows from Mill Creek are
also directed to the GRNRA.
The proposed pump station will increase stormwater storage in the ponds by
pumping treated stormwater out of the GRNRA more quickly than gravity-flow
allows, which will reduce flood risk along Mill Creek and other areas in the Valley.
While the proposed pump station will help decrease the chance of flooding in the
Valley, it will also provide additional wetland benefit as a lower resting elevation in
the GRNRA ponds will enable emergent wetlands to thrive.
Design of the proposed stormwater pump station requires specialized expertise in
the field of water resources, mechanical designs, and electrical systems. Jacobs
Engineering Group, Inc. has this area of experience and expertise. Additionally,
Jacobs and the City have successfully partnered on other recent projects, including
the GRNRA South Stormwater Pump Station, which was recently constructed, and
the Washington Avenue South Stormwater Pump Station, which is currently under
design.
The GRNRA North Stormwater Pump Station project is part of the c
comprehensive plan to reduce overall flood risk for the Kent Valley and its
surrounding areas. This contract with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. allows us to
accomplish our plan.
BUDGET IMPACT: This project and this scope of work has funds allocated from the
Qbdlfu!Qh/!466
5/H
Storm Drainage Utility in the 2021 budget.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Evolving Infrastructure - Connecting people and places through strategic investments in physical
and technological infrastructure.
Thriving City - Creating safe neighborhoods, healthy people, vibrant commercial districts, and
inviting parks and recreation.
Sustainable Services - Providing quality services through responsible financial management,
economic growth, and partnerships.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Jacobs - GRNRA N Stormwater PS 2 (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!467
5/H/b
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
between the City of Kent and
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter
the "City"), and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. organized under the laws of the State of Texas, located and
th
Avenue NE, Suite 500, Bellevue, WA 98004, Phone: (425) 233-3102, Contact:
doing business at 1100 112
Erik Brodahl (hereinafter the "Consultant").
I. DESCRIPTION OF WORK.
The Consultant shall perform the following services for the City in accordance with the following
described plans and/or specifications:
The Consultant shall provide engineering design and bidding services for the Green River
Natural Resource Area (GRNRA) North Stormwater Pump Station Project. For a description,
see the Consultant's Scope of Work which is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by this
reference.
The Consultant further represents that the services furnished under this Agreement will be performed
in accordance with generally accepted professional practices within the Puget Sound region in effect at the
time those services are performed.
II. TIME OF COMPLETION. The parties agree that work will begin on the tasks described in
Section I above immediately upon the effective date of this Agreement. The Consultant shall complete the
work described in Section I by December 29, 2023.
III. COMPENSATION.
A. The City shall pay the Consultant, based on time and materials, an amount not to exceed Two
Hundred Eight Thousand, Seven Hundred Eighty Two Dollars and Ninety Two Cents
($280,782.92), for the services described in this Agreement. This is the maximum amount
to be paid under this Agreement for the work described in Section I above, and shall not be
exceeded without the prior written authorization of the City in the form of a negotiated and
executed amendment to this agreement. The Consultant agrees that the hourly or flat rate
charged by it for its services contracted for herein shall remain locked at the negotiated rate(s)
for a period of one (1) year from the effective date of this Agreement. The Consultant's billing
rates shall be as delineated in Exhibit A.
B. The Consultant shall submit monthly payment invoices to the City for work performed, and a
final bill upon completion of all services described in this Agreement. The City shall provide
payment within forty-five (45) days of receipt of an invoice. If the City objects to all or any
portion of an invoice, it shall notify the Consultant and reserves the option to only pay that
portion of the invoice not in dispute. In that event, the parties will immediately make every
effort to settle the disputed portion.
C. Card Payment Program. The Consultant may elect to participate in automated credit card
payments provided for by the City and its financial institution. This Program is provided as an
alternative to payment by check and is available for the convenience of the Consultant. If the
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 1
Qbdlfu!Qh/!468
(Over $20,000)
5/H/b
Consultant voluntarily participates in this Program, the Consultant will be solely responsible
for any fees imposed by financial institutions or credit card companies. The Consultant shall
not charge those fees back to the City.
IV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The parties intend that an Independent Contractor-
Employer Relationship will be created by this Agreement. By their execution of this Agreement, and in
accordance with Ch. 51.08 RCW, the parties make the following representations:
A. The Consultant has the ability to control and direct the performance and details of its
work, the City being interested only in the results obtained under this Agreement.
B. The Consultant maintains and pays for its own place of business from which the
Consultant’s services under this Agreement will be performed.
C. The Consultant has an established and independent business that is eligible for a
business deduction for federal income tax purposes that existed before the City
retained the Consultant’s services, or the Consultant is engaged in an independently
established trade, occupation, profession, or business of the same nature as that
involved under this Agreement.
D. The Consultant is responsible for filing as they become due all necessary tax
documents with appropriate federal and state agencies, including the Internal Revenue
Service and the state Department of Revenue.
E. The Consultant has registered its business and established an account with the state
Department of Revenue and other state agencies as may be required by the
Consultant’s business, and has obtained a Unified Business Identifier (UBI) number
from the State of Washington.
F. The Consultant maintains a set of books dedicated to the expenses and earnings of its
business.
V. TERMINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, upon
providing the other party thirty (30) days written notice at its address set forth on the signature block of
this Agreement. After termination, the City may take possession of all records and data within the
Consultant’s possession pertaining to this project, which may be used by the City without restriction. If the
City’s use of the Consultant’s records or data is not related to this project, it shall be without liability or legal
exposure to the Consultant.
VI. FORCE MAJEURE. Neither party shall be liable to the other for breach due to delay or failure
in performance resulting from acts of God, acts of war or of the public enemy, riots, pandemic, fire, flood,
or other natural disaster or acts of government (“force majeure event”). Performance that is prevented or
delayed due to a force majeure event shall not result in liability to the delayed party. Both parties represent
to the other that at the time of signing this Agreement, they are able to perform as required and their
performance will not be prevented, hindered, or delayed by the current COVID-19 pandemic, any existing
state or national declarations of emergency, or any current social distancing restrictions or personal
protective equipment requirements that may be required under federal, state, or local law in response to
the current pandemic.
If any future performance is prevented or delayed by a force majeure event, the party whose
performance is prevented or delayed shall promptly notify the other party of the existence and nature of
the force majeure event causing the prevention or delay in performance. Any excuse from liability shall be
effective only to the extent and duration of the force majeure event causing the prevention or delay in
performance and, provided, that the party prevented or delayed has not caused such event to occur and
continues to use diligent, good faith efforts to avoid the effects of such event and to perform the obligation.
Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, the Consultant shall not be entitled to, and the City
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
shall not be liable for, the payment of any part of the contract price during a force majeure event, or any
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 2
Qbdlfu!Qh/!469
(Over $20,000)
5/H/b
costs, losses, expenses, damages, or delay costs incurred by the Consultant due to a force majeure event.
Performance that is more costly due to a force majeure event is not included within the scope of this Force
Majeure provision.
If a force majeure event occurs, the City may direct the Consultant to restart any work or
performance that may have ceased, to change the work, or to take other action to secure the work or the
project site during the force majeure event. The cost to restart, change, or secure the work or project site
arising from a direction by the City under this clause will be dealt with as a change order, except to the
extent that the loss or damage has been caused or exacerbated by the failure of the Consultant to fulfill its
obligations under this Agreement. Except as expressly contemplated by this section, all other costs will be
borne by the Consultant.
VII. DISCRIMINATION. In the hiring of employees for the performance of work under this
Agreement or any subcontract, the Consultant, its subcontractors, or any person acting on behalf of the
Consultant or subcontractor shall not, by reason of race, religion, color, sex, age, sexual orientation, national
origin, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, discriminate against any person who
is qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment relates. The Consultant shall execute
the attached City of Kent Equal Employment Opportunity Policy Declaration, Comply with City Administrative
Policy 1.2, and upon completion of the contract work, file the attached Compliance Statement.
VIII. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers,
officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or
suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of or in connection with the Consultant's
performance of this Agreement, except for that portion of the injuries and damages caused by the City's
negligence.
The City's inspection or acceptance of any of the Consultant's work when completed shall not be
grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115,
then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property
caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials,
employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's duty to defend, indemnify, and hold the City harmless,
and the Consultant’s liability accruing from that obligation shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's
negligence.
IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE INDEMNIFICATION
PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONSULTANT'S WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL
INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES
FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
In the event the Consultant refuses tender of defense in any suit or any claim, if that tender was
made pursuant to this indemnification clause, and if that refusal is subsequently determined by a court
having jurisdiction (or other agreed tribunal) to have been a wrongful refusal on the Consultant’s part, then
the Consultant shall pay all the City’s costs for defense, including all reasonable expert witness fees and
reasonable attorneys’ fees, plus the City’s legal costs and fees incurred because there was a wrongful refusal
on the Consultant’s part.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
IX. INSURANCE. The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement,
insurance of the types and in the amounts described in Exhibit B attached and incorporated by this reference.
X. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION. The City will provide its best efforts to provide reasonable
accuracy of any information supplied by it to the Consultant for the purpose of completion of the work under
this Agreement.
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 3
Qbdlfu!Qh/!46:
(Over $20,000)
5/H/b
XI. OWNERSHIP AND USE OF RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS. Original documents, drawings,
designs, reports, or any other records developed or created under this Agreement shall belong to and
become the property of the City. All records submitted by the City to the Consultant will be safeguarded by
the Consultant. The Consultant shall make such data, documents, and files available to the City upon the
City’s request. The Consultant acknowledges that the City is a public agency subject to the Public Records
Act codified in Chapter 42.56 of the Revised Code of Washington. As such, the Consultant agrees to
cooperate fully with the City in satisfying the City’s duties and obligations under the Public Records Act. The
City’s use or reuse of any of the documents, data, and files created by the Consultant for this project by
anyone other than the Consultant on any other project shall be without liability or legal exposure to the
Consultant.
XII. CITY'S RIGHT OF INSPECTION. Even though the Consultant is an independent contractor
with the authority to control and direct the performance and details of the work authorized under this
Agreement, the work must meet the approval of the City and shall be subject to the City's general right of
inspection to secure satisfactory completion.
XIII. WORK PERFORMED AT CONSULTANT'S RISK. The Consultant shall take all necessary
precautions and shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and subcontractors in the
performance of the contract work and shall utilize all protection necessary for that purpose. All work shall
be done at the Consultant's own risk, and the Consultant shall be responsible for any loss of or damage to
materials, tools, or other articles used or held for use in connection with the work.
XIV. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
A. Recyclable Materials. Pursuant to Chapter 3.80 of the Kent City Code, the City requires its
contractors and consultants to use recycled and recyclable products whenever practicable. A price
preference may be available for any designated recycled product.
B. Non-Waiver of Breach. The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of any of the
covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement, or to exercise any option conferred by this
Agreement in one or more instances shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of those
covenants, agreements or options, and the same shall be and remain in full force and effect.
C. Resolution of Disputes and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. If the parties are unable to settle any
dispute, difference or claim arising from the parties’ performance of this Agreement, the exclusive means
of resolving that dispute, difference or claim, shall only be by filing suit exclusively under the venue, rules
and jurisdiction of the King County Superior Court, King County, Washington, unless the parties agree in
writing to an alternative dispute resolution process. In any claim or lawsuit for damages arising from the
parties' performance of this Agreement, each party shall pay all its legal costs and attorney's fees incurred
in defending or bringing such claim or lawsuit, including all appeals, in addition to any other recovery or
award provided by law; provided, however, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the City's
right to indemnification under Section VIII of this Agreement.
D. Written Notice. All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the parties at
the addresses listed on the signature page of the Agreement, unless notified to the contrary. Any written
notice hereunder shall become effective three (3) business days after the date of mailing by registered or
certified mail, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addressee at the address stated in this
Agreement or such other address as may be hereafter specified in writing.
E. Assignment. Any assignment of this Agreement by either party without the written consent
of the non-assigning party shall be void. If the non-assigning party gives its consent to any assignment,
the terms of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and no further assignment shall be made
without additional written consent.
F. Modification. No waiver, alteration, or modification of any of the provisions of this Agreement
shall be binding unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the City and the
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Consultant.
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 4
Qbdlfu!Qh/!471
(Over $20,000)
5/H/b
G. Entire Agreement. The written provisions and terms of this Agreement, together with any
Exhibits attached hereto, shall supersede all prior verbal statements of any officer or other representative
of the City, and such statements shall not be effective or be construed as entering into or forming a part of
or altering in any manner this Agreement. All of the above documents are hereby made a part of this
Agreement. However, should any language in any of the Exhibits to this Agreement conflict with any
language contained in this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail.
H. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant agrees to comply with all federal, state, and municipal
laws, rules, and regulations that are now effective or in the future become applicable to the Consultant's
business, equipment, and personnel engaged in operations covered by this Agreement or accruing out of
the performance of those operations.
I. Public Records Act. The Consultant acknowledges that the City is a public agency subject to
the Public Records Act codified in Chapter 42.56 of the Revised Code of Washington and documents, notes,
emails, and other records prepared or gathered by the Consultant in its performance of this Agreement may
be subject to public review and disclosure, even if those records are not produced to or possessed by the
City of Kent. As such, the Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with the City in satisfying the City’s duties
and obligations under the Public Records Act.
J. City Business License Required. Prior to commencing the tasks described in Section I,
Contractor agrees to provide proof of a current city of Kent business license pursuant to Chapter 5.01 of the
Kent City Code.
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 5
Qbdlfu!Qh/!472
(Over $20,000)
5/H/b
K. Counterparts and Signatures by Fax or Email. This Agreement may be executed in any
number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, and all of which will together constitute
this one Agreement. Further, upon executing this Agreement, either party may deliver the signature page
to the other by fax or email and that signature shall have the same force and effect as if the Agreement
bearing the original signature was received in person.
IN WITNESS, the parties below execute this Agreement, which shall become effective on
the last date entered below. All acts consistent with the authority of this Agreement and prior
to its effective date are ratified and affirmed, and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed
to have applied.
CONSULTANT:CITY OF KENT:
By: By:
Print Name: Print Name: Dana Ralph
Its Its Mayor
DATE: DATE:
NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: NOTICES TO BE SENT TO:
CONSULTANT:CITY OF KENT:
Erik Brodahl Chad Bieren, P.E.
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. City of Kent
th
1100 112 Ave. NE, Suite 500 220 Fourth Avenue South
Bellevue, WA 98004 Kent, WA 98032
(253) 856-5500 (telephone)
(425) 233-3102 (telephone)
(253) 856-6500 (facsimile)
N/A (facsimile)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kent Law Department
ATTEST:
Kent City Clerk
Jacobs - GRNRA N Stormwater PS 2/Hallock
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT - 6
Qbdlfu!Qh/!473
(Over $20,000)
5/H/b
DECLARATION
CITY OF KENT EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY POLICY
The City of Kent is committed to conform to Federal and State laws regarding equal opportunity.
As such all contractors, subcontractors and suppliers who perform work with relation to this
Agreement shall comply with the regulations of the City’s equal employment opportunity policies.
The following questions specifically identify the requirements the City deems necessary for any
contractor, subcontractor or supplier on this specific Agreement to adhere to. An affirmative
response is required on all of the following questions for this Agreement to be valid and binding.
If any contractor, subcontractor or supplier willfully misrepresents themselves with regard to the
directives outlines, it will be considered a breach of contract and it will be at the City’s sole
determination regarding suspension or termination for all or part of the Agreement;
The questions are as follows:
1.I have read the attached City of Kent administrative policy number 1.2.
2.During the time of this Agreement I will not discriminate in employment on the basis of sex,
race, color, national origin, age, or the presence of all sensory, mental or physical disability.
3.During the time of this Agreement the prime contractor will provide a written statement to
all new employees and subcontractors indicating commitment as an equal opportunity
employer.
4.During the time of the Agreement I, the prime contractor, will actively consider hiring and
promotion of women and minorities.
5.Before acceptance of this Agreement, an adherence statement will be signed by me, the
Prime Contractor, that the Prime Contractor complied with the requirements as set forth
above.
By signing below, I agree to fulfill the five requirements referenced above.
By: ___________________________________________
For: __________________________________________
Title: _________________________________________
Date: _________________________________________
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS - 1
Qbdlfu!Qh/!474
5/H/b
CITY OF KENT
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
NUMBER: 1.2 EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1998
SUBJECT: MINORITY AND WOMEN SUPERSEDES: April 1, 1996
CONTRACTORS APPROVED BY Jim White, Mayor
POLICY:
Equal employment opportunity requirements for the City of Kent will conform to federal and state
laws. All contractors, subcontractors, consultants and suppliers of the City must guarantee equal
employment opportunity within their organization and, if holding Agreements with the City
amounting to $10,000 or more within any given year, must take the following affirmative steps:
1. Provide a written statement to all new employees and subcontractors indicating
commitment as an equal opportunity employer.
2. Actively consider for promotion and advancement available minorities and women.
Any contractor, subcontractor, consultant or supplier who willfully disregards the City’s
nondiscrimination and equal opportunity requirements shall be considered in breach of contract
and subject to suspension or termination for all or part of the Agreement.
Contract Compliance Officers will be appointed by the Directors of Planning, Parks, and Public
Works Departments to assume the following duties for their respective departments.
1. Ensuring that contractors, subcontractors, consultants, and suppliers subject to these
regulations are familiar with the regulations and the City’s equal employment opportunity
policy.
2. Monitoring to assure adherence to federal, state and local laws, policies and guidelines.
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS - 2
Qbdlfu!Qh/!475
5/H/b
CITY OF KENT
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
This form shall be filled out AFTER COMPLETION of this project by the Contractor awarded the
Agreement.
I, the undersigned, a duly represented agent of
Company, hereby acknowledge and declare that the before-mentioned company was the prime
contractor for the Agreement known as that was entered
into on the (date), between the firm I represent and the City of
Kent.
I declare that I complied fully with all of the requirements and obligations as outlined in the City
of Kent Administrative Policy 1.2 and the Declaration City of Kent Equal Employment Opportunity
Policy that was part of the before-mentioned Agreement.
By: ___________________________________________
For: __________________________________________
Title: _________________________________________
Date: _________________________________________
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
EEO COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS - 3
Qbdlfu!Qh/!476
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!477
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!478
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!479
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!47:
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!481
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!482
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!483
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!484
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!485
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!486
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!487
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!488
5/H/b
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!489
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*
5/H/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!48:
5/H/b
EXHIBIT B
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENTS
Insurance
The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement,
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which
may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder
by the Consultant, their agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors.
A.Minimum Scope of Insurance
Consultant shall obtain insurance of the types described below:
1.Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non-owned,
hired and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance
Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing
equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be
endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage.
2.Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on ISO
occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from
premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed
operations, personal injury and advertising injury, and liability
assumed under an insured contract. The Commercial General
Liability insurance shall be endorsed to provide the Aggregate Per
Project Endorsement ISO form CG 25 03 11 85. The City shall be
named as an insured under the Consultant’s Commercial General
Liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the
City using ISO additional insured endorsement CG 20 10 11 85 or a
substitute endorsement providing equivalent coverage.
3.Workers’ Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial
Insurance laws of the State of Washington.
4.Professional Liability insurance appropriate to the Consultant’s
profession.
B.Minimum Amounts of Insurance
Consultant shall maintain the following insurance limits:
1.Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum combined single
limit for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per
accident.
2.Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with limits
no less than $3,000,000 each occurrence, $3,000,000 general
aggregate.
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!491
5/H/b
EXHIBIT B (Continued)
3.Professional Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less
than $3,000,000 per claim and $3,000,000 policy aggregate limit.
C.Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following
provisions for Automobile Liability and Commercial General Liability
insurance:
1.The Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as
respect the City. Any Insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool
coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Consultant’s
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
2.The Consultant’s insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage
shall not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days
prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has
been given to the City.
3.The City of Kent shall be named as an additional insured on all
policies (except Professional Liability) as respects work performed
by or on behalf of the Consultant and a copy of the endorsement
naming the City as additional insured shall be attached to the
Certificate of Insurance. The Consultant’s Commercial General
Liability insurance shall also contain a clause stating that coverage
shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made
or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer’s
liability.
D. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not
less than A:VII.
E.Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the
amendatory endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the
additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of
the Consultant before commencement of the work.
F.Subcontractors
Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or
shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor.
All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the same insurance
requirements as stated herein for the Consultant.
Buubdinfou;!Kbdpct!.!HSOSB!O!Tupsnxbufs!QT!3!!)3827!;!Hsffo!Sjwfs!Obuvsbm!Sftpvsdft!Bsfb!)HSOSB*!Tupsnxbufs!Qvnq!Tubujpo!Dpotvmubou
Qbdlfu!Qh/!492
5/I
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Chad Bieren, PE - Public Works Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5600
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: 2021 Street Sweeping Services Agreement with McDonough
and Sons, Inc - Authorize
MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor to sign a Street Sweeping Services
Contract with McDonough and Sons, Inc., in an amount not to exceed
$20,250 per month, plus premium services and extra call-out charges, for
Street Sweeping services, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable
to the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
SUMMARY: The current street sweeping contract is set to expire on June 30, 2021.
Under the current contract, residential roads are swept once per month January
through September and twice per month October through December. During the
fall, leaves may cause localized flooding and it is also the time when most material
may be washed into the storm system and catch basins. Sweeping these materials
is more cost effective than increasing catch basin cleanings.
The proposed contract includes premium sweeping charges ($0.050 per lineal foot)
for downtown streets and tree-lined streets outside of downtown. This contract also
includes emergency callout sweeping ($55.00 per hour) to address spills and other
in-house construction needs.
Staff advertised for bids and received two proposals. Staff recommends contracting
with the low bidder, McDonough and Sons, Inc. for a three-year contract with two
one year extensions that would be approved by the Mayor based on a
recommendation from Public Works.
BUDGET IMPACT: The current contract is $14,626.38 per month. The proposed
contract is $20,250.00 per month plus premium service and extra call-out charges.
Extra sweeping call-out is estimated to be about 100 hours. This street sweeping
contract is funded by the storm drainage utility.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Thriving City - Creating safe neighborhoods, healthy people, vibrant commercial districts, and
inviting parks and recreation.
ATTACHMENTS:
Qbdlfu!Qh/!493
5/I
1. Street Sweeping Evaluation Sheet (PDF)
2. Street Sweeping - McDonough & Sons (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!494
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Fwbmvbujpo!Tiffu!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui
5/I/b
Qbdlfu!Qh/!495
Dpousbdu!bnpvout!jo!iboe
$8 Million
$650,000
Fyusfb!Txffq!Qfs!Ipvs
$55
$140
Qsfnjvn!Tfswjdf!Dptu!Qfs!Gu
$0.01
$0.05
Mvnq!Tvn!Dptu!Qfs!Npoui!
$20,250.00
$36,544.58
uif!dpousbdu
dpousbdups!joufoet!up!efejdbuf!up!
22
Tusffu!txffqjoh!frvjqnfou!
Frvjqnfou
Tymco 600 Tymco 600
Schwarze M600
Schwarze A7000
tusffu!txffqjoh!tfswjdft
$!pg!zfbst!fyqfsjfdf!qfsgpsnjoh!
3819
tqfdjgjdbujpot
Qspqptbm(t!Beifsfodf!up!XX
3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Qspqptbmt
!
Dpousbdups
NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot-!Jod/Pmtpo!Cspuifst!Qsp!Wbd
23
Psefs!pg!Gjojti
5/I/c
STREET SWEEPING SERVICE CONTRACT
2021
THIS CONTRACT is entered into between the CITY OF KENT, a Washington
municipal corporation ("CITY") and McDonough and Sons, Inc., a Washington
("Contractor").
RECITALS
The Contractor represents that it has the experience, resources, and expertise
to perform the Contract services; and
After a due diligence period observed by both parties, the City desires to enter
into this Contract with the Contractor for street sweeping services.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises in
this Contract, the City and the Contractor agree as follows:
1. DEFINITIONS
The following definitions will apply to the following words and terms when used
in the Contract, whether or not these words and terms are capitalized, unless
specifically defined otherwise within any section or subsection.
1.1 City. – The City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation, whose
mailing address is 220 Fourth Avenue South, Kent, Washington 98032.
As used in this Contract, it includes the official of the City holding the
Office of Mayor or designated representative including, but not limited to,
the Public Works Director or designee and the Street Manager.
1.2 Contract. – This Contract, exhibits thereto, any change orders,
Contractor’s response to the City’s Request for Proposals (RFP), and any
clarifications, amendments, or additions to the Contract.
1.3 Contractor. – The individual, firm, joint venture, co-partnership or
corporation, and its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and
assigns, or the lawful agent of any such individual, firm, joint venture,
partnership, or corporation, or its surety under the contract bond,
constituting one of the principles to the Contract and undertaking to
perform the work herein specified. Where any pronoun is used as
referring to the word "Contractor" it shall mean the Contractor.
1.4 Curb. – A vertical or sloping member generally along and defining the
edge of street.
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 1 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!496
5/I/c
1.5 Emergency. – Any set of circumstances which, at the sole discretion of
the City, gives rise to a need for immediate services from Contractor to
protect the life, health and/or safety of citizens and/or to protect the City’s
infrastructure.
1.6 Hazardous Material. – Any substance that is defined as hazardous or
toxic by federal or state law or regulation, including but not limited to 40
C.F.R. Part 261; 42 U.S.C. Section 6901, et seq.; 15 U.S.C. Section 2601
et. seq; Chapter 70A.300 RCW; and Chapter 173-303 WAC.
1.7 Intersection. – The area embraced within the prolongation or connection
of the lateral curb lines, or if none, then the lateral boundary lines of two
streets which join one another at, or approximately at, right angles, or
the area within which vehicles traveling upon different streets joining at
any other angle may come in conflict. The junction of an alley with a
street is included.
1.8 Premium Service. – Services, at the discretion of the City, by which the
Contractor shall, within 24 hours of notice, proceed to sweep at least once
per day in areas designated by the City. This PREMIUM SERVICE will
continue for 90 days unless extended or suspended by the City primarily
occurring during the months of October through December. The option
to use, extend or suspend PREMIUM SERVICE shall be at the sole
discretion of the City.
1.9 Premium Service Area. – Areas designated by the City, to be swept at
least once per day for a period up to 90 days. Streets can be added or
deleted at the sole discretion of the City.
1.10 Special Sweeping. – Consists of as-needed sweeping to assist with
cleaning up of spills, accidents and other unplanned events, including the
sweeping of sand after snow events, except that sand along the gutter
line shall be regarded as part of the regular Contract Work.
1.11. Street. – As referred to in this Contract shall be defined as the entire
surface between rights of way lines, from curb to curb, including island,
traffic curbs, intersection areas, auxiliary lanes and those paved areas
between curbs that exist where alleys intersect streets.
1.12 Sweeping Material. – The material, debris, or waste that is swept from
the street including decant (extracted liquid) and spoils (the remaining
solids). Decant will be deposited at designated decant locations, Exhibit
E, and elsewhere as approved by the City in writing. Spoils will be
disposed of at designated disposal facilities.
1.13 Work. – The furnishing of all labor, materials, equipment, and other
incidentals necessary or convenient to the successful completion of the
service and carrying out all of the duties and obligations imposed by the
Contract.
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 2 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!497
5/I/c
2. PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND
Prior to execution of this Contract by the City, the Contractor shall make,
execute and deliver a good and sufficient bond equal to the amount of the fifty
thousand dollars ($50,000). The bond shall be with a surety company as surety and
be conditioned that the successful Proponent shall faithfully perform all of the
provisions of this Contract and pay all laborers, mechanics, and subcontractors and
material persons and all persons who supply such person or persons or subcontractors
with provisions and supplies for carrying on of such work. The surety must agree to
be bound by the laws of the State of Washington and subject to the jurisdiction of the
State of Washington. The Payment and Performance Bond shall be on the form
provided as Form F to this Contract.
3.TERM AND PAYMENT
3.1 Term of Contract and extensions. The contract for service shall be in effect
for a term of 3 years, commencing on July 1, 2021, and ending on June 30,
2024. However, if the Contractor has fully performed all the terms, covenants
and conditions of the Contract to the City's satisfaction, and because the
Contract is not a PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT, and is a SERVICE CONTRACT, the
City may, at its sole option, extend the terms of this Contract for up to two (2)
one-year service contract extensions. The City's option to extend this Contract
shall be delivered by written notice to the Contractor not less than 60 days prior
to the expiration of each contract term.
3.2 Termination. The City may terminate this Contract upon 90 days’ notice to the
Contractor.
3.3 Compensation and taxes.
3.3.1 Contractor shall be paid monthly in the lump sum of $20,250 for properly
providing the required service to Frequency Areas A, B, and C, as described in
the Proposal Forms for this Contract. However, the City of Kent reserves the
right to alter the frequency in which Area B is serviced with a minimum 90 days’
written notice in which case the monthly lump sum will be $20,250. If the City
chooses to alter the frequency of Area B (March through October), the change
shall commence in January of the following year and last through the term of
the Contract and any applicable extensions – unless further contract
modifications are made by the City.
3.3.2 Contractor shall be paid in the amount of $0.05 per linear foot of curb for
properly providing the required service to Frequency Area D, Premium Service,
as described elsewhere in this Contract. Payment will be based on the actual
linear feet swept. Services performed in excess of those authorized by the City
will not be compensated.
3.3.3 Contractor shall pay all applicable taxes.
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 3 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!498
5/I/c
3.4 Compensation for additional services.
3.4.1 Special Sweeping. In the event the City orders Special Sweeping service,
the Contractor will be paid on an hourly basis for actual, reasonable time
at the rate of $55 per hour. Invoices for payment for Special Sweeping services
must show the name of the City staff member requesting Special Sweeping,
date and time of request, location of the work performed, and date and time the
work was completed.
3.4.2 Increased service during term of Contract. The City reserves the right to
increase the total linear curb footage beyond that originally set forth in this
Contract. The City shall pay Contractor for the additional footage as follows:
(a) Establish the street sweeping frequency schedule for the added street(s);
(b) Determine the total additional linear curb footage per sweeping schedule
for the added street(s);
(c) Determine a price per foot for each affected street schedule from the
costs, linear curb footage and schedules established in this Contract;
(d) Multiply the total additional linear curb footage per sweeping schedule by
the price per foot for that schedule as stated in this Contract; and
(e) If the City increases the required sweeping area by a total additional linear
curb footage exceeding 25% of the total linear curb footage originally
contracted for in this Contract, either party may re-open negotiations for
the specific, limited purpose of adjusting the price for these additional
services.
3.5 Penalty for missed service. In the event Contractor fails to sweep one or
more streets during the sweeping cycle set forth in this Contract, the City may,
at its sole option, elect to require the Contractor to sweep the missed streets as
provided for in this Subsection 3.5, OR the City may elect to reduce the payment
owed to the Contractor. If the City elects to reduce the payment owed to the
Contractor, the reduction shall be calculated as follows:
(a) Determine the Contractor’s contract price per linear curb foot swept from
the costs, linear curb footage and schedules established in this Contract;
(b) Multiply the contract price per linear curb foot swept by the total number
of linear curb feet that the Contractor failed to sweep in a given month;
and
(c) Reduce the next monthly payment due to the Contractor by the total
reduction calculated in this Subsection.
3.6 No Compensation for Weather Impacts. Contractor shall not be entitled to
extra time or compensation for weather-related debris, sand in the gutter line
from street sanding, or similar weather-related conditions.
3.7 Schedule of payments by City. Contractor shall invoice the City by the second
day of each month. Payment for services rendered during each month will be
paid as soon as possible under the City's standard schedule for processing
invoices, provided the Contractor has met the conditions of this Contract and
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 4 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!499
5/I/c
that proper invoices and other required records have been timely received by
the City. The estimated time for payment is 30 days from the date of proper
receipt of Contractor's invoices. Payment will be based on the actual linear feet
swept. Invoices shall include the specific identification of costs for Special
Sweeping or other extra work. Disposal site tickets, invoices and or receipts
shall be provided with the invoices. The invoice requirements for Special
Sweeping in section 3.4.1 shall be observed.
3.8 Documentation of services performed. As described in Subsection 5.3,
Contractor shall track work performed using Global Positioning System (GPS)
monitoring of vehicles, with maps showing work performed to be available to
the City online. The Contractor shall submit hardcopy color maps to the City
upon request. All cost for GPS tracking and the production of these maps,
including, but not limited to, time, material, hardware, software, and
transferring electronic files, if requested by the City, shall be borne by
Contractor.
4. SCOPE OF SERVICES
4.1 Contract Work. As the term Work is defined in Section 1.13.
4.2 Furnishing of labor, tools and equipment. The Contractor shall complete all
Work and furnish all labor, tools, materials, and equipment for street sweeping
in accordance with and as described in this Contract.
4.3 Permits and licenses. The Contractor shall be responsible to obtain and pay
for any permits or licenses required by the City or any other local, state or
federal governmental authority that are necessary to perform the Contract,
including all required licenses for Contractor's officers, agents, employees and
subcontractors.
4.4 Independent contractor status. Contractor is and shall be at all times acting
as an independent contractor and not as an employee of the City.
4.5 Laws to be observed. The Contractor shall always comply with all Federal,
State, regional, tribal and local laws, ordinances and regulations that affect Work
under this Contract. The Contractor shall defend, indemnify and save harmless
the City (including elected officials, agents, officers and employees) against any
claims that may arise because the Contractor (or any employee of the Contractor
or any subcontractor) violates a legal requirement. This subsection 4.5 is
supplemental and in addition to any section or subsection in this Contract that
makes reference to specific laws, ordinances or regulations.
4.6 Taxes and insurance fees. The Contractor shall secure at its expense, and
shall be responsible for all payments of sales and income taxes, social security
withholding, state disability insurance compensation, unemployment
compensation, and all other payroll deductions for the Contractor, officers,
agents, employees and subcontractors.
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 5 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!49:
5/I/c
4.7 Employee and Subcontractor requirements. Contractor and any
subcontractors shall comply with the following employee requirements:
4.7.1 All workers shall be competent and experienced in the performance of the
Work to which they are assigned. Failure or delay in the performance of
this Contract due to the Contractor’s failure to provide workers adequate
in number and skill to perform the Contract shall constitute a material
breach of this Contract.
4.7.2 PAYMENT OF PREVAILING WAGES IS REQUIRED FOR THIS SERVICE
CONTRACT pursuant to Chapter 39.12 RCW, as currently enacted or
hereafter amended.
4.7.3 Contractor shall require that all operators of its street sweeping
equipment maintain current, valid, appropriate Washington State Driver's
Licenses and any other pertinent requirements thereof, including
commercial driver's licenses and insurance, if not insured by Contractor.
4.7.4 Contractor shall require all employees to be courteous at all times, to
abstain from the use of loud or profane language and to perform the Work
as quietly as possible. The City reserves the right to determine whether
Contractor is in compliance with this subsection.
4.7.5 Contractor shall, at all times, have designated persons available to accept
orders for Special Sweeping and other directions from the City. Such
person(s) shall have immediate charge of operations and shall provide
the required performance.
4.7.6 All operators of Contractor’s street sweeping equipment shall attend Spill
Response Training, offered by the City Environmental Engineering
Division, at least once per calendar year.
5. REQUIREMENTS FOR VEHICLES
5.1 General Appearance. Sweeping vehicles shall be numbered and shall have
the Contractor's name and vehicle number painted in letters of contrasting color
at least four inches high on each side and on the back of each vehicle. No
advertising shall be permitted other than the name of the Contractor. The
Contractor shall allow the City of Kent to place stormwater educational magnets
on street sweepers at the sole expense of the City. All vehicles shall be kept in
a clean and sanitary condition, and all sweeping vehicles shall be cleaned at
least once a week. Repainting of all vehicles shall be done as needed to maintain
an acceptable appearance, or within 30 days after written notification by the
City.
5.2 State Standards. Sweeping vehicles required for performance shall be
maintained in good working condition, equipped with proper warning lights, and
operated and equipped in accordance with Chapter 46.37 RCW, as currently
enacted or hereafter amended, as it applies to slow moving and/or maintenance
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 6 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:1
5/I/c
vehicles.
5.3 GPS Required. Each of Contractor's sweeping vehicles dedicated to the
performance of this contract Work shall be equipped with a functioning GPS
mobile unit. The GPS mobile unit shall be capable of tracking the sweepers
position, direction, speed, time and status (sweeping or not sweeping) when
operating within the City limits in any weather. Contractor shall maintain daily
electronic files of the GPS tracking information. Further, the Contractor shall
use the GPS electronic files to produce a plotted color map, on a weekly basis,
reflecting the Contractor’s sweeping activities of the previous week. The map
shall be produced in an electronic format and be made available to the City e-
mail. Hand drawn maps will not be accepted. A hard copy of the plotted map
shall be submitted to the City upon request. The Contractor shall retain all
electronic records for the records retention period set forth in Section 14.1. The
Contractor shall, upon request, provide the City with any electronic files or maps
requested.
5.4 Age Of Vehicles. No sweeping vehicle may be more than five years old at any
time it is used to perform obligations under this Contract.
5.5 Leaks And Spills. All sweeping vehicles shall be kept in good working
operations. If at any time any automotive fluid is leaking from the sweeping
vehicles, Contractor shall remove the vehicle from service and complete repairs
within 24 hours. If any automotive fluids are spilled on the City streets, the
Contractor shall immediately report the spill to the City spill hotline at (253)
856-5600. The spill hotline number shall be posted in all street sweepers at all
times. All sweeping vehicles shall carry the City spill hotline number in the cabs
of the vehicle. All sweeping vehicles shall include a spill kit of new absorbent
material to prevent any automotive fluids from entering the City storm sewers.
6. NON-EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIME
Whenever directed to perform non-emergency Special Sweeping, Contractor
shall respond and commence that work as directed by the City.
7. EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIME
Whenever directed to perform Emergency Special Sweeping, Contractor shall
respond and commence that work within two hours of receiving that direction.
Minimum compensation time for that extra work shall be two hours at the established
rate for Special Sweeping.
8. EMERGENCY USE OF OTHER CONTRACTOR
In an Emergency, the City reserves its absolute right to hire any street sweeping
service provider to perform any amount of work for any length of time at such rates
as the City determines to be in the City's best interests during the time of that
Emergency. However, the City will use its best efforts to utilize Contractor for these
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 7 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:2
5/I/c
Emergency services whenever practical.
9. RESTRICTIONS ON PERFORMANCE
The Contractor shall comply with the following route restrictions:
9.1 Frequency Area A \[Core Area\]. Core Area streets (refer to schedule) are
designated for NO PARKING, MONDAYS ONLY, from 4:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. for
street sweeping purposes.
9.2 Frequency Area B \[Residential Area\]. No sweeping activities shall take place
between 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. weekdays. Weekend sweeping may be
allowed between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. with the prior written permission of
the City.
9.3 Frequency Area C \[Major Arterial\]. No sweeping activities shall take place
between 6:00 am and 9:00 am or between 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. weekdays.
9.4 Premium Service Area D \[Designated Roads To Be Swept Once Daily\].
Premium Service Areas will be designated by the City at the time service is
required. This will include, but is not limited to, the prompt removal of leaves to
reduce clogged drain lids and localized flooding. This service may be required
once daily for up to 90 days. This Premium Service is further described in
Exhibits B and C.
9.5 Coordination With Solid Waste Collection. Contractor shall not sweep
residential streets the same day solid waste, recycling or yard and food waste is
collected by the City’s solid waste collection service provider. The Contractor
shall work with City staff and the solid waste service provider to avoid conflicts.
The solid waste collection service dates shall take precedence and street
sweeping shall be adjusted accordingly. Occasionally, solid waste collection
dates may change due to operational efficiencies. In those circumstances
Contractor may be required to adjust schedules.
10. GENERAL SWEEPING REQUIREMENTS
10.1 Streets shall be swept clean and no piles of debris shall be left anywhere within
any street or right-of-way.
10.2 Intersections shall be swept clean and Contractor shall hand sweep areas
skipped by the sweeping machines consistent with frequencies identified in this
Contract.
10.3 Water shall be used to control dust as needed and in compliance with state,
regional and local air quality regulations.
10.4 The Contractor shall be responsible for the cleaning of all debris spilled or
tracked on any street, alley or public place by any of its equipment. If the
Contractor fails to clean the same within 24 hours of notice by the City, the City
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 8 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:3
5/I/c
may cause such streets to be cleaned and may charge the costs to the
Contractor. The City is authorized to deduct such cost from any payments due
to the Contractor consistent with Section 3.5.
11. CHANGES
The City may issue a written change order for any change in the services to be
provided during the performance of this Contract. If the Contractor determines, for
any reason, that a change order is necessary, Contractor must submit a written change
order request to the person listed in the notice provision section of this Contract within
14 days of the date Contractor knew or should have known of the facts and events
giving rise to the requested change. If the City determines that the change increases
or decreases the Contractor’s costs or time for performance, the City will make an
adjustment according to the terms of this Contract. If the Contractor fails to require a
change order within the time allowed, the Contractor waives its right to make any claim
or submit subsequent change order requests for that portion of the contract work. If
the Contractor disagrees with the price adjustment for the change order, the Contractor
must complete the change order work and may proceed with the claims process below.
The Contractor accepts all requirements of a change order by: (1) endorsing it,
(2) writing a separate acceptance, or (3) not protesting in a way this section provides.
A change order that is accepted by Contractor as provided in this section shall
constitute full payment and final settlement of all claims for contract time and for
direct, indirect and consequential costs, including costs of delays related to any work,
either covered or affected by the change.
12. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
12.1 Affirmation Of Knowing Decision By Contractor. The Contractor
acknowledges that it has made its own examination, investigation, and research
regarding the proper method of doing the work, all conditions affecting the work
to be done, the labor, equipment and materials needed and the quantity of the
work to be performed. The Contractor is satisfied with its own investigation and
research regarding all of these conditions and the Contractor's decision to enter
into this Contract is based upon such investigation and research. The Contractor
further assumes full responsibility for any estimates, statements or
interpretations made by any officer or agent of the City whether or not all or
part of any of those estimates, statements or interpretations may prove to be in
any respect erroneous.
12.2 No Implication Of City Ownership. The Contractor shall not use a firm name
containing the words "Kent", "City", or any words implying municipal ownership.
12.3 Cost Of Water And Duty Of Care To Water System. It is the Contractor's
sole responsibility to obtain and pay for any water used in the sweeping
operation and to obtain all necessary permits and meters. Contractor may
obtain permits and meters for the City of Kent Water District at the City Public
th
Works Operations building at 5821 S. 240 Street in Kent. In areas where the
Soos Creek Water District or Lake Meridian Water District have jurisdiction,
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 9 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:4
5/I/c
Contractor shall be responsible for contacting those Districts to obtain permits
and meters. Copies of hydrant permits shall be carried on all sweepers at all
times. Reasonable care must be taken in order to protect the water systems
from damage or contamination, including but not limited to using backflow
prevention devices. In the event any damage occurs, or potential contamination
is suspected, Contractor shall immediately notify the City at (253) 856-5600 or
the appropriate water district.
13. CONTACTS
13.1 Contractor’s responsible management or supervisory persons shall be accessible
at or through Contractor’s office during regular business hours (8:00 A.M. to
5:00 P.M.) on weekdays to assure the required contractual performance.
Contractor shall maintain a telephone message system to receive messages
when the office is closed.
13.2 In addition, the parties agree that they will establish acceptable procedures for
communication of necessary information. Each party agrees to designate a key
employee who will be the responsible contact person for that party with respect
to implementation of the Contract and communication of information necessary
for performance. Each party agrees to follow the procedures established
between the parties for regular, effective communication of information between
the parties, including Emergency events that may occur outside of regular
business hours.
14.REQUIRED RECORDKEEPING
14.1 Contractor shall keep at all times accurate and complete records and accounts
in writing and otherwise in accord with accepted accounting practices. Records
shall include but not be limited to, route books indicating which streets were
swept, such records will be consistent with data generated by the GPS system
attached to the Contractor's sweepers.
14.2 Contractor shall allow the City, or it's duly authorized representative or agent,
reasonable and adequate access to all records, data, copies or duplicates without
charge.
14.3 Each Monday, Contractor shall deliver to the City a written or electronic report
of work performed during the previous week. The City will not process a
purchase order for payment if Contractor does not timely and accurately provide
these reports. In the event no such written report is received by the City, the
City's record shall control in any dispute between Contractor and the City and
the Contractor waives and releases its right to prove or allege any facts or other
data differing from the City's record.
14.4 Within seven days of the effective date of this Contract, the Contractor shall
submit for the City's approval, a daily sweeping schedule, together with a
planned route outline on maps attached as Exhibit C or as may hereinafter be
amended by the City. Contractor shall designate which holidays it will observe
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 10 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:5
5/I/c
and indicate all schedule modifications if the holiday falls on a regular sweeping
day. Should the Contractor need to modify the schedule as submitted, the
Contractor shall give not less than seven days’ written notice to the City.
Contractor shall work with Republic Services to ensure residential streets
(Frequency Area B) are not swept the same day garbage, recycling or yard and
food waste is collected.
14.5 Contractor shall maintain accurate records of the sites utilized for disposal of the
street sweeping spoils. At a minimum, these records shall show dates and times
of transportation and disposal, amount of spoils disposed, and the name and
location of the disposal site used. This information shall be provided in the
Contractor's weekly reports. Disposal tickets, receipts and/or invoices shall be
attached to Contractor’s monthly invoices.
14.6 Contractor shall maintain all records for a minimum of seven years after the
termination date of this Contract or such longer time as is the duration of any
litigation arising out of Contractor’s performance of the Contract.
15. RESPONSIBILITY FOR DAMAGE TO UTILITIES OR PROPERTY
Contractor shall protect all public and private utilities and property from
damages by Contractor’s operation. If utilities or property are damaged by reason of
the Contractor's operations, Contractor shall, at its own expense, promptly repair or
replace same to the original and/or better conditions. In the event Contractor fails to
promptly make the repairs, the City shall make the repair or replacement, and the cost
of doing so shall be billed to Contractor or alternately at the City's option, the City may
deduct that cost from any payments due the Contractor. The Contractor shall be
responsible for all consequences and shall defend, indemnify and hold the City
harmless for any losses caused by the damaging or interruption of utility services or
damages to property.
16. HANDLING AND DISPOSAL OF WASTES – GENERALLY
16.1 Extra care shall be taken in the loading and transportation of street sweeping
spoils and other waste so that none of the material to be collected is left either
on private property or on the streets or alleys. Any matter left on private
property or on streets or alleys by the Contractor shall immediately be removed
upon notice from the City at no extra cost to the City.
16.2 Decant as herein defined shall be disposed of at the locations specified by the
City in Exhibit E to this Contract or as otherwise approved by the City in writing.
16.3 Contractor shall deliver, at its cost, street sweeping spoils to a disposal site
operated by King County, or its successors, or such other site or sites as shall
be approved by and meets with the disposal requirements of the Washington
State Department of Ecology and any other Federal, State or Local Agency or
Department with Jurisdiction; provided that the Contractor shall not use any
dump or solid waste disposal site that the City would be prohibited from using
were the City to collect and dispose of street sweeping spoils or waste on its
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 11 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:6
5/I/c
own. The Contractor shall advise the City of the disposal site or disposal sites
being used by the Contractor by attaching a copy of the disposal tickets, invoices
and/or receipts for each site used to invoices submitted. CONTRACTOR SHALL
NOT TEMPORARILY STORE ANY STREET SWEEPING SPOILS OR WASTE AT ANY
SITE OTHER THAN A DISPOSAL SITE THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR THAT SPECIFIC
PURPOSE.
16.4 Contractor assumes responsibility for all sweeping material collected and
disposed under the terms of this Contract.
17. HANDLING OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
17.1 Contractor recognizes that the sweeping material collected by its street
sweepers either is or may contain dangerous or hazardous wastes.
17.2 Contractor agrees to collect, handle, transport and dispose of the sweeping
material specifically in accordance with all applicable standards, rules and
regulations now in effect or hereafter amended or enacted by the Washington
Department of Ecology and the United States Environmental Protection Agency
or their successors.
17.3 Contractor further assumes full responsibility and holds the City harmless for
complete compliance with all applicable local, state or federal laws, rules or
regulations that apply to the services provided in this contract as they affect the
collection, handling, transportation or disposal of hazardous or dangerous
wastes collected by its street sweepers.
18. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
18.1 Hold harmless. The Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its
officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all
claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney
fees, arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Contract, except
to the extent that such injuries and damages are caused by the sole or
contributory negligence of the City.
18.2 Acceptance by City not a waiver. The City's inspection or acceptance of any
of the Contractor’s work when completed shall not be grounds to avoid any of
these covenants of indemnification.
18.3 Potential limits to liability. Should a court of competent jurisdiction
determine that this Contract is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of
liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to
property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Contractor
and the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the
Contractor's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Contractor’s
negligence.
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 12 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:7
5/I/c
18.4 Waiver of immunity under industrial insurance. Solely for purposes of
enforcing the indemnification obligations of a party under the terms of this
Contract, Contractor expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 RCW and
acknowledges that such waiver has been specifically negotiated.
18.5 Terms survive expiration of Contract. The provisions of this Contract that
address insurance and indemnification shall survive the expiration or termination
of this Contract, unless a specific section of this Contract states otherwise.
19. INSURANCE
19.1 Minimum insurance requirements. Contractor shall procure and maintain
for the duration of this Contract insurance of the types and in the amounts
described below against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work by the
Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees, subconsultants or
subcontractors.
19.2 Certificate Of Insurance. Before beginning work on the project described in
this Contract, the Contractor shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing:
a. Automobile Liability insurance with limits no less than $5,000,000
combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage;
and
b. Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance written on an
occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit
per occurrence and general aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury
and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be limited to:
blanket contractual; products/completed operations/broad form property
damage; explosion, collapse and underground (XCU); and employer's
liability.
c. Excess Liability insurance with limits not less than $4,000,000 per
occurrence and aggregate. Note that if Excess coverage in this amount
applies to Auto as well as CGL, then the Auto coverage will be acceptable
at $1,000,000.
d. Contractor’s/Consultant’s Pollution Liability insurance covering
losses caused by pollution conditions that arise from the
operations of the Contractor. Coverage limits shall be no less
than $1,000,000.
e. Insurer. Insurance coverage is to be provided only by an insurer
with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII.
19.3 City Insurance Shall Not Contribute. The Contractor’s insurance shall be the
primary insurance as respects the City. Any insurance or self-insurance
maintained by the City shall be in excess of Contractor’s insurance and shall not
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 13 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:8
5/I/c
contribute with it.
19.4 City Named As Additional Insured. The City, its officers, officials,
employees, agents and volunteers shall be named as an additional insured on
the insurance policy, as respects work performed by or on behalf of the
Contractor and a copy of the endorsement naming the City as additional
insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance, which shall be
kept on file with this Contract. The City will not execute the Contract until such
documents are provided.
19.5 Coverage Shall Apply Separately To Each Insured. Contractor’s insurance
shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each
insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to
the limits of the insurer's liability.
19.6 Notice Required To City Prior To Change In Coverage. Contractor’s
insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled,
suspended or altered in any material way without the City being given 30 days’
prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, of the proposed
cancellation or material change in coverage.
19.7 Responsibility For Premiums Or Deductibles. Any payment of premiums,
deductibles, or self insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the
Contractor.
19.8 Proof Of Subcontractor Insurance. Where use of a subcontractor is allowed
under this Contract, Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insureds under
Contractor’s policies OR shall furnish the City separate certificates or
endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall
meet the same insurance requirements as stated in this Contract for Contractor.
19.9 City Not Responsible For Contractor’s Tools & Equipment. The Contractor
hereby agrees and acknowledges that the City bears no liability or responsibility
for any loss or damage from any cause whatsoever to Contractor’s tools,
machinery, equipment, or vehicles, including rented tools, machinery, or
equipment, or tools, machinery, or equipment owned or rented by Contractor’s
agents or subcontractors.
20. FORCE MAJEURE
Neither party shall be liable to the other for breach due to delay or failure in
performance resulting from acts of God, acts of war or of the public enemy, riots,
pandemic, fire, flood, or other natural disaster or acts of government (“force majeure
event”). Performance that is prevented or delayed due to a force majeure event shall
not result in liability to the delayed party. Both parties represent to the other that at
the time of signing this Agreement, they are able to perform as required and their
performance will not be prevented, hindered, or delayed by the current COVID-19
pandemic, any existing state or national declarations of emergency, or any current
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 14 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4:9
5/I/c
social distancing restrictions or personal protective equipment requirements that may
be required under federal, state, or local law in response to the current pandemic.
If any future performance is prevented or delayed by a force majeure event, the
party whose performance is prevented or delayed shall promptly notify the other party
of the existence and nature of the force majeure event causing the prevention or delay
in performance. Any excuse from liability shall be effective only to the extent and
duration of the force majeure event causing the prevention or delay in performance
and, provided, that the party prevented or delayed has not caused such event to occur
and continues to use diligent, good faith efforts to avoid the effects of such event and
to perform the obligation.
Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, the Contractor shall not be
entitled to, and the City shall not be liable for, the payment of any part of the contract
price during a force majeure event, or any costs, losses, expenses, damages, or delay
costs incurred by the Contractor due to a force majeure event. Performance that is
more costly due to a force majeure event is not included within the scope of this Force
Majeure provision.
If a force majeure event occurs, the City may direct the Contractor to restart
any work or performance that may have ceased, to change the work, or to take other
action to secure the work or the project site during the force majeure event. The cost
to restart, change, or secure the work or project site arising from a direction by the
City under this clause will be dealt with as a change order, except to the extent that
the loss or damage has been caused or exacerbated by the failure of the Contractor to
fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. Except as expressly contemplated by this
section, all other costs will be borne by the Contractor.
21. LABOR DISPUTES
In the event of a strike or labor dispute involving Contractor’s employees, the
City and Contractor shall meet to determine the appropriate manner of continuing
public service under the Contract. While not relieving the Contractor of obligations
under the Contract, the City will cooperate with Contractor in providing for the
continuation of services in the best interest of public health, safety and welfare.
22. CLAIMS
If the Contractor disagrees with anything required by a change order, another
written order, or an oral order from the City, including any direction, instruction,
interpretation, or determination by the City, the Contractor may file a claim as provided
in this section. The Contractor shall give written notice to the City of all claims within
14 days of the occurrence of the events giving rise to the claims, or within 14 days of
the date the Contractor knew or should have known of the facts or events giving rise
to any claim, whichever occurs first. Any claim for damages, additional payment for
any reason, or extension of time, whether under this Agreement or otherwise, shall be
conclusively deemed to have been waived by the Contractor unless a timely written
claim is made in strict accordance with the applicable provisions of this Agreement.
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 15 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!4::
5/I/c
At a minimum, a Contractor’s written claim shall include the information set
forth in subsections A, items 1 through 4 below.
FAILURE TO PROVIDE A COMPLETE, WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF CLAIM
WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED SHALL BE AN ABSOLUTE WAIVER OF ANY
CLAIMS ARISING IN ANY WAY FROM THE FACTS OR EVENTS SURROUNDING
THAT CLAIM OR CAUSED BY THAT DELAY.
A.Notice of Claim. Provide a signed written notice of claim that provides the
following information:
1.The date of the Contractor’s claim;
2.The nature and circumstances that caused the claim;
3.The provisions in this Agreement that support the claim; and
4.The estimated dollar cost, if any, of the claimed work and how that
estimate was determined.
B.Records. The Contractor shall keep complete records of extra costs and time
incurred as a result of the asserted events giving rise to the claim. The City
shall have access to any of the Contractor’s records needed for evaluating the
protest.
The City will evaluate all claims, provided the procedures in this section are
followed. If the City determines that a claim is valid, the City will adjust payment
for work or time by an equitable adjustment. No adjustment will be made for
an invalid protest.
C.Contractor’s Duty to Complete Protested Work. In spite of any claim, the
Contractor shall proceed promptly to provide the goods, materials and services
required by the City under this Agreement.
D.Failure to Protest Constitutes Waiver. By not protesting as this section provides,
the Contractor also waives any additional entitlement and accepts from the City
any written or oral order (including directions, instructions, interpretations, and
determination).
E.Failure to Follow Procedures Constitutes Waiver. By failing to follow the
procedures of this section, the Contractor completely waives any claims for
protested work and accepts from the City any written or oral order (including
directions, instructions, interpretations, and determination).
23. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
CONTRACTOR MUST, IN ANY EVENT, FILE ANY LAWSUIT ARISING FROM OR
CONNECTED WITH THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN 120 CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE DATE
THE CONTRACT WORK IS COMPLETE OR CONTRACTOR’S ABILITY TO FILE THAT SUIT
SHALL BE FOREVER BARRED. THIS SECTION FURTHER LIMITS ANY APPLICABLE
STATUTORY LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR CLAIM’S FILING BY CONTRACTOR.
24. NON-DISCRIMINATION
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 16 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!511
5/I/c
24.1 Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or proponent for
employment because of race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, national origin,
age, sex, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, political ideology,
the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap or the use of a trained
guide or service dog by a disabled person, unless based upon bona fide
occupational qualification. Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that
proponents are employed, and that employees are treated during employment,
without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, national origin, age,
sex, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, political ideology, the
presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap or the use of a trained
guide or service dog by a disabled person. Such action shall include, but not be
limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer,
recruitment, or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or
other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including
apprenticeship.
24.2 Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and
applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this non-
discrimination clause.
24.3 Failure to comply with any of the terms of this section shall constitute a material
breach of this Contract.
25. MINIMUM WAGE AND SERVICE CONTRACT AFFIRMATIONS
25.1 Contractor affirms that it has read and signed the Non-collusion/Minimum wage
combined affidavit & certification form. See, Form 2 of the response to the City’s
Request for Proposals. Contractor agrees that this project constitutes “Public
Work” for the purpose of complying with the prevailing wage requirements found
in RCW 39.12.020, but in all other respects is a service contract. Contractor
agrees that it shall pay prevailing wages at applicable state rates.
25.2 Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and
applicants for employment, notices as required by the Washington State
Department of Labor and Industries.
25.3 No payment will be made on this Contract until the Contractor and each and
every subcontractor has submitted a Statement of Intent to Pay Prevailing
Wages as approved by the Industrial Statistician of the Department of Labor and
Industries. Payment on the final invoice for the Contract will be withheld until
the Contractor and each and every subcontractor has submitted an “Affidavit of
Wages Paid” that has been certified by the Industrial Statistician of the
Department of Labor and Industries.
26. OTHER REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO CITY
In addition to any other remedy provided herein, the City reserves the right to
pursue any remedy available at law including the enforcement of the Contract terms
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 17 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!512
5/I/c
for performance against Contractor and/or its successors and assigns. The pursuit of
any right or remedy by the City shall not prevent the City from thereafter declaring a
forfeiture or revocation for breach of the conditions herein.
27. TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT ARE CONTROLLING
The written provisions and terms of this Contract, its exhibits and attachments,
amendments and change orders shall supersede all statements of any officer or other
representative of the City, whether oral or written, and such statements shall not be
effective or be construed as entering into or forming a part of, or altering in any manner
whatsoever, this Contract.
28. WAIVER OF TERMS MUST BE IN WRITING
No waiver of any of the provisions of this Contract shall be binding unless in
writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the City.
29. SEVERABILITY AND RE-AWARD OF CONTRACT
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Contract should be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section,
sentence, clause or phrase of this Contract. In the event that any of the provisions of
this Contract are held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City
reserves the right to reconsider the award of this contract and may amend, repeal,
add, replace or modify any other provision of this Contract, or may terminate this
Contract.
30. DISPUTES
This Contract shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Washington. If the parties are unable to settle any dispute, difference,
or claim arising from the performance of the Contract, the exclusive means of
resolution shall be by filing suit under the venue, rules and jurisdiction of the Superior
Court for King County Washington. In any claim or lawsuit for damages arising from
the performance of this Contract, each party shall pay its own legal costs and attorneys’
fees. Provided, however, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the City’s
right to indemnification under Sections 14, 15, 16 and 17 of this Contract.
31. NOTICES
All notices regarding this Contract shall be sent to the parties at the addresses
below. Any written notice shall become effective as of the date of mailing by registered
or certified mail and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addressee at the
address stated in this Contract or such other address as may hereafter be specified in
writing. Provided, however, that daily operational and emergency communications
shall be as provided for in Section 13 of this Contract.
32. ENTIRETY
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 18 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!513
5/I/c
The Contract, Contractor’s Response to the RFP and all forms and attachments
are incorporated into this Contract by this reference and represent the entire
agreement of the City and the Contractor with respect to the services to be provided
under this Contract. To the extent any conflicting terms or conditions exist among this
Contract, the Response to the RFP and the attachments, this Contract shall control.
No prior written or oral statement or proposal shall alter any term or provision of this
Contract.
THE PARTIES agree to all terms and conditions of this Contract which shall be
effective on the last day executed and warrant that the persons executing have the
authority to do so.
CITY OF KENT CONTRACTOR
______________________________
By: By: ___________________________
Its: Mayor Its:____________________________
Dated: _____________________ Dated: _________________________
ADDRESS: ADDRESS:
220 Fourth Avenue South ____________________________
Kent, Washington 98032 ____________________________
(253) 856-5770 ____________________________
ATTEST:
_________________________________
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
Law Department
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 19 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!514
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!515
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!516
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!517
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!518
5/I/c
EXHIBIT A
PREVAILING WAGE RATES
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 20 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!519
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!51:
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!521
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!522
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!523
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!524
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!525
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!526
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!527
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!528
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!529
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!52:
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!531
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!532
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!533
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!534
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!535
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!536
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!537
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!538
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!539
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!53:
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!541
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!542
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!543
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!544
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!545
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!546
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!547
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!548
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!549
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!54:
5/I/c
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
Qbdlfu!Qh/!551
5/I/c
EXHIBIT B
LISTS OF STREETS
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 21 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!552
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!553
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!554
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!555
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!556
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!557
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!558
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!559
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!55:
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!561
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!562
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!563
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!564
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!565
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!566
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!567
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!568
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!569
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!56:
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!571
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!572
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!573
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!574
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!575
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!576
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!577
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!578
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!579
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!57:
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!581
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!582
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!583
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!584
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!585
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!586
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!587
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!588
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!589
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!58:
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!591
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!592
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!593
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!594
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!595
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!596
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!597
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!598
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!599
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!59:
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:1
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:2
5/I/c
EXHIBIT C
MAP
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 22 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:3
5/I/c
EXHIBIT D
INSURANCE SUBMITTALS FROM CONTRACTOR
(To be included in the final contract.)
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 23 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:5
5/I/c
EXHIBIT E
MAP OF DECANT SITES
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 24 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:6
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
ES evA
461
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:7
ES e
vA 251
E
S ev
A 841
ES evA
231
ES
e
vA
421
ES
ev
A 4
21
E
S e
v
A 6
11
!
ES
evA
61
1
E
S
evA
8
01
dR
nosneB
ES evA 801
E
S ev
A 401
dR koorbgni
r
!
dR yellaV E
eC
d
aorli
aR
N
evA
4
S e
vA 67
dao
darl
orli
aR
P
U
y
wH
yell
aV
W
S
evA
86
R
y
M
S
y
99 )RS(
S
61
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
VV
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:8
VV
.R
.R
.P.
U
VV
VV
VV
VV
VV
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5:9
VV
VV
VV
VV
V
S
v A6
9
V
V
Sl
P
VV
V
V
VV
l S V
VV
VV
V
V
Sv A5
9
VV
Sl
P3 9
VV
Sv A2 9
"21"21
Sl
V
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!5::
ESl
P1 01
VV
V
VV
VV
VV
VV
VV
VV
VV
E
LA
WS-
OI
B
VV
V
V
VV
VV
VVV
VV
P
VV
VV
VV
Sv
A4 9
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
VV
5/I/c
VV
Qbdlfu!Qh/!611
VV
VV
VV
ESv
A9 1
1
V
V
VV
VV
E
Sl P
8 11
VV
VV
VV
VV
V
ESv
A7 11
VV
V
VV
V
ESv A5
V
V
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!612
V
VV
ESv
A0
V
VV
V
31
V
VV
V
V
V
l P
VV
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
VVV
VV
5/I/c
Sv Ad r3
V
VV
Qbdlfu!Qh/!613
VV
VV
V
V
VV
VV
V
VV
VV
VV
S
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou
V
5/I/c
Qbdlfu!Qh/!614
VV
VV
V
V
VV
V
VV
3
6
3
l P5
VV
v
SA6 3
3
An otecnirP
V
"21
VV
"21
5/I/c
EXHIBIT F
BOND FORM
Buubdinfou;!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!.!NdEpopvhi!'!Tpot!!)3828!;!3132!Tusffu!Txffqjoh!Tfswjdft!Bhsffnfou!xjui!NdEpopvhi!boe!Tpot-!Jod!.
CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING 2021 May 18, 2021
Page 25 of 25
Qbdlfu!Qh/!615
5/J
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Chad Bieren, PE - Public Works Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5600
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Summit Landsburg Road Puget Sound Energy Electrical
Agreement - Authorize
MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor to sign an Electrical Relocation
Agreement for $157,669.86 with Puget Sound Energy for the Rock Creek
Culvert Replacement at Summit Landsburg Road, subject to final terms and
conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
SUMMARY: In 2010, the City entered into an agreement with the National Marine
Fisheries Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to implement a
he Rock Creek Watershed in
-right at Clark
Springs.
Landsburg Road. This project is intended to remove a barrier to fish passage. The
replacement project includes removal of the existing culvert, construction of a fish
passable bridge and related habitat improvements.
This work will require relocation of electrical facilities owned and operated by Puget
Sound Energy within the right-of-way of Summit Landsburg Road. PSE intends to
relocate their facilities by boring them under Rock Creek. Portions of this work will
This agreement allows for PSE to be reimbursed by the City for portions of their
cost for this work is $157,669.86.
BUDGET IMPACT:
using previously allocated funds.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Evolving Infrastructure - Connecting people and places through strategic investments in physical
and technological infrastructure.
ATTACHMENTS:
Qbdlfu!Qh/!616
5/J
1. Kent (Rock Creek) Electric Relocation Agreement-Municipality (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!617
5/J/b
GBDJMJUZ!NPEJGJDBUJPO0SFMPDBUJPO!BHSFFNFOU!
!
____ day of ______________, 2021, is made by and between PUGET SOUND
ENERGY, Inc., a Washington coCity of Kent, a
municipal corporation of
SFDJUBMT!
A. The Company owns and operates certain facilities: A 12.47 kV single phase
power distribution system, associated poles and equipment, and secondary voltage
wires/cables. (Such facilities are collectively referrSome or
more of the Facilities occupy and use a portion of the Company
known as King County Right of Way County Some or more of the
Facilities are within City of Kent Right of Way City governed by a
Franchise Agreement with the City of Kent.
B. The City plans to construct improvements to the culvert for Rock Creek
crossing under SE Summit-Landsburg Rd
Improvements cross over, under, along, in, upon, and through the County Right of Way
and City Right of Way.
C. The Improvements necessitate the modification and/or relocation of the
Facilities. In connection with the Improvements, the City has requested the Company to
modify and/or relocate a portion or portions of the Facilities to ensure proper operating
clearances are maintained between such Facilities and the Improvements in accordance
new operating rights sufficient for the Facilities (including the Relocated Facilities) may
also be necessary.
D. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement to govern the engineering,
design, construction and installation of the Relocated Facilities.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Fmfdusjd!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3824!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Fmfdusjdbm
Page 1 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!618
5/J/b
!
BHSFFNFOU!
Now, therefore, the Parties agree as follows:
2/!Gbdjmjujft!Npejgjdbujpo
2/2!Tdpqf!pg!Xpsl
The following is the scope of work for the Relocated Facilities: Remove existing
pole, equipment and overhead electrical wire in conflict with proposed bridge, install new
poles on both sides of bridge, horizontal directional drill in new 6
between new poles, pull in new single phase 1/0 primary cable, install new overhead wire
to maintain system continuity, and replace single electric service in conflict with bridge
approach.
design standards and all required approval by government authorities.
2/3!Pcmjhbujpot!pg!uif!Djuz!
The City shall coordinate with the Company concerning the design and
construction of the Improvements and the Relocated Facilities within County Right of
Way, and shall, at its expense, provide final restoration. For the design and construction
of the Improvements and Relocated Facilities within City Right of Way, the City shall
coordinate with the Company per the terms of franchise agreement.
2/4!Pcmjhbujpot!pg!uif!Dpnqboz
The Company shall coordinate with the City concerning the design and
construction of the Relocated Facilities and the Improvements and shall design and
perform the Work, except for any of the Work to be performed by the City.
2/5!Xpsl!Tdifevmf
Prior to the commencement of the Work, the Company and the City shall
mutually agree upon a schedule that sets forth milestones for completing the Work
agreement of the Parties.
The Company shall perform the Work in accordance with the Work Schedule,
provided, however, that the ability of the Company to perform the Work is subject to any
and all conditions placed upon the Company by governing jurisdictions. The Parties
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Fmfdusjd!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3824!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Fmfdusjdbm
Page 2 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!619
5/J/b
acknowledge that delays caused by any jurisdictional agency or property owner from
whom permits, easements, and other operating rights are required may occur. So long as
the Company exercises reasonable effort to perform the Work in accordance with the
Work Schedule, the Company shall not be liable to the City (or its agents, servants,
employees, contractors, subcontractors, or representatives) for any claims, actions,
damages, or liability asserted or arising in connection with the Work Schedule.
2/6!Pxofstijq!pg!Gbdjmjujft
The Company shall own, operate, and maintain all Relocated Facilities installed
pursuant to this Agreement.
2/7!Qfsnjut
The Parties acknowledge that the governing jurisdictions require the Company to
secure the following permits prior to commencement of the construction necessary to
complete the work: The Company is to obtain City of Kent and King County right of way
permits. The Parties acknowledge that the City will obtain and provide any environmental
permits necessary to complete the Work at no cost to the Company.
3/!Dptut
3/2!Hfofsbm
The City shall be responsible for, and shall reimburse the Company for, bmm of the
costs and expenses necessarily incurred for or allocable only to the Work in County Right
of Way
without limitation, bmm of any and all actual direct or indirect costs necessarily incurred or
reasonably allocated to this Agreement or its performance, including, but not limited to,
the cost of labor, personnel, consultants, attorneys and other professionals, travel,
printing, supplies, taxes, permits, approvals, assessments, inspections, tests,
transportation, material, supplies, equipment, tools, utilities, services, rental charges,
consumables, premium for bonds or insurance, disposal costs, overhead, administration
and general expenses, and any other charges authorized by applicable tariffs for work
occurring in County Right of Way. The relocation of Facilities within City Right of Way
.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Fmfdusjd!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3824!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Fmfdusjdbm
Page 3 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!61:
5/J/b
3/3!Qbznfou!
Upon completion of the Work to be performed by the Company pursuant to
paragraphs 1.1 through 1.3 above, the Company shall deliver to the City a written
statement of the actual Costs and Expenses to design and perform the Work. Within
forty-five (45) days after the receipt of such statement, the City shall remit to the
Company a payment equal to the amount of bmm of the actual Costs and Expenses
occurring in County Right of Way
3/4!Ftujnbuf!pg!Dptut!boe!Fyqfotft!
As of the date of this Agreement, the estimate for all Costs and Expenses to
perform the Work in in the County Right of Way and in accordance with this Agreement
is One Hundred Fifty Seven Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Nine Dollars and Eighty Six
Cents ($157,669.86 This Estimate does not affect or limit the
recoverability by the Company of any actual Costs and Expenses in excess thereof.
The Parties further agree that the foregoing Estimate is subject to change for
reasons that include, but are not limited to, the following:
a) the City revises its construction plans for the Improvements in a manner
that requires the Company to revise its construction plans for the Relocated Facilities
b) the City (or its agents, servants, employees, contractors, subcontractors, or
he Relocated Facilities; or
c) Construction has not started within ninety (90) days from the date of this
Agreement.
3/5!Dibohf!Psefs!Qspqptbmt
If the estimated Costs and Expenses for a Revision are greater than 10% of the
Estimate herein, the Company shall require the City to sign a Change Order Proposal
describing the Revision and the estimated Costs and Expenses associated with said
Revision, but only for Revisions in the County Right of Way. The City shall be
responsible for, and reimburse the Company for, bmm of the actual Costs and Expenses of
the Revision in the County Right of Way pursuant to paragraphs 2.1 through 2.3.
3/6!Dptut!Vqpo!Ufsnjobujpo!pg!Xpsl
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Fmfdusjd!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3824!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Fmfdusjdbm
Page 4 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!621
5/J/b
In the event that theCitydecides to voluntarily cancelthe Improvements or the
Work to be performed under this Agreement, the City shall reimburse the Company for
all costs reasonably incurred by the Company in connection with the Work prior to the
date the Company is notified by the City in writing of such cancellation.
4/!Mjnjubujpo!pg!Mjbcjmjuz
liability in connection with the Work hereunder shall be limited
to property damages or personal injuries caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the
Company, its employees or agents, limited to the extent of negligence attributable to the
Company, its employees or agents. In no event shall the Company be liable for any
consequential, indirect, special, or incidental damage, nor shall the Company be liable for
injuries or damages of any kind that arise from causes beyond the control of the
Company, including but not limited to acts of God, weather, labor disputes, procurement
delays, delays in plan or permit approvals, or other third party actions.
5/!Joefnojuz
The City releases and shall defend, indemnify, and hold the Company harmless
from all claims, losses, harm, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including, but not
the
performance of the Cityce of such
activities the Citys remain employees of the City.
The Company releases and shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City harmless
from all claims, losses, harm, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including, but not
lim
e
Company.
In witness whereof, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set
forth above.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Fmfdusjd!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3824!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Fmfdusjdbm
Page 5 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!622
5/J/b
CITY OF KENTPUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC.
By By
________________________________ ______________________________
Its Its
_______________________________ ______________________________
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Fmfdusjd!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3824!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Fmfdusjdbm
Page 6 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!623
5/K
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Chad Bieren, PE - Public Works Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5600
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Summit Landsburg Road Puget Sound Energy Gas Agreement
- Authorize
MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor to sign a Gas Relocation Agreement
for $100,318.76 with Puget Sound Energy for the Rock Creek Culvert
Replacement at Summit Landsburg Road, subject to final terms and
conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
SUMMARY: In 2010, the City entered into an agreement with the National Marine
Fisheries Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to implement a
atershed in
Springs.
Landsburg Road. This project is intended to remove a barrier to fish passage. The
replacement project includes removal of the existing culvert, construction of a fish
passable bridge and related habitat improvements.
This work will require the relocation of gas facilities owned and operated by Puget
Sound Energy within the right-of-way of Summit Landsburg Road. PSE intends to
relocate their facilities by boring them under Rock Creek. Portions of this work will
This agreement allows for PSE to be reimbursed by the City for portions of their
cost for this work is $100,318.76.
BUDGET IMPACT:
using previously allocated funds.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Evolving Infrastructure - Connecting people and places through strategic investments in physical
and technological infrastructure.
ATTACHMENTS:
Qbdlfu!Qh/!624
5/K
1. Kent (Rock Creek) Gas Relocation Agreement-Municipality (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!625
5/K/b
GBDJMJUZ!NPEJGJDBUJPO0SFMPDBUJPO!BHSFFNFOU!
!
____ day of ______________, 2021, is made by and between PUGET SOUND
ENERGYy of Kent, a
SFDJUBMT!
A. The Company owns and operates certain facilities: An intermediate pressure,
thylene gas main in the right-of-way of SE Summit-Landsburg Rd. (Such
the Facilities
occupy and use a portion of the Company
Right of Way County Some or more of the Facilities are within City of
Kent Right of Way City governed by a Franchise Agreement with the
City of Kent.
B. The City plans to construct improvements to the culvert for Rock Creek
crossing under SE Summit-
Improvements cross over, under, along, in, upon, and through the County Right of Way
and City Right of Way.
C. The Improvements necessitate the modification and/or relocation of the
Facilities. In connection with the Improvements, the City has requested the Company to
modify and/or relocate a portion or portions of the Facilities to ensure proper operating
clearances are maintained between such Facilities and the Improvements in accordance
new operating rights sufficient for the Facilities (including the Relocated Facilities) may
also be necessary.
D. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement to govern the engineering,
design, construction and installation of the Relocated Facilities.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Hbt!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3823!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Hbt!Bhsffnfou!.
Page 1 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!626
5/K/b
!
BHSFFNFOU!
Now, therefore, the Parties agree as follows:
2/!Gbdjmjujft!Npejgjdbujpo
2/2!Tdpqf!pg!Xpsl
The following is the scope of work for the Relocated Facilities: Horizontally
culvert and reconnecting the gas main on both sides of the culvert.
d all required
approval by government authorities.
2/3!Pcmjhbujpot!pg!uif!Djuz!
The City shall coordinate with the Company concerning the design and
construction of the Improvements and the Relocated Facilities within County Right of
Way, and shall, at its expense, provide final restoration. For the design and construction
of the Improvements and Relocated Facilities within City Right of Way, the City shall
coordinate with the Company per the terms of franchise agreement.
2/4!Pcmjhbujpot!pg!uif!Dpnqboz
The Company shall coordinate with the City concerning the design and
construction of the Relocated Facilities and the Improvements and shall design and
perform the Work, except for any of the Work to be performed by the City.
2/5!Xpsl!Tdifevmf
Prior to the commencement of the Work, the Company and the City shall
mutually agree upon a schedule that sets forth milestones for completing the Work
agreement of the Parties.
The Company shall perform the Work in accordance with the Work Schedule,
provided, however, that the ability of the Company to perform the Work is subject to any
and all conditions placed upon the Company by governing jurisdictions. The Parties
acknowledge that delays caused by any jurisdictional agency or property owner from
whom permits, easements, and other operating rights are required may occur. So long as
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Hbt!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3823!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Hbt!Bhsffnfou!.
Page 2 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!627
5/K/b
the Company exercises reasonable effort to perform the Work in accordance with the
Work Schedule, the Company shall not be liable to the City (or its agents, servants,
employees, contractors, subcontractors, or representatives) for any claims, actions,
damages, or liability asserted or arising in connection with the Work Schedule.
2/6!Pxofstijq!pg!Gbdjmjujft
The Company shall own, operate, and maintain all Relocated Facilities installed
pursuant to this Agreement.
2/7!Qfsnjut
The Parties acknowledge that the governing jurisdictions require the Company to
secure the following permits prior to commencement of the construction necessary to
complete the work: The Company is to obtain City of Kent and King County right of way
permits. The Parties acknowledge that the City will obtain and provide any environmental
permits necessary to complete the Work at no cost to the Company.
3/!Dptut
3/2!Hfofsbm
The City shall be responsible for, and shall reimburse the Company for, bmm of the
costs and expenses necessarily incurred for or allocable only to the Work in County Right
of Waye,
without limitation, bmm of any and all actual direct or indirect costs necessarily incurred or
reasonably allocated to this Agreement or its performance, including, but not limited to,
the cost of labor, personnel, consultants, attorneys and other professionals, travel,
printing, supplies, taxes, permits, approvals, assessments, inspections, tests,
transportation, material, supplies, equipment, tools, utilities, services, rental charges,
consumables, premium for bonds or insurance, disposal costs, overhead, administration
and general expenses, and any other charges authorized by applicable tariffs for work
occurring in County Right of Way. The relocation of Facilities within City Right of Way
3/3!Qbznfou!
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Hbt!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3823!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Hbt!Bhsffnfou!.
Page 3 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!628
5/K/b
Upon completion of the Work to be performed by the Company pursuant to
paragraphs 1.1 through 1.3 above, the Company shall deliver to the City a written
statement of the actual Costs and Expenses to design and perform the Work. Within
forty-five (45) days after the receipt of such statement, the City shall remit to the
Company a payment equal to the amount of bmm of the actual Costs and Expenses
occurring in County Right of Way
3/4!Ftujnbuf!pg!Dptut!boe!Fyqfotft!
As of the date of this Agreement, the estimate for all Costs and Expenses to
perform the Work in in the County Right of Way and in accordance with this Agreement
is One Hundred Thousand Three Hundred Eighteen Dollars and Seventy Six Cents
($100,318.76) This Estimate does not affect or limit the recoverability by
the Company of any actual Costs and Expenses in excess thereof.
The Parties further agree that the foregoing Estimate is subject to change for
reasons that include, but are not limited to, the following:
a) the City revises its construction plans for the Improvements in a manner
that requires the Company to revise its construction plans for the Relocated Facilities
b) the City (or its agents, servants, employees, contractors, subcontractors, or
tallation of the Relocated Facilities; or
c) Construction has not started within ninety (90) days from the date of this
Agreement.
3/5!Dibohf!Psefs!Qspqptbmt
If the estimated Costs and Expenses for a Revision are greater than 10% of the
Estimate herein, the Company shall require the City to sign a Change Order Proposal
describing the Revision and the estimated Costs and Expenses associated with said
Revision, but only for Revisions in the County Right of Way. The City shall be
responsible for, and reimburse the Company for, bmm of the actual Costs and Expenses of
the Revision in the County Right of Way pursuant to paragraphs 2.1 through 2.3.
3/6!Dptut!Vqpo!Ufsnjobujpo!pg!Xpsl
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Hbt!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3823!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Hbt!Bhsffnfou!.
Page 4 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!629
5/K/b
In the event that theCity decides to voluntarily cancelthe Improvements or the
Work to be performed under this Agreement, the City shall reimburse the Company for
all costs reasonably incurred by the Company in connection with the Work prior to the
date the Company is notified by the City in writing of such cancellation.
4/!Mjnjubujpo!pg!Mjbcjmjuz
ability in connection with the Work hereunder shall be limited
to property damages or personal injuries caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the
Company, its employees or agents, limited to the extent of negligence attributable to the
Company, its employees or agents. In no event shall the Company be liable for any
consequential, indirect, special, or incidental damage, nor shall the Company be liable for
injuries or damages of any kind that arise from causes beyond the control of the
Company, including but not limited to acts of God, weather, labor disputes, procurement
delays, delays in plan or permit approvals, or other third party actions.
5/!Joefnojuz
The City releases and shall defend, indemnify, and hold the Company harmless
from all claims, losses, harm, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including, but not
performance of the ormance of such
activities the s remain employees of the City.
The Company releases and shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City harmless
from all claims, losses, harm, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including, but not
mployees of the
Company.
In witness whereof, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set
forth above.
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Hbt!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3823!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Hbt!Bhsffnfou!.
Page 5 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!62:
5/K/b
CITY OF KENTPUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC.
By By
________________________________ ______________________________
Its Its
_______________________________ ______________________________
Buubdinfou;!Lfou!)Spdl!Dsffl*!Hbt!Sfmpdbujpo!Bhsffnfou.Nvojdjqbmjuz!!)3823!;!Tvnnju!Mboetcvsh!Spbe!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Fofshz!Hbt!Bhsffnfou!.
Page 6 Form last revised 8/30/02
Qbdlfu!Qh/!631
5/L
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Chad Bieren, PE - Public Works Director
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
253-856-5600
DATE: May 25, 2021
TO: Kent City Council - Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: South 212th Street Preservation Puget Sound Regional
Council Grant Acceptance - Authorize
MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor to sign agreements with the
Washington State Department of Transportation to obligate $700,000 in
addition to the $1.4 million of federal grant funds obligated in July of 2019
for expenditure on the South 212th Street Overlay - East Valley Highway to
72nd Avenue South project, subject to final terms and conditions
acceptable to the City Attorney and the Public Works Director.
SUMMARY: This project has been awarded to the contractor, Lakeside Industries,
thnd
and will overlay South 212 Street between East Valley Highway and 72 Avenue
South. In April 2018, City staff competed for and was successful in receiving $1.4m
of federal construction funds through the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC).
Recently, the PSRC made additional funds available for distribution to projects that
Washington State Statewide Transportation Improvement Program funding award.
This increases the total federal funds for this phase from $1,400,000 to $2,100,000
and decreases the required local match to 13.5%.
BUDGET IMPACT: This is a positive budget impact that adds $700,000 to the
project, increasing the total federal funds from $1,400,000 to $2,100,000. This
additional funding will decrease the amount the City will contribute to this project
from the Business and Occupation Tax funds. Savings will be used on street
improvements in the 2021 and 2022 overlay projects.
SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:
Evolving Infrastructure - Connecting people and places through strategic investments in physical
and technological infrastructure.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 212th LAA Supplement 1 140-041 (PDF)
Qbdlfu!Qh/!632
5/L/b
Local Agency Agreement Supplement
AgencySupplement Number
City of Kent
1
Federal Aid Project NumberAgreement Number
CFDA No. 20.205
STPUL-1250(009)LA10029
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance)
The Local Agency requests to supplement the agreement
Project Description
S. 212th St. Preservation Grant0.76 miles
Name Length
72nd Ave. S. to 84th Ave. S. (EVH)
Termini
Description of Work No Change
The 212th Preservation project includes grinding, replacement of failing pavement sections and a full-width asphalt concrete pavement
overlay of the entire roadway from East Valley Highway to 72nd Ave. S. Curb ramps, sidewalks and driveways upgrades.
Additional PSRC funds available for project.
December 31, 2024
Are you claiming indirect cost rate? Yes No Project Agreement End Date
3.23.2021
Yes
Estimate of Funding
(1) (3) (4) (5)
(2)
Type of Work
Previous Estimated Total Estimated Agency Estimated Federal
Supplement
Agreement/Suppl.Project FundsFundsFunds
PE
1/11
a. Agency
1
%
1/11
b.Other
Federal Aid
1/11
c.Other
Participation
1/11
d.State
Ratio for PE
1/111/111/111/111/11
e.Total PE Cost Estimate (a+b+c+d)
Right of Way
1/11
f. Agency
1
%
1/11
g.Other
Federal Aid
1/11
h.Other
Participation
1/11
i.State
Ratio for RW
1/111/111/111/11
1/11
j.Total R/W Cost Estimate (f+g+h+i)
Construction
2-648-684/11678-683/11 3-216-256/11 395-2:6/112-931-:61/11
k.Contract
%
97/6
2-1:9-398/11.2-1:5-984/11 4-525/11 4-525/11
Dpousbdu!)opo.qbsujdjqbujo
l.Other
361-343/11.62-543/11 2:9-911/11 37-949/11282-:73/11
Dpotvmubou
m.Other
Federal Aid
85-344/11.85-344/11 1/11
Bhfodz!)opo.qbsujdjqbujoh
n.Other
Participation
91-:36/1148-988/11 229-913/11 27-14:/11213-874/11
o. Agency
Ratio for CN
6-111/111/11 6-111/11 786/115-436/11
p.State
4-157-361/11.726-19:/113-542-272/11442-272/113-211-111/11
q.Total CN Cost Estimate (k+l+m+n+o+p)
4-157-361/11.726-19:/113-542-272/11442-272/113-211-111/11
r.Total Project Cost Estimate (e+j+q)
Washington State
Department of Transportation
By
Buubdinfou;!323ui!MBB!Tvqqmfnfou!2!251.152!!)3822!;!Tpvui!323ui!Tusffu!Qsftfswbujpo!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Sfhjpobm!Dpvodjm!Hsbou!Bddfqubodf!.
Title
Date Executed
DOT Form 140-041Page 1
Revised /20
Qbdlfu!Qh/!633
5/L/b
AgencySupplement Number
City of Kent
1
Federal Aid Project NumberAgreement Number
CFDA No. 20.205
STPUL-1250(009)LA10029
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance)
VI.Payment and Partial Reimbursement
VII.Audit of Federal Consultant Contracts
IX.Payment of Billing
VIII.Single Audit Act
XVII.Assurances
Buubdinfou;!323ui!MBB!Tvqqmfnfou!2!251.152!!)3822!;!Tpvui!323ui!Tusffu!Qsftfswbujpo!Qvhfu!Tpvoe!Sfhjpobm!Dpvodjm!Hsbou!Bddfqubodf!.
DOT Form 140-041Page 2
Revised /20
Qbdlfu!Qh/!634